_that_america_was_being_'stingy'___ 1228 * a_point_in_time * 2004 041228 ... http a suggestion by Jan Egeland, the United_Nations humanitarian aid chief http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6762079/ 041228 ... p2 what a dick $35 million as a start is stingy? when we have a $7.6 trillion national debt and a budget deficit of $445 billion? yes it's because we have as ass in the office but the fact remains you are asking for money from a country that is in deep financial trouble 041229 ... p2 if you're going to take a snapshot of a_point_in_time try taking the whole picture 041229 ... Mister Brightside The White House is going to spend $35 to $40M (not including the cost for security) on the Inauguration Ceremony in January. That widen the picture any? 041229 ... p2 the current administration sucks donkey balls no question but to complain about only getting $35 million? accept it and shut up or refuse it and fuck off 041229 ... Mister Brightside the fact of our own looming financial crisis is due in no small part to this gang of donkey-ball-suckers and their need to spend money on fantasies like missile defense and empire-building, but since this administration has been in the habit of asking other countries to contribute blood and money far in excess of what said donkey-ball-suckers are willing to give in return, the criticism is not unwarranted By threatening to reduce or cut off their aid packages, the Bushmonkey arm-twisted a lot of these small asian countries (and others as well) to pitch in and support with either money, materiel or personnel, his war of choice in Iraq , now that THEY have an actual crisis as opposed to some make-believe "imminent threat" (80,000+ deaths at the current estimate with a projection of over 100,000) it would behoove the Legion of Dumbasses to live up to their "compassion" rhetoric and pony up more than they would spend on their own little ianuguration party. Likely, any other president wouldn't have jacked up our economy this badly and would have pledged more in relief money, but the two go hand in hand in this case. Bushmonkey guts our economy to finance his bizarro-world domestic and foreign policy agendas and then stiffs one group of brown people in need on one side of the subcontinent because he prefers to spend the money killing other brown people on the other side of the subcontinent. it's a nice, big interconnected world, and being cheap to people you've been holding over a barrel is just bad business 041229 ... Given OOps... America was being "stingy"? Absolutely_NOT!!! Dollars_and_Cents: a_wrong_war_in_21k 041229 ... Strideo Jan Egeland is an ass. It would be one thing if he just tried to appeal to the U.S. for more aid, but to call the U.S. stingy implies that these other nations are ENTITLED to a hefty aid package from the U.S. and his remark was inappropriate. ... 041229 ... * The $35 billion (instead of "million") is _only_the_beginning___ * 041229 ... p2 let's also re-focus this picture http://www.timesofmalta.com/core/article.php?id=173563 Asked about the response of rich nations to such crises, he said: "It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really. "If actually the foreign assistance of many countries now is 0.1 or 0.2 per cent of their gross national income, I think that is stingy really. I don't think that is very generous," he said. The United Nations urged rich nations a quarter of a century ago to give away 0.7 per cent of their gross domestic product every year in the form of development aid. To date, however, just a handful of European nations, most of them in Scandinavia, actually meet that goal. 041229 ... p2 it seems that it was a more general remark than this blathe made it appear 041229 ... Strideo and *ahem* "certain" U.N. officials skim how much off the top? sorry, I can't help myself! :) ... 041229 ... U.S. "Resconstruction" Projects in Iraq? 041229 ... U.S. "Reconstruction" Projects in Iraq? 041229 ... Yahoo! Search The Bush administration has spent little over $1 billion on Iraqi reconstruction although Congress has earmarked $18.4 billion. The administration has blamed the slow pace of reconstruction on the insurgents in Iraq. 041229 ... Mister Brightside *ahem* I can't help myself, but how much money are Halliburton, KBR and Titan Corp being paid even as they over-padded their bills? How much money did our government pour into the Hussein regime between 1980 and 1990 (remember, we didn't cut them off until they invaded Kuwait - and i'll bet it was a lot more than $35M/Year) How much moeny are we floating to our pet dictators in Pakistan and Uzbekistan? Hm? 041229 ... daxle i'd much prefer it be 'thudy' 041231 ... OOps... * What's_reality * _24_percent_vs_1_percent_... 041231 ... 0^0 "M Spice" of Weapon_of_Mass_Deception 041231 ... Given "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." 041231 ... Moment_of_truth The Bush administration has spent little over $1 billion on Iraqi reconstruction although Congress has earmarked $18.4 billion. The administration has blamed the slow pace of reconstruction on the insurgents in Iraq. * Parallel_Sayings * 041231 ... Strideo "but how much money are Halliburton, KBR and Titan Corp being paid even as they over-padded their bills?" Tell me. "How much money did our government pour into the Hussein regime between 1980 and 1990 (remember, we didn't cut them off until they invaded Kuwait - and i'll bet it was a lot more than $35M/Year)" And this is relevant to my statement in what way? "How much moeny are we floating to our pet dictators in Pakistan and Uzbekistan? Hm?" I don't know. Can you tell me? ... 041231 ... 1231 US to increase tsunami aid to $350 mn + 1 04:23 041231 ... U.S. Given _24_percent_vs_1_percent_ "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." A logical and scientific Intelligence_estimate of United_States "actual" aid on Asian_Tsunami would be very much less than $350 million * 1 / 24 or less than 14.6 million 041231 ... "The other day, a United Nations official accused the United States of being “stingy” in terms of aid to tsunami victims in South Asia. After criticism from the State Department, the official clarified his position. Americans are not being stingy in helping tsunami victims, only stingy in terms of overall foreign aid as compared to other countries. This is a familiar attack, which comes up annually when the foreign aid appropriations bill is before Congress. But let’s look at the facts. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris, in 2003, the world’s major countries gave $108.5 billion in combined foreign aid. Of this, the U.S. contributed $37.8 billion or 35 percent of the total. The next largest foreign aid contributor was The Netherlands, which gave $12.2 billion, following two years in which it was actually a net recipient of foreign aid. The claim of stinginess, however, comes from a different calculation—foreign aid as a share of national income. In 2003, U.S. foreign aid came to just 0.34 percent, well below the world leading Dutch at 2.44 percent. Other big contributors are Ireland (1.83 percent), Norway (1.49 percent), and Switzerland (1.09 percent). The U.S. would have to triple foreign aid just to reach the lowest of these contributors. The first thing one notices when looking at the big foreign aid contributors is that they all spend very little on national defense. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in 2002, The Netherlands spent just 1.6 percent of its gross domestic product on defense. Norway spent 2.1 percent, Switzerland spent 1.1 percent, and Ireland spent a piddling 0.7 percent. By contrast, the U.S. spent 3.4 percent—and this was before the Iraq war. It’s easy to be generous with foreign aid when another country is essentially providing your defense for free. Another thing one notices is that the foreign aid data are only for “official” (i.e., government) aid. The data are sketchy, but by all accounts Americans are far more generous in terms of charitable contributions than the citizens of any other country. A 1991 study found the United Kingdom to have the second largest percentage of private charitable giving. But in 2003, charitable giving amounted to 8.6 billion pounds or 0.8 percent of GDP in the U.K., according to the Charities Aid Foundation, compared to $241 billion or 2.2 percent of GDP in the U.S., according to the American Association of Fundraising Counsel. But even this estimate of charitable giving by Americans is low because it counts only cash contributions and omits volunteer work. According to Independent Sector, in 2003, they contributed an additional $266 billion worth of their time to charitable enterprises. This is based on a value of $17.12 per hour of time. But even if one assigns a value equal to the minimum wage, this noncash contribution still comes to about $100 billion. In the area of international aid, the official data also exclude private transfers such as remittances by foreign workers in the U.S. According to the Inter-American Development Bank, remittances to Latin America alone amounted to $38 billion in 2003—more than all official assistance combined. And $31 billion of that came from the U.S. In some countries, foreign remittances came to more than 10 percent of GDP, thus having a significant impact on economic growth and poverty alleviation. Former U.S. Agency for International Development official Carol Adelman attempted to calculate a total of all private foreign aid in 2000 in a 2003 Foreign Affairs magazine article. She found that private foreign aid greatly exceeded that provided by the U.S. government. Official aid came to $22.6 billion that year, but private aid came to $35.1 billion, including $18 billion in remittances, $6.6 billion from private voluntary organizations, $3.4 billion in aid from churches, $3 billion from foundations, $2.8 billion from corporations, and $1.3 billion from universities. But even this understates the extent to which Americans help developing countries, because it excludes private investment and trade. According to the Institute of International Finance, in 2003, Americans invested $124 billion in emerging market economies, three-fourths in direct investment such as plant and equipment and the rest in stocks and bonds. Americans also buy a considerable amount of goods from developing countries. This year, about a third of all our imports will come from developing countries, providing jobs and incomes for millions of poor people. This is probably less than most protectionists think. The bulk of our imports still come from industrialized countries such as Canada, Japan and Germany. In short, the charge of stinginess is unfounded. The U.S. carries much of the world on its back, providing other nations with security, aid and much of their investment and income. It also pays for a fourth of all the salaries of U.N. bureaucrats." 050101 ... why not given, _24_percent_vs_1_percent_? 050102 ... Mister Brightside Let's just put it this way, Strideo. Our government, especially when headed by members of a certain political party as it is now, like to spend a great deal of their time talking a lot of hot air about nebulous concepts like "compassionate conservatism" "moral values" and "culture of life" when in fact they have always been willing to spend hundreds of times more money both directly and indirectly on killing. That's what bearing this has. Our wonderful so-called "christian" leadership failing to put their money where their mouth is. ***the three companies i mentioned have already been paid BILLIONS in the last 21 months ***The US government between 1980-90 poured hundreds of millions if not several billion dollars into Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq - and then as a bonus, provided him with deep discounts on military hardware ***Up until the amount of US aid was increased to $350M from $15M-$35M, the regime of Islam "Boil n' Bag" Karimov was doing better than the Tsunami victims getting an average of just over $160M/ year (They had an election there a few weeks ago, but the real opposition parties were outlawed and as such kept off the ballots, the two parties in their elections were both just offshoots of the party that's been in charge since they ceased to be Soviet territory - Ralph Nader could go there and argue that there is no difference between their two parties, but then the Uzbek government, with the aid of US tax dollars would disappear him off somewhere and when we did find him again, we'd be identifying his body, becauase that's what the "culture of life" is really all about) 050102 ... What Powell said * 2 hours, 18 minutes ago * Powell disputed accusations that the United_States had failed to deliver on past aid pledges. "When we pledge an amount, we plan to deliver that amount," 050102 ... OOps... Classic Spice around_and_across the "WMD"... 050102 ... UN21 That each country"s pledge amount (especially United_States) shall be officially transferred to United_Nations for "safekeeping"... 050102 ... Strideo Oh yeah, like unicef money. They won't use it for anything else THIS time right? Anyways, hello Mister Brightside how are you today? "***the three companies i mentioned have already been paid BILLIONS in the last 21 months" Duh, they're supposed to be paid. Otherwise they won't fulfill their contracts. "***The US government between 1980-90 poured hundreds of millions if not several billion dollars into Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq - and then as a bonus, provided him with deep discounts on military hardware" Can you tell me why? "***Up until the amount of US aid was increased to $350M from $15M-$35M, the regime of Islam "Boil n' Bag" Karimov" And can you tell me the purpose for this? It seems a little odd to me. I think that you're put off by my criticisms of the United Nations and so you try to counter it by telling me where you don't think the United States should be spending money? "Well gee, I'm sorry. I geuss the U.N. didn't do anything wrong." Yeah, right. I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to make the case for. ... 050103 ... Mister Brightside No i'm just saying that most of our defenses and/or criticisms of just about anybody lately amount to a serious case of the whole pot-kettle scenario. I mean i know that the whole oil-for-food debacle is an obligatory talking point for the Dennis Miller fans and the Fox News crowd, but really, on closer examination, the people in our government most fond of using that issue as a bully-pulpit are prime examples of it taking one to know one in the "ethical lapses" categopry. Colin Powell added a little more to my own point by calling the increased aid package "an investment in out own security" because it is a good PR move for the US in the region to spend a little more on humanitarian efforts than on flinging ordnance. The day we declare ourselves to be above any criticism is the day our claims to jutice and benevolence become a fraud 050103 ... Strideo can you answer my other questons? ... 050103 ... Strideo "I mean i know that the whole oil-for-food debacle is an obligatory talking point for the Dennis Miller fans and the Fox News crowd, but really, on closer examination, the people in our government most fond of using that issue as a bully-pulpit are prime examples of it taking one to know one in the "ethical lapses" categopry." Hmmm, I don't know, this seems like a bit of a stretch to me. It sounds more like rhetoric than anything solid. I would need more specific examples of "ethical lapses" to consider your point. "Colin Powell added a little more to my own point by calling the increased aid package "an investment in out own security" because it is a good PR move for the US in the region to spend a little more on humanitarian efforts than on flinging ordnance." Are you sure you aren't just being nit-picky? After all there would be some truth to that statement and it doesn't nesisarily declare that security was our sole motivation in sending aid. Can you give me the source where these quotes come from? I can't seem to find it. ... 050103 ... Strideo well, I may have found it. let's see . . . ... 050103 ... Strideo No, I need your help. I can't find that particular statement from Secretary Powell. I found one from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright on development assistance, globalization: "At the same time, we should do all we can to help those who are doing their best to help themselves. This isn't international social work, as some claim. It is an investment in our own security and long-term growth. Nothing could be more pragmatic." "an investment in our own security" is there really anything wrong with this? ... 050103 ... Mister Brightside One other thing to consider, the source of the corruption allegations against the UN is none other than Ahmed "spying for Iran" Chalabi, who, based on the amount of WMD we found in Iraq, is not particularly the most credible of sources. I mean, hey, I know the Imperial Clique over at DoD would still like to take whatever smoke Chalabi blows up their ass as gospel, but i'm more inclined to take that silly bastard with a big fuckin' grain of salt (or maybe even the big 50lb bag of Morton's Coarse rock-salt) 050103 ... Mister Brightside The quote i attributed to Powell was something i heard in the background on the also only slightly more accurate than Chalabi CNN. 050103 ... what Bush said http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050103/480/whre10401031555 "that he is appointing former Presidents George H.W. Bush, left, and Bill Clinton right, to head up efforts to raise money for the massive American relief operation in the Asian tsunami-battered regions" 132005 050103 ... Japan raises aid to $500 million (Jan 3,2005) 050103 ... Mister Brightside I wasn't criticizing Powell's remark, i was saying it affirmed a portion of my argument. good business, good PR and what-not? interesting move to send Bush Sr and Clinton... intriguing. 050103 ... 132005 Japan tops donor list with $500m - at The Guardian (UK). (Jan 3, 2005) * Asian_Tsunami * 050103 ... 123 Given:- Three US presidents appealed to the American public to give money to aid the victims of the Asian_tsunami. * Moment_of_Truth * _that_america_was_being_'stingy'___... 050103 ... U.S. http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/30824.html Presidents appeal for Americans to dig deep 050103 ... . "I ask every American to contribute as they are able to do so," said Mr Bush, in a joint appeal with his father, George, and Bill_Clinton." 050103 ... 3 minutes ago America"s Presidents Call on U.S. to Help Tsunami Survivors 050103 ... What Powell said "I don't anticipate an increase in money. We haven't spent the money that we've committed so far," Powell said. 1 hour, 23 minutes ago 050104 ... WMD Bush or Powell? 050104 ... U.S. Eureka!!! Bush + Colin_Powell + ... = Weapon_of_Mass_Deception (WMD) 050104 ... phil stop the crap. 050104 ... ... w___h_____y_______? 050104 ... WMD w___h_____y_______ ? 050104 ... unhinged america has always been stingy; at least in my lifetime 180909 what's it to you? who go blather from