TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Serious Problems are Afoot in New Orleans
Pages (10): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »

Before and after pics of New Orleans..



Some more pics...

The latest dollar figure that I've heard (from the BBC) is that this disaster will cost in the neighborhood of 25 billion dollars. So, I think that the US probably could use a few bucks from other countries. Sure, the US is "rich" but its people aren't and they're the ones that could use the donated money, along with donated man-power to help save those poor bastards.

This is going to sound jaded, but to me, here's the bottom line: When there is a disaster anywhere in the world, the US is expected to give money and other resouces to aid clean up and recovery efforts. When there's a diaster in the US, they're on their own.

I have yet to read or hear anything anywhere that shows other countries volunteering even token amounts to the rescue and recovery efforts in New Orleans/the South. I hope someone can prove me wrong.

You give aid to countries that need it! America owns a 5th of the entire world's wealth!

Its like the EU - some countries are net contributors cos they are richer, whereas the other countries are net benefactuaries cos they are poor

America does not need any aid

I was actually reading an article in the newspaper today about money that made a great point. People are always willing to tell the wealthy how to spend their money but are never willing to return the favor. $25 Billion! Yes, the U.S. needs some aid. I will be shocked if there is any sizeable world rescue effort at all. It could be just a number of workers, or soldiers to help out. Equipment, etc. But, I won't hold my breathe, wouldn't want anybody to return any favors.

Well considering rescue crews in the gulf states can only spray paint red X's on the doors of homes where dead people are inside and don't have time to fish out the dead bodies floating in the streets I would say that if not monetary aid, aid in materiale would be quite welcome.

quote:

Originally posted by kush paintings I was actually reading an article in the newspaper today about money that made a great point. People are always willing to tell the wealthy how to spend their money but are never willing to return the favor. $25 Billion! Yes, the U.S. needs some aid. I will be shocked if there is any sizeable world rescue effort at all. It could be just a number of workers, or soldiers to help out. Equipment, etc. But, I won't hold my breathe, wouldn't want anybody to return any favors.

For fucks sake how many fucking times?!!?!

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono I have yet to read or hear anything anywhere that shows other countries volunteering even token amounts to the rescue and recovery efforts in New Orleans/the South. I hope someone can prove me wrong.

I believe I posted something earlier as to how Venezuela offered to help. That BEING Venezuela.

quote:

For fucks sake how many fucking times?!!?!

quote:

You give aid to countries that need it! America owns a 5th of the entire world's wealth! Its like the EU - some countries are net contributors cos they are richer, whereas the other countries are net benefactuaries cos they are poor America does not need any aid

hu huh and would this be some anti-american remarks as to how the US owns the world. Why don't you just say that. It sounds better instead of fucking around. I don't believe you have bothered to notice, but the US is in serious trouble. We have a 7Trillion dollar debt. Thats more than Germ, UK, Italy GDP. So if a nuke went off in london you would want no help? This is a natural disaster and it would be nice to see NATIONS who depend on our consumption to help out. Such nations being china, mexico, canada, Japan.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley You give aid to countries that need it! America owns a 5th of the entire world's wealth!

Yet it need the aid after Sept 11th?

How come the world offers aid to the USA after a building or two collapsed in NYC by political forces, yet when a whole city is wiped off the face of this earth by natrual forces, nothing?!

quote:

Its like the EU - some countries are net contributors cos they are richer, whereas the other countries are net benefactuaries cos they are poor

Then how come Germany (an EU net contributor) needed aid from all over the EU after their recent floods?!

The Germans are rich enough to deal with their own problems right, why give EU monies for their floods?

quote:

America does not need any aid

Do unto others as you would have done unto you.

Yes i agree other countries should help the US with material aid. I'm pretty sure the rest of the western world would if they asked for it tho (like they did on sept 11th). But money aid just doesnt make sense. US is one of the richest countries in the world, they can afford it. I mean really, not even India wanted to accept any foreign aid after the tsunami since they thought they could afford it themselves. If India can, then America can too. So that aid money would be better to give to some poor country to help them develop.

And yes very tragic event, hopefully the fatalties can be kept pretty low thanks to the evacuation and such. But i guess it will still be pretty high

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Yet it need the aid after Sept 11th? How come the world offers aid to the USA after a building or two collapsed in NYC by political forces, yet when a whole city is wiped off the face of this earth by natrual forces, nothing?!

They asked for help then but not now?

quote:

Then how come Germany (an EU net contributor) needed aid from all over the EU after their recent floods?! The Germans are rich enough to deal with their own problems right, why give EU monies for their floods?

That argument really doesnt make any sense at all. Germany is contributor to the EU catastrophy funds, which are intended for floodings like that. Of course they should get money for that. It's like if the US decided that only certain "poor" states should get federal money for things like this.

Not doing enough, quck enough.

Its really ridicilous how little aid is going into Lousiana and the surronding areas.

Despite being declared a national emergency, these states are going through rescue and salavage operations on all only their state forces.

The national guard is there, not the army.

Its obvious what has to be done:
Ships need to converge on New Orleans and Biloxi. Repair, construction, drainage, bridge building, barges, carriers, transports, cruises ship, they all need to be send to those areas.

Right now I am in Galveston Texas - they are building a new interstate bridge to connect the island with the mainland. No one will care if the project goes 2,3, even 6 months over schedule - there are other bridges servicing the island. Those crews need to be moved out (forced out and compensated) to go work on the levies, bridges in the like in effected areas.

The cruises ships, Carnival, Royal etc, have moved their ships based in New Orleans to Galveston and they are operating 2-3 day cruises out of here (two days ago they were selling these cruises for $99 a person .... that's cheaper than staying in a 6 motel).

These ships need to be confiscated and compensated by the government as floating hotels in the effect areas to faciliate living accomadation to the soldiers, rescue, utility, and construction crews. They could probably make a lot more money doing that then crusing out as well..

If there was quicker response by all these private forces and a national emergency plan and discipline to activate military and support vessles quicker we could have avoided the disasterous pictures that will unfold over the next couple days:

New Orleans, the 35th largest city in the US, is gone.

I don't know if this is the USA's pompeii or if they will rebuild... but the city is gone.

could there be a stigma attach to this whole 'fcuk all aid' story considering the fact that 75% of the population is black?? I mean, there are a lot of racist bigots that are clapping their hands in glee at this event.. sad, but probably true.

Interesting interface at NYT gives a bit of understanding as to the damage:

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...PHIC/index.html

Maybe the EU should add America into it's Cotonou Convention and only give out aid when certain political conditions are met

Oh yea and you can knock off the millions in aid the UK would be giving America from our tab in Iraq...

And while yoo're at it you can knock off the millions the EU would be giving America for the clean up job NATO is currently doing in Afghanistan after America decided to go to war there, only to fuck off to Iraq to leave it to the other countries to sort out

Sock it to them george!!

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono The latest dollar figure that I've heard (from the BBC) is that this disaster will cost in the neighborhood of 25 billion dollars. So, I think that the US probably could use a few bucks from other countries. Sure, the US is "rich" but its people aren't and they're the ones that could use the donated money, along with donated man-power to help save those poor bastards. This is going to sound jaded, but to me, here's the bottom line: When there is a disaster anywhere in the world, the US is expected to give money and other resouces to aid clean up and recovery efforts. When there's a diaster in the US, they're on their own. I have yet to read or hear anything anywhere that shows other countries volunteering even token amounts to the rescue and recovery efforts in New Orleans/the South. I hope someone can prove me wrong.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley You give aid to countries that need it! America owns a 5th of the entire world's wealth!

Proof or STFU.

Who owns the other 4 parts? And if we in the US do own that wealth then where is it because I have no shares in it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita



NDP is more accurate though isnt it?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley And while yoo're at it you can knock off the millions the EU would be giving America for the clean up job NATO is currently doing in Afghanistan after America decided to go to war there, only to fuck off to Iraq to leave it to the other countries to sort out

What a wonderful attitude. If a nation volunteers itself to help in a war effort there is some kind of running total that is kept so if a disaster occurs in a coalition country that war money somehow goes into the "aid" category. I'm glad the US didn't take that stance when it came to Europe or Japan after WWII and the recovery needed there.

Because Europe and fucking Japan needed help! Like the fucking Asian countries needed help! None of them had any fucking money

America is the richest country in the world, it does not need any fucking help!

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!!

Are you people brain dead or summat?!

Aid goes to countries that cannot afford on their own to do whatever the aid is intended for...

Which part of that concept are you having difficulty understanding?!

nice post George

I would like to point out that my reasons for posting what I have is nothing to do with any dislike for America. It is simply in responce to what I percieve as people on this thread seemingly gloating over the tragic events in NOLA as a way of having a go at other nations. America helped out in the Tsunami therefore why is nobody helping America? I am giving you the simple answer than help is simply not needed. Fair enuf it might be a nice gesture, but it would only be a gesture. America was able to help in Asia after the Tsunami because it could help (and as it was able to help was morally obliged to do so) The reason America was able to help there is exactly the same reason America does not need any help now (work it out)

And I'm so glad you all took great pleasure in this event so you could use it to have a go at other nations. Fuck your parents must be proud

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Because Europe and fucking Japan needed help! Like the fucking Asian countries needed help! None of them had any fucking money America is the richest country in the world, it does not need any fucking help! JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!!! Are you people brain dead or summat?! Aid goes to countries that cannot afford on their own to do whatever the aid is intended for... Which part of that concept are you having difficulty understanding?!

Intelligent post. Always nice to see.

You're the one fixated on money here. There are more ways than money to aid a country in need. There are thousands of people still stranded in the South, there are levies to fix, possible disease outbreaks to deal with, looting to be controlled, dead bodies to remove, utilities to repair and a huge clean up effort needed. Money can help all of that, but so does man power and machinery.

Even the "richest country in the world" can use help when it comes to cleaning up an entire region that has been devistated and an infrastructure that has been destoryed. "Aid" can be monetary, but in some cases, especially this case, it also means devoting people to help in the aftermath.

Quit being so fixated on the money arguement. Aid means help, and in this case it means people, equipment and supplies as much as it may mean money.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael19 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita NDP is more accurate though isnt it?

Read the controversies section for GDP.


There are over 6 billion people on the planet, relate the following to that number:

NEW YORK, June 9, 2005 � The world�s high-net-worth wealth grew strongly in 2004 for a second consecutive year, increasing 8.2 percent to $30.8 trillion, according to the 2005 World Wealth Report, released today by Merrill Lynch and Capgemini.

The number of high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) � individuals with a net worth of at least U.S. $1 million, excluding their primary residence � grew by 7.3 percent to 8.3 million, a net increase of 600,000 worldwide. North America led with a nearly 10 percent growth rate to 2.7 million HNWIs, surpassing the 2.6 million in Europe. Asia-Pacific�s growth rate of over 8 percent � to 2.3 million HNWIs � was twice that of Europe.

� The two main drivers of personal wealth creation � economic growth and market capitalization � worked together to generate the strongest growth in high net worth wealth that we�ve seen in more than three years,� said James P. Gorman, executive vice president of Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. and head of Corporate Acquisitions, Strategy and Research. �Looking regionally, Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia and India saw the highest rates of HNWI population growth, while wealthy people in South Africa and the Middle East benefited from the rise in commodity and oil prices. Growth generally lagged in Europe, with only two nations � the United Kingdom and Spain � showing growth comparable to the worldwide rate,� Mr. Gorman said.

2004 also witnessed the expansion of the European Union, with 10 new countries admitted as members. While the GDP growth varied from country to country, Germany, France and Italy, which together account for half of Europe�s economic output, remained in an economic trough. Bertrand Lavayssiere, managing director, Global Financial Services for Capgemini, commented, �While structural issues in the European economy � notably high unemployment and slow GDP growth � constrained wealth creation across most of the region, the so-called BRIC nations � Brazil, Russia, India and China � continued to emerge as an economic force and create wealth in the process.�

�Stock market gains as measured by the world�s largest indices tended to moderate in 2004 after a very strong recovery in 2003, while growth in some of the smaller, developing markets was extremely strong, driven by commodities and oil,� he continued.
High-Net-Worth Wealth Grows Strongly at Over 8 Percent, Surpassing $30 Trillion in 2004, According to Merrill Lynch and Capgemini

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.