Sputnik Music Forums

Sputnik Music Forums (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/index.php)
-   Archives (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=80)
-   -   Is the Australian government response to the tsunami disaster adequate? (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283431)

davo_guitarman 12-29-2004 09:22 AM

Is the Australian government response to the tsunami disaster adequate?
 
is it?

(LOKI) 12-29-2004 05:51 PM

all I have heard is the European Union imediately putting in £2 million and America soon followed, although I just heard this on the bbc so probly best to be skeptical

vai61 12-29-2004 06:08 PM

I heard they doubled their budget on that

relayer 12-29-2004 06:14 PM

At the moment the Australian government has contributed 35 million AU$ to countries affected by the tsunami. That's about 25 million US$. I think that's pretty good, very good compared to 2 million pounds. Though that's understandable just 'cos the EU isn't exactly in the region.
Immediately after the whole disaster happened the Australian government pledged 10 million dollars, which was followed by a further 25 million yesterday, or the day before. How should anyone here know if that's adequate? Maybe it isn't nearly enough...it's a big number though.

vertigo39 12-29-2004 07:55 PM

It's a very good contribution for the Aussies. Especially when you look at the size of their economy compared to the U.S. or the European union.

bassplayer18 12-29-2004 09:38 PM

i heard on the news earlier today that canada donated $44 million (thats about $34 million american) to the countries affected by the tsunami. beat that australia!

RouteOne 12-29-2004 10:18 PM

America will take care of it....as always....

bassplayer18 12-29-2004 10:31 PM

no, the UN will.

Cave_boy 12-30-2004 12:52 AM

I think aussie has done very well, compared to everyone else it was a sterling effort. When you look at the population of australia then compare it to other countries and what they've given, well done aussie.

geetar_joe 12-30-2004 12:55 AM

bingo cave_boy. its all relative. but we have a duty to help out these countries in SE Asia, just like when the Bali bombs went off.

Cave_boy 12-30-2004 01:05 AM

yeah, I hope helen and her cronies put together a sum relative to aussies. around 6 million would do it. However aussie does have the bigger economy, but hell, we've given more than that away in the past easily, no reason why our government couldn't front that no problem. Initially they only put up half a mill, but that was before anyone realised just how bad things were.

Alley McSqueal 01-02-2005 12:47 AM

The Aussies are doing well. Were only a small nation, remember that.

MIllions of dollars just from the publics donations are going through for the tsunami aid.

Maveryck 01-02-2005 01:49 AM

The world has pledged more than $2 billion at this point. Of this, Australia accounts for about $85 million ($38 million from the public, $47 million from the government).

Given our closeness to the region, and the pressing need for us to show our support for some of our closest neighbours, I think our efforts have been pathetic. Our people are giving enough, but our government is being very cheap. Even the United States has pledged $350 million.

It seems Howard's willing to follow Bush's lead on committing billions to the War in Iraq, but not on donating hundreds of millions in humanitarian efforts to our own bloody neighbours.

anti-centrist2 01-03-2005 02:50 AM

i heard $60 Million had been donated by the Australian public...

im probably wrong though

anti-centrist2 01-03-2005 02:53 AM

here's a page about Aussie Donations:

[url]http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=25511[/url]

Maveryck 01-03-2005 03:02 AM

[QUOTE=anti-centrist2]i heard $60 Million had been donated by the Australian public...

im probably wrong though[/QUOTE]


No, you're right. I was counting in U.S. dollars though. :p

Jimm 01-03-2005 03:45 AM

I think what Australia has pledged is fine, and if being relative to our GDP, is very generous.

relayer 01-03-2005 03:49 AM

Australia is not only giving money though. Doctors and all sorts of emergency workers are being sent to affected regions to directly help people. Recently on the news here they showed a whole military hospital being packed into a plane to be sent to Asia. I think that might well be much more helpful than sending huge sums of money. Who knows how much of those millions of dollars will actually, physically help people? Whereas when people are sent, we can be quite sure that they're there working and helping out.
So although big sums of money are really great, skilled people are also a significant contribution.

blizzard 01-03-2005 04:25 AM

Australia is quite generous i think although i can't really compare it to other nations because over here we don't here how much other nations have pledged although i believe nations in the UN have pledged half a billion in total.

leopard_punk 01-03-2005 05:37 AM

The Japanese government are giving £260 million compared to America's £180 million.

Maveryck 01-03-2005 05:57 AM

[QUOTE=leopard_punk]The Japanese government are giving £260 million compared to America's £180 million.[/QUOTE]


Rep++ for Japan, if I could.

The Australian government is considering increasing its contribution to $500 million Australian dollars, which is about 180 million pounds. I think the idea is to match the U.S. contribution.

We need to raise our standards in terms of who we're matching; reaching Japan's level of generosity would make for a better goal.

leopard_punk 01-03-2005 06:06 AM

Japan has been very generous. I think that as well as doing it as an act of support for the victims, Japan is a country which is also under threat from natural disasters such as Tsunamis. The world can see how generous it has been and Japan probably hopes that one day when they have a big disaster and need overseas help, the rest of the world will remember how much they pledged and be as generous back to Japan. So it seems to me that Japan is sort of securing the future (which is not a bad thing) maybe...

jensmatty 01-03-2005 06:20 AM

^^ that's what the world's all about. well, not ALL about, but yea. I think as long as australia's putting as much support towards them financially and otherwise while still functioning ourselves as we can, then it's good. but if there's 10 million sitting in the bank for office renovations in Parliament House, then im p!ssed at the government.

Norton_Ghost_7.0 01-04-2005 08:12 AM

[QUOTE=Maveryck]Rep++ for Japan, if I could.

The Australian government is considering increasing its contribution to $500 million Australian dollars, which is about 180 million pounds. I think the idea is to match the U.S. contribution.

We need to raise our standards in terms of who we're matching; reaching Japan's level of generosity would make for a better goal.[/QUOTE]

I don't see why we have to match anyone.

geetar_joe 01-04-2005 09:19 AM

we shouldnt have to match. we should give as much as we can afford. myself, thats not much. but i'm off to thailand in less than 2 weeks, i'll see what i can get done over there to help out.

we've got family friends over in sri lanka, so we've sent them packages. apparently whats most needed is fresh underwear (seriously).

Frankie-C! 01-04-2005 09:27 AM

Why would you be worried about wearing any underwear at all?

guitarist.py 01-04-2005 01:11 PM

Australia has about 1/2 the population of California and ~1/20th the population of the U.S. So credit where credit is due. Aussies are generous!

Nuke Broadcast 01-04-2005 02:04 PM

i found this on another forum i'm a part of...this guy...wow.

"i find it funny that charity is being tracked like a football game score or two children talking about who's dad is stronger. does it matter to the needy where the food came from or which country donated the most to the relief effort (per capita). i think it is in poor taste to criticize any nation for any charitable work. that is tantamont to looking the gift horse in the mouth. "sure you helped, but you didn't help enough". i say "bull****". everyday that goes by, i am believing more and more in a principle of socio-economic darwinism. sure, the united states is probably a corrupt nation, but it is powerful. we swing our power around like club and **** anyone that gets in our way, but we are not conscience-less. our people care (for now). as our nation's government turns the world against us, the world will eventually turn the united states citizens against the world. and heaven help the world when the conscience of the united states, it's people (people like thm), stop caring. heaven help the world, when the it convinces even the most liberal eco-pansy that no matter how much you do, the world will still hate and berate you. hell... it is **** like this that makes me say '**** it'. our charity isn't good enough for the far east, fine, i think it is better spent in our inner cities and farmlands anyway."

guitarist.py 01-04-2005 02:51 PM

^^^ He's right. All this anti American bs is starting to bother even the liberals here and like he says... we could help our own and forgo the rest of the world and no other nation has the ability to force us into any situation we can't control. Don't forget who saved the rest of the world from the Nazi's and the Japanese wormongers that murdered over 10,000,000 chinese citizens.

That said. It should be known that the average US citizen does care and will help if other nations stop berating us out of jealousy


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.