douchebag UN diplomat complains about Tsunami donations

[Col. Crackpot]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041 ... -7268r.htm

evidently a UN relief official feels that this is a good time to lecture the west on tax policy, criticize western aid, not to mention completely ignore the private donations from private citizens.

But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
"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."

[CJvR]

Socialism in action. You can always raise taxes, never ever lower them. There isn't any problem in the world that can't be fixed by raising taxes.

[Chris OFarrell]

While this guy is an idiot, it is a somewhat fair point in ways.

I mean the UN has, two days after the disaster, formally announced they are going to give one point five...million in aid. Though I don't hold this against them, the EU has no resources in of itself. The EU though, has generously granted a whopping 5 million. The US an AMAZING 6.5 million. Given that the death toll here is IMEDIATLY in the 30K range and your looking at it probably going to skyrocket in the future due to loss of infrastructure. Australia, which is insignificant, compared to the EU or US pledged 10 million on day one.

Granted, this is discounting to a large degree some of the more intangible assistance being given by the major countries. The Sixth Fleet for example has many of its P3's running recon flights all along the area to tag locations for assistance, faster and more accurately then anyone else could do in the time available.

I do acknowledge the fact that typical people on the street are pooring their own funds in and taken TOGETHER its considerable enough. And this guy is a complete dickhead for thinking private citizens have so much spare change lying around that billions will appear on demand. People ARE giving bloody generously. But Governments exist to be handle the big international issues. To channel massive resources when needed and the lack of a massive response truly shocks me. Where are the promises of billions of dollars in aid or debt relief or whatever, so the countries can rebuild in the future? Where are the never-ending trains of aircraft from the major western powers sending in a constant supply of materials and personal to help 24 hours a day? The infrastructure being moved in to deal with the disease and secondary effects that are no doubt going to spring up soon?



Now I grant you there is near total chaos here. There is fragmented reporting and we don't know that much about what is going on, but the somewhat tame response from the major western powers to this truly surprises me.

[Prozac the Robert]

It's pretty obvious that increasing tax would make more money available, especially if the tax increases were reasonably spread throughout society so as to not place to high a burden on any group.

It's also true that western countries have a lot more money than other countries and that we could stand to donate more.

I don't think it's true that people would stand for higher taxes though, even when its patently obvious that not everybody is donating privately, even among the people with money to do so. I tend to think of charity as a sort of tax on generosity, especially if it's the sort of thing a government would be able to better handle.

[Col. Crackpot]

But Chris, this is the very reason why we have the Red Cross and Red Crescent! This is their sole purpose in life and their organizations are designed for this. For governments to set up agencies to do the very same would be redundant and we'd spend more money on governmental infrastructure and less on actual aid. Granted, Western governments need to do more, but this just happened and the scope of the crisis is still being assessed (in no small part by the Royal Australian and United States Navies). This kind of pubic statement serves no purpose other than to piss people off... oh yeah and give the douchebag some political "face time".

[The Duchess of Zeon]

For the record, the United States also pledged another 15 million for a cumulative total of 21.5 millions, and that does not include the cost of supplies that have been shipped in, nor the cost of deploying forces from Okinawa and ships in the area for disaster relief.

[Frank Hipper]

For the record, the United States also pledged another 15 million for a cumulative total of 21.5 millions, and that does not include the cost of supplies that have been shipped in, nor the cost of deploying forces from Okinawa and ships in the area for disaster relief.

Not to mention that was pledged before any requests for aid were even made, as far as I know.
How you can label someone as stingy when they start giving before you even ask for help is beyond me.

[Stravo]

I wonder how stingy we are when we have ships out there getting ready to provide relief to the devastated area? Pacific command is trying to organize a relief effort according to Bush and that was on day one of this shit.

The more I hear the inane babble coming from that mostronsity of a world body the more I believe that the UN, much like children, should be seen and not heard.

[SirNitram]

Socialism in action. You can always raise taxes, never ever lower them. There isn't any problem in the world that can't be fixed by raising taxes.

It's probably a superior mindset to the one currently gripping the states, which is that there's nothing that can't be solved by a tax cut.

[Col. Crackpot]

Socialism in action. You can always raise taxes, never ever lower them. There isn't any problem in the world that can't be fixed by raising taxes.

It's probably a superior mindset to the one currently gripping the states, which is that there's nothing that can't be solved by a tax cut.

no, it's the same stupid mindset, just reversed.

[SirNitram]

Socialism in action. You can always raise taxes, never ever lower them. There isn't any problem in the world that can't be fixed by raising taxes.

It's probably a superior mindset to the one currently gripping the states, which is that there's nothing that can't be solved by a tax cut.

no, it's the same stupid mindset, just reversed.

With the functional difference that the latter threatens to drive the government into bankruptcy. Equal stupidity on both, but one has a negative side effect that directly impacts the government's performance. Ergo, one is worse. The 'Tax Cuts Are An A Priori Good' side.

[CJvR]

With the functional difference that the latter threatens to drive the government into bankruptcy. Equal stupidity on both, but one has a negative side effect that directly impacts the government's performance. Ergo, one is worse. The 'Tax Cuts Are An A Priori Good' side.

Nah, 0% taxes do not mean no goverment income. 100% taxes or more does not assure the availability of resources.
If the political will to maintain some form of a disaster relief fund had exsisted it could have been easliy managed. Using this disaster to argue for tax raises is IMPO nothing but very cheap political oppertunism.

[SirNitram]

With the functional difference that the latter threatens to drive the government into bankruptcy. Equal stupidity on both, but one has a negative side effect that directly impacts the government's performance. Ergo, one is worse. The 'Tax Cuts Are An A Priori Good' side.

Nah, 0% taxes do not mean no goverment income. 100% taxes or more does not assure the availability of resources.
If the political will to maintain some form of a disaster relief fund had exsisted it could have been easliy managed. Using this disaster to argue for tax raises is IMPO nothing but very cheap political oppertunism.

That's a lovely little strawman of what I actually said. Kindly do come back when you are ready to address what was really said. It really would be wonderful to have an intelligent conversasion on this point.

[CJvR]

What strawman would that be? The 100% or more, that actually happened.

[Admiral_K]

Sounds like a guy I was arguing with on this board a month or so back. They want to point at only what the U.S. government is directly contributing, but ignore what our private citizens give. Raising taxes wouldn't make more money available, it would likely lessen it as people would be less willing to donate money if they have less of it.

American private charities are set to spend more than $200 billion this year, and more than half of U.S. adults will work on volunteer projects, putting in an estimated 20 billion hours in donated time.
One study by the Washington-based Philanthropy Roundtable found that the average American household contributes seven times as much to charity as its German counterpart, and Americans are six times more likely than Germans to do volunteer work.

"A country that makes a film like 'Star Wars' deserves to rule the world."
http://washingtontimes.com/world/200412 ... -4234r.htm

[SirNitram]

What strawman would that be? The 100% or more, that actually happened.

The 'Well, he's talking about raising or lowering taxes, so let's immediately talk about 0% or 100% taxes' bit. As, as any educated person would be aware, one does not imply the other. Perhaps I would have been more correct to title it a Non Sequitor.

Now, perhaps you aren't aware, but I wasn't talking about extremist situations which, while having existed, are not present today. No, I am speaking of the happenings of the nation cited(The US), in which tax breaks are considered an a priori good. And, while it is true that a nation with 0% taxes would still have some form of income, that does not for a nanosecond address the point, you insolent little weasal. The point is money coming in has been reduced, particularly in an administration where money is flowing out faster.

To the intelligent debator, it is obvious that whether to raise or lower taxes is a context-sensitive thing. But just as Socialism can go too far(As in the UN fellow's statements), tax cuts can go too far, and thus I'm mocking both. And you, incidentally, for being a little twat.

[Col. Crackpot]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6762079/

Colin Powell fires back at Norwiegan douchebag:
-US Aid will be "Billions"
-The United States has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world

[Colonel Olrik]

The three million immediate €uros from the EU are also only the beginning, , and kind of an irrelevant comparison given the fact that all EU countries have been giving individual help and donations and they're not being included in that sum (today two cargo planes left Portugal filled with emergency supplies and medical teams, for example).

[phongn]

The Abraham Lincoln carrier group and Bonhomme Richard amphibious group (isn't Lonestar deployed with that one?) are deploying to the area. Those landing ships and helicopters should be useful in getting stuff to places where the transportation grid has been destroyed.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The Abraham Lincoln carrier group and Bonhomme Richard amphibious group (isn't Lonestar deployed with that one?) are deploying to the area. Those landing ships and helicopters should be useful in getting stuff to places where the transportation grid has been destroyed.

Yes, he is, and yes, both those vessels and the considerable air lift resources that they have--and in the case of the amphibious group, amphibious resources--are going to be quickly on hand. They will be absolutely vital for delivering supplies, doctors, and repair specialists to remote outlying islands and regions of Sumatra and Sri Lanka where the coastal infrastructure has been totally destroyed. Of course, the Indian and Thai carriers are already on hand and already engaged in rescue operations, so that will be five air-capable platforms and several amphibious-capable platforms, all of which are vital.

We have already dispatched a fair number of airplanes to Thailand and Sri Lanka with supplies as I understand it, at least twelve and maybe twice that. We are also preparing a sizeable contigent of troops on Okinawa for deployment to Thailand.

The amount that the US is giving as just been increased yet again, by about 30 million (the first amount of 6.5 million was from USAid and they've increased that amount to 35 million--or they have given another 35 million outright, I'm not sure). That's in addition to the 15 million of government support which is apparently coming from other agencies. And, again, this is over and above the cost of the deployment of forces and the supplies which are already being distributed.

[Queeb Salaron]

Would Americans mind being forced to donate a little bit of their income to help rebuild Asia? Not the reasonable portion of us, no. But forcing people to donate to charity is like holding a gun to a child's head while he brushes his teeth. It's a bit overkillish, and it's probably unnecessary.

The US has only pledged so much money, but don't discount the power of American citizens. I expect that over the next week or so, independent donations will be made to charitable funds that will more than make up for the amount of money not donated by the government.

Yes, people want to help, but people also want to do it on their own terms. Americans especially are more fond of donating what THEY think they can afford rather than what the government determines they can afford.

[Chmee]

We just don't do very good P.R. in this area. Yes, our charitable donations by private citizens are awesome .... Gates Foundation alone makes a serious difference on vaccinations in Third World countries and the funding of global AIDS research. But it's true that our per-capita government aid to developing countries is one of the lowest in the West.

When you combine that with us having very high per-capita military spending and being the leading arms dealer in the world ..... well, it's not hard to see why people have a jaded view of our humanitarianism. You just have to remind them that governments are one thing, people are another ...

[Chris OFarrell]

Oh and I withdraw my comments earlier after doing some research. I was under the impression that the amounts the governments were saying they would spend were inclusive of the operating costs of airlifts and supplies and so on, which they are not.

I wonder if anyone would have a running tally of just what has been sent in total. It must be getting higher. I mean Australia alone has sent a half dozen Hercs and a 707. And is going to keep it going. The US has sent in many of PACFLTS assets and has a mix of Hercs, Galaxies and Globemasters apperntly on the way or standing up. Many European countries are sending at least a few military lift aircraft....

[Chris OFarrell]

The Abraham Lincoln carrier group and Bonhomme Richard amphibious group (isn't Lonestar deployed with that one?) are deploying to the area.

Well he posted this in the earlier thread:

Rumor Mill already started on the Hizzile. These areas need Humanitarian Aid, and of course we're floating around with three 'Phibs. There is a slow realization that we may end up floating around the Indian Ocean for the next 4 months, without Hazard pay and us being on deployment in a non-taxfree zone, and no port visits.

It's a dirty Job, but someone has to do it. I hear they're evacuating what's left of Phuket.

[phongn]

Its the mobility which is really important. With the infrastructure destroyed if they simply pour in supplies now they might get stuck on the tarmac with no way to get out to those who need it.