Stingy

Oh Jan, why did you have to go and point out a bit of truth?

The administration is howling after the UN's Jan Egeland stepped ever-so-slightly on their footsies with his comment that rich nations are being "stingy" with their aid in response to the tsunami calamity. Powell was immediately on the tube to growl some words (which must have hit hard since he carries so much weight with the UN these days), and Dubya thinks we are a "very generous" nation...

Just how generous would "very generous" be?

Apparently we are only a "very generous" nation when we are shamed into being so...

The Bush administration more than doubled its financial commitment yesterday to provide relief to nations suffering from the Indian Ocean tsunami, amid complaints that the vacationing President Bush has been insensitive to a humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions.

As the death toll surpassed 50,000 with no sign of abating, the U.S. Agency for International Development added $20 million to an earlier pledge of $15 million to provide relief, and the Pentagon dispatched an aircraft carrier and other military assets to the region.

But really, $35 million is nothing (even if it is essentially a deposit). Hell, we are spending that much on Bush's second inauguration alone:

The estimated budget for the event is $30-40 million, but that will not cover security costs.

Yeah, you read that right... sans security costs. And then there is this:

First, the U.S. Agency for International Development, which distributes foreign aid, will have to ask for more money, since the initial $35 million aid package drained its emergency relief fund, said Andrew Natsios, the agency's administrator.

"We just spent it," Natsios said. "We'll be talking to the (White House) budget office ... what to do at this point."

Even that piddling amount drained our entire budget for this kind of thing. But wait, there's more:

Still, the United Nations' Egeland complained on Monday that each of the richest nations gives less than 1 percent of its gross national product for foreign assistance, and many give 0.1 percent. "It is beyond me why we are so stingy, really," he told reporters.

Among the world's two dozen wealthiest countries, the United States often is among the lowest in donors per capita for official development assistance worldwide, even though the totals are larger. According to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development of 30 wealthy nations, the United States gives the least -- at 0.14 percent of its gross national product, compared with Norway, which gives the most at 0.92 percent.

Look, it is embarassing that nobody is above one percent, but for the US to be bringing up the rear is downright criminal. But of course the Bushies will try to but a good spin on it:

"That's a European standard, this percentage that's used," Natsios said. "The United States, for 40 years, has never accepted these standards that it should be based on the gross national product. We base it on the actual dollars that we spent."

"The reason is that our gross national product is so enormous. And our growth rates are so much higher than the other wealthy nations."

Don't you understand?!? The reason we can't give more is because we are so flush with cash! It's so simple... Don't you see?!?

I'll tell you what I see... we are spending some $10 billion (that's "billion" with a "b") on a missile defense system that isn't even close to working on the rigged tests we subject it to (and may never work ever), yet we have a hard time mustering $35 million (that's "million" with an "m") for disasters like this.

So spare me your indignant stance when someone rightly points out that we are stingy with our aid.
P.S. Where was all this money and aid when the Darfur genocide started? There are a hell of a lot more lives at stake there as well.

Update: Ezra has some good words as well. What is amazing to me here is that Bush and COmpany are not only being callous about the situation by staying in Crawford and offering peanuts, they are proud about doing so...