| Author | Message | ||
     tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1826 Registered: 3-2004 |
Marc: What;s really funny is being told I have to send money through charity, but should rebel against property taxes, or higher taxes in general. Does this mean I should choose to whom I contribute my (nonexistent) resources? I would rather trust the government, which is much more powerful than I, to do so. However, if I can't trust the government, I am in a bit of a silly little bind, am I not? Well, laugh hardy as you drink up to the new year, Marc! | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1827 Registered: 3-2004 |
Whoa, mem just got her name on the FBI's most wanted list, archive, above!! Great company, eh, mem? | ||
| notehead Supporter Username: Notehead Post Number: 1839 Registered: 5-2001  |
No, mem, I read your posts and I think I understand what you are saying. I just can't help feeling that, say, 1% is too much to ask our government to spend on disaster recovery operations around the world. We are the largest contributor in the world, and I am proud of that, but I think we ought to do even more. Other wealthy countries are no less behooved to provide generous assistance, but my attention is primarily on my own government. | ||
| Rick B Citizen Username: Ruck1977 Post Number: 424 Registered: 8-2003 |
tulip, from what I read, my understanding was that the sensors were installed in the Pacific because seismic activity was higher there. However, the Indian and Atlantic oceans were *relatively* calm in comparison to the Pacific. I don't think anyone is to blame. blame is not giong to help anyone at this point.... | ||
| Mustt_mustt Citizen Username: Mustt_mustt Post Number: 179 Registered: 8-2003 |
NAGAPPATTINAM, India — To save his only son, Vijay Kumar hugged the boy as hard as he could. But in the struggle against the horrific power of the waves, that last embrace just wasn't enough. Kumar fought hard. He refused to let the first wave take 3-year-old Rajaraman when it lifted the pair to the height of a two-story building and whirled them around. He wouldn't let go when the wave bashed father and screaming child against snapped trees, tumbling chunks of concrete and other debris as they tried to keep their heads above the choking, dark water. But then the tsunami dropped them as quickly as it had snatched them, and something wooden, a tree or piece of a smashed boat, hit Kumar hard in the back. The force of the sudden blow threw open his arms. The water pulled Rajaraman away and down into a roiling torrent, and all his father could do was watch the terrified face of his son as the boy disappeared. On Tuesday, Kumar still had not found his son's body, so there cannot be a burial, a proper goodbye. And a father's heart is as empty as the menacing ocean is deep. "What else is there left in life? I have lost my son," he wept outside the ruins of his home in the port area of this southern Indian city. "My God, what did we do wrong to lose him?" | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1828 Registered: 3-2004 |
Rick B: I think your info may be a bit off. 255,000 people lost their lives in an earthquake in China in 1976, and many major quakes have been in the Asian region. Scientists have known Sumatra had a potential for earthquakes/tsunamis. Other tidal waves have hit Alaska, and there's a good warning system in the Pacific. I'll look it up for you. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1829 Registered: 3-2004 |
Rick B: Researchers say the earthquake broke on a fault line deep off the Sumatra coast, running north and south for about 600 miles or as far north as the Andaman and Nicobar islands between India and Mynamar. "It's a huge rupture," said Charles McCreary, director of the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center near Honolulu. "It's conceivable that the sea floor deformed all the way along that rupture, and that's what initiates tsunamis." | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1830 Registered: 3-2004 |
On 17 August, Indonesian officials banned climbing on the Mount Kaba Volcano. Since the 7.3 earthquake occurred on 3 June 2000, the seismic activity at Mount Kaba has increased. All three of Mount Kaba's craters have been releasing smoke. Geologists are drilling around the craters to channel lava, steam, and gas out in an attempt to prevent an eruption. This information summarized from Discovery Online. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1831 Registered: 3-2004 |
Quakes Strike Asia But Are They Linked? By Jason Szep, Reuters, June 9, 2000 The earth moved in Asia Thursday as powerful aftershocks rocked the west coast of Indonesia's Sumatra island, and a series of earthquakes jolted China, Myanmar and Japan. Experts said last Sunday's quake in Indonesia's Bengkulu province, measuring 7.9 on the Richter scale, may have led to a shift in the huge tectonic plates deep under Asia's seas, prompting the burst of seismic activity this week. Japan was rocked by three fairly strong earthquakes this week, while China and Myanmar were each hit by two. Nearly all measured above five on the open-ended Richter scale. “It is not unusual to have a sequence of activity on a single seismic belt, some of it can be quite intense,'' said C.M. Tam of the Hong Kong Observatory, referring to the circum Pacific belt stretching from New Zealand across a wide swathe of East Asia. Bengkulu's earthquake, which killed at least 120 people, injured some 1,300 and damaged thousands of homes and buildings, has spawned around 400 aftershocks, seismologists said. The Bengkulu earthquake, which appears to have occurred after a rupture between two key plates - the Pacific and Indian plates - may have triggered a chain reaction of seismic activity along the circum Pacific and Eurasia belts, the seismologists said. Professor Ding Jianhai of China's State Seismological Bureau said the Sumatra, Myanmar and China quakes all occurred along the Eurasia seismic belt stretching from the Mediterranean sea through the Himalayas to Indonesia. He described the belt as “very active'' and said he believed all the tremors were related. “According to our estimates, there are about average 18 earthquakes at more than seven on the Richter scale globally in a year, mainly in two belts, the Euroasia belt and the belt around the Pacific,'' he said. Aftershocks from the Bengkulu quake included a major tremor measuring 6.2 early Thursday, but most experts expect the aftershocks and other regional seismic activity to wind down steadily. | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 4412 Registered: 5-2001  |
Notehead, I hear you. But is there a point where we are too generous, and begin to suffer internally because of it? The world's wealthier countries are expected to contribute %.7 of their respective .gdps per year in foreign aid, but no one does, so perhaps the whole foreign aid/disaster recovery strategy needs to be reworked, for instance, Israel has been the #1 US foreign aid recipient for decades, prior to my studies I had always thought Israel was doing rather well on it's own - perhaps shifting commitments before we go broke is in order. Anyway, I hope the tsunami victims get all the help they need. | ||
| Pippi Supporter Username: Pippi Post Number: 600 Registered: 8-2003  |
Bush Criticizes U.N. 'Stingy' Comment By JOHN HEILPRIN WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush defended American generosity Wednesday, even as his administration figures out how to pay for more help beyond the $35 million it has already promised to tsunami victims in Asia. In his first remarks since the weekend disaster that so far has killed more than 76,000, Bush - like some in his administration previously - took umbrage at a U.N. official's suggestion that the world's richest nations were ``stingy,'' and indicated much more is expected to be spent to help the victims. ``Well, I felt like the person who made that statement was very misguided and ill-informed,'' Bush said from his Texas ranch. ``We're a very generous, kindhearted nation, and, you know, what you're beginning to see is a typical response from America.'' Bush noted that the United States provided $2.4 billion ``in food, in cash, in humanitarian relief to cover the disasters for last year. ... That's 40 percent of all the relief aid given in the world last year.'' But the journey from the $35 million to potentially $1 billion or more in help for the tens of thousands of latest victims is fraught with bureaucratic twists. First, the U.S. Agency for International Development, which distributes foreign aid, will have to ask for more money, since the initial $35 million aid package drained its emergency relief fund, said Andrew Natsios, the agency's administrator. ``We just spent it,'' Natsios said in an interview Tuesday with The Associated Press. ``We'll be talking to the (White House) budget office ... (about) what to do at this point.'' Natsios said the Pentagon also is spending tens of millions to mobilize an additional relief operation, with C-130 transport planes winging their way from Dubai to Indonesia with tents, blankets, food and water bags. As of Wednesday, dozens of countries and relief groups had pledged at least $261 million in help for South and East Asia, said the Geneva-based U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. ``There's no doubt there'll be more than that,'' said Jamie McGoldrick, the U.N. officer in charge of coordinating the international response from Switzerland. ``The size of this thing is a challenge.'' But measuring the generosity of the United States depends on the yardstick. The U.S. government is always near the top in total humanitarian aid dollars - even before private donations are counted - but it finishes near the bottom of the list of rich countries when that money is compared to gross national product. Such figures were what prompted Jan Egeland - the United Nations' emergency relief coordinator and former head of the Norwegian Red Cross - to challenge the giving of rich nations. ``We were more generous when we were less rich, many of the rich countries,'' Egeland said. ``And it is beyond me, why are we so stingy, really. ... Even Christmas time should remind many Western countries at least how rich we have become.'' Egeland told reporters Tuesday his complaint wasn't directed at any nation in particular. Secretary of State Colin Powell clearly was annoyed while making the rounds of the morning television news shows Tuesday. He said it remains to be determined what the eventual U.S. contribution will be, but that he agrees with estimates that the total international aid effort ``will run into the billions of dollars.'' Natsios was quick to point out Tuesday that foreign assistance for development and emergency relief rose from $10 billion in President Clinton's last year to $24 billion under President Bush in 2003. Powell said U.S. assistance for this week's earthquake and tsunamis alone will eventually exceed $1 billion. ``The notion that the United States is not generous is simply not true, factually,'' Natsios said. The United States uses the most common measure of the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a group of 30 rich nations that counts development aid. By that measure, the United States spent almost $15.8 billion for ``official development assistance'' to developing countries in 2003. Next closest was Japan, at $8.9 billion. That doesn't include billions more the United States spends in other areas, such as AIDS and HIV programs and other U.N. assistance. Measured another way, as a percentage of gross national product, the OECD's figures on development aid show that as of April, none of the world's richest countries donated even 1 percent of its gross national product. Norway was highest, at 0.92 percent; the United States was last, at 0.14 percent. On the Net: U.S. AID: http://www.usaid.gov/ United Nations: http://ochaonline.un.org 12/29/04 12:13 | ||
| mem Citizen Username: Mem Post Number: 4413 Registered: 5-2001 |
Pippi, That article still doesn't do the intuitive math. Comparing our gdp to their gdp is like apples to oranges in terms of our having to contribute the percentage amounts. Here's a comparison: Countries are expected to give 10% of gnp to foreign aid per year. Country X gnp is $100, therefore gives $10. Country Y gnp is 1,000,000, therefore gives $100,000? I don't think they should assign % proportionally - it needs more thought. Note may be right, perhaps we need to give more, but if we had to give equal commitment, we would lose whatever gov't funding we had targeted for science, research, environment studies, etc. that other countries can't or won't fund, and this carries invaluable benefits for the entire world. Anyway, it's another perspective we had discussed in class. | ||
| Rick B Citizen Username: Ruck1977 Post Number: 427 Registered: 8-2003 |
tulip, no doubt (about your posted research), i was simply re-iterating what I had heard in the news story. The idea was that, in some manor, the Pacific ocean, at the time these sensors were installed, had more seismic activity. Not deaths related to seismic activity, but activity in general. The Indian Ocean was less threatening at the time, same went for the Atlantic Ocean. So the Pacific was targeted, and sensors installed. The story went on to talk about the later requests for sensors in the Indian Ocean, but funding never came through. *disclaimer - i am only re-stating what I heard on the news, i am not claiming this to be facts and have done no research to back it up. | ||
| sportsnut Citizen Username: Sportsnut Post Number: 1663 Registered: 10-2001 |
The worst part about this is that even before reading this thread I knew that tulip et al would ••••• about the amount of money sent. Tulip you've got enough money to get online to insanely rant about the country you live in but you claim to not have enough resources to send assistance. You say that you pay it in taxes and that your taxes should go to pay foriegn aide. You are truly disgusting. People like you always use 20/20 hindsight to ••••• about problems that could not have been forseen. FWIW, a disaster like this one happens a lifetime if that frequently. The reason that they had no sensors in that area is just that. They didn't have funding and they had to prioritize. The fact that you could even remotely imply that somehow the U.S. is at fault is repulsive. If you really hate this country so much please send me your address I'll mail you the airfare to get the hell out. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1832 Registered: 3-2004 |
I didn't blame the US for not having sensors. I didn't use the word "stingy" first. You are so sad. People like you are sad. Hey, sports, have a great new year. Sports, sweetheart, tell me, what's disgusting about paying for foreign aid in taxes? | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 4962 Registered: 1-2003  |
If you subscribe to the "give until it hurts" notion, then your tax dollars don't suffice, because you are already within your normal budget, which probably doesn't hurt that much. At least it doesn't hurt nearly as much as things hurt in Asia today. I don't mean we should give until we are as poor as they are. That would be foolish. But even if you are having money troubles, I don't think you are unable to help. Very poor people are doing what they can to help. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1833 Registered: 3-2004 |
Folks, I am not advocating not giving. And what I do or not do is not necessarily any of your business. I am saying, if you give individually, as our president is encouraging us to do, you don't necessarily know where the money is going. Theoretically, and ideally, the government (our government) should gather this "generosity" together in the form of taxes. But, I forgot, you guys are in the middle of a ... TAX REVOLT!!!! | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 4966 Registered: 1-2003 |
I'm not revolting against taxes. Don't paint all people here with the same brush. I just read Homegrown Democrat, and I'm with Keillor. I think it's bizarre that people spend so much on buying and improving their homes and begrudge their school districts a few hundred dollars a year's increase. Anyway, you might be right that the government channels aid better than charities do. I have no idea. Still, the disaster will not increase my taxes, so I plan to give more than I budgeted for donations, because I think it's the right thing to do. | ||
| Cathy Supporter Username: Clkelley Post Number: 662 Registered: 6-2002 |
Tom is right. We can argue all day about how much the gov't should be giving, and I'm sure we'll never reach agreement on that. But there is no excuse for not giving yourself. My 7-year old daughter emptied her piggy bank into my lap last night and told me she wanted to give the money to help the people in Asia. We talked it over, discussed a few aid programs, and decided that her $15.50 should go to Unicef. It's only the meager contents of a kid's piggy bank, but it's 100% of her available money. I'm passing it on to Unicef as directed. And I'm including a chunk of my own money along with it, as well as a chunk to Doctors without Borders. When countries aid patterns are compared, you know they don't only compare the percentage that governments give. They also compare percentage of GDP given by private citizens. In this area, too, the US lags behind most other industrialized countries. For this there is no excuse. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 1834 Registered: 3-2004 |
Well, Tom, I think that's wonderful. At least you understood what I was saying about the practical advantages of having taxes pay for foreign aid, and having government channel aid. What's so radical about that, I wonder? It's an idea that's been around for a while. Can't pin it on me, alone. I'm not painting you with the same brushstroke as Sportsnut, although you are beginning to sound as hoity-toity as he does. But maybe you have just had a bad holiday season, Tom. You know what? I was trick or treating for UNICEF before most of you on MOL were born. Think of that. |
