Are We Stingy? Yes

NYT ^ | 30 December 2004 | Who Really Cares?

[.cnI redruM]

President Bush finally roused himself yesterday from his vacation in Crawford, Tex., to telephone his sympathy to the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia, and to speak publicly about the devastation of Sunday's tsunamis in Asia. He also hurried to put as much distance as possible between himself and America's initial measly aid offer of $15 million, and he took issue with an earlier statement by the United Nations' emergency relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, who had called the overall aid efforts by rich Western nations "stingy." "The person who made that statement was very misguided and ill informed," the president said.

We beg to differ. Mr. Egeland was right on target. We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15 million. That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities.

The American aid figure for the current disaster is now $35 million, and we applaud Mr. Bush's turnaround. But $35 million remains a miserly drop in the bucket, and is in keeping with the pitiful amount of the United States budget that we allocate for nonmilitary foreign aid. According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent.

______________________Snip______________________________

[shubi]

I don't see that we have any obligation to help any of these nations. Especially not in rebuilding infrastructure of holiday resorts and places where everyone is dead.

[commonguymd]

Unearned money does funny things to people. Drive in downtown Norfolk for witness bearing.

[weegie]

Im sorry Shubi but that is nonsense and insulting. The UK charity (ie non government spend) in 2000 was 14bn (in sterling).One major difference is that most other countries dont give tax exemption for charitable donations.

[tenger]

Didn't they already turn away help from Israel? It must mean that they have all the help they need.

[devolve]

 KERRY KORNERS, BOSTON 

[Hoodlum91]

The numbers are from 1997 (cited in the fact book). They do not include the recent commitment to Africa for AIDS.

Also, these numbers probably don't include investment by individual agencies. I work at a small government agency that provides development capital to emerging markets and in 2003, we provided close to $2 billion. As we are one of the smallest agencies, I can't see how these numbers are correct.

[weegie]

Very possibly Hoodlum but I'm sure that other countries have the same anomalies.

Again I'm in no way suggesting that the US is not generous and compassionate but the idea that generosity or compassion is a uniquely American trait is wrong

[KwasiOwusu]

"We beg to differ. Mr. Egeland was right on target. We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15 million."

Exactly how much is France, Germany, the EU, Norway (where the half wit Mr. Egeland comes from) and the Old York Slimes editorial board and staff giving to these flood victims here?
I thought so. Also, how much is the incredibly stupid ,American-hating Euro-nut Mr. Egeland, who is paid more than president Bush for basically doing nothing, giving to the victims of the floods right now?

How much exactly did th rest of the world, including Norway, give to the victims of the natural disasters in Florida this year again?
I thought so.

Its not America's responsibility to do everything ALL the time to bailout every hard luck story country out there. Hey, we already spent over $200 Billion (and over a thousand of precious American lives lost) bailing out Afghanistan and and Iraq, while bringing democracy to Afghanistan for the first time in Afghan history. How much did Norway contribute to saving Afghanistan again?

Its time for the rest of the world to do some of the heavy lifting for a change, starting with that funny country Norway, where this dunderhead Mr. Egeland comes from. After all, Norway makes more free money from oil per head than even Saudi Arabia.That is money they are basically getting free of charge for doing next to nothing. Why don't they give say a Billion dollars or so, for starters? Hey Mr. Egeland, charity begins at home.

The Old York Slimes is beyond contempt.

[rumsfeld=victory]

In reality, Egeland didn't suggest we raise taxes to pay for humanitarian aid. He made reference to the idea that "taxpayers" would like to see more money allocated to foreign aid.

He also included his own country--Norway--and the EU with countries he called "stingy."

When he used the word, he was also referring to those countries' collective contributions to foreign aid in general, over past years, rather than their responses to this catastrophe specifically.

If it's true he earns $300,000 per year, then he does not in fact earn more than the President, whose salary is $400,000 annually.

[expatguy]

bttt

[Mfkmmof4]

So how much is this bozo contributing to the victims?

[KwasiOwusu]

Those figures do not include the vast amounts of money spent by American private charities like the Bill Gates Foundation, nor does it include the over $200 Billion America has spent liberating and restoring democracy to Afghanistan, and on the way to restoring democracy in Iraq, including and rebuilding those countries' schools, hospitals, roads, banks etc etc.

Nor does it cover the over a precious thousand American lives lost in taking out the evil, despicable, genocidal regimes that had to be removed before democracy could be restored to these countries. That of course is priceless.

Those CIA figures you quote are probably from the agenda driven, highly politicized liberals that Klinton installed in the CIA, where being cleaned out by the Bush administration even as we speak.

[Quilla]

I believe the inaugural will cost 2 million less than Clinton's second term inaugural which cost 31 million.

I doubt we will see actual figures, but I imagine heightened security concerns in a post 9-11 world will add considerably to the costs of President Bush's inaugural.

[not_apathetic_anymore]

We spent 240 billion in private charities in 2003 alone.

That sounds like a factoid that might come in handy when trying to rebutt the leftists at work, they'll ask for a source ... If you know weere that number came from I'd love to have that info.

[commonguymd]

"It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really," the Norwegian-born U.N. official told reporters. "Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become."

"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy," he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."

Can be read either way.

[Uncle Vlad]

Does anyone even pay attention to the New York Times anymore?

[longtermmemmory]

How can ANY corporation advertise in this "newspaper"? Stockholders should demand their various corporations stay the heck away from them. (too bad Fox news does not do a new york daily to directly compete with the NYT head to head)

I would be embarrased to be caugh holding the NYT in public.

[commonguymd]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/24/national/main560206.shtml

[weegie]

It certainly doesn't include private donations either from the US or anywhere else (Sainsbury foundation in the UK for example) I don't believe I ever claimed it did.

Nor did I claim that it included millitary spend and I certainly did not demean in any way the sacrifices made by the US troops (although how that is pertinent to this debate, I'm not sure).

You however seem to be claiming that the CIA is in fact disseminating falsehoods in order to bring down the US.

Perhaps you could tell me which story you want told and Ill try and find the facts to support it

[Hoodlum91]

I don't think the US is exclusively generous, but your numbers are flat out wrong.

The 7 billion from Japan is the FY 03/04 number, while the 6.9 billion from the US is the 1997 number. It's comparing apples to oranges. Corrected numbers (from ODA site):

2003

United states $15.8 billion
Japan $8.9 billion
France $7.3 billion


Also from global issues.org: "Since 1992, Japan had been the largest donor of aid, in terms of raw dollars. That was until 2001 when the United States reclaimed that position, a year that also saw Japan's amount of aid drop by nearly 4 billion dollars "

On a little side note, it is interesting that in raw dollars, the US was second behind Japan during the entire Clinton administration.