Are We Stingy? Yes

[cal04]

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.

Bush administration officials help create that perception gap. Fuming at the charge of stinginess, Mr. Powell pointed to disaster relief and said the United States "has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world." But for development aid, America gave $16.2 billion in 2003; the European Union gave $37.1 billion. In 2002, those numbers were $13.2 billion for America, and $29.9 billion for Europe.


more
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/opinion/30thu2.html?oref=login&oref=login

[hermetic]

1. Depends on who's doing the getting

Lloyd S. Blankfein, president and chief operating officer of Goldman Sachs, received a nearly $20 million bonus in 2003 http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/28/business/28bonus.html

Here's another frame of reference: In 2003, E. Stanley O'Neal, the CEO of Merrill Lynch, (and a record-setting fundraiser for Bush's campaign http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/bushbeat/archive/000184.php ), got a bonus of $13.5 million plus stock worth $11.2 million, as the Times calculated it.
If you're keeping track, this is the running total:
• U.S. aid after tsunami: $35 million
• Bonuses paid in 2003 to corporate execs Blankfein and O'Neal: $44.7 million

[tx_dem41]

2. I have a problem with an editorial based on a statement by a UN

official, that we now know was never uttered by that official.

[diddlysquat]

3. I missed something here.

How do we know that it was never uttered by a UN official? Is there a link to that?

[tx_dem41]

4. Link to what you missed.

http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200453#1326

[diddlysquat]

6. Thanks! that's what I needed.

[noamnety]

5. We are cheap bastards

We give a fair amount because we are huge, but as a percentage of GNP, we are pathetic. We give about .1 - .14% in developmental aid. Most of Europe gives several times that amount. There's a chart here: http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp

I stumbled on this while reading about disaster aid - Saddam offering help to the US after 9/11 if we asked for it, despite all the economic sanctions we put on him. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/09/20/gen.iraq.saddam/

[cattleman22]

7. Why do most of these editorials and posts ignore the giving by individuals

There is an article on MSNBC that people from the US have privately given tens of millions of dollars. Shouldn't that number be included in the total amount that the US has donated?

[BrklynLiberal]

8. Because that does not represent the government policy

[Kellanved]

10. Because private donors behave pretty much the same

Per capita US citizens act pretty much like their country. I have no actual data on hand, but the US is pretty far behind in the per capita private donations, when compared to other industrialized countries. (not for the current disaster, I mean as a general trend).

Edit: Americans generally donate far more per capita, but much of it goes into things tax-financed in other countries (churches etc.). In the international development department France, Germany, Japan, and a few more out-donate the US (not just per-capita, AFAIR).

[The Judged]

9. Where the average weekly income on Wall Street is over $5,000.00

and the minimum wage in most states is $5.15 hourly, and there are states with NO minimum wage, I don't need America's response to Tsunami to shape my opinion on American stinginess.

[LibertyorDeath]

11. ROFL

" According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries"

24% OMFG who conducted this Poll? is this for real?

Tell me this is not true. Most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries

24% LOL :)

[eauclaireliberal]

12. Here's the solution to the aid problem:

The Sri Lankan, Thai, and Indonesia governments should give free drilling rights to the BFEE in Southeast Asia.

There: problem solved.