Should we be helping myanmar/burma after the cyclone?

[6SpeedTA95]

Guys the question is simple, with more than 28,000 dead and hundreds of thousands homeless and without food/shelter/water should the USA help Myanmar/Burma? I realize we are already but should we? I do not feel it is our responsbility but for the sake of the people I think its good that we try to help countries when major disasters like this happen.

[thewise1]

The idea of foreign aid is something I'm probably not informed enough to really speak accurately to. That said, I will do so anyway based on what I do know.

Some things to consider -

1. Will we piss off any other groups/countries by giving money to these folks? If so, are the folks of myanmar/burma friends of the United States? Would they send us help if we needed it or would they take the opportunity to somehow improve their situation while we were down?
2. Does the federal government have a moral right (I'm sure there is a legal right, so one hopes the reader of this post won't bother trying to appeal to the law in their argument against this) to spend our tax dollars on the needs of people in other countries? Shouldn't there be some sort of benefit required for Americans if our government is spending money? I realize that from a charity/human standpoint it's noble to help those who experience loss like that, but the US Government should also have a fiduciary responsibility to its people if they are forced to pay it taxes.
3. So many things are billed as 'life threatening' - 'must be dealt with right away', from the viaduct in seattle that has been 'life threatening' since the Nisqually earthquake to the war on terror which is supposedly the only thing saving us from the shadow of radical islam, yet little or no progress is made on any of these (I realize that the viaduct example is local and thus a local government issue, but seattle is sending money too I believe). Why are we spending money to alleviate others misery when we have our own pressing problems?

I do understand the desire and nobility of helping others but I've always believed charity should be freely given to maintain the nobility - which means that people need to do it on their own, of their own free will. Many are quick to volunteer others money via foreign aid packages, but not so many are willing to pony up their own money directly, because like the government, they have their own problems here at home that they need to pay for.

An added dimension in this particular equation is that Myanmar has been seizing the foreign aid as it comes in, or they were at least. Is Myanmar some kind of dictatorship? I don't know very much at all about the region and haven't bothered to look it up, but in the situations where we help the people under dictators or tyrannical governments, we may be doing them a disservice by keeping them just happy enough to let that government maintain its rule over them.

Just some thoughts, maybe I'm completely wrong, but these are questions I've got myself. I'm not against helping them, but I think it should be up to you and me to do it on our own. The federal government shouldn't be a charity and insurance policy rolled into one IMHO.

[A_C_E]

Now that the government of Burma has let up and decided to allow direct foreign aid in, yes, we should.

A major natural disaster which kills tens of thousands and does untold amount of damage? I will gladly give up some of my disposable income to help these people who have had their food, their homes, and their families taken from them--through no fault of their own.

[kombayn]

I voted no, but that's because I think the money should be used to help our own people with our own problems, such as fixing ghetto's in America or give the money to people who need it here. Allow charities to help the people over there, just like the Tsunami help, where people sent money to help them or Katrina. Especially if the countries leaders at first are refusing our aid in the first place.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Now that the government of Burma has let up and decided to allow direct foreign aid in, yes, we should.

A major natural disaster which kills tens of thousands and does untold amount of damage? I will gladly give up some of my disposable income to help these people who have had their food, their homes, and their families taken from them--through no fault of their own.

The question really though is should you be forced to if you don't want to?

Because by the government doing it instead of through private charity, that's exactly what's happening

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by motivez

The question really though is should you be forced to if you don't want to?

Because by the government doing it instead of through private charity, that's exactly what's happening

The government always spends our money in ways we might not agree with. IF that's your problem then it goes alot deeper than aid to Burma.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

The government always spends our money in ways we might not agree with. IF that's your problem then it goes alot deeper than aid to Burma.

Sure, but his point was that he'd gladly do it. Maybe not everyone would.

The government making that decision is taking the choice away from him and everyone else.

Lets say they're going to give 300ish million in aid, is the better policy to do that, or to give everyone in America who paid taxes $1 and let them send it if they want to?

[kombayn]

^Completely agree with Lou. I watch them spend the money in places that don't need be all the time. I have to come to the conclusion we'll be in the business of welfare, so my ultimate opinion is to use that money for our parts of the country and it still doesn't help that much.

Aid falls far short of Myanmar's urgent needs: relief groups - Yahoo! News

It's on the Yahoo! front page. Even with foreign aid, they can't get what they need and plus, who's to say they're even seeing the money? I feel bad for the people and it's horrible they have to go through this situation. But, isn't this the exact reason the United Nations were created? To help countries around the world and keep the peace? I'm not surprised though, people start pointing fingers at richer countries to help out.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

The government always spends our money in ways we might not agree with. IF that's your problem then it goes alot deeper than aid to Burma.

Agreed.

The government is also forcing people to use their tax dollars to patrol Baghdad and shoot Iraqis. At least with this method they're using it for a noble cause.

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Now that the government of Burma has let up and decided to allow direct foreign aid in, yes, we should.

A major natural disaster which kills tens of thousands and does untold amount of damage? I will gladly give up some of my disposable income to help these people who have had their food, their homes, and their families taken from them--through no fault of their own.

That's noble that you will give up some of your disposable income. Have you done so yet?

The reason I ask that is because you haven't done that by way of the government - your 'disposable' income does not include tax dollars. We are already stretched thin financially, as everyone rightfully points out when we spend money on Iraq or welfare or whatever your personal dislike is, so why is it ok to spend it on them when we're already in the red?

I'd love to contribute to charity or help people or buy a boat, but I don't, because I'm not far enough into the black to do so. As a country, we're not even in the black, yet we justify it for certain projects...

I don't mean that as a personal attack on you by any means, but once again we have a situation where you're glad to volunteer everyone's tax dollars as if somehow your approval outweighs everyone else's approval. Just a thought.

[7960]

private citizens should be sending whatever they want to send

the united states govt should be sending our best wishes and should be helping facilitate getting donations from american citizens past corrupt govt officials and into the hands of people who will actually help legit victims.

[Kytro]

I am opposed mostly because the government is not to be trusted - they are unlikely to allow aid to get where it needs to go much of the time.

[7960]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

Now that the government of Burma has let up and decided to allow direct foreign aid in, yes, we should.

A major natural disaster which kills tens of thousands and does untold amount of damage? I will gladly give up some of my disposable income to help these people who have had their food, their homes, and their families taken from them--through no fault of their own.

scan and post the check you wrote from your disposable income?

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by 7960

private citizens should be sending whatever they want to send

the united states govt should be sending our best wishes and should be helping facilitate getting donations from american citizens past corrupt govt officials and into the hands of people who will actually help legit victims.

Excellent point...so you'd say no to government aid I assume?

[motivez]

I think the answer is a resounding no unless we can be assured it'll go to help those in need and not the horrible government running the show there.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by 7960

scan and post the check you wrote from your disposable income?

I donated 30 bucks through Google to Direct Relief International.

Sure it's not much, but I'm a poor college student and $30 would go a long way if everyone pitched in.

Donate here if you feel compelled to do so: Support disaster relief in Myanmar (Burma)

[kinggovernor]

Our military can offer 1st class logistical support to NGOs, so I think yes we should use those assets to help.

[7960]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Excellent point...so you'd say no to government aid I assume?

I would say no to govt aid in the form of money.

After the tsunami we sent navy ships there to make electricity and water......I'm good with that. But I disagree with us just writing checks.

[7960]

Originally Posted by A_C_E

I donated 30 bucks through Google to Direct Relief International.

Sure it's not much, but I'm a poor college student and $30 would go a long way if everyone pitched in.

And when's the last time you wrote a $30 check to something/someone in need within 10 miles of you?

Donate here if you feel compelled to do so: Support disaster relief in Myanmar (Burma)

No, thanks.

[A_C_E]

Originally Posted by 7960

And when's the last time you wrote a $30 check to something/someone in need within 10 miles of you?

Easter.

I donate $50 evey Christmas and Easter to St. Luke's Mission in Buffalo.

Go ahead, call me a latte liberal. See if I give a flying fuck.