Ball is now in other G-8 nations' courts. Match it?
Of course, let's hope that Congress passes the thing, otherwise it won't be so hot. Keep an eye on the "Nay" votes. They'll need to go, even if they're Republicans. Nobody should compromise on this issue. It's too big to reduce to politics.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
And, watch for the strings attached. If I recall correctly, this aid is tied to the elimination or great reduction of family planning and education for those countries that get it.
By the way, if Bush has signed it then Congress has already passed it.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
"We believe in the value and dignity of every human life."
This has become one of the few strongpoints of Mr. Bush, the meaningless rhetorical flourish.
And don't forget, no child gets left behind
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jay the Obscure: Drop in the bucket.
You would prefer nothing? We just TRIPLED our share. Half a loaf remains better than no bread.
quote: And, watch for the strings attached. If I recall correctly, this aid is tied to the elimination or great reduction of family planning and education for those countries that get it.
quote:The new AIDS package, which Congress completed last week, recommends that 55 percent of direct aid go to treatment programs, 20 percent to prevention, 15 percent to palliative care and 10 percent to children orphaned by the disease. It also would allow, but not require, the administration to contribute up to $1 billion in 2004 to the international Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
... To appease conservatives, the measure says one-third of the money going toward prevention be set aside for projects that promote abstinence -- an issue that was prominent in the final congressional debate. The bill says religious groups will not lose funding because they oppose certain preventive methods, such as condom distribution.
Nothing about removing the family planning options. They get two-thirds of the prevention money. (See the effective "ABC" program in Uganda.)
quote: By the way, if Bush has signed it then Congress has already passed it.
You've forgotten how Congress works.
quote:While the legislation nearly triples current U.S. contributions to AIDS programs, Congress still must approve actual spending levels in its annual budget appropriations process.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
There has to be some Bigger Plan behind this, though. I can't believe the US just gives away money for anyone's sake. Of course it will 'strengthen the ties' with African countries and international organizations, but since when did they start caring about those things?
You give a starving man half a loaf of bread, then cut away a thrid of that and the man is still starving. Half measures don't fix the problem.
Besides, we're not talking about a single man or a loaf of bread, we're talking about the truck loads of medicine that the world needs, and here we just tripled our share from nothing to next to nothing.
And then removoved a thrid of that!
It's world wide! Ten billion wouldn't do anything for even a thrid of Africa, but then you have India and China on top of that.
But hey, yay for Mr. Bush, the United States finally did something. It saw a buliding on fire and walked up and threw a cup of water on it.
quote:Of course, let's hope that Congress passes the thing....
Apparently you missed what I was responding to.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Nobody "removed" a third of anything. You must be stoned.
Unless you're going to tell me that abstinence causes AIDS, and the Ugandan ABC program is a failure, when it clearly isn't.
You know, if you really feel THIS strongly about it, how much money did YOU donate to AIDS-related charities this year?
Well, you just donated another $47. So did I. Happy now?
(Actually, given our tax system, you and I didn't donate quite that much. Those evil rich people did. And that goes beyond whatever they normally donate to said NGO charities. Hate them.)
OH, and BTW, the last UN report I read about this crisis asked for a global donation of 7 billion a year to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and Malaria. Given that we'll now be putting up $2-3 billion (between 28% and 43%of that,) by ourselves, says something. We are, as usual, taking on a good chunk of Someone Else's Problem. Not bad for an evil nation that only cares about its own interests.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
"There has to be some Bigger Plan behind this, though."
Well even if it is just a plain PR-thing, a countermeasure if you will, against all the shit they got for Desert Storm II, it's not the worst motive ever. And that may be an encouraging thought.
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by First of Two: OH, and BTW, the last UN report I read about this crisis asked for a global donation of 7 billion a year to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and Malaria. Given that we'll now be putting up $2-3 billion (between 28% and 43%of that,) by ourselves, says something. We are, as usual, taking on a good chunk of Someone Else's Problem. Not bad for an evil nation that only cares about its own interests.
Now, I may have some sort of short term memory disorder, but I recall this coming up before, and you bragging about how the US pays so much more than everyone else, and about how great you are and how all other countries should match you.
Then I recall showing the actual donation as divided by the GNP of the country. And I remember that, if you took into account the countries' wealth, America actually donated less per person than about 11 other countries, including the UK, Australia, Canada, France, and even fucking Belgium.
Now, I'm not so petty as to say that George has done A Bad Thing. Rather, he has done A Good Thing. But putting in the most money when you are the richest organism isn't quite as gracious as it would initially appear. Bill Gates could give $1 million to a charity, but it's a relative pittance to him, and in many ways it would mean a lot more if a poor old lady put in every penny that she had.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I have to agree with Laim, and I don't mean to sound petty. Yay for Congress and yay for Mr. Bush.
This is a good thing, I just don't think it is nearly enough.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Yeah but consider that you're cutting taxes, increasing military spending and running your economy into the ground. Put in that perspective, it ain't that bad. Though 100 billion and fixing the cost of medicine to the 3rd world from your oh-so-benevolent drug companies (to prices they could actually afford, then levying the rest from funds) would go a shite load further.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Yeah but consider that you're cutting taxes, increasing military spending and running your economy into the ground.
I still don't get why you think the third is somehow connected to the other two. The federal budget is NOT the economy.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't have time to take you through economics 101 Ommey.
Suffice it to say that there is a limited amount of resources at any time. Therefore what one sector does will effect the rest. Especially when that given section of the economy -governement directed spending, fiscal policy etc- is a damn large portion. Believe me, it has a shite load to do with the health of the economy.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't have time to take you through economics 101 Ommey.
Good, 'cause it'd be a waste of my time. 'A'.
there is a limited amount of resources at any time. Therefore what one sector does will effect the rest.
Exactly. When that uber-huge sector of the economy suddenly starts to consume a significantly smaller portion of the resources available, there will be more available to the rest of the economy. This is a Good Thing, not a Bad Thing. Mind you, I consider the contiunous inflation of the US money supply since WW2 a problem that's eventually gonna bite us on the ass and a Very Bad Thing, and deficit spending doesn't help that, but as for immediate economic growth, there is neither historical or theoretical evidence that tax cuts in and of themselves could possibly hurt the economy.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
