OPINION & EDITORIAL
Stingy states of America
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Julie Isen:
- Cystic Fibrosis in need of cure (May 2, 2005)
- Russ Feingold in 2008? (September 1, 2005)
- Inequality looms over Wisconsin (September 16, 2005)
- Waging war on women's health (September 20, 2005)
- Wisconsin deserves FEMA relief funds (September 29, 2005)
Related Stories:
- Hmong deserve political asylum (March 1, 2007)
- Water wars loom over horizon (May 4, 2007)
- Remember the history of war (March 1, 2002)
- Where's a Neo-con to turn? (May 1, 2003)
- Escalating crisis imperils region (October 10, 2006)
by Julie Isen
Monday, January 17, 2005
Since Dec. 26, 2004, the world’s attention has been focused, and rightfully so, on the horrible tidal waves resulting from the earthquake in Asia. Cities are ravaged. Parts of Southeast Asia and East Africa that were once filled with tourists and resorts are now merely ghost towns. Over 155,000 people are believed to be dead and even more are missing. Hospitals are packed with survivors. Food and shelter are stretched thin across the dilapidated cities. Families are devastated. One Swedish teenager lost his parents, grandmother, cousin and aunt in a moment’s time. CNN notes U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as commenting on the aftereffects, “I have never seen so much utter destruction mile after mile.”
The tsunami was one of the world’s worst natural disasters. Soon after Mother Nature struck, aid poured in from all over the world, showing what a capacity for compassion the global community really has. In a time of need, the world can be counted on for help.
And yet, some rich countries have already been branded “stingy” by the U.N. humanitarian aid chief, Jan Egeland from Norway. Not having named any country specifically, it was a surprise that the United States came out with an extremely defensive reaction, personally attacked Egeland and labeled him “misguided and ill-informed,” as reported by Pacificnews.org. The U.S. later added $20 million to the $15 million previously offered. The total is now up to $350 million, which is still quite lower than the United States can afford.
There is, of course, only one explanation for this suspicious reaction: the United States is aware that it could be doing much more.
Australia, the lovely and generous land down under, has pledged $1 billion over the next five years to Indonesia, the country hit hardest in the tsunami. The country, under the courageous leadership of Prime Minister Howard, is overseeing an aid program in conjunction with Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. Australia is giving almost three times what America is giving. And all of this is coming from a country that has a GDP that is over $10,000 less per capita than that of the United States.
There are countries whose generosity has not been recognized, such as the millions of dollars and planes filled with supplies and food sent from Israel.
The outpouring of love and support that the United States received after Sept. 11 was simply incredible, and the United States has failed to return the same support in a disaster that took more than forty times as many lives. Not to mention that less than 1 percent of the U.S. budget is currently being spent on foreign aid, which is near the lowest percentage among the industrialized countries.
Now, let’s compare this $350 million to other things that America is spending money on. So far, approximately $40 million is being spent on the inauguration parties that are coming up soon. Hundreds of thousands of people have died in a natural catastrophe and we feel it is more important to spend money on parties recognizing the winner of an election that cost around $4 billion alone than rebuilding the suffering communities across the world.
Then, of course, there is the Iraq war, in which we will have invested almost $200 billion. Imagine that. Billions on a war that was based on a lie — a war we can’t get out of in a timely manner or with a clear strategy. Think of it, extra money lying around just in case of a natural disaster, or a disaster of any type, for that matter. Bush’s government also plans to spend around $13 billion on nuclear weapons this year. That’s just wonderful.
It’s important to note that America is helping the people of Southeast Asia and East Africa. Individual Americans and non-profit organizations have donated millions of dollars, food and supplies to relief efforts. At the time of this article’s writing, there was also a large telethon planned with George Clooney hosting. However, being such a wealthy country, we can and should do better.
To those who say this kind of thinking is just politicizing a natural disaster to get an agenda across: It’s not politicizing if all you are trying to do is get more money to those who need it; those whose homes are ruined, those whose breadwinners are dead or missing, those whose lives have been ruined and changed forever. They need money. We have money to give. Your bickering is only making matters worse.
Our generation has never seen such a disaster, and it’s time for unparalleled support. People are in such dire straits; giving them money is the least we can do. We will hopefully never be able to comprehend the horror that they endured, but we can do more to help them recover.
Julie Isen (jisen@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in political science.
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 3:44am):
Julie, that $350 million figure is a couple of weeks old, and much more has been donated from private sources around the country. No Julie, the United States is not being stingy! We have never been, so keep your America-bashing to yourself!
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 3:59am):
"There is, of course, only one explanation for this suspicious reaction: the United States is aware that it could be doing much more."
But you forget, Julie, that at first no one was aware of just how serious the crisis was until the death toll started climbing. Then the money really started pouring in. And the amount started climbing well beyond the $350 million you stated.
Why do you insist on continually assailing the US while the generosity of Americans keeps on growing? Will you ever be satisfied that there are enough people who care? Must you always use guilt to squeeze money out of people's pockets for worthy causes? Keep it up and maybe no one will care anymore.
By the way, what the hell have YOU done for the tsunami victims? What have YOU and whatever radical campus organization you belong to done to help the effort? Probably nothing but sit around and bitch at everybody else!
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 4:13am):
I'm also interested in knowing just how much a certain group of local orgs are spending to ride chartered buses to Washington DC to "turn their backs" on president Bush's inauguration. Couldn't they do better by sending the money to aid the tsunami relief effort.
Going all that distance on a crowded bus just to make a symbolic protest that everyone will forget about one week later is just plain stupid. Isn't there a more immediate need elsewhere in the world? Aren't there more pressing concerns at the moment besides protesting something that's already said and done? What's the point? Where's the logic in all that?
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 10:29am):
Speaking of wealthy countries which should do better, what about their Islamic comrades in the Middle East drenched in oil wealth from gouging the rest of the world with ever higher oil prices?
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 11:02am):
Australia is giving more money because they are trying to expand their sphere of influence.
Colin Powell has said US aid for the tsunami victims will eventually reach $1 billion.
The US gave over $23 billion in aid to developing countries and for emergency relief in 2003 (consult the US Agency for International Development for exact figures: http://www.usaid.gov/). That's double what any other country gave. And while it's true that it's a lower proportion of GDP than that given by many other countries (including Egeland's native Norway), let's not forget that the US also finances the national defense of several other nations, either in full or in part, including most of Europe. So the accusation of stinginess is neither fair nor accurate.
The wealthy Muslim countries have given next to nothing because their rulers don't care about human life, except insofar as lives can be used to advance cynical propagandist goals.
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 11:52am):
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/12-30-2004.gif
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 12:09pm):
Ah Julie, look how the Trolls come out from under their Bridge when you accuse the Greatest Nation on Earth of, gasp, Hypocrisy!
Yes, we are the the wealthiest nation on earth, and our resources abundant, and in the Role of a Lifetime, Jan Egelund did exactly what an Officer of the International Community should do....chide us.
For in the wake of that Terrible Wave we had a Golden Opportunity to do right...and we damn near Blew It.
Of course, we give a huge amount of money, but compared to the Vast Oceans of Wealth our nation pilots its Boats of Industry upon, it was a Pittance.
Germany gave nearly twice as much per citizen as the United States did, and that's taking in account the $350 million officially pledged, even if More may be On the Table.
What is the problem with the right? It is that Their Efforts are Never Good Enough for us Liberals. Is that true?
Yes, and no. If President Bush seem'd more Inclined to Help, then to Throw Himself a Glorious Party, then the Mr. Egelund may have been less pushy.
When we finally got round to Making Things Right, it was rightly seen as an Opportunity, Nearly Lost.
What is the end result? Muslim revolutionaries dispensing more relief than U.S. or Western Agencies in Banda Aceh, a damaged (again) international image, and Ridicule Rightly Deserved.
Bush, you Damn Near Fucked Us Again.
The Above Posters are...as usual...Morons of the Lowest Order.
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 12:12pm):
It is I, Locke, the Enlightened One, speaking Ill of those who Question the Liberal Ideology. We, after all, have to remember that the Taking of Stands, and Defense of Intellectual Honor, is something that Liberals Do Best.
Locke, out.
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 2:50pm):
This wanky article comes from the same airhead who suggested keeping ratty apartments downtown so she may look out upon them from her tower.
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 6:07pm):
The U.S. has always done more for others than any other country in the world, plain and simple. I'm sick and tired of tax-and-spend liberals bitching about how "stingy" we Americans are. Europeans don't contribute dick to any international relief effort compared to the billions we Americans dole out every year. From now on I'll be as stingy as I damn well wanna be!
When liberals stop bitching and start contributing something themselves, then I'll be interested in hearing their opinions on generosity. Until then, to hell with 'em!
Anonymous (January 17, 2005 @ 11:23pm):
"When liberals stop bitching and start contributing something themselves, then I'll be interested in hearing their opinions on generosity. Until then, to hell with 'em!"
Yeah, hi, I'm a tax-and-spend liberal who's just as pissed off as you that we're being called stingy. $1 billion from our government, and probably several times that from private citizens' donations? That's not stingy, it's extremely generous. And where the hell were Egeland and people like him when Florida and the Caribbean got hit by four devastating hurricanes in one month last year?
So stop complaining about liberal bitching. If you paid any attention to the world instead of just ranting, you'd know that it's only the most extreme, idiotic liberals that are calling us stingy, all evidence to the contrary. Just like it's only the most extreme, idiotic conservatives who think Reaganomics actually work, all evidence to the contrary.
Rather than turning this into another idiotic pissing contest between liberals and conservatives, we ought to present a united front against people like Egeland and the author of this article and tell them to go to hell. If they think we're so stingy, they should empty out their own bank accounts.
Anonymous (January 18, 2005 @ 1:51am):
"Rather than turning this into another idiotic pissing contest between liberals and conservatives..."
I am a liberal who does not believe in tax-and-spend. Conservatives aren't the only ones who are pissed, and tax-and-spend liberals like you are also on our shit list, punk!
Anonymous (January 18, 2005 @ 10:22am):
Beyond all that there is the problem that they cannot even get the support to the people who need it. Most of the money is currently just sitting there while they try to figure out how to get supplies to the people who need them, so it makes more sense for the US to continue giving as the opportunity presents itself than to blow their whole load now.
Anonymous (January 18, 2005 @ 11:34am):
"...so it makes more sense for the US to continue giving as the opportunity presents itself than to blow their whole load now."
Yeah, um, whatever.
Anonymous (January 18, 2005 @ 10:06pm):
"There are countries whose generosity has not been recognized, such as the millions of dollars and planes filled with supplies and food sent from Israel."
Come on, don't be pathetic, You don't have a record of what they have contributed to the tsunami victims. They hardly gave anyhting.
The real issues of Israel and Tsunami here are 2:
1) The stingy states of america gave Israel $6.8 Billion last year, like every year, for no good reason, and Israel is living off of that, that coulld be health insurance for 6.8 million americans, not to mention Asian victims of the disastor.
2) Israeli Rabbinical creas went into Thailand after the disastor, into areas where Israeli tourist where know to have been, and started searching for their bodies, holding and preventing the burrial of the piles of thousands of dead bodies, risking the spread of disease, and the death of htousands others, just so that Jews from Israel are not burried with infidels (Goyeem or Non-Jews).
Now that is bullshit,
Anonymous (January 18, 2005 @ 10:16pm):
Ah, sounds like the anti-Semites are seizing an opportunity to mouth off. Yeah, I figured the left-wing Nazis in Madison wouldn't want to pass up the chance. Another good reason to ignore liberals altogether.
