Are We Stingy? Yes

[charrison]

linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

The Aussies are almost at $1b this accouts for 1.6% gdp

$1b is 0.009% US gdp just for a perspective.

I have a thread where all funding info is to be put...there's way too many of these

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

The Aussies are almost at $1b this accouts for 1.6% gdp

$1b is 0.009% US gdp just for a perspective.

I have a thread where all funding info is to be put...there's way too many of these

.au only has a 150B economy?

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

The Aussies are almost at $1b this accouts for 1.6% gdp

$1b is 0.009% US gdp just for a perspective.

I have a thread where all funding info is to be put...there's way too many of these

Just for perspective I doubt Australia's economy is only 62.5 Billion dollars a year. Second you're complaining about a .009% US donation? There are approximately 6.5billion people in the world. 150,000 have died. Whoopty fricken do. Multiple people have probably died since I began writing this post to respond to your stupidity. Since you want to play with numbers lets play.

150,000 people is what percentage of the worlds population?
Well to find percentage you use the following formula:

part......... percentage
----- = --------------
whole ......... 100

So we know the part is 150,000 and the whole is 6.5Billion (6,500,000,000)

150000 ................ x
--------- = ----------------
6,500,000,000 .... 100

So first we multiply both sides by 100 and we get :

15,000,000
-------------- = X
6,500,000,000

X= .00231

So Stunt according to you we are giving .009% of our GDP to fund .0023077% of the World Population, most of whom sent nothing when 9/11 happened. So it sounds to me like we are paying 4x more then we should be.

Now when we subtract .0023077 from .009 what do we get?

.00669 <----(notice how close it is to 666) This is the amount of our GDP that we are overpaying. Seeing as how the .009 you gave me and the 6.5B are just estimates. It is very possible and very likely that we are overpaying by .00666 of our GDP and would confirm what we've known all along- LIBERALS ARE THE DEVIL.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

The Aussies are almost at $1b this accouts for 1.6% gdp

$1b is 0.009% US gdp just for a perspective.

I have a thread where all funding info is to be put...there's way too many of these

Just for perspective I doubt Australia's economy is only 62.5 Billion dollars a year. Second you're complaining about a .009% US donation? There are approximately 6.5billion people in the world. 150,000 have died. Whoopty fricken do. Multiple people have probably died since I began writing this post to respond to your stupidity. Since you want to play with numbers lets play.

150,000 people is what percentage of the worlds population?
Well to find percentage you use the following formula:

part......... percentage
----- = --------------
whole ......... 100

So we know the part is 150,000 and the whole is 6.5Billion (6,500,000,000)

150000 ................ x
--------- = ----------------
6,500,000,000 .... 100

So first we multiply both sides by 100 and we get :

15,000,000
-------------- = X
6,500,000,000

X= .00231

So Stunt according to you we are giving .009% of our GDP to fund .0023077% of the World Population, most of whom sent nothing when 9/11 happened. So it sounds to me like we are paying 4x more then we should be.

Now when we subtract .0023077 from .009 what do we get?

.00669 <----(notice how close it is to 666) This is the amount of our GDP that we are overpaying. Seeing as how the .009 you gave me and the 6.5B are just estimates. It is very possible and very likely that we are overpaying by .00666 of our GDP and would confirm what we've known all along- LIBERALS ARE THE DEVIL.

^^ HAHAHA you put so much effort into that.
Too bad i didnt even read it all.

This is the site i was going from
Looks like they are incorrect on the gdp side if you want real numbers here:

Aussies: 914m (0.16% of GDP) - guess it was a measly decimal place you are freaking over
USA: 733m (0.007% of GDP) - that site is bad with decimals.

Anyways...your other calculation is wrong too...you don't give aid to dead people but the population affected by it. Also if you are woopeedooing 150,000 dead...what's 0.0007% of that...oh right it's your life...pretty insignificant

 

[Coomby]

The figures you are using aren't quite equal either. The 914m you mention is only the government aid and one package announced yesterday. I think the total amount is around 1.8 billion to Indonesia alone. Aid has also been given to Thailand and other countries affected. The people themselves have given over 150 million and companies have also given huge amounts, this will only increase as fundraisers and people returning to work from holidays can give more.

I believe the figure you give for the US is total figure as I read that the government gave 350 million.

Makes me proud to be an Aussie!

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Coomby
The figures you are using aren't quite equal either. The 914m you mention is only the government aid and one package announced yesterday. I think the total amount is around 1.8 billion to Indonesia alone. Aid has also been given to Thailand and other countries affected. The people themselves have given over 150 million and companies have also given huge amounts, this will only increase as fundraisers and people returning to work from holidays can give more.

I believe the figure you give for the US is total figure as I read that the government gave 350 million.

Makes me proud to be an Aussie!

Yeah for sure man!...welcome to anandtech!
don't get sucked in

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison
linkage

EVAL US multinationals have contributed >$300M so far.



$350-450M from the gov
300M from companies

Anyone have a figure on contributions from citizens yet?

We are going to clear $1B in aid easy.

:thumbsup::beer:

The Aussies are almost at $1b this accouts for 1.6% gdp

$1b is 0.009% US gdp just for a perspective.

I have a thread where all funding info is to be put...there's way too many of these

Just for perspective I doubt Australia's economy is only 62.5 Billion dollars a year. Second you're complaining about a .009% US donation? There are approximately 6.5billion people in the world. 150,000 have died. Whoopty fricken do. Multiple people have probably died since I began writing this post to respond to your stupidity. Since you want to play with numbers lets play.

150,000 people is what percentage of the worlds population?
Well to find percentage you use the following formula:

part......... percentage
----- = --------------
whole ......... 100

So we know the part is 150,000 and the whole is 6.5Billion (6,500,000,000)

150000 ................ x
--------- = ----------------
6,500,000,000 .... 100

So first we multiply both sides by 100 and we get :

15,000,000
-------------- = X
6,500,000,000

X= .00231

So Stunt according to you we are giving .009% of our GDP to fund .0023077% of the World Population, most of whom sent nothing when 9/11 happened. So it sounds to me like we are paying 4x more then we should be.

Now when we subtract .0023077 from .009 what do we get?

.00669 <----(notice how close it is to 666) This is the amount of our GDP that we are overpaying. Seeing as how the .009 you gave me and the 6.5B are just estimates. It is very possible and very likely that we are overpaying by .00666 of our GDP and would confirm what we've known all along- LIBERALS ARE THE DEVIL.

^^ HAHAHA you put so much effort into that.
Too bad i didnt even read it all.

This is the site i was going from
Looks like they are incorrect on the gdp side if you want real numbers here:

Aussies: 914m (0.16% of GDP) - guess it was a measly decimal place you are freaking over
USA: 733m (0.007% of GDP) - that site is bad with decimals.

Anyways...your other calculation is wrong too...you don't give aid to dead people but the population affected by it. Also if you are woopeedooing 150,000 dead...what's 0.0007% of that...oh right it's your life...pretty insignificant

So I called your BS and then you go back and change your statistics? Laff. I thought about putting in there that the money isn't going towards the dead people but in all reality it is. Would the living over there be getting the money if it wasn't for the dead? It's a fair statement that almost noone pays this much attention to situations in countries that don't get all this press- Africa, some parts of South America where the people are starving. Hell, (you libs know about that right? remember 666 by your statistics) there are people dying of starvation in this country and living off the streets. Every dollar you want to give to the people in Asia I'd rather give to all races of my fellow citizens that need help or increase the pay of our deployed soldiers. At least what we give to them comes back to us in way of a stronger economy. In terms of your point about me being insignificat I completely agree.
I wouldn't sacrifice one of my countrymen to bring back all 150,000 of those people- it's not my decision.

 

[Stunt]

^^ I didnt change my stats...
I just took the data off the site which were incorrect. I don't double check everything...pointless except for pesky nitpickers.
and why are you calling me a "lib" and referring to liberals as the devil...

it is very selfish of you to only want to invest in your own nations economy. Why stop at the national level why not stop all funds going to the poorer red states from the blues as it doesnt help the blue state's economies?

 

[hysperion]

Originally posted by: Stunt
^^ I didnt change my stats...
I just took the data off the site which were incorrect. I don't double check everything...pointless except for pesky nitpickers.
and why are you calling me a "lib" and referring to liberals as the devil...

it is very selfish of you to only want to invest in your own nations economy. Why stop at the national level why not stop all funds going to the poorer red states from the blues as it doesnt help the blue state's economies?

I'm not even gonna argue with you. You made yourself look like a retard and all I did was point it out.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: Stunt
^^ I didnt change my stats...
I just took the data off the site which were incorrect. I don't double check everything...pointless except for pesky nitpickers.
and why are you calling me a "lib" and referring to liberals as the devil...

it is very selfish of you to only want to invest in your own nations economy. Why stop at the national level why not stop all funds going to the poorer red states from the blues as it doesnt help the blue state's economies?

I'm not even gonna argue with you. You made yourself look like a retard and all I did was point it out.

hehe...fine with me...
made too many assuming, nit picky, brain dead commments in this thread eh?...
see you in the next one

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: hysperion

Originally posted by: Stunt
^^ I didnt change my stats...
I just took the data off the site which were incorrect. I don't double check everything...pointless except for pesky nitpickers.
and why are you calling me a "lib" and referring to liberals as the devil...

it is very selfish of you to only want to invest in your own nations economy. Why stop at the national level why not stop all funds going to the poorer red states from the blues as it doesnt help the blue state's economies?

I'm not even gonna argue with you. You made yourself look like a retard and all I did was point it out.

hehe...fine with me...
made too many assuming, nit picky, brain dead commments in this thread eh?...
see you in the next one

I think it would be more fair to wait until actual donations have been given and the money is put to use. The amount of aid is already staggering, and it is hard to put a tangible monetary value on troops, ships, helicopters, planes, and supplies. The US has not always given aid in the form of money, but it tends to give more aid in the way of manpower, military support, food, water, materials, ships, planes, etc. I don't know why this has to be a contest about who gives the most, because there is simply no way to calculate(reliably) all the aid from every country. Powell has specifically said that he will give more as it is needed. The amount of personnel and supplies heading there right now should show the US is serious about relief.

Yes, I know, waiting for everything to be surveyed and the supplies and money to be put to use wouldn't fit your agenda, but I'm just trying to be rational.

 

[chrisms]

Even when we try to help out people we get sh*t talked about us. Fvck the world, let the Europeans complain. That's all they're good at.

 

[Centinel]

So we contribute to the disaster, then we're bitched at for not contributing enough?

That's like giving money to the Salvation Army guy ringing the bell at Christmas (which is apparently a conflict of church and state so most stores have banned them) yellling at you for not giving enough.

Jesus people, DONATIONS are DONATIONS helping those people out.

Of course, noone wants to tally up the monitary costs of supporing the men of an entire carrier battle group each day that are currently actually there on the ground.

but anyway.

 

[Genx87]

I don't want to donate to the Iraq fiasco anymore. Where are the forms to opt out?

Move to Canada.

We say that we want to be safer at home...so we spend $200 Billion blowing up other countries and give $35 million to help disaster destroyed nations. Sounds reasonable.

How much money did we spend in WWII? Not once was the mainland of the US attacked.
Again if you dont like it then pull out your pocket book, join the red cross, go over there and help.

People who piss and moan about a handout are the lowest forms of scum.

Good...fund the military. As for the reconstruction of Iraq, fvck it! Let the people of the US donate to rebuild it if they wish? How about that? You don't mind the "goodwill" towards Iraq, do you?

Brilliant strategy. You complain terrorism will be headed off if we help these people in Sri Lanka but somehow forget if we let the people of Iraq burn they wont be more pissed? Liberals these days are just delusional.

Our Constitution doesn't include starting pre-emptive wars by lying to Congress either, but we're there anyway. Only an ass like you would even state such bullsh*t.

Pure conjecture.

On your comment of my being un-American - I raise my big ole fat middle finger to you! People like you screw our Constitution every day and then use the paper for toilet paper. What a waste of good air you are.

Grow up

I notice you don't mind rebuilding Iraq with the big ole Welfare package do you? $200,000,000,000 must not equal higher taxes. Watching US military walk around the streets of Iraq with millions of dollars in CASH handing it out (after negotiation) for damage. How about let's look for DONATIONS to rebuild Iraq then?

So you think we should let the people of Iraq rot? What good will come of that? Do you think past your next meal?

 

[0roo0roo]

i think a carrier costs what? a million dollars a day? 2 squadrons of helicopters off that carrier supply road unaccessable areas of the most devastated areas? whats that worth? while many of the countries that don't fund their militaries can't do much but throw money...which doesn't do the people much good at this point. tangible assets>donation fund. so numbers aren't much alone. it probably feels good though, american bashing always does.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
i think a carrier costs what? a million dollars a day? 2 squadrons of helicopters off that carrier supply road unaccessable areas of the most devastated areas? while many of the countries that don't fund their militaries can't do much but throw money...which doesn't do the people much good at this point. tangible assets>donation fund. so numbers aren't much alone. it probably feels good though, american bashing always does.

Oh agreed there are few militaries with the capabilities of the US. Getting the aid to victims would be harder. But definately not impossible.
The rest of the world is and can do what the US is currently doing. As efficiently...maybe not...but they are doing much more than throwing money. Look at the link i posted and all the military efforts being executed.

Also if you want to think about how much the carrier and missions are costing you...you might as well work in how much you are saving on training operations and driving around in the ocean
The cost of having the carrier fleet there is marginally more expensive than if there had been no tsunami.

Just being a Devils Advocate. The world is doing an excellent job with aid contributions and efforts :thumbsup:

 

[KBeee]

"These numbers leave out private donations, which dwarf goverment aid. "
Not quite true

Also fron NYT -

"Land of Penny Pinchers
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
<snip>
Americans give 15 cents per day per person in official development assistance to poor countries. The average American spends four times that on soft drinks daily.

In 2003, the latest year for which figures are available, we increased such assistance by one-fifth, for President Bush has actually been much better about helping poor countries than President Clinton was. But as a share of our economy, our contribution still left us ranked dead last among 22 top donor countries.

We gave 15 cents for every $100 of national income to poor countries. Denmark gave 84 cents, the Netherlands gave 80 cents, Belgium gave 60 cents, France gave 41 cents, and Greece gave 21 cents (that was the lowest share, beside our own).

It is sometimes said that Americans make up for low official aid with private charitable donations. Nope. By OECD calculations, private donations add 6 cents a day to the official U.S. figure - meaning that we still give only 21 cents a day per person. "

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: KBeee

"These numbers leave out private donations, which dwarf goverment aid. "
Not quite true

Also fron NYT -

"Land of Penny Pinchers
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
<snip>
Americans give 15 cents per day per person in official development assistance to poor countries. The average American spends four times that on soft drinks daily.

In 2003, the latest year for which figures are available, we increased such assistance by one-fifth, for President Bush has actually been much better about helping poor countries than President Clinton was. But as a share of our economy, our contribution still left us ranked dead last among 22 top donor countries.

We gave 15 cents for every $100 of national income to poor countries. Denmark gave 84 cents, the Netherlands gave 80 cents, Belgium gave 60 cents, France gave 41 cents, and Greece gave 21 cents (that was the lowest share, beside our own).

It is sometimes said that Americans make up for low official aid with private charitable donations. Nope. By OECD calculations, private donations add 6 cents a day to the official U.S. figure - meaning that we still give only 21 cents a day per person. "

That's only developmental aid through one program.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: KBeee

"These numbers leave out private donations, which dwarf goverment aid. "
Not quite true

Also fron NYT -

"Land of Penny Pinchers
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
<snip>
Americans give 15 cents per day per person in official development assistance to poor countries. The average American spends four times that on soft drinks daily.

In 2003, the latest year for which figures are available, we increased such assistance by one-fifth, for President Bush has actually been much better about helping poor countries than President Clinton was. But as a share of our economy, our contribution still left us ranked dead last among 22 top donor countries.

We gave 15 cents for every $100 of national income to poor countries. Denmark gave 84 cents, the Netherlands gave 80 cents, Belgium gave 60 cents, France gave 41 cents, and Greece gave 21 cents (that was the lowest share, beside our own).

It is sometimes said that Americans make up for low official aid with private charitable donations. Nope. By OECD calculations, private donations add 6 cents a day to the official U.S. figure - meaning that we still give only 21 cents a day per person. "

How much do donations come out to per capita? What does it come down to per person? I'm pretty sure the US would be on top in that case because in terms of actual gross dollars, the US is the biggest contributor to International Aid by quite a margin, iirc.

The issue of national income seems to penalize the US for having such a huge economy. What about a comparison of personal income percentage of charitable contributions to international aid. THis whole "based on national income" seems to be a bit of a strawman.

As far as private contributions, see here:

http://www.usaid.gov/fani/over...view_devassistance.htm

At $9.9 billion, official development assistance accounts for just 17 percent of U.S. assistance to developing countries (table 1). Private international assistance, by contrast, is $33.6 billion - 60 percent of the U.S. contribution, and projected to grow to 69 percent by 2010. Every year the publication of the OECD?s report on development assistance results in press reports and statements by academics and opinion leaders disparaging America?s stinginess. They assert that U.S. foreign policy will be ineffective without more official development assistance.53 They claim that U.S. foreign aid programs collapsed after the Cold War.54 But official development assistance is a limited and outdated way of measuring a country?s giving, and donors should reevaluate it, given the enormous growth in the private sector around the world.

In 2000 the international affairs budget totaled $22.6 billion-so at $9.9 billion, official development assistance accounted for less than half. That official assistance consists primarily of allocations to USAID, the Peace Corps, multilateral institutions, and certain programs sponsored by the State Department and Department of Defense (table 2). The other $12.7 billion spent on international affairs represents all other contributions.

Despite reservations about government aid, Americans have a long tradition of domestic and international generosity. Money finds its way from the United States to developing countries through churches, private charities, foundations, and remittances by U.S. workers to their homelands. In 2000 U.S. universities and colleges gave more to developing countries in foreign scholarships than Australia, Belgium, Norway, Spain, and Switzerland each gave in official development assistance. Remittances from U.S. immigrants to their homelands exceeded official development assistance from Japan-the second largest provider (in dollars) of government aid to developing countries in 2001.

Over the past 25 years U.S. private giving has grown significantly. Churches and other religious congregations initially played the largest role in international giving through relief and humanitarian assistance as well as overseas missions. Then colleges, universities, and foundations began responding to international development needs with scholarships and support for foreign universities and research centers. The number and budgets of private voluntary organizations have also grown as Americans have offered their money and time to international causes. With globalization and changing immigration patterns, U.S. corporations have also increased their philanthropy to developing countries. And U.S. immigrants, many from developing countries, have been sending more and more money back to their homelands.

 

[Geardo]

I don't want us to spend one penny on foreign aid, I want to spend all our tax dollars on weapons!