Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charlatan
Besides, the US is stingy remark was, in context, not inacurate. At the time the US official had made the statement (with specific reference to the Tsunami), the US had not even come close to donating the amount they went on to make.
I remember seeing him live and in context.
|
Yes, I remember seeing that as well, and I couldn't help but think to myself that it had been less than a week since the disaster, and while opinion was that the amount of aid needed was going to be HUGE, no one had any idea how much might actually be appropriate to pledge. Once reliable information began to be processed, the US stepped up with pledges above and beyond the $300 million (if I remember correctly) that was originally offered. And, could it be possible that a US official might recognize that the US people could be expected to step up with significant additional dollars in light of such a tragedy?
And don't forget that another reason to give at the governmental level is foreign policy goals. I seem to recall that public opinion surveys in Indonesia and Pakistan after their disasters showed that opinions of the US were generally more favorable.
I also seem to remember an argument floating around that basing giving on a percentage of GDP made it a little tough for the US to keep up, since one of the largest economies in the world would have to give much more in order to keep up with someone like Norway. Is that accurate?
EDIT
By the way, does anyone know what the official estimate of dollars spent by the US providing US military support during tsunami relief was? At one time, I thought I heard an estimate in the hundreds of millions. Quite a large "in-kind" donation, I think.