Re: 40M for Bush Inauguration and 15M for Tsunami Disaster WAS Re: Bush accused of undermining the UN with aid coalition

From: John S. Dyson (toor_at_iquest.net)
Date: 12/31/04 

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 05:01:40 +0000 (UTC)

In article <41D4B6EA.3000407@nospam.com>,
        Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com> writes:
> The numbers say it all.
>
Like usual, the limited selected numbers that you used are misleading.
The American contribution in total will likely be in the multi-$100M
range or more.

The little, old-Europe countries, as typified by the initial French sub $200K
contribution will likely try to cook the books to make themselves look
like they contributed more than the US, but alas, the largest part of
the US contribution will be the private assistance, while the governmental
part of the American contribution will be within the same range as the
more spendy Europeans.

Also, the 'per capita' contribution numbers are not quite 'fair',
especially when the individual contribution total numbers will most
likely be based upon govermental numbers. In the US, the government
is a very ineffective way of distributing assistance (except in the
very initial phases.)

Geesh, I doubt the French (or other OLD EUROPE countries) have the
airlift capability or the military resources to quickly supply the
damaged regions with supplies (certainly not nearly the capability
of the US.)

There are alot of capabilities that the US provides that totally
shame the lesser nations like France, Germany or Zimbabwe...

John