forum challange: tsunami aid

Nick,

quote:

---

Anything, as long as you don't come into the Music Room expounding the glories of the Golden Era of Canadian rock bands which basically boils down to one: The Guess Who/BTO/Ironhorse.

---

Oh puh-leaze, Mr. Lees. Everyone knows there's only ONE Canadian rock band worth mentioning -- Rush (or possibly Max Webster if you're pressed to pick a runner up).

Joe

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Petrik:
Nick,
Oh puh-leaze, Mr. Lees. Everyone knows there's only ONE Canadian rock band worth mentioning -- Rush (or possibly Max Webster if you're pressed to pick a runner up).
Joe

---

Actually, I'd give Rush the runner up spot too. But I'm biased. And going back to your earlier posting Joe - no, I didn't think anyone in here was bragging and swaggering over something so terrible. Present company excepted and all that.

Cheers

Harry

(On some planets I would be considered normal)

OK, the disaster in Asia was/is a terrible thing.
However, I can't help feeling a certain hypocracy about the way the media have "hyped" it all - stirring up big feelings and sympathy etc.
After all, in very recent times, there was a disaster which affected more than 33 million people, destroyed in excess of one million dwellings, and permanently or temporarily displaced more than 4 million inhabitants.
Do we hear much or anything about that disaster? Did we all pledge zillions in aid? Does anyone have any idea to what disaster I'm referring to?
Have we all forgotten?
Bangladesh floods, July 2004.
The BIG difference is that we, Westerners and Europeans, don't generally use Bangladesh as a holiday resort, so we weren't, on the whole, affected by the massive problem there. We didn't lose 200 people, so we're not bothered; or the media aren't all that bothered.
It's a disgrace that Bangladesh has to a large extent been "forgotten". This latest Asia disaster "billed" as the "worst human catastrophe of modern times" - isn't. Terrible yes, but out of proportion compared to other huge scale happenings.

I realise that some of my comments may stir peoples emotions and I appreciate that if any of my own family had been lost, I would be devestated. Friends of mine were there in Thailand, thankfully, they are fine.
If I had lost family in Bangldesh, I would possibly feel betrayed by the apparent lack of concern towards that huge disaster.

Well Joe's effort to do something good has be nicely flushed down the toilet. Unbelievable! Joe, may I suggest that people PT you with donation amounts for your tally. No fear of willy waving then. Perhaps matthewr could whip a vertical Mick Parry thermometer, with a scale of 1MP = $1K?

cheers,

Dan

Dan

There is a massive way in which charity donations are raised either side of the pond.

On your side, the MO is to encourage competition with a fanfare of publicity etc.

Over here, that is considered really vulgar. Donations are nearly always given quietly.

There is no way on earth that I would publicise what I have given.

It is just one of those cultural differences and we have to respect each others point of view.

Regards

Mick

The danger with the Tsunami fund is that it may get too large and after the initial recovery has taken place there will still be a huge pot of money left over which will be argued over as to which bit of work and which country is to benefit from it.

Often in these cases money donated for one instance or charity cannot be directed to another similar one.

For the benefit of the chaps on the left side of the pond - so far the UK public has donated over £70million

Derek

<< >>

quote:

---

NB,


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have made a donation to the fund but will not be stating anywhere how much it was. I have far more respect for those that help quietly rather than shouting out at the top of their voices about how great they are.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I hope it didn't come across that I started this thread so I could brag about how much I gave because that certainly wasn't my intention. My hope was simply that the thread would prompt the forum community to give if members hadn't given something already.

---

Joe,

My comments were not aimed at yourself and I commend your effort's in trying to raise funds for the truely needy.

My concearns are that we can get too carried away with trying to be the biggest contributor that we can forget the real cause.

I do believe that the media are hyping this way out of context and before you critisise me, I have two friends in Sri Lanka and have spoken to them recently.

One final comment aimed at the media, wouldn't it be better to donate the fortune it has cost them to hype this out of all context to the disaster fund, rather than profit from this disaster?

Regards


NB

blythe & Mick Parry have got it spot-on IMHO.

I just can't stand this cynical media fanfare and trumpeting the death toll and the amount raised in charity. They're doing a great job of reducing all human suffering to raw figures for the sake of a great story. I was at large media company yesterday and their spokesperson openly admitted that disasters like the tsunami were good for their business. I don't blame them as thats the business they're in.

The whole saga is being emotionally stage managed for a post-Diana (UK) public that has become hooked on wallowing in grief. I'm sorry if I've caused any offence to the forum community in stating the above but that's what I truly feel.

BTW I have made a quiet donation and will continue to do so.

Best regards,
Mole Man

Mick,

quote:

---

There is a massive way in which charity donations are raised either side of the pond.

On your side, the MO is to encourage competition with a fanfare of publicity etc.

Over here, that is considered really vulgar. Donations are nearly always given quietly.

There is no way on earth that I would publicise what I have given.

It is just one of those cultural differences and we have to respect each others point of view.

---

It's easy to forget that even though we mostly speak and write the same language, Brits and North Americans do have some striking cultural differences that are not always apparent over a forum. Here, for example, it's considered gauche to point out the many expensive luxury items in our possession, but it's OK to boast about how much you give to charity. ;-)

Joe

Here, it's always been cosidered most vulgar to let it be known how much one gives to charity. IMO this "Bah! Humbug!" attitude is a VERY BAD THING.

Here's a question for those who disagree. I'm sorry if this ruffles a few feathers - but then maybe it should:

Is it more important that people give to charity for the "right reasons" (as defined by you) unsullied by "impure motives" (as assumed by you) or is it more important that those who are in need receive as much help as possible as soon as possible?

If countries or individuals are prepared to compete to be the biggest donor among their peers then good for them.

Jeremy

I can see your point but at the end of the day, cultural attitudes are difficult to overcome.

To give an instance.

In my club, we leave envelopes on the dinner table for members to slip some money in for various events such as the earthquake appeal.

That method raises quite large amounts and no one knows how much the other man donated.

We also have boards on the wall, where you sign you name up at £1.00 a time. Some chaps put up 50 signatures.

The envelope method, always raises more cash.

If the cause is right, people will give, Band Aid proved that.

Regards

Mick

Mick,

I agree that public disclosure may not be to everyones taste (mine included) and that's why I suggested Joe have an anonymous tally. Still, if you think such a tally would not in any way motivate someone to chip in, then there is little point. However, it may be that those dropping by the forum will see that some members are more than one-dimensional hi-fi nerds. It's a pretty poor show if all one reads are questions about the new $30K CD spinner and suggestions that Bill Gates should cough up some more.

cheers,

Dan

Dan

I am not knocking anything.

The only point I am making is that public donations work well in your part of the world and anonymous donations seem to work better over here. Let us just do it in the way that works best in our respective countries.

The main thing is that the highest amount is raised and the people who need the money get it fast.

The one good thing to come out of this, is that we all want to do our bit because the cause is seen as deserving and it as transcended national agendas.

Regards

Mick

Mick,

I couldn't agree more.

Dan

Like many others, I have also given to charity but don't wish to talk about it or go into details(*).

Matthew

(*) I'm a bit concerned that some of you might miss the implication here -- which is that I gave loads becuase I am Rich and Ace.

Just a perspective:

Cost of IRAQ war just for Britain is over £1.5 Billion pounds per year.

The US has spent over $200 Billion so far & $80 billion a year is estimated for 2005.

October 2004:

LONDON - Nearly 100,000 more Iraqis have died during the American-led occupation than would have been expected otherwise, a study posted on The Lancet medical journal's website Thursday estimates

In 1990, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), composed mainly of Tutsi refugees who had fled to Uganda, invaded Rwanda. Fighting continued for the next four years. In April 1994, Juvenal Habyarimana and the president of Burundi, who had been discussing ways to bring an end to the conflict, were killed in a plane crash. The Hutus, who blamed the Tutsis for the crash, tried to annihilate the Tutsi people. More than one million Tutsis and some moderate Hutus were killed. Two million Rwandans fled to Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo to escape the violence


(Sources: various Internet news agencies.)

We are one crazy species. Terrible though the earthquake was, it's killing and devastation pale into insignificance next to the things we can do to ourselves.

And I haven't even mentioned how many die of hunger or preventable disease....



Stephen

The wonderful thing about charity, is that no one has to give anything. No one has to tell anyone how much they have given or to which charity they have given.
No one has the right to criticise anyone for giving ANY amount, large or small to who they wish; there's always the old lady who leaves zillions to the dogs' home or whatever.
If my favoured charity is one for black, single, lesbian women living with HIV/AIDS, then it is MY choice to give to that cause. If I choose to give to that cause, I feel it TOTALLY out of order for ANYONE to criticise me for the amount I give or the cause I give to.
To that end, to criticise someone, such as Bill Gates is treading on thin ice IMHO.
I personally know one multi-millionaire who is not going to donate a penny to the Asia fund because he claims he has seen too many instances first hand, where leaders of aid groups have pocketed HUGE sums of money. He also, quite rightly pointed out that Thailand, is not a poor country and whilst some coastal areas are indeed extremely badly effected, there is still a huge area physically untouched by the flooding. The same person, annually gives VAST sums of money to various charities of his choice.

We're now more than a week on from the day of the Asia disaster and I feel it's well overdue that the "news programs" stop this heart wrenching repetition that we're still being subjected to. As per my earlier post, the numbers pale into signifcance compared to other recent natural disasters which have been long forgotten by most.....

No, I'm not heartless, but enough is enough.

Well said Sir (Last post )


Fritz Von Kyber pass

N.B. I can't help wondering if the Thai PM shouild resign over his failure to curb child abuse, or is this just a UN thing ?

blythe,
What a shame I can't give you five stars for your posting - I'm so glad that the real world has at last visited this thread.

I wonder if people and companies will be donating the notional value of any publicity that has accrued to them since publicaly making a donation?

This just in from a friend who arrived in Thailand the day after the earthquake. We couldn't believe that a)she still went, and b)she got in. But our assumptions were based on what was on the telly.

"...I know the pix on tv are horrendous, but on CNN anyway they are mostly
re-runs and yes, I'm hundreds of miles from the fault line, on another ocean
entirely. The western world is rerunning footage of last
weeks tragedy over and over again and the cancellations are pouring in. They
are so incredibly pleased we didn't cancel, we get the same messages over
and over again: thank you for coming here, please tell your friends. It is
strange because we all feel when we go home, tanned rested and happy, we'll
be seen by many in the UK as callous, yet if they understood the damage that
western media coverage is doing then they wouldn't put their hand in their
pity pocket, they would book a bloody holiday here! The begging-bowl
syndrome of damaged third world just feeds western capitalism - thai economy
needs healthy tourism and there is absolutely no reason the media could not
show footage of the hundreds of miles of undamaged, beautiful land...."

Quoted with her permission and not in any way to detract from what is obviously a terrible disaster. But a bit of balance nonetheless.

Cheers

Harry

Excellent post innit:

The sums of money that are being published are not yet hard cash!

I note that the UN has expressed concern that a lot of PLEDGED money never materializes , based on previous experience of this sort of donation situation.

In fact the UN went as far as to say that one of the top priorities of the charity effort should be to turn Pledged donations into cash before they "disappear" into thin air.

The other thing in common with other comments here pointed to by the UN was the fact that 2005 was planned to provide significant charity to other areas of the world suffering from catastrophe, particulalrly in Africa, and there is already a concern that the Tsunami disaster will turn these vital programs into "forgotten plans"

regards
GEOFF

"Just trying to make a NAIM for myself"

Two quotes this week that made me think

Beb Geldof, 'The asian disaster was caused by Nature, the African one by Man'

Greenpeace spokesman 'It is hard to criticise charity, but only when people in the west think about how they will change rather than what they can give will we really alter the world.'

The words may be sl inaccurate but the sentiments are as they intended.
Bruce

It is interesting to see what emotions Joe's request has stirred up. To my mind when a disaster such as this takes place it is up to each individual to make their own personal, private decision as to how they handle it. remember that many in our communities give to others all the time, not just when a disaster such as this occurs. Even more so when affected personally. eg the Bali bombings when many of my countrymen were killed. As to whether certain countries will make donations for ulterior reasons let us not worry about this at the moment. Any assistance to anyone is important. History will be the final arbiter.

St*ll*n owes me ONE MILLION POUNDS after losing a wager and I am happy to pledge that.

Matthew