White House Objects to U.N. Calling U.S. 'Deadbeat' Donor

[GaryC 7]

White House Objects to U.N. Calling U.S. 'Deadbeat' Donor

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday that U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's word choice was "unfortunate," given that the U.S. is the largest contributor to the United Nations.

AP

Thursday, March 12, 2009

The White House is taking offense at U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's comment that the United States is a "deadbeat" donor to the world body.

Press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday that Ban's word choice was "unfortunate," given that the U.S. is the largest contributor to the United Nations. The U.S. pays 22 percent of the organization's nearly $5 billion operating budget but is perennially late paying its dues.

Ban made the "'deadbeat" comment Wednesday during a private meeting with lawmakers at the Capitol.

He had met with President Obama in the Oval Office on Tuesday.

Asked whether Ban should retract his comment, Gibbs said it would be appropriate for Ban to acknowledge the American taxpayers' role.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100da...deadbeat-donor/

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

maybe it's time for other countries to step up and pay more instead of the usa getting such a large share of the costs.

[MrsCat 6]

^ sorry Canada's tapped out. We have something called healthcare.

[tmma 467]

nuts to the UN....

eta-I was going to edit-but then 'nuts to the UN' pretty much sums it up, so I'll leave it.

Edited March 13, 2009 by tmma

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

^ sorry Canada's tapped out. We have something called healthcare.

share the timbits and i'll let you off.

[MrsCat 6]

^ sorry Canada's tapped out. We have something called healthcare.

share the timbits and i'll let you off.

Done. They won't be the day olds either.

[alienlovechild 75]

The White House is taking offense at U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's comment that the United States is a "deadbeat" donor to the world body.

That South Korean deadbeat forgets which country saved South Korea and continues to have thousands of Americans defending his country for 59 years.

Ban made the "'deadbeat" comment Wednesday during a private meeting with lawmakers at the Capitol.

If any of our lawmakers had the brains or guts they should have told him Americans buy a lot of Korean junk so let Korea use the money to up it's own UN contribution.

Asked whether Ban should retract his comment, Gibbs said it would be appropriate for Ban to acknowledge the American taxpayers' role.

Obama's mouthpiece defending taxpayers after squandering billions. That's ironic.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He's not far off the mark...

• USA’s aid, in terms of percentage of their GNP has almost always been lower than any other industrialized nation in the world, though paradoxically since 2000, their dollar amount has been the highest. (Only since 2004 have they move up from last place, by just one or two places.)
• Since 1992, Japan had been the largest donor of aid, in terms of raw dollars. That was until 2001 when the United States reclaimed that position, a year that also saw Japan’s amount of aid drop by nearly 4 billion dollars (as tables and charts below will also show).

http://www.globalissues.org/article/35/us-...-aid-assistance

[tmma 467]

He's not far off the mark...

• USA's aid, in terms of percentage of their GNP has almost always been lower than any other industrialized nation in the world, though paradoxically since 2000, their dollar amount has been the highest. (Only since 2004 have they move up from last place, by just one or two places.)
• Since 1992, Japan had been the largest donor of aid, in terms of raw dollars. That was until 2001 when the United States reclaimed that position, a year that also saw Japan's amount of aid drop by nearly 4 billion dollars (as tables and charts below will also show).

http://www.globalissues.org/article/35/us-...-aid-assistance

Is the $ amount of foreign aid taken into account? What about the 'security services/ peacekeeping' services we provide here there and everywhere?

I feel we do our bit.

Besides, I don't think the UN is hurting for $$$$ ( especeially after the oil-for-food debacle).

eta-the $$$ may arrive 'late' to the UN, but at least they get it. That's more than than can be said for some States tax payers who are waiting for their refund of their own money.

Edited March 13, 2009 by tmma

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He's not far off the mark...

• USA's aid, in terms of percentage of their GNP has almost always been lower than any other industrialized nation in the world, though paradoxically since 2000, their dollar amount has been the highest. (Only since 2004 have they move up from last place, by just one or two places.)
• Since 1992, Japan had been the largest donor of aid, in terms of raw dollars. That was until 2001 when the United States reclaimed that position, a year that also saw Japan's amount of aid drop by nearly 4 billion dollars (as tables and charts below will also show).

http://www.globalissues.org/article/35/us-...-aid-assistance

Is the $ amount of foreign aid taken into account? What about the 'security services/ peacekeeping' services we provide here there and everywhere?

I feel we do our bit.

Besides, I don't think the UN is hurting for $$ ( especeially after the oil-for-food debacle).

eta-the $$ may arrive 'late' to the UN, but at least they get it. That's more than than can be said for some States tax payers who are waiting for their refund of their own money.

In terms of percentage, we have not lived up to our promises. Whether you agree with giving aid or not, if we in fact promised aid and haven't lived up to that promise, criticism of breaking that promise is warranted.