Poor Bush

Jeff Taylor | January 5, 2005

The guy cannot get a break with this tsunami thing. The President announces he will give $10,000 to Asian relief, which is dwarfed by Formula One racing star Michael Schumacher's pledge of $10 million and matched by $10K from the Oakland County employees' "casual Friday" fund.

Such gift scorekeeping is rather tawdry at even a 6-year-old's birthday, and Schumacher did suffer the very personal loss of a bodyguard and does make $80 million a year, but the White House must wonder if it went a little light on the donation.

Comments

|1.5.05 @ 6:52PM|#

Well, ya know that Bush, he's just a poor workin' man.

|1.5.05 @ 6:52PM|#

Sandra Bullock gave a cool $1 million a few days ago; Sting is selling two yoga lessons (at $250k a piece) for the cause; etc.

|1.5.05 @ 7:10PM|#

It's an orgy. The media won't let go while it still plays. When will it stop? When people don't tune in for it any longer.

Kafka's ``Hunger Artist'' lost out to public boredom eventually.

|1.5.05 @ 7:11PM|#

Gary-
So in other words, Sting gives up an hour of his time, someone else ponies up the money, and STING gets the credit for generosity?

|1.5.05 @ 7:19PM|#

But they're a $300,000 value!

|1.5.05 @ 7:21PM|#

Jennifer,

I never wrote that it was generous. However, it is an interesting way for him to raise money and why begrudge the effort?

Angie|1.5.05 @ 7:22PM|#

Such gift scorekeeping is rather tawdry at even a 6-year-old's birthday

Yes, but when someone can clearly help out more, and chooses not to, and its the same person who doesn't even comment on what happened for three days. It does make some sit back and just shake their heads.

|1.5.05 @ 7:37PM|#

"The President announces he will give $10,000 to Asian relief, which is dwarfed by Formula One racing star Michael Schumacher's pledge of $10 million and matched by $10K from the Oakland County employees' "casual Friday" fund."

Relatively speaking, we should refer to the President's contribution as "conservative compassion."

|1.5.05 @ 7:44PM|#

Would it help if the president went and hugged the newly orphaned? Maybe if he went and personally handed out 100 dollar bills to the survivors? Maybe if he gave a speech about how he felt their pain?

Naah, that'd just be grandstanding.

QFMC cos. V

Ayn_Randian|1.5.05 @ 7:44PM|#

Angie, you could clearly help out more, if you have time to participate in self-indulgent foolishness like accusing the president of "not doing enough". Couldn't you be working and donating your wages to the victims, instead of commenting on Hit and Run? Couldn't you budget your life and sell what you don't need for those poor people? I am shaking my head at you, Angie, 'cause you're not sacrificing enough, and we all know that sacrifice is the ultimate in morality. I guess you're choosing not to help more either.

I choose not to help, that's my choice. I won't be guilted into doing something for people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach. So what, does that make me morally inferior, Angie?

|1.5.05 @ 7:59PM|#

--I choose not to help, that's my choice. I won't be guilted into doing something for people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach. So what, does that make me morally inferior, Angie?

Yes, yes it does.

|1.5.05 @ 8:15PM|#

The guy gave $10,000!
Why is this a competition?
How much have you "stone-throwers" given?

|1.5.05 @ 8:19PM|#

Yes, but when someone can clearly help out more, and chooses not to

Like you, you mean?

|1.5.05 @ 8:26PM|#

As if we needed any further proof that G.W. Bush excels at driving people totally insane regardless. I wonder how so many people out there survived all these years he's been alive.

Great comedy, all of it is.

|1.5.05 @ 8:26PM|#

Such gift scorekeeping is rather tawdry at even a 6-year-old's birthday, and Schumacher did suffer the very personal loss of a bodyguard and does make $80 million a year, but the White House must wonder if it went a little light on the donation.

You gotta be kidding me!? This looks like a Cavanaugh post to me. I had to do a doubletake when I saw it was Jeff.

You (that's an inclusive you, including Jeff, the posters begruding him on this thread and the media) people are assholes. The man just gave $10k to help the effort. Who in the hell are you to criticize him? So what, he can afford more - he most likely just made a huge year-end donation somewhere, and who cares if he didn't?

Motherfu....that's twice this week you putzes made me defend him. I feel dirty.

Ayn_Randian|1.5.05 @ 8:39PM|#

Might I add, Goiter, that I really didn't care for your beliefs before, but you have earned my respect.

Seriously, Taylor, when did you chart channeling Cavanaugh? So what if the casual Friday fund raised as much: no one is under any obligation to help, no matter how liberal you go.

And E. Steven, maybe you can tell me how you have ascertained my moral inferiority. Does that mean the more you give, the more saintly you are?

|1.5.05 @ 8:54PM|#

Bush's contribution looks exceedingly tawdry against the Australian government's recently announced contribution of $Aud1 BILLION to Indonesia for rebuilding after the tsunami. This in addition to the initial $Aud40 million. Good on Schumacher, he has raised the personal donation bar. By the way, I havn't heard of any significant donations from the exceedingly oil rich (and Muslim) nations of the Middle East

|1.5.05 @ 9:42PM|#

Poor Bush

Yeah, I really feel sorry for him.

|1.5.05 @ 9:44PM|#

Bush's primary problem is that he's spent so much time giving out other people's money he probably hasn't had the time to give any more than 10K of his own.

|1.5.05 @ 9:49PM|#

I don't know why I should bedgrudge or praise Bush on the matter. He doesn't seem special either way one might like look at it.

My wife and I gave what we could fit into our budget. That means no DVD rentals, movie going, latte drinking, challah bread eating, and no ordering beignet mix or omaha steaks for a month.

|1.5.05 @ 9:57PM|#

Part, not all, of the motivation in announcing the personal Bush gifts was political, an effort to compensate for the utterly wrong and frenzied notion that Bush should've somehow "done more" in the wake of the disaster. (I was holding out for a "tiz nammies hate our freedom" speech, but that's me.)

To the extent that Bush's personal gift is dwarfed by other personal gifts, that "do something" parry is thwarted for the people obsessing over Bush's personal reaction to the event. That does not seem to be criticism, just fact.

|1.5.05 @ 10:13PM|#

I hate the President as much as the next person who's paying attention to current events, but criticizing the guy for giving a "mere" 10,000 dollars seems a bit much. I gave 50 dollars to the Red Cross. I could have given more; I had it availible. But I'm also a College student, and I don't feel the need to impoverish myself merely because there's a need somewhere. And, consequently, I don't really feel right condemning him because maybe he feels the same way.

|1.5.05 @ 10:34PM|#

Right now, somewhere in Aceh, surveying the damage, is an Indonesian relief director, commenting to another official: "Thank God George W. Bush is the President of the United States."

But seriously, folks...

|1.5.05 @ 10:34PM|#

Might I add, Goiter, that I really didn't care for your beliefs before, but you have earned my respect.

I'm glad I anonomously earned the respect of another anonymous poster ;)

What were my beliefs before that caused such distaste?

|1.5.05 @ 10:40PM|#

"The man just gave $10k to help the effort. Who in the hell are you to criticize him?"

Thomas Paine's Goiter,
I believe it says the following under the Hit&Run title banner:
Continuous news, views, and ABUSE by the Reason staff.
(Did you get the abuse part? I capitalized it for you, incase you didn't.) ;-)

|1.5.05 @ 10:45PM|#

My wife and I gave what we could fit into our budget.

Comment by: Gary Gunnels at January 5, 2005 09:49 PM

?????? Umm, Gary... I thought...

|1.5.05 @ 10:55PM|#

crimethink,

Thought what? I am gay. Dude. Ever heard of a bi-sexual? :)

|1.5.05 @ 11:01PM|#

"I choose not to help, that's my choice. I won't be guilted into doing something for people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach."

LOL. Not that I'd expect any better from a Randoid, but have you read any of the stories regarding the victims? Even if you ignore all of those who were tourists, or those who were merely working along the shore, or those whose homes were destroyed by the earthquake rather than the tsunami, a lot of the dwellings destroyed by the tsunami were a far cry from being grass huts. And public knowledge about the potential for a tsunami hit was far from ubiquitous, as evidenced by the fact that many people had no idea what was going on when the tide initially pulled back, and tragically chose to stay where they were.

Do you blame tornado victims for their plight as well? If The Big One hit CA, will you blame the victims for being stupid enough to live near the San Andreas?

|1.5.05 @ 11:01PM|#

cdunlea,

That was really funny, BTW.

|1.5.05 @ 11:05PM|#

I believe it says the following under the Hit&Run title banner:
Continuous news, views, and ABUSE by the Reason staff.
(Did you get the abuse part? I capitalized it for you, incase you didn't.) ;-)

For such a large collection of 'leave me alone' and privacy types, you people sure don't try and leave others alone.

|1.5.05 @ 11:06PM|#

Sulla,

Ok, I'm curious. Can you name someone specifically or is this more a kin to a general attitude? I think of myself as pretty fiercely libertarian (wearing my "Enjoy Capitalism" tee and all) and I don't believe I've noticed anything like what you are claiming. Of course, it might simply be that I only started reading Reason a few years ago and haven't been around long enough to notice said changes. Anyway, you've got my attention. :)

|1.5.05 @ 11:10PM|#

Thomas Paine's Goiter,

Bush is a public figure; he asked for the abuse by merely running for office. :)

|1.5.05 @ 11:11PM|#

Nobody read through W's mail to find out what he donated. Im sure there was a press-release.

|1.5.05 @ 11:16PM|#

BTW, we've reach $4 billion in pledges according to the U.N. (I don't believe that includes private donations). Egeland is now critizing the oil-rich countries of the middle east. Australia and Germany are now the biggest donors.

|1.5.05 @ 11:19PM|#

what? Are Indonesia's Muslim brothers not being very generous?

|1.5.05 @ 11:19PM|#

Gary,

8-O ???!!!??

|1.5.05 @ 11:20PM|#

BTW, the disaster could have a silver-lining if it forces locals to deal with government corruption in the effected counries (especially in Indonesia).

|1.5.05 @ 11:22PM|#

Gary,

I've somewhat recovered from the shock. Is your wife Jewish by any chance?

|1.5.05 @ 11:27PM|#

Coarsetad,

Apparently not. Which is strange since one of the five pillars concerns charity ("zakah" I think). Of course charity is a pretty elastic concept in Islam and applies to everything from almsgiving to meeting folks with a cheerful smile to preaching the "good news" (obviously the latter item is phrased as a Christian might say it but I think its analagous).

|1.5.05 @ 11:29PM|#

crimethink,

My wife does not practice Judaism. I'd say that she's more of a "create your God as you go" kind of person.

|1.5.05 @ 11:30PM|#

crimethink, I was surprised as well but too polite to bring it up. VBG

|1.5.05 @ 11:34PM|#

No one in particular Gary, really, just a general sense. This may be real or merely perceived (or misperceived as the case may be). I've recently been able to spend a bit more time reading here than I had been for several months and there's just something slightly different. I myself am not all that uber-libertarian (more lib-leaning or practical libertarian) but that's neither here nor there, I suppose. Or perhaps it is, can't say for certain.

This post wasn't exactly representative of that feel, but more of a charicature. There's something rather humorous about a bunch of libertarian sorts sitting about discussing the pluses and minuses of some one else's charitable givings.

|1.5.05 @ 11:39PM|#

Sulla,

Oh, we discuss a lot of silly shit here. I don't believe Taylor was criticizing the President's gift. I think it was more like "he can't catch a break" in the perception game. As to other posters, I can't say that all of them are libertarians.

|1.5.05 @ 11:41PM|#

Sulla,

Anyway, what can I say? I didn't vote for Bush in 2000 or 2004, so its not like I am a big fan of the guy. At the same time, I can't say whether his gift was appropriate because I don't do his books and, unlike the President, I can't look into or read the soul's of others. :)

|1.5.05 @ 11:43PM|#

crimethink,

Any other burning questions you'd like to ask?

Ayn_Randian|1.5.05 @ 11:47PM|#

Goiter,

I am no anonymous man. Click my name and my real persona emerges quickly enough. Anyway, i used to misread your posts as lefty, is all. (I mean, come on, the left pre-empted Paine years ago)

So, Eric II, if I live on San Andreas, knowing what I know right now, should you have to bail me out?

|1.5.05 @ 11:54PM|#

Ayn Randian,

Paine's economics were very left-wing (at least in some of his writings).

|1.6.05 @ 12:16AM|#

Any other burning questions you'd like to ask?

Yes. WHERE IS MY JADE MONKEY???!!!!

|1.6.05 @ 12:30AM|#

Anyway, i used to misread your posts as lefty, is all. (I mean, come on, the left pre-empted Paine years ago)

I'm far from left...my biggest influences are Adam Smith, Burton Malkiel, JS Mill and Uncle Milty. Not Berle.

|1.6.05 @ 12:43AM|#

"So, Eric II, if I live on San Andreas, knowing what I know right now, should you have to bail me out?"

The comments of yours that I responded were about how and why you, personally, have chosen not to donate to the victims of a disaster. There was nothing about whether someone should be required to do so.

For the record, I don't think anyone should be forced to donate to the tsunami victims, by means of government aid, on purely humanitarian grounds, regardless of whether they had any advance knowledge of what could come. But as I noted in another thread, there are major economic and national security incentives for the US government to provide at least some help. And I think the economic part would hold true if the Big One hit a densely-populated part of California.

|1.6.05 @ 12:54AM|#

Eric II, etc.,

Quite obviously we can all agree that coercion is not something we advocate, though we may disagree what "morality" or "self-interest" demands of us in response. I and my wife felt some moral obligation to respond to the events in South and SE Asia but that may not be true to Ayn and there is nothing wrong with Ayn sticking by her guns (though I disagree with her/him).

|1.6.05 @ 1:04AM|#

Geez, surely people know the prez only makes 1/100th what the typical pop/sports star makes. This whole pissing contest, both on the personal as well as national level, makes me sick. People should give whatever they care to. After all, why all the attention on charity now? Every year there are earthquakes, mudslides and disasters all over the globe, and no one gave a shit whether Sting or a Bush family member gave more money. Why just today I saw a dozen crippled, homeless people on the street with nothing, and there wasn't a note in the news about how much money anyone gave to help them.

|1.6.05 @ 1:09AM|#

Why just today I saw a dozen crippled, homeless people on the street with nothing, and there wasn't a note in the news about how much money anyone gave to help them.

Have you notified Anderson Cooper?

|1.6.05 @ 1:13AM|#

"Have you notified Anderson Cooper?"

Well, my point is that maybe no one should. The focus should be on the story, not on how much different people/countries give.

Ayn_Randian|1.6.05 @ 1:14AM|#

Nice try, Eric, but you said:

If The Big One hit CA, will you blame the victims for being stupid enough to live near the San Andreas?

It's pretty clear you were trying to assert that those who are living in disaster areas and are fully aware of the potential dangers should be bailed out anyway. So yes, I would call them stupid.

|1.6.05 @ 1:15AM|#

"I and my wife felt some moral obligation to respond to the events in South and SE Asia but that may not be true to Ayn and there is nothing wrong with Ayn sticking by her guns (though I disagree with her/him)."

I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. My response to him wasn't about his unwillingness to donate per se, but rather his snide remark blaming the victims for being "people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach."

A point-of-view that merely states, "This wasn't my fault, so I'm under no obligation to do anything", is something that I've got no problem with, though I might chose to react differently. But that wasn't the case here.

|1.6.05 @ 1:27AM|#

"It's pretty clear you were trying to assert that those who are living in disaster areas and are fully aware of the potential dangers should be bailed out anyway."

Really? I thought I made it pretty clear that my main point that was that most of the tsunami victims had no clue as to what could happen and/or no chance to save themselves even if they had a clue.

The San Andreas comment was peripheral to the main argument. But since you brought it up, I think it should be kept in mind that the odds of any one of the 20+ million people living near the fault in CA losing their homes to the Big One is quite low. But there's a decent chance that a small number of them will meet that fate in the next 50 or so years.

So even if they were aware of the potential for an earthquake the people who suffer that fate will still be the victims of some very bad luck, and would deserve some sympathy (though to repeat, no one should feel obligated to help them out on humanitarian grounds). Ever heard of game theory?

|1.6.05 @ 1:38AM|#

The problem is that there are very few places on this planet that don't come with significant risks.

|1.6.05 @ 2:03AM|#

Anyone else notice that Chricton is making a Jurassic Park IV?

How much terrible crap can this man produce?

DaveInBigD|1.6.05 @ 2:07AM|#

Maybe he meant to give $9999 so as not to force his bank to report his large transaction to the feds.

WOO HOO! We can make this into a privacy thing now! We're libertarians, so we can't use this to promote more and better spending as your Big Two would do, so we get by with tying the tsunamis to know-your-customer laws...

|1.6.05 @ 2:30AM|#

Ken Shultz - Why are you slamming the President? You USED to be a Republican, but now I see you're still wasting time with Libertarians. I just saw the movie "Rudy" for the nth time.. You USED to be that guy. Now, I don't know what to think. Such a waste of so much potential... What happened to you over the last five years?

|1.6.05 @ 6:57AM|#

I'd recommend rending of garments, and perhaps bringing back potlatch, the conspicuous destruction of wealth as a demonstration of moral purity. The media coverage would get great ratings, too.

Money isn't wealth, by the way. It's just a ticket in line to say what the economy does next. I want to see real stuff destroyed.

We'll see who's morally best!

|1.6.05 @ 7:01AM|#

So people who live in places that might get hit by natural disasters are idiots who get what they deserve? Okay, so where the fuck does Ayn Randian live? How many places are completely free from any risk of tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, landslides, wildfires, meteor impacts, etc.? Shall we all move there then?

|1.6.05 @ 7:05AM|#

I was going to ask the same question as Grumpy. We know Ayn Randian must not live within 100 miles of the Atlantic Ocean or Gulf of Mexico, because those dumb fucks (myself and my One True Love included) know that there's a danger of a hurricane blowing away our houses sometime. S/he can't live in the Midwest, where dumb fucks know a tornado could come along any minute and blow them to Oz. California's out due to earthquakes, mudslides, and riots, whereas Washington State, Oregon and Hawaii are volcano territory. Also, the coasts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf of Mexico could all be hit by a tsunami if tectonic conditions are right.

By process of elimination I have concluded that Ayn Randian lives in an underground bunker in Montana.

|1.6.05 @ 7:09AM|#

Either that, or he's an incredible hypocrite with balls the size of watermelons.

|1.6.05 @ 8:48AM|#

Fuck the yoga lessons. If Sting was serious, he would get The Police back together for some charity gigs. They would fucking clean up.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 8:53AM|#

mr randian is ostensibly advocating political violence to free the individual of any social obligation (or what remains of any) on his site. are any of you truly surprised that he is at least in part an antisocial malcontent? it's what objectivism is -- it's the logical consequence of unlimited emancipation.

fwiw, i detest that fascist monkey in his political context, but i can't muster anything but goodwill for the fact that he contributed $10,000.

|1.6.05 @ 9:00AM|#

Or it could just be that he took the possibility of a natural disaster into account when he bought the house, saved accordingly for the possibility of such an event, and doesn't think others should be guilted or coerced into helping him out.

Now I disaggre with his assertion that there's any comparison between people who live near the San Andreas fault and the people whose homes were destroyed by the tsunami. For one thing, there wasn't a tsunami of this scale in recorded human history, much less in the Indian Ocean--those folks had absolutely no reason to fear a tsunami or even prepare for it. The same is not true of folks on the US west coast.

|1.6.05 @ 9:02AM|#

"I was going to ask the same question as Grumpy. We know Ayn Randian must not live within 100 miles of the Atlantic Ocean or Gulf of Mexico, because those dumb fucks (myself and my One True Love included) know that there's a danger of a hurricane blowing away our houses sometime. S/he can't live in the Midwest, where dumb fucks know a tornado could come along any minute and blow them to Oz. California's out due to earthquakes, mudslides, and riots, whereas Washington State, Oregon and Hawaii are volcano territory. Also, the coasts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf of Mexico could all be hit by a tsunami if tectonic conditions are right.

By process of elimination I have concluded that Ayn Randian lives in an underground bunker in Montana."

First, yes, it is a bit callous and silly to begrudge these folks for living in a place that has a one-in-a-million chance of being obliterated by a tsunami. Hell, might as well begrudge us humans for living on the planet earth, given that it's a certainty that someday, another ELE asteroid will surely kill us all.

However, there is an element of truth to be examined there. It was illustrated quite well in John Stossel's Reason piece, "Confessions of a Welfare Queen". That is, the idea that when people decide to set up shop in, for example, a place where it is almost certain that your house will be washed away in a few years, then it is foolhardy and counter-productive for others to subsidize their bad decision. They should be made to bear the burden of their risk on their own, either through high insurance premiums, or by catastrophic losses when the inevitable happens.

A great example of this is the recent hurricane season in Florida. Most insurance companies wisely have provisions that withhold coverage if the homeowner has not performed some sort of minimum upkeep beforehand. So, after the hurricanes hit, the insurance companies, rightly, refused water damage coverage to people who had neglected to perform routine roof maintenance, which might have prevented the damage. But so many people complained, those cocksuckers at FEMA stepped in and forked over the remainder---in effect subsidizing their laziness.

Next time their roof falls into disrepair, will those people have any incentive to spend the money on maintenance? Of course not, because now they know that FEMA will foot the bill.

It is this kind of bullshit, along with Stossel's example of federally subsidized coastal insurance, that encourage people to take risks that they would not otherwise take. This is not to say that, with 5 million people starving and dying of disease in Indonesia, one should be shamed out of helping them, but it does raise a good question: namely, should we do anything more than help them survive? Should we also help them rebuild their coastal cities? Maybe, maybe not. I would say, charitable private donations, yes, perhaps, since these tsunamis are relatively rare.

However, even as we are looking at a death toll around 150 thousand and every blog and radio show and reporter still fails to comprehend the numbers, I was struck by a great argument made over at Catallarchy by Patri Freidman yesterday...namely that, each year, the three largest diseases, TB, Malaria, and AIDS, take 1 million lives apiece. That is, as Patri put it, a tsunami-sized toll on humanity EACH MONTH. Yet, what we have here is what they call an "availability bias"; i.e. "unexpected events tend to rouse much more emotion than expected ones". Thus, we have massive donations pouring in from all over the globe for these people, but there are much bigger killers out there, and those killers, unlike the tsunami, never stop. Each year, it's the same. Each of the big three takes 1 million people.

But when's the last time you whipped out your wallet and sent a donation to support malaria eradication? When's the last time your heart sank because you happened to think about the million people that die from tuberculosis each year? Bill Gates knows about "efficient donations", which is why he gave like $35 million to malaria research. Most people don't know, however, which is why many people were confused as to why he made that donation.

But the reality is, all that money that you guilty people are forking over to red cross and DWB, etc., to help the tsunami victims, will probably have a one-time effect. It's not going to prevent tsunamis. On the other hand, a donation to TB or aids research might help eradicate those diseases, which would end the constant march of death, and have a lasting effect.

Just something to think about as we're guilting people into donating to tsunami victims.

|1.6.05 @ 9:05AM|#

The death of over 150,000 people is only unique in this case because of the cause. The economic sanctions against Iraq in the 90s probably killed more than 150,000 children under 5. If 150,000 people starve to death in the African subcontinent this year, will Sting do his part by doing a few more yoga lessons?

The real issue here is not how much Bush (or anyone else) has given. It is the human tendency to focus on the novel (a tsunami) rather than the mundane (starvation, disease, etc.) Outlawing DDT has killed far more people than any natural disaster. Where might I donate money to bring back DDT?

What someone donates to a charitable cause is no concern of mine. What Mr. Taylor does here is a dangerous parlour game because it opens the door to speculate on other people's "morality." A good deal of this "I am holier than thou" has already spilled out upon this thread. Once one begins questioning the morality of one's neighbor, the natural temptation is to do something to make one's neighbor "more moral." This usually comes in the form of the taxman who visits to take what others think you ought to have charitably given.

|1.6.05 @ 9:13AM|#

"mr randian is ostensibly advocating political violence to free the individual of any social obligation (or what remains of any)"

What exactly is "political violence"?

Whacking somebody on the head with a butterfly ballot?

|1.6.05 @ 9:58AM|#

Evan Williams-
Just so you know, my complaint with the Ayn Randian isn't that he's not donating, but that he basically said the tsunami victims had their own stupidity to blame for their predicament, and taking that "sanction of the victim" bullshit WAY too far.

|1.6.05 @ 10:24AM|#

great, so here I read a list of all those back patters who have donated money. Congratulations, a major media news story has guilted all of you into donating. Bravo, there was never a need to donate money ever before, for there was never any suffering in the world before the Tsunami. 10000 killed in a flood near India last year warrented no calls for mass donations, but 200000 killed this year did. Yippie. If only 10k killed could get 24 hours of news coverage as opposed to a blip in the paper. you are all so noble in responding to a numbers game.

|1.6.05 @ 10:28AM|#

People who follow the teachings of the gospels don't brag about how much money they donate to charity. Doesn't Bush even own a Bible?

|1.6.05 @ 10:31AM|#

Congratulations, a major media news story has guilted all of you into donating.

The stories are interesting, but personally I've better uses for my money. I hope the corpse fishing and hut re-thatchings go well, though.

|1.6.05 @ 10:34AM|#

The economic sanctions against Iraq in the 90s probably killed more than 150,000 children under 5.

Liar! We're so evil, our Zionist sanctions killed 5,000 kids under 5 per DAY! 1,825,000 per year! The Asian tsunami was just a minor tenement fire compared to that statistical marvel.

|1.6.05 @ 10:48AM|#

Jose, the 150,000 deaths from the Tsunami do not replace the deaths that would have occured from disease and violence and starvation in the region, they happen on top of them.

In fact, they probably make those other problems worse.

|1.6.05 @ 10:53AM|#

"Liar! We're so evil, our Zionist sanctions killed 5,000 kids under 5 per DAY! 1,825,000 per year!"

Nope. Whatever the number is, the responsibiilty for it lies entirely with Saddam's regime. He is the one who diverted the oil for food revenue from it's intended purpose and into his own pocket.

drf|1.6.05 @ 10:54AM|#

"... with balls the size of watermelons"

for a remedy, see the pharma debate below.

and would he qualify for an agricultural subsidy with that?

and here in chicagoland, we get the coast, no tornadoes, AND we get colored oleo.

on topic: very cool of the prez to be that generous! we should, however, get people interested in helping out with private funds for domestic charity. the cool thing about shrub doing this is that, unlike his predecessor, he's not trying to get zamfir'd from a chunky intern...

the german-language press is eating this up, what schumi did. and with germany being "most generous", it's been mentioned on several newscasts from over there that social democracies are indeed the "most generous" systems. and one commentator noted the generosity of the hollywood lampshades (errr, "stars") who ALSO are against the iraq war. can't they leave that the fuck out and congratulate the president on practicing what he preaches (something fundies are known for NOT doing)

snap snap. thank You, Mr. President!

|1.6.05 @ 11:06AM|#

the responsibiilty for it...

I was being facetious.

but that he basically said the tsunami victims had their own stupidity to blame for their predicament

Well, it was their governments that failed to install early warning systems in the Indian Ocean. And since in the eyes of the international "community" I'm apparently supposed to feel some culpability for the policies of my own republican government, surely the collective peoples of Asia and east Africa share blame...

ed|1.6.05 @ 11:27AM|#

No, rst, they are "victims", and therefore blameless.

Matt|1.6.05 @ 11:30AM|#

People who follow the teachings of the gospels don't brag about how much money they donate to charity. Doesn't Bush even own a Bible?

This one's off base, joe. He speechified urging all Americans to donate to the relief effort. You don't need a Bible to know that the next thing you'd better do after that is pony up yourself. It's not like he sits around trying to figure out ways to write Maureen Dowd's column for her.

Phil|1.6.05 @ 11:31AM|#

Geez, surely people know the prez only makes 1/100th what the typical pop/sports star makes.

You don't labor under the misimpression that George Bush gets by on his presidential salary, do you?

|1.6.05 @ 11:34AM|#

" it's been mentioned on several newscasts from over there that social democracies are indeed the "most generous" systems."

Those "social democracies" wouldn't have any money to be generous or social with, or even exist at all if they hadn't been living off of our defense spending for the last 60 years.

We've been covering their ass so they haven't had to pay for doing it themselves.

|1.6.05 @ 11:42AM|#

"People who follow the teachings of the gospels don't brag about how much money they donate to charity."

Nor do they advocate using government as a mechanism to mandate charity from other people.

raymond|1.6.05 @ 11:50AM|#

"The president has sent contributions totaling $10,000 to some of the international relief organization who are working in the region to help those in need recover from this grave tragedy," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters traveling with Bush in Illinois.

What someone donates to a charitable cause is no concern of mine.

So tell that to Scott McClellan.

(btw. Why would I have my people tell your people how much I've given if I didn't have some PR reason?)


What Mr. Taylor does here is a dangerous parlour game because it opens the door to speculate on other people's "morality."

Not a fair comment. I've been speculating about Bush's "morality" since he was governor of Texas, presiding over all those ritualistic state killings.


...people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach.

Sometimes I read things here which make me wonder if some of you ever get out. Or perhaps you do know what the real world is like and are being brutish just for the fun of it.

The poor don't actually have lots of choices.

|1.6.05 @ 11:52AM|#

No, rst, they are "victims", and therefore blameless.

Ah, no wonder the victim mentality is so popular.

Oh I'm sorry are we still on our compassion kick this week?

|1.6.05 @ 12:00PM|#

The poor don't actually have lots of choices.

Neither do I. Unfortunately I'm too white and too male to convince anyone that I went from being poor to being not poor with my own hard work. Sure, now I can choose between sirloin and mignon, but relatively speaking that's still not a whole lot of choices. Most notably I don't have that pesky choice of, do I send a million to Asia, or buy another mansion? Let the celebrities play their games of philanthropic oneupmanship. We don't make a difference in Asia and we know it. Keep your donations and buy yourself an iPod. Your compassion will wear thin long before your iPod's MTBF has expired.

|1.6.05 @ 12:08PM|#

Comparing disasters like this to diseases is a little unfair. Everybody is quite aware that in order to survive a person needs food, water, shelter, clothing. Disasters like earthquakes, tidal waves, volcanoes, remove ALL of that for an entire community. Even Ayn_Randian, stripped of those things, would be unable to survive without the help or charity of others. But, diseases (even in epidemic proportions) leaves the structures of a community intact, and the ability of that community to care for the sick. Now this tsunami, destroyed entire communities, and it destroyed enough infastructure of entire countries, that international aid was basically vital. The people that are affected are now doubled screwed, because if somebody does get TB or malaria now, there is no hospital, there is no medicine, there isn't even a bed to die in. The impact of a disaster is better looked at by the precentage of a community it affects than by sear numbers. This tsunami likely killed hundreds of thousands out of a few million people, and left million homeless out of millions of people. Sounds like a much bigger impact than 1 million or 2 dying throughout a population of 6 to 8 billion.
Somebody made the comment of why not a huge outpouring charity when 10,000 died from floods in India, well probally because India's own infastructure was equipped to deal with a disaster of that size, and there simply wasnt the need to make it an international incident.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 12:11PM|#

i find it interesting that one's emotional antipathy for europe seems directly correlated to one's level of philistinism.

i wonder if it isn't the same for one's opinion of america when in europe....

|1.6.05 @ 12:12PM|#

"He speechified urging all Americans to donate to the relief effort."

Which is quite nice, but doesn't require bragging about your own dollar amount.

"Nor do they advocate using government as a mechanism to mandate charity from other people."

Actually, Gil, the Bible is silent on that, as opposed to the black and white denunciation of conspicuous charity.

"Unfortunately I'm too white and too male to convince anyone that I went from being poor to being not poor with my own hard work." Which, certainly, is just as easy to do Sri Lanka as it is in the United States.

"Your compassion will wear thin long before your iPod's MTBF has expired." The houses, medical facilities, and rebuilt infrastructure, on the other hand, will still be there long after the iPOD works out.

Out of curiosity, why this sudden support for Interim Planning Overlay Districts? ;-)

|1.6.05 @ 12:20PM|#

"Actually, Gil, the Bible is silent on that"

Not unless "thou shall not steal" has recently been removed from the 10 commandments.

|1.6.05 @ 12:23PM|#

"i wonder if it isn't the same for one's opinion of america when in europe...."


Plain old jealousy sufficiently sums up the source of european's opinions of America.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 12:23PM|#

Unfortunately I'm too white and too male to convince anyone that I went from being poor to being not poor with my own hard work. Sure, now I can choose between sirloin and mignon, but relatively speaking that's still not a whole lot of choices. Most notably I don't have that pesky choice of, do I send a million to Asia, or buy another mansion? Let the celebrities play their games of philanthropic oneupmanship. We don't make a difference in Asia and we know it. Keep your donations and buy yourself an iPod. Your compassion will wear thin long before your iPod's MTBF has expired.

apparently, mr rst, your life of persecution has relieved you of any sympathy for your fellow man. lucky you?

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 12:26PM|#

Plain old jealousy sufficiently sums up the source of european's opinions of America.

LMAO! mr martin, you're an even more natural savage than i imagined. can the libertarians safely blame public schooling for your blank slate?

|1.6.05 @ 12:33PM|#

your life of persecution

Who said I had a life of persecution?

any sympathy for your fellow man.

I have plenty of sympathy. Just not any compelling motivation to spend money on it.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 12:37PM|#

I have plenty of sympathy. Just not any compelling motivation to spend money on it.

lol -- better that than to tear up at soap operas, mr rst, i grant you.

|1.6.05 @ 12:37PM|#

"Who said I had a life of persecution?"

I think it was the whining about not being able choose between a mansion or million dollar donation.

|1.6.05 @ 12:38PM|#

The Bible doesn't define taxation as theft, Gil. It does, however, speak kindly of many rulers who taxed their subjects, which can be read either as outright support, or a neutral acceptance.

I guess I now have a response to conservative Catholics who accuse their more enlightened brethren of "confusing Jesus with Marx."

drf|1.6.05 @ 12:39PM|#

gaius,

as someone you accused of having a smug and conventional attitude towards art and culture, would you care to continue your dart-throwing psychogram of me?

is it one of those that to be considered highly cultured and educated by some annointed "intelligencia" clan, you have to "love europe" and lament that we aren't like that?

or was it objecting to the news i heard on BR3 or Radio Wien or ORF 1 or DR P1 today that i passed on? pick up ekstrabladet or aftonbladet or krone to see what appears in the most widely read papers in those countries.

|1.6.05 @ 12:39PM|#

Man, gaius is on today! But with this material to work with, who wouldn't be?

|1.6.05 @ 12:54PM|#

I think...

And that was your mistake. Whether or not one can - or wants to - choose between a mansion or a million dollar donation is not causally related to the level of persecution they have faced in their life.

|1.6.05 @ 12:57PM|#

shouldn't one be able to do want one wants in a free society? Is theft of your money by the government not a form of persecution?

|1.6.05 @ 1:00PM|#

The great thing about using "corrupt" to refer to any policy you don't like, is that you can actually be corrupt - stick your hand in the till, violate the internal rules, knowingly lie to further your ends, use your power to reward friends - and hold youself and your side out as no different from those who do their jobs honestly, but hold different opinions.

Hold a Cogressional vote open for 12 hours in order to have more opportunities to bribe and threaten in order to get votes? Hey, it's no more corrupt than supporting progressive taxation.

|1.6.05 @ 1:02PM|#

Yeah, Coarsted, and who are they to tell me which side of the road I can drive on? Or order a soldier to fire on the enemy in battle?

Anything the government does is to be judged exactly as if it was being done by a private citizen or armed gang. Exactly!

|1.6.05 @ 1:09PM|#

"Yeah, Coarsted, and who are they to tell me which side of the road I can drive on? Or order a soldier to fire on the enemy in battle?"

Gosh.... I guess that would make me a dictator. Cool, that was easier than I thought.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 1:10PM|#

is it one of those that to be considered highly cultured and educated by some annointed "intelligencia" clan, you have to "love europe" and lament that we aren't like that?

lol -- certainly not, mr drf -- but you do have to be capable of thoughts more complex than "disagreement=jealousy". of this, i think, you are very well capable and demonstrative.

fwiw, i don't particularly like the modern condition of europe myself -- my criticism is of western civ, not america uniquely.

|1.6.05 @ 1:16PM|#

"The Bible doesn't define taxation as theft, Gil."

Taxation generically isn't. Taxation for the express purpose of transferring money out of one individual's pocket into another's is.

Robin Hood was a thief.

If you direct Robin Hood's theivery, you are also a thief.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 1:31PM|#

not to get technical, but joash, king of the israelites, did in fact impose taxes for repairs to the temple -- and god reprimanded the levites for being slow to collect it. (2 chronicles 24).

just so we're straight on who is thieving.

|1.6.05 @ 1:31PM|#

"LMAO! mr martin, you're an even more natural savage than i imagined. can the libertarians safely blame public schooling for your blank slate?"

Well then, Gaius, suppose you enlighten us as to why the inhabitants of nations who have owed the very existence of their continuation as nation states for 60 years on our military protection, not to mention owing their ability to finance their "social democracies" on same said military protection on our dime are so ungratefull about it and presume to be immenently qualified to instruct us about what we should be doing.

They all have chronically lower economic productivity and higher unemployment rates than we do and chronically lower standards of living.

There was an article in the Wall Street Journal a while back about a study that showed that people in every state of the United States had a hihger standard of living than than all the nations of Europe. Even those considered "poor" here routinely have things that a lot of those considered "middle class" over there don't have - like air conditioning for example. The study was done by a European organization, Sweedish, I think it was.

We have outdone them all militarily and economically for a very long time.

If their antipathy ain't jealousy, then by all means tell us what it is.

|1.6.05 @ 1:34PM|#

"not to get technical, but joash, king of the israelites, did in fact impose taxes for repairs to the temple -- and god reprimanded the levites for being slow to collect it."

Which has no bearing on using taxation to take money away from one individual to give to another.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 1:42PM|#

taxation to take money away from one individual to give to another.

ok, i'll bite: what is the principle of taxation, mr martin, if it is not the first aspect of the taking of money and the giving of it to someone else?

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 1:46PM|#

Anything the government does is to be judged exactly as if it was being done by a private citizen or armed gang.

And why not? What makes government's shit so holy?

Of course, joe, even you would likely admit there are limits to what the government should be able to do no matter what the majority wants it to do. Why would that be? Maybe there are limits to what any human should be able to do to another, no matter who or how many people back it? Once you say the government is different, for whatever reason, what logical reason do you have for saying it can't do anything it wants?

That said, I'm enough of a realist that I'm not going to say all taxes should absolutely be ended immediately. But if taxes are in a sense "necessary," they should be clearly seen as a necessary evil that are only justified by their necessity, not just chips to be shifted around as the government oh-so-wisely chooses.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 1:46PM|#

If their antipathy ain't jealousy, then by all means tell us what it is.

it was funny, and now it's sad.

raymond|1.6.05 @ 1:47PM|#

Plain old jealousy sufficiently sums up the source of european's opinions of America.

No. It's not my philistinism. It's not my jealousy. It's this kind of remark--> "...people stupid enough to live there year after year,knowing that something like this could happen, and still live in grass huts on the beach." And this one--> "Unfortunately I'm too white and too male to convince anyone that I went from being poor to being not poor with my own hard work." And this one, from another thread--> 'The average American, if told that the would-be attorney general favors depriving terrorists of sleep, subjecting them to loud noises, making them think they're going to die, humiliating them, etc, would say "excellent, keep up the good work".'

Whiney, cruel, holier-than-thou ignorance about the real world.

That's not to say that there aren't plenty of trous de cul in Europe, too. There are. But since the "average American" is, by your own proud admission, such a connard insupportable, heck. What do you expect Europeans to think of you? All anyone has to do is take you at your word.


btw. re Bible: "Render to Caesar..." And, "Slaves, obey your masters". You can prove anything using Scripture, if you know where to look.

|1.6.05 @ 1:52PM|#

Jose,

DDT isn't banned; its used throughout the Third World for malaria control. Now certainly some environmentalists have its use and production difficult, but its never been banned throughout the world.

|1.6.05 @ 1:52PM|#

Got to love it, when silly threads like this turn into bible study. There is no denying the "free minds" here.

|1.6.05 @ 1:56PM|#

"ok, i'll bite: what is the principle of taxation, mr martin, if it is not the first aspect of the taking of money and the giving of it to someone else?"

The principal of taxation is to finance the provisioning of government services. When the government pays a defense contractor for a fighter plane in furtherance of it's military protection services, it is not "giving" money to the contractor - it is paying for a physical product that it takes ownership of in exchange for the cash. I believe the lawyers refer to this as the "consideration" in contractual terms.

However, when government hands out the taxpayers money to selected individuals in the form of welfare, etc., those individuals are not providing any product or service back to the government or the taxpayers in return. There is no "consideration".

That is the difference.

|1.6.05 @ 1:56PM|#

First we had a Marius. Now we have a Sulla.

I told you that letting Scipio go to Africa was a bad idea.

QFMC cos. V

|1.6.05 @ 2:00PM|#

"it was funny, and now it's sad."

Still waiting for YOUR explanation Gaius

drf|1.6.05 @ 2:00PM|#

hey gaius!

check out my vantage point: while i certainly have experienced some sort of jealousy in the sense that "you're the superpower now. we were. hrumph" and there were some embittered editorials in newspapers, books, "studies", etc. i was actually going on a different path than that.

what i experienced over there was a steady drum beat of subtle anti americanism. in other contexts, it would be called sexist or racist, but i definitely experienced an interesting angle with that.

and my reaction to the news stories that were most definitely playing one-upsmanship with the US as demonstration of their superiority to be rediculous. i don't like that kind of nationalistic dick waving from us, either.

and yeah - i had sorta figured you to be a critic of the western cultural state :)

but sure, i'm a philistine, but not for the "jealousy" reasons. i'm much too unsubtle for that :)

cheerio,
drf

|1.6.05 @ 2:05PM|#

"First we had a Marius. Now we have a Sulla."

What's with all these Roman monikers in here anyway?

You all must haved watched Gladiator one times too many.

LOL

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:10PM|#

it is not "giving" money to the contractor - it is paying for a physical product that it takes ownership of in exchange for the cash.

you make a distinction here that doesn't really exist except in primitive minds, mr martin.

you do in fact give money to the contractor. you expect something in return -- sometimes something material (in your mind, a bomb or a missile or something) and often instead a service (say, bomb missile tracking).

when you give money to a widowed single mother of three, or a family whose home was destroyed by a earthquake, what do you get in return?

many would spitefully say "nothing", i'm sure, and that would make them assholes.

but i'm wondering if you actually *see* nothing -- and that would make you simply pitiable.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:10PM|#

Still waiting for YOUR explanation Gaius

that's the sad part, mr martin.

|1.6.05 @ 2:16PM|#

"you make a distinction here that doesn't really exist except in primitive minds, mr martin."

No it's a real distinction that exists in the physical world.

You're sucking wind Gaius


"that's the sad part, mr martin."

And sucking wind with that one too.

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 2:20PM|#

Gilbert Martin,

I have a different reason than gaius's for saying your distinction, technically speaking, is not valid.

What if giving money to people in need is a "government service?"

Just because you prefer the government to give money to people who build fighter planes rather than to people who don't provide something material back doesn't inherently mean you get the right to take other people's money for the privilege but those who prefer the opposite don't.

|1.6.05 @ 2:25PM|#

"They (filthy, ingrate Europeans) all have chronically lower economic productivity and higher unemployment rates than we do"

Actually, France has higher productivity than America. But don't let that stop you.

fyodor,

"Of course, joe, even you would likely admit there are limits to what the government should be able to do no matter what the majority wants it to do." Of course.

"Once you say the government is different, for whatever reason, what logical reason do you have for saying it can't do anything it wants?"

Easy there big fella. Stating that a different set of rules applies to the government does not mean that no rules apply to the goverment. In some areas, they may rightfully do more than an individual, and in some areas, less.

"But if taxes are in a sense "necessary," they should be clearly seen as a necessary evil that are only justified by their necessity, not just chips to be shifted around as the government oh-so-wisely chooses." Now we get to the nitty-gritty: who decides?

raymond, please don't accept right wingers as accurate representatives of all Americans. The massive outpouting of generosity from this country's pubic and private sectors should demonstrate that only a tiny fraction of the public blames the tsunami's victims for their fates.

|1.6.05 @ 2:29PM|#

when you give money to a widowed single mother of three, or a family whose home was destroyed by a earthquake, what do you get in return?

Oh, that such a sob story could be attached to each disbursement of our government's handouts. But that belief doesn't really exist except in primitive minds.

No, you don't get anything in return, and there is nothing to see in return. Such miserable stories as you describe are not attached to the largest part of the myriad handouts our government subsidizes. You're aiming for pity but you've hit a big pile of bullshit instead.

|1.6.05 @ 2:31PM|#

"What if giving money to people in need is a "government service?""

It isn't.

It's a transfer payment - not a service.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:34PM|#

i don't like that kind of nationalistic dick waving from us, either.

yep, mr drf, i rather agree that there is condescension -- but perhaps its less nationalist than culturalist (and there they have us in virtually every way, i must submit).

it reminds me (as i've probably said before) of the relationship of the ancient greeks to their cultural coattailers, the romans. the romans (of the mold of cato) saw them as effete, sycophantic, morally pernicious; the greeks saw them as savage, stupid, brutal.

while i am not one for praying to the nation, what i cannot understand is the bizarre symptoms of wounded pride i see in americans today. call a european's home country weak and he'll agree with you.

the inability to brook even mild tonal criticism of the nation from any quarter -- but particularly europe! -- without flying into a murderous rage is symptomatic of a country and a people who are off the rails with delusional arrogance. good-natured patriotism has become wild-eyed jingoism has become belief in American Supremacy -- and it makes me fear for my home, truly.

|1.6.05 @ 2:37PM|#

"Actually, France has higher productivity than America. But don't let that stop you."

Really.

What is their productivity rate, who calculated it to be higher than ours and did it take into account the fact that they've been subsidized by our military protection for over 60 years?

And if whoever did it didn't factor that into the calculation, then their number is as phony as a 9 dollar bill.

|1.6.05 @ 2:39PM|#

Mr. Martin,

Hands off Marius. The Senate will deal with him in due time.

What's not to like about Rome? One sees there all the controversey and tumult of modern America without any personal stake in the outcome.

"There is this exceptionally beneficial and fruitful advantage to be derived from the study of the past, that you see, set in the clear light of historical truth, examples of every possible type. From these you may select for yourself and your country what to imitate, and also what, as being mischievous in its inception and disastrous in its issues, you are to avoid." Livius

QFMC cos. V

|1.6.05 @ 2:39PM|#

Perhaps people expect the Nanny State and NGOs have competently budgeted for the "fight" against ongoing tragedies like HIV or malaria. There's someoene else "taking care of it" so they need not bother to pay attention. Unexpected tragedies are almost implicitly not budgeted, so it might make sense to contribute in excess of normal voluntary and involuntary charity.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:40PM|#

No, you don't get anything in return, and there is nothing to see in return.

you would make an excellent barbarian, mr rst. perhaps you and mr martin could form a tribe... but no, alas, that would impinge on your solitude, wouldn't it? ah, you wouldn't want to drag that deadweight around.

drf|1.6.05 @ 2:43PM|#

"raymond, please don't accept right wingers as accurate representatives of all Americans"

-- we've got tons of those on both sides that shouldn't be representative.

gaius:
"call a european's home country weak and he'll agree with you."

however, again, this is based on my experiences, and others may have a different call. insult, say, a dane's healthcare system, and they'll bristle. comment that the elite schools in the US are "better" (based on some sort of context-based, objective measure) than their's, they'll bristle.

stuff like that. i've lived for some years in copenhagen, and i found that people i was around were fine with certain "insults" (military weakness or something like that), but tread on a sacred toe, and you'd get the same angry nationalistic response. mind you, these were people who were of the "finer sort", including several gov't ministers and titled people...

joe and raymond:

blaming the people for being a victim here is as terrible and rephensible for blaming the woman for getting attacked by some fucking thug. those are probably the same fuckers who enjoy torture. fuck them. maybe they lost someone in one of the hurricanes. we then can give an "told you so"? no we wouldn't do that... or would we?
(actually not, but it was obnoxious to write)

|1.6.05 @ 2:44PM|#

Please read more carefully, Mr. Gunnels. I said "Outlawing DDT has killed far more people than any natural disaster." I did not say it had been banned worldwide. The bans in first world countries like the U.S. had a negative impact on other countries because foreign aid was often tied to not using DDT.

"EPA administrator William Ruckelshaus overruled the EPA hearing officer and banned DDT. He later admitted that he made the decision for political reasons. Science, along with economics, has a role to play . .. .. [but] the ultimate decision remains political, Ruckelshaus said.

The U.S. decision had a rapid effect in the developing sector, where the State Department made U.S. aid contingent on countries not using any pesticide that was banned in the United States. The U.S. Agency for International Development discontinued its support for DDT spraying programs, and instead increased funding for birth control programs.

Other Western nations, Sweden and Norway, for example, also pressured recipient nations to stop the use of DDT. Belize abandoned DDT in 1999, because Mexico, under pressure from the United States and NAFTA, had stopped the manufacture of DDT, which was Belize's source. Purchases of replacement insecticides would take up nearly 90 percent of Belize's malaria control budget. Mozambique stopped the use of DDT, because 80 percent of the country's health budget came from donor funds, and donors refused to allow the use of DDT,reported the British Medical Journal (March 11, 2000)." Excerpt from 21st Century Science editorial by Marjorie Mazel Hecht

If you can find a charity dedicated to bringing back DDT, I'll write a check today.

And please, Joe, France has a tiny advantage over the U.S. in manufacturing productivity per hour. GDP per capita in the U.S., however, is $37,500 per year; France is at $27,700 (2003). GDP per capita is a better measure of affluence than manufacturing productivity.

|1.6.05 @ 2:46PM|#

"Just because you prefer the government to give money to people who build fighter planes rather than to people who don't provide something material back doesn't inherently mean you get the right to take other people's money for the privilege but those who prefer the opposite don't."

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution requires the federal government to confine itself to ennumerated powers. Spending money for national defense is an ennumerated power. Taking money for the express purpose of transferring it from the pocket of one idividual citizen to another is not an ennumerated power of government.

|1.6.05 @ 2:47PM|#

I take it Marius has never visited France.

drf|1.6.05 @ 2:51PM|#

why, Jose?

it's a great place to visit.

|1.6.05 @ 2:51PM|#

"Mr. Martin,

Hands off Marius. The Senate will deal with him in due time."

Hopefully sooner rather than later.

Send him to fight in the coluseum.

Us "barbarians" need our bread and circuses.

LOL

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:54PM|#

mind you, these were people who were of the "finer sort", including several gov't ministers and titled people...

that's interesting, mr drf. personal pride? i've yet to meet (not that i've met them all) a european who didn't readily admit national flaws except where he had real territory to defend.

lol -- of course, they were also very good at pointing out other people's national flaws....

fwiw, i'm sure that pride of place still does exist in europe -- it's simply that it's been well laundered 1914-45.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 2:55PM|#

I take it Marius has never visited France.

actually, mr ortega y gasset, i have -- and found them as i describe.

|1.6.05 @ 2:56PM|#

Mr. Gasset,

Marius has only been to France to kill Gauls.

DRF,

You made a comment about one-upsmanship. Perhaps the initial low bid was just a clever ploy to use anti-Americanism to get everyone else to pony up more money. That would be pretty damn clever.

QFMC cos. V

drf|1.6.05 @ 2:57PM|#

" personal pride? i've yet to meet (not that i've met them all) a european who didn't readily admit national flaws except where he had real territory to defend"

yes, that ugly thing pride. well, i kinda like it when you harness it to push yourself beyond what you thought you could do and challenge yourself to broaden your horizons.

in that vein, i'm going to stop saying "yu go, girl" to myself this year!

drf|1.6.05 @ 3:00PM|#

Fabius:

manificus! that kind of ruse i would bet our president would be good in mastermining. that's got an element of b-school, owning a sports team, and getting people to (mis)underestimate him!

nice one!

drf

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 3:05PM|#

in that vein, i'm going to stop saying "yu go, girl" to myself this year!

pride: best in strict moderation, devastating in large quantities, and bizarre in vernacular.

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 3:09PM|#

Spending money for national defense is an ennumerated power.

First of all, that's a different justification than your first one. Tangential, but different.

Next, this justification presumes that the Constitution is some sort of absolute source of moral authority. Maybe it is for you, and I agree it's a pretty good blueprint for government and that our government certainly has no right to do things not enumerated there, but I see no grounds for saying that taxation is theft when it is used for powers not enumerated for it in the Constitution but not when it is for powers that are in there.

|1.6.05 @ 3:10PM|#

you would make an excellent barbarian, mr rst.

Perhaps. But until such determinations can be made objectively, I will barbarically expect that my government comport itself like the business that it is, putting its bottomline first, investing in opportunities by virtue of their return both to the business and its shareholders.

|1.6.05 @ 3:12PM|#

presumes that the Constitution is some sort of absolute source of moral authority.

Careful. Last time I suggested the Constitution wasn't the be-all and end-all of moral authority I got trolled to death.

|1.6.05 @ 3:19PM|#

"First of all, that's a different justification than your first one. Tangential, but different"

The first one still stands as it is.

Transfer payments are not products or services and products or services are not transfer payments. A basic economic fact.

This is just another reason for the govt not doing it.


" but I see no grounds for saying that taxation is theft when it is used for powers not enumerated for it in the Constitution but not when it is for powers that are in there."

Hmmm.

Seems to me you're being deliberately obtuse.
If government has no authority to do something then it has no authority to take money from taxpayers for doing that thing either. And taking money from someone that you have no authority to take is theft.

|1.6.05 @ 3:19PM|#

Jose,

Outlawing DDT has killed far more people than any natural disaster. Where might I donate money to bring back DDT?

No caveats here. No effort to describe the actual use of DDT today. And an indication in the last sentence that DDT is no longer in use (why would one need to bring back DDT if it were in use) and that thus the "outlaw" or "ban" is worldwide. In other words, I read your statement and it has nothing in it like your latter statement. Write more clearly and you'll save your readers these sorts of exchanges.

BTW, DDT is used world-wide, even in countries where it is banned; there is no need to "bring it back" in other words.


Gilbert Martin,

Hmm, A/C is not common in much of Europe because its not particularly needed there (you'll find the same is true with window screens - what bugs?). If you had ever lived in Europe you would know this. I think you'll also find that A/C is not as common in Oregon as it is in Alabama. Does that make Oregonians economically inferior? I doubt it. I suggest you read Montaigne.

The OECD calculated the productivity rates (you can go to their website to check out their statisical models, data, etc.).

About 50% of the difference in per capita GDP is related to differences in car fuel consumption.

|1.6.05 @ 3:24PM|#

In my experience, the French have, how shall I phrase this, an abundance of national pride.

At the risk of returning this thread to the subject, private charity is a private matter. Perhaps the President's press secretary opened the door... but must we walk in? I would not presume to tell a man to whom he should give his money. I certainly would not have cheek to suggest a given sum was too small. Questions about my charitable giving are strictly limited to the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future.

Oh, and Mr. Gunnels, just bypass my posts. It will save us both time and effort.

|1.6.05 @ 3:26PM|#

About 50% of the difference in per capita GDP is related to differences in car fuel consumption.

Citation please.

|1.6.05 @ 3:35PM|#

"Hmm, A/C is not common in much of Europe because its not particularly needed there (you'll find the same is true with window screens - what bugs?). If you had ever lived in Europe you would know this. I think you'll also find that A/C is not as common in Oregon as it is in Alabama. Does that make Oregonians economically inferior? I doubt it. I suggest you read Montaigne. "

It doesn't get hot anywhere in Europe in the summertime? I seem to recall something about a bunch of people dying from heat exhaustion over there a while back during a summer heat wave.

A/C was just one example anyway. As I said, it was the results of a study done by a European organization that was reported in the Wall Street Journal that concluded every state in the US had a higher standard of living than Europe.

|1.6.05 @ 3:44PM|#

"It doesn't get hot anywhere in Europe in the summertime? I seem to recall something about a bunch of people dying from heat exhaustion over there a while back during a summer heat wave."

I seem to recall you once posting a comment that was neither idiotic nor gratuitously rude. So?

Paris has a more temperate climate than much of the US. During a rare stretch of extreme heat, the normal preparations people take for the weather were insufficient.

On the extremely rare occasions that it snows in Atlanta, lots of people die in automobile accidents - they don't own snow tires, they don't know how to streer into the skid, and they drive too fast. Far fewer people die in similar snow storms in North Dakota. Does this demonstrate that Atlanta has a lower standard of living than Bismark?

drf|1.6.05 @ 3:47PM|#

GM:

that heat wave was unusual. lotsa people died here in the summer of 1995, too. and we have air conditioning.

and no, it doesn't get as hot or as sticky or as humid there as it does here east of the mississippi.

no A/C where i've lived. no screens, either.

denmark's std of lvg is most certainly higher than west virginia's.

could you reference this article? for it is not believable as is.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 3:49PM|#

expect that my government comport itself like the business that it is, putting its bottomline first

but it clearly isn't a business, is it, mr rst? why would you pretend it is?

if we maintain the charade for the purposes of illustration, what would its goal be? not profit with a fiat currency -- every surplus (not that we're in danger of one) must be spent to maintain money supply.

i think in actuality it is �creating a more perfect union, insuring justice, promoting the general welfare, providing for the common defense, and securing the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity.�

no business is concerned with the general welfare or insuring justice, and these are missions best not relegated to expediency.

raymond|1.6.05 @ 3:53PM|#

GDP per capita is a better measure of affluence than manufacturing productivity.

Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland, Denmark, Ireland, US... France is 14th in GDP (nominal) per capita.

Interestingly, the US population below the poverty line (13%) is twice that of France (6.5%).

Here are the rankings of some countries in the news lately:

86 Thailand ($2309)
120 Indonesia ($971)
122 Sri Lanka ($965)
139 India ($563)

These are countries where people are stupid and brown and so do not possess the remarkable courage of the disadvantaged white male "rst" who, in a society ruled by brown females, pulled himself up - against all the odds - from misery with his own calloused hands. Plus, they insist on living in hovels on the beach.

please don't accept right wingers as accurate representatives of all Americans

Heck. I don't even accept them as accurate representatives of all right wingers!

And this is almost a cliché, but I don't think Europeans are anti-American so much as disdainful of the administration. Or rather, their antipathy is not directed towards Americans, but towards the American government and its policies. There's a world of difference.

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 3:55PM|#

Hmmm.

Seems to me you're being deliberately obtuse.
If government has no authority to do something then it has no authority to take money from taxpayers for doing that thing either. And taking money from someone that you have no authority to take is theft.

I am arguing that whether or not taxation is theft is not dependent on whether the taxation is used for Constitutionally enumerated powers. Now, one may argue that spending on activities not constitutionally enumerated is...well, unconstitutional. But I don't see what constitutionally enumerated spending authority has to do with the concept that taxation is theft, and you haven't said, best I can tell.

rst,

Heh-heh, well, what fun is life without a little risk, eh? :-) But thanks for the warning!!

drf|1.6.05 @ 4:04PM|#

"rather, their antipathy is not directed towards Americans, but towards the American government and its policies. There's a world of difference"

i experienced something different. in my danish classes, approved by the ministry, many examples were factually inaccurate but portrayed america in extreme negative lights and the discussion questions were "where would you prefer to live?" or "which system cares for people more?"

whenever there was a local show that portrayed americans in a certain way, people expected me to be boorish, or ignorant, or dumb, or unkulturny as the character was. someone tried explaining us history to me, "you don't learn this stuff".

i was doing some work another time where we were at the exchange students office at the Buz school in vienna, where i heard the academic advisor give two pieces of advice to two students who had the same question: the first was american, the discussion was in english. the number of (english language) classes available to this particular (grad) student was less than the german undergrad student who inquired in german. the german asked why there was a difference, the answer was "amis struggle at our undergrad courses. no multiple choice questions".

this was during clinton's presidency.

i don't wish to paint with a "all are" brush - i only wanted to portray as i experienced it.

both experiences were patterns and predictable. and i would find this just as disgusting as the "trendy fracnophobes" who can fuck themselves, too. but what i experienced, especially in denmark was an institutionalized, enforced incorrect, negative image of america and americans.

kennst �brigens den HUBER B�ne? der hat amoi mit dem ostbahn kurti einen song "nachbarn" g'sungn. es woa anlasslich anm koncert "schweiz braucht europa"

|1.6.05 @ 4:08PM|#

"I seem to recall you once posting a comment that was neither idiotic nor gratuitously rude. So?"

Blow it out your ass, punk.

Was that rude enough for you?

It's no less than you deserve.

|1.6.05 @ 4:11PM|#

"Now, one may argue that spending on activities not constitutionally enumerated is...well, unconstitutional. But I don't see what constitutionally enumerated spending authority has to do with the concept that taxation is theft, and you haven't said, best I can tell."

I already have said - several times now.

If you don't get it, that's fine with me.

|1.6.05 @ 4:14PM|#

why would you pretend it is?

I "pretend" it is a business because your mere statement that it "clearly isn't" a business does not automatically mean that it isn't.

no business is concerned with the general welfare or insuring justice

Your opinion seems to be based on an accounting of all businesses that exist presently, and it betrays an adversarial bias. A business is any entity that engages in a set of pursuits in the exchange of commodities and/or services.

Take the not-for-profit model...to say that such vague social goals you specify are out of the reach of a well-run business is myopic.

Perhaps you do not understand because you give a priori moral authority to the government.

|1.6.05 @ 4:16PM|#

"could you reference this article? for it is not believable as is."

I saw it in a paper copy of the Wall Street Journal some time ago - about a month ago maybe.

I don't subscribe to the WSJ online so I don't know if you could get to it in their archives or not - you'd have to pay to get access to it anyway.

|1.6.05 @ 4:17PM|#

I'm still spoiling for a fight with the New Jersey haters. Yeah, Cavanaugh, that means you.

Damn, wrong thread. The tone of this thread's about right though.

QFMC cos. V

drf|1.6.05 @ 4:20PM|#

thanks, Gilbert!

actually, this is of personal interest, as a friend of mine was looking for similar data for his thesis... the timeframe is fine - andy is resourceful. and he subscribes.

thanks again!
drf

|1.6.05 @ 4:21PM|#

Some would say 'twasn't rude enough.

And I'm more of a grunge type, really.

fabius|1.6.05 @ 4:23PM|#

fletch lives:

(talking about the 56 toxic waste dumps)

"okay Frank. just give me the ones that aren't in new jersey"
"ummmmm. only one"

how'z that?

joe - grunge. figgers. :)

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 4:24PM|#

If you don't get it, that's fine with me.

Aw shit, don't be that way! Just because someone else is pissing you off! You explained that the Consitution gives the central government the power to provide for defense but not for transfer payments. Fine and good. But that doesn't make taxation any more voluntary. When someone takes your money without your permission, that's theft. Just because the theft is authorized by the Constitution doesn't make it any less theft, no more than any other justification. I invite you to tell me where I err, but whether you take me up on that or just tell me to piss out my hat, all "fine with me"....

drf|1.6.05 @ 4:24PM|#

dammit. warren. i told you NOT to pour me another drink. that last one was me, not fabius. it was to fabius.

it was a star trek IV moment when chekov is captured on the CVN Enterprise...

|1.6.05 @ 4:26PM|#

This "government should/sholdn't operate like a business" business is a dead end, intellectually. "Like a business" carried so much baggage that the argument goes nowhere.

rst, are there certain specific business practices or attitudes that business should copy? I don't, for example, believe we should be working to maximize our profit.

|1.6.05 @ 4:29PM|#

"actually, this is of personal interest, as a friend of mine was looking for similar data for his thesis... the timeframe is fine - andy is resourceful. and he subscribes."

Well like I said - it was a European organization that did the study. As I recall it was based on a whole lot of factors - it wasn't just predicated on whether people had air conditioning or not for all you characters who keep harping about that. That was just one factor that I remember being mentioned.

drf|1.6.05 @ 4:32PM|#

okay. thanks again.

|1.6.05 @ 4:41PM|#

"But that doesn't make taxation any more voluntary. When someone takes your money without your permission, that's theft. Just because the theft is authorized by the Constitution doesn't make it any less theft, no more than any other justification. I invite you to tell me where I err, but whether you take me up on that or just tell me to piss out my hat, all "fine with me"...."

OK one last time fyodor.

I didn't say taxation, generically was voluntary or generically was theft. The portion of taxation used to fund transfer payments to other individuals in unconstitutional and IS theft.

So if the goverment collects $5,000 in taxes from someone this year - with $4,000 going to fund legitimate, ennumerated Constitutional services (actual phsyical services that presumably provide some tangible benefit to those doing the paying) and $1,000 going to fund unconstitutional transfer payments to other individual citizens (that does not provide any tangible benefit to those doing the paying) - that $1,000 is being stolen from that person.

|1.6.05 @ 4:43PM|#

Jose,

So am I supposed to bypass your posts or what?

Economist magazine; one of the issues towards the end of 2003.

Gilbert Martin,

It doesn't get hot anywhere in Europe in the summertime?

Not like it does during summer in much of the U.S. Paris summertime weather is largely in the 70s. Now during the heat wave two summers ago the French bought A/C units in mad bunches; but that would seem to indicate wealth rather than poverty. But their use of technology as is appropriate for their environment doesn't strike as an indication that France is poorer than the U.S. Heck, your reasoning strikes me as silly as a Frenchman arguing that since foie gras or gsm networks are hard to find in the U.S. that Americans are poor.

And the reason I harped on the example was because it was the example that you gave us. You picked your own poison, not I.

|1.6.05 @ 4:49PM|#

Jose & Gilbert,

You could also reference the following:

Robert Gordon, Two Centuries of Economic Growth: Europe Chasing the American Frontier

There ought to be a .pdf copy of it floating around the internet.

drf|1.6.05 @ 4:49PM|#

found it!

http://www.timbro.se/bokhandel/pdf/9175665646.pdf

of course, i even subscribe to timbro...

thanks GM!

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 4:52PM|#

If you don't get it, that's fine with me.

it's still sad.

|1.6.05 @ 4:59PM|#

If the best you can do for a citation is The Economist towards the end of 2003 or a vague reference to Gordon's work, then yes.

|1.6.05 @ 5:10PM|#

"And the reason I harped on the example was because it was the example that you gave us. You picked your own poison, not I."

Did I ever say the study results were predicated exclusivelly on whether people had air conditioning or not?

I think not. I merely mentioned as being one of the factors I remember from the article.


"Not like it does during summer in much of the U.S. Paris summertime weather is largely in the 70s."

What about in Spain and Italy?

|1.6.05 @ 5:14PM|#

If you're already bored with supporting disaster relief (you must be because Sri Lanka and Indonesia are sooo last week) you can send your donations to the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights where it will fight anti-NJ propaganda and the imperialist designs of Pennsylvania and New York.

The address is -

J. Frank Vespa-Papaleo, Esq., Director
Office of the Director
140 East Front Street
PO Box 090
Trenton, NJ 08625-0090

Cash is prefered.

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 5:49PM|#

Gilbert Martin,

You don't seem to understand what I'm saying, but I'll try it from a different angle, with a question:

If a constitutional amendment were passed empowering the federal government to distribute transfer payments, would taxation for that purpose no longer be theft?

|1.6.05 @ 5:58PM|#

fyodor:

He understands the question. Believe me, I've had this argument before......

|1.6.05 @ 5:59PM|#

Jose,

Clearly that wasn't the "best" I could do. Which is why I pointed you to a second source. Boy you are disingenuous aren't you?

Gilbert Martin,

Its a stupid factor.

What about in Spain and Italy?

Its always been my impression that A/C is a lot more common there than in France. Then again, a great many Italian and Spanish homes were built in the era before A/C and thus were designed in such a way as to cool a home without it.

|1.6.05 @ 6:03PM|#

"If a constitutional amendment were passed empowering the federal government to distribute transfer payments, would taxation for that purpose no longer be theft?"

Sure it would - becauase it's still a transfer payment not a service. A real service is something that - presumably - provides something of benefit to those paying for the service in exchange for their money. A forced transfer payment provides nothing of benefit to the ones doing the paying.

Like I said before, the unconstitutional part is just an additional reason not to do it.

gaius marius|1.6.05 @ 6:10PM|#

lol -- mr matt, mr fyodor, i think we've all had this argument with mr martin at some point. at some point, you have to write him off. some people are like sculpture; some are like lightswitches.

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 7:07PM|#

gaius marius,

The term "moving target" also come to mind!

fyodor|1.6.05 @ 7:09PM|#

Gilbert Martin,

By your logic, if I were to take $50 from you at gunpoint and then hail you a cab, I would not be committing theft!

|1.7.05 @ 8:49AM|#

Nope.

That's your spin - not my logic.

Transfer payments are theft.

Transfer payments are also unconstitutional.

Transfer payments would still be theft even if they were constitutional.

Robin Hood was a thief.

He would still be a thief even if his thievery were sanctioned by the King.

As I said before, whether you get this or not is fine with me.

|1.7.05 @ 3:05PM|#

"A forced transfer payment provides nothing of benefit to the ones doing the paying."

I believe that having an economic safety net - including unemployment payments, universal health care, and a guaranteed retirement - provide significant economic and social benefits to the country. Not just to the people who get the checks, but to the rest of us, who can go through our own lives with less fear, and who do not have to suffer the consequences that attend the presence of a large class of people suffering severe economic hardship - higher crime rates, for example.

Also, I spent $400,000 of federal money reconstructing an intersection into a public square in one of my city's poorest neighborhoods, in order to improve the quality of life there, and encourage the private market to invest in the housing stock of the surrounding area. Those who paid for this project - the taxpayers - were paying for the labor of a design/engineering firm, a set of plants for reconstructing the roadway, X amount of asphalt, Y linear feet of curbing, etc. etc. etc. In other words, they received goods and services, just like they do when they pay for McDonnel Douglass to design and build an aircraft. Yet somehow, I believe Gilbert Martin is going to consider this to be an example of theft.