Tsunami stinginess? Are we giving enough?

hardheadjarhead said:
An article from Boston.com that states we're giving some of the least, per capita, of the western nations:

This article is actually old; it was part of the initial outcry that pointed out that our intiial pledge of disaster relief ($35 million) was less than half the planned expense for Bush's inauguration party.

The United States has since pledged far more for tsunami relief, as have individual US citiizens; however, as pointed out in a recent article in the UK Guardian, even this pledge is less than a day and half's expenditure on the war in Iraq.
 
Well, lets' see if we can kick those negative rep points up a notch or two ...

Let's recall the Bush administrations silence for the first 4 days.

Then, he pledged 15 million dollars to help.

Then he added another 20 million dollars to the pledge ... at the same time the Inauguration parties planned for his second go-round were scheduled to spend 40 million.

Now, the administration has increased the pledge to 350 million dollars; which is about $1.20 per citizen. This is the same amount spent by the military during the morning shift in Iraq (approximately 4. 5 hours worth of invasion).

Australia has increased its pledge to 764 million dollars. Germany is offering 690 milllion dollars.

Some have argued that privately Americans are more generous than anyone else, although the Scandanavian countries (communist bastards) give more per capita than the U.S.

Penultimately - a web survey by the local news organization showed that 40% of locals had given, or planned to give. Which means 60% of locals did not give and plan not to give.

Finally, as a liberal, I was always of the mind that 'we are all in this together'. But considering the beating my point of view took at the ballot box in November, I am doing my best to be a blue-in-red-clothes. I have always seen the Red point of view to be 'Hooray for me & to hell with everyone else'. Therefore, I have pledged to not give to the damn fools who chose to live next to the beach, near a fault line.

Two post script thoughts:
1 - Nashua, NH has an elevation of 169 feet ... tsunami's got no power here.
2 - At this point, donated monies are being earmarked specifically for tsunami relief. The Blue in me, realizes that is foolish, as the International Red Cross should be able to re-allocate the monies to other areas of need, but are prohibitied by many of the donation request rules. :(
 
I am not so sure it is fair to be overly critical on the Bush administration (wow...please save this quote for the day the secret service comes looking for me ;) ), or on Americans on this issue yet.

#1. Not saying anything about the issue for a few days in this case may have actually been a nessicary thing. None of us knew, first of all, the level of destruction this tragedy would have, not even a few days after, so we can't blame the administration for not wanting to speak to soon before we knew the extent of the damage. Plus, there is this tendency for the rest of the world to look to America, being that we are richest country, to solve the problems, and if we don't or can't then we are just a bunch of rich buttholes. Well, in this case, no amount of money we donate will bring back the dead, and no amount of money that we could give in America would fully rebuild the devistated areas. EVERYONE in the world needs to work and donate to really make the difference, not just us. We really can't do this one alone. So, the U.S. and the people of Southeast Asia cannot afford to have other countries relax their efforts just because "rich bastard america" stepped up to the plate.

Also, keep in mind that this was not like an attack where time is of the essence to stop the attack. There was nothing we could have done to "stop" anything once the Tsunami hit; we can only help repair the damage.

#2. Many of the numbers I have seen that have been used to criticize american support only use the dollars that the actual U.S. Government allocated towards the effort. These numbers completely ignore the large corporations that have donated money towards the effort. Most of our money in America is within our businesses, not our Government. I have not seen hard numbers that show so far what our businesses have donated collectively.

#3. This is not a sprint, this is a marathon. I think it is a little premature to criticize any country who is donating money. This rebuilding effort is going to gon on for a few years at least. We will need a steady stream of capital to support the rebuilding effort, not just a large upfront chunk and we're done. We need to see what people do to help over the long haul, and not criticize one another over the short haul.

#4. This isn't a contest to see who can give the most money. This is something that all countries should be working together on to help these devistated areas. The tragidy, or the rebuilding effort, should not be used for political posturing, or to criticize one another. I think that kind of stuff will only hurt the effort rather then help it, especially early on.

#5. Our Tax season just started. Many people and businesses will be donating over the next 3 months to get the tax write off. Many people will be waiting for a check from their taxes, and may donate some of that money. Again, it is way too early to be critical, especially for us considering this.

I'll address my final point in a seperate post. But in general, I am actually going to have faith that we will do our part over the long haul, until I see some real evidence to the contrary of course.

Paul
 
Final Point: WE EACH NEED TO DO A LITTLE SOMETHING TO DO OUR PART.

Right now there seems to be a sentiment that "it is up to someone else who has more money then me to do something about this tragedy." This is propigated by hearing about the million dollar donations on the News. Right now for many of us, it feels like the little bit that we could do to help would amount to nothing.

However, we forget about the power that we could all do collectively. If every person could muster up 10 bucks, we would have (according to U.S. population by the census bureau) well over $295 billion dollars in aid. And considering that this is the biggest tragidy that any of us has seen in at least my lifetime of almost 27 years, 10 bucks or 20 or 50 to the Red Cross or some charity to help is something we should all do, I think.

Heck, we could even put our martial arts to work. Rich Parsons and I are going to do a benefit seminar sometime in February, and all the proceeds are going to be donated: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20647 Sure, whatever we muster may only be a small fraction of a percent, but every little bit that we do will help those victims.

So, I say that we should all try to do SOMETHING, as every little bit counts.
 
Tulisan said:
And considering that this is the biggest tragidy that any of us has seen in at least my lifetime of almost 27 years
Just a couple of thoughts ...

Perhaps you have heard of the Sub-Saharan African AIDS epidemic. The impact on that continent DWARFS the tsunami damange, and the continent will quite likely never recover. (Incidently, the Bush administration has pledged 15 Billion dollars to this cause, which it has not funded).

You also mentioned it was a marathon, not a sprint. In this you are correct. Unfortuneately, it will soon be forgotten. Last year, in December, Bam, Iran was hit with a devastating earthquake. The damage and loss of life (30,000)was severe. The global community pledged 1 Billion dollars to aid those who suffered from this event. To date, Iran has received less than 20 million dollars of that pledged assistance (2%).

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/01/05/tsunami.aid.promises/

excerpt said:
Today, it's estimated that more than 100,000 residents of Bam are still living in temporary shelters and tents.
The Iranian government says that of the $1 billion pledged, only $17.5 million has been received.
 
Considering the aids epidemic takes about 250 thousand lives per year, I would have to agree. But I was talking about natural disasters.

It is to bad that we all seem to have short term memory syndrome as well; a few months after a major tragidy its business as usual? Let's hope that isn't the case this time.
 
Tulisan said:
It is to bad that we all seem to have short term memory syndrome as well; a few months after a major tragidy its business as usual? Let's hope that isn't the case this time.
Unfortunately, it probably will end up that way. As time passes, another tragedy comes along that gets the collective attention.

- Ceicei
 
Maybe now these countries will get on board with the warning system that the other countries in the tsunami zone are on, there will be more tsunamis in the future. I'm not against helping those that need it, but, it would be better to avoid those situations in the future.
 
I've read some disturbing articles that there were warnings that weren't issued. I believe it was the head forecaster in Thailand that lost his job because he knew about the earthquake and the strong possibility of tsunamis but didn't want to say anything because it would hurt tourism and the government would become angry.
 
Hi all,

I read that President Bush has appointed his Dad and x Pres Clinton to rally the private czns to come up with money for this.

I think that is really the one that might come on strong and show the true help that we will give to the area.

Regards, Gary
 
GAB said:
Hi all,

I read that President Bush has appointed his Dad and x Pres Clinton to rally the private czns to come up with money for this.

I think that is really the one that might come on strong and show the true help that we will give to the area.

Regards, Gary

Yea, Larry King interviewed them both...it was kind of cool actually to see a non-partisen effort there...
 
Tulisan said:
Considering the aids epidemic takes about 250 thousand lives per year, I would have to agree. But I was talking about natural disasters.

It is to bad that we all seem to have short term memory syndrome as well; a few months after a major tragidy its business as usual? Let's hope that isn't the case this time.
I think you estimate is a bit low. In 2004, according to this report, 2.3 million Africans died from AIDS.

http://www.avert.org/aidsimpact.htm

Some might wonder if it would be better for the world if more Europeans took their vacations in the game preserves of Namibia and Mozambique.
 
Hmmmmm!



michaeledward said:
Well, lets' see if we can kick those negative rep points up a notch or two ...

Let's recall the Bush administrations silence for the first 4 days.

Then, he pledged 15 million dollars to help.

Then he added another 20 million dollars to the pledge ... at the same time the Inauguration parties planned for his second go-round were scheduled to spend 40 million.

Now, the administration has increased the pledge to 350 million dollars; which is about $1.20 per citizen. This is the same amount spent by the military during the morning shift in Iraq (approximately 4. 5 hours worth of invasion).

Australia has increased its pledge to 764 million dollars. Germany is offering 690 milllion dollars.

Some have argued that privately Americans are more generous than anyone else, although the Scandanavian countries (communist bastards) give more per capita than the U.S.

Penultimately - a web survey by the local news organization showed that 40% of locals had given, or planned to give. Which means 60% of locals did not give and plan not to give.

Finally, as a liberal, I was always of the mind that 'we are all in this together'. But considering the beating my point of view took at the ballot box in November, I am doing my best to be a blue-in-red-clothes. I have always seen the Red point of view to be 'Hooray for me & to hell with everyone else'. Therefore, I have pledged to not give to the damn fools who chose to live next to the beach, near a fault line.

Two post script thoughts:
1 - Nashua, NH has an elevation of 169 feet ... tsunami's got no power here.
2 - At this point, donated monies are being earmarked specifically for tsunami relief. The Blue in me, realizes that is foolish, as the International Red Cross should be able to re-allocate the monies to other areas of need, but are prohibitied by many of the donation request rules. :(
 
Given how trendy it's become these days to bash the US, I doubt any amount of aid we give will please our critics. It's a shame some will focus on only on the negative. If I wanted to go that route, I could point out the relatively measly contribution from France, one of our biggest critics, and our "ally."

Jeff
 
Kreth said:
Given how trendy it's become these days to bash the US, I doubt any amount of aid we give will please our critics. It's a shame some will focus on only on the negative. If I wanted to go that route, I could point out the relatively measly contribution from France, one of our biggest critics, and our "ally."

Jeff
Jeff,

Why do you feel it is 'trendy' to 'bash' the US?
Why do you feel it is OK for you to 'bash' France?
And what is your intention of placing the word 'ally' in single quotes?
Claiming that France is 'one of our biggest critics', begs the question, on what are they criticizing us, followed by an examination of that criticism to see if it is valid.

Would you care to expand on your thoughts? It would certainly be helpful to all involved in this thread.

Mike
 
If i heard corectly, the US was one of the first on scene iwth a aircraft carrier to help. at this point money isn't the main thing required, supplys and ways to distribute it are.
 
I would like to point out...

As the Death Toll, Level of Destruction, and Damage assesments rose,

So did the amount of money we pledged.

That doenst seem so odd to me.

And Who cares if "Gunther" pleged 100 dollars and "Pierre" Pledged 98, and "Sam" Pledged 75...

They ALL assisted in a time of Crisis, and it should NOT be the amount of help, but the fact that they all helped, that matters.
 
About the AIDs pandimic. There are countrys that over a third of the population has hiv/aids of course this is an guess. Aids is severly stigmatised in parts of the world.
As for the number of deaths, some places aren't alllowed to put AIDs as the reason a person died on the death certificate.
Now if you take a country with a really high rate of AIDs and include a lack of medicine to do anything about it with. Now a stigm on having AIDs that aids it's spreading things are a mess. This also harms the economy. You lose alot of your adult labor force and orphan a lot of kids.
As for the Bush presidency I wouldn 't expect one cent out of them...
 
Back
Top