Is $500,000 'generous'? It's only around 30 cents a household. Perhaps 'generous' needs to be prefixed with 'relatively'(as compared to previous appeals, not countries).
In terms of government aid the following countries have pledged;
NZ $1 million
UK 6 million pounds (NZ$13 million)
Australia $10 million (NZ$12.5 million)
US $100 million (NZ$135 million)
The Australian government has pledged 13 times the amount that NZ's has.
Some people have a problem with the government sending 'their' money - I don't. This is a valid area for collective action. In any case, our government can and does waste $1,000,000 at the drop of a hat at home.
Murdoch Mysteries: S02 E11 – Let Us Ask The Maiden
30 minutes ago
6 comments:
It kills genuine philanthropy, the Canadian guvamint has pledged dollar for dollar, up to 50 million dollars, what ever it's citizens donate. So if you donate one dollar this means the guvamint will take another dollar from you.
Warwick
In any case, our government can and does waste $1,000,000 at the drop of a hat at home.
The govt wastes more like 70 BILLION dollars at home.
Haiti has been a basket case for longer than I have been alive.
America has poured billions into the country over the last sixty odd years and none of it went anywhere near the peasants. The money enriched the dictators of Papa Doc's ilk with america's blessing.
For the Clintons to suddenly show concern after this latest disaster is sickening to watch.
You cant save all the whales.
Dirk
In any case, our government can and does waste $1,000,000 at the drop of a hat at home.
That is no reason surely.
As to Haiti - this may be the best thing that ever happened to that country. There is the real possibility that they may get decent infrastructure out of this, new public buildings and the start of a real state. Of course, it is more likely that corruption and bureaucracy will mean that the place remains a shit-hole.
If people were truly concerned about people who live in holes like Haiti then they should be re-colonised.
"Some people have a problem with the government sending 'their' money - I don't"
Well whether you agree or not is pretty much irrelevant as clearly it is no longer 'their'/'your' money in the legal sense. If it was still my money then I could simply get it back, much as I can withdraw 'my' money from the bank. The money has, in the eyes of the state, become the property of the state and can be dispensed with however to suit their own nefarious purposes.
"This is a valid area for collective action."
Perhaps it is, but collective action does is not the sole domain of the state. This could equally well be organised by a charity from *voluntarily* donated funds. Just because the thief uses money he has stolen from me to pay for his daughters medical treatment does not make the thieving ok.
"Some people have a problem with the government sending 'their' money"
when that money is extorted from productive men in freer countries then yes we do have a problem
Post a Comment