"The United States, at the president's direction, will be a leading partner in one of the most significant relief, rescue and recovery challenges that the world has ever known," said White House deputy press secretary Trent Duffy.
But U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Jan Egeland suggested that the United States and other Western nations were being "stingy" with relief funds, saying there would be more available if taxes were raised.
"It is beyond me why are we so stingy, really," the Norwegian-born U.N. official told reporters. "Christmastime should remind many Western countries at least, [of] how rich we have become."
"There are several donors who are less generous than before in a growing world economy," he said, adding that politicians in the United States and Europe "believe that they are really burdening the taxpayers too much, and the taxpayers want to give less. It's not true. They want to give more."
In response to Mr. Egeland's comments, Mr. Duffy pointed out that the United States is "the largest contributor to international relief and aid efforts, not only through the government, but through charitable organizations. The American people are very giving."
Why should it be the government that has to donate all of that money in a free society? That is what those socialist f*ckheads at the UN don't understand. In a free society, people give when they want to. Oh yeah, BTW, the US got hit with some major shit this past year. I don't remember the UN rushing aid to help us.
So far, hundreds of millions of dollars in PRIVATE donations have come forth. The US government shouldn't have to chip in a dime more, but they are. They are also providing the support of a carrier group as well. That is a lot of logistical capability, free. Perhaps the US should take the funding it give the UN and channel it straight to the relief effort. Let's see what sort of mood it puts the UN in. Probably foul after their oil-for-food program got shafted.
No comments:
Post a Comment