Thursday, December 30, 2004

Sri Lanka rejects Israeli tsunami aid

Someone left a comment saying I was "heartless" because I wrote that the U.S. taxpayer shouldn't have to pay for tsunami aid.

But I don't see why Sri Lanka, the country where most of the aid is going to go to, deserves any aid at all on account of them rejecting an offer of Israeli aid. Sri Lanka hates the Jews so much that they'd rather let their people die than allow an Israeli rescue team into their country.

LimeyPundit said in his blog:

If I were making decisions in the upper reaches of the Sri Lankan government, I don't think I would be turning down offers of help from anybody right now.

I am in complete agreement with him.

Smooth Stone wrote about how Israel has sent copious amounts of tsunami aid that hasn't been reported by the mainstream media. I think Isreal has been extremely charitable sending money and supplies to Sri Lanka after being snubbed. If I were in the upper reaches of the Isreali government, I'd tell the Sri Lankan government to go seek aid elsewhere.

------

I wrote this post from home because we had an "early release" from work. Whoo! Just like high school. If you're worried about the taxpayers' money being wasted on sending government workers home early, don't worry, nobody was doing any work today anyway.

10 comments:

Publicola said...

From what I've heard India also declined aid, but for seemingly different reasons. The gist was they said "thanks, but we have things under control. We'll get back to you if we can't handle it". I don't know much about the government of India but that was impressive to me (if what I heard was accurate).

& about being sent home early - in general I'd much rather my tax money be wasted that way than it be wasted by government doing things. I think it'd be preferable if we made a switch & the government wa sonly open on holidays. But maybe that's just me. :)

Manish said...

But I don't see why Sri Lanka, the country where most of the aid is going to go toI'm not sure which country is getting the most aid, but considering that Indonesia has 3 times the casualties as Sri Lanka, my guess would be Indonesia.

deserves any aid at all on account of them rejecting an offer of Israeli aid.The article that Limey Pundit links to notes that Sri Lanka has accepted aid from various Israeli and Jewish organizations including Latet and Zaka as well as government sources and that a small Israeli team was coming to Sri Lanka. The only thing was that a 150-person team was scraped in favour of a smaller team for some reason that isn't completely clear.

The reason why the countries hurt by the tsunami are too poor to afford their own tsunami relief is because their governments are corrupt and they don't allow free markets to flourish and create wealth.Actually, I would say that the reason many 3rd world countries get especially hard hit by natural disasters have little to do with the lack of "free markets" and have more to do with the lack of "big-government building codes". In California, the threat of a building toppling due to earthquake is considered rare and we are told to be more worried about objects getting hurled at you, rather than trying to escape out of a building for fear of the building toppling as was the case in the earthquakes in Iran and India recently.

Anonymous Poet said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Publicola said...

Manish,
I really wouldn't trust that Cali knows what it's talking about. In a democratic state they may have building codes that in theory make the buildings sturdier, but in reality I wouldn't trust them past a certain point.

As for building codes making buildings safer in general - well if they're followed & the codes are halfway logical then yes. Then again if we had codes that stipulated all shirts must be long sleeve with 4 inches of padding we could cut down on injuries from falls. But just because something is possible doesn't mean it's right to do it.

In other words it's in theory possible to make buildings safer through building codes. In practice it doesn't work out as well for a variety of reasons & in principle it's wrong for a government to dictate how I should construct my property.

tsopranos said...

Look forward to reading your blog Libertarian Girl. Was linked to it from HammerofTruth.com

Also, check out http://timwest.blogs.com/

kstrna said...

Question, given your belief the government of Sri Lanka is so corrupt & that is one of the reasons you belileve it should not recieve US aid, should individuals and companies be giving to the relief effort for Sri Lanka? Given the logic expressed here, the answer would be no.

Manish said...

Publicola:
I really wouldn't trust that Cali knows what it's talking about.

Why is that? They seemed to have done a pretty good job so far. In Loma Prieta, the only major structure that had major damage was the Bay Bridge, but this was known to be a earthquake hazzard because it was built before earthquake standards had been in place. In the Seattle quake a few years ago, there was little damage and few injuries.

In other words it's in theory possible to make buildings safer through building codes. In practice it doesn't work out as well for a variety of reasonsYou'll have to provide me some examples of this. I'm not saying that all government regulation does what it intends, but building codes seem to do a pretty good job.

And I have another question for you...lets say that your building is on an earthquake fault and doesn't follow building codes and an earthquake occurs and the building topples while you are in the house. Would you want a "big government" rescue crew to try and find you or would you prefer to remain as you are?

in principle it's wrong for a government to dictate how I should construct my property.glad you see things that way...because I intend to buy your neighbors property and construct a 20 story building. There will be a strip club downstairs which will operate 24 hours a day and the construction crews will also be jack-hammering all night. I won't build enough parking, so there will be parked cars all over your street.

Publicola said...

Manish,
"...because I intend to buy your neighbors property and construct a 20 story building. There will be a strip club downstairs which will operate 24 hours a day and the construction crews will also be jack-hammering all night. I won't build enough parking, so there will be parked cars all over your street."

No problem with you building a 20 story building next to me. It's your property & you can do with it as you see fit.

24 hour strip club? Again no problems. It's your property. Though I would hope that being a good neighbor means waiving the cover & giving a discount on the drinks :)

Construction crews working at night - this is problematic. While it is your property & you can do with it as you see fit the excessive noise created by such construction would intrude upon my enjoyment in a tangible way. One of the few local laws concerning the use of property that I condone is a well reasoned noise law (note that I said well reasoned). So construct from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. but at least after 7 p.m. revert to hand tools of a non noisy nature. (Besides, you want to try to find a union that you can afford to have working thrid shift for ya? Good luck.)

The parking thing - again no biggie. cars that block my drive will be towed or moved & I'd post signs to that effect. Despite their coming for your strip club (presuming you run it well - which isn't as easy as you'd think) you shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of other people simply because you provided a draw for them. The streets are public & I have no reason to complain if they get crowded with parked cars or traffic. If it bugs me that much I'd simply move.

So aside from the noise thing which does create a tangible intrusion there just isn't anything substantive that I could object to about you putting up a 20 story building next to my house. If I found it objectionable I'd move to a place where I controlled enough land around me to prevent it from occurring again.

If I built a building & it collapsed whether it was up to code or not it'd be my responsibility to provide for a rescue crew. In other words I wouldn't turn down help but ideally I'd have provided for it beforehand w/o getting a "big government" rescue crew involved. This could be anything from arranging a private contractor to working an arrangement with the local (i.e. not "big government") emergency crews.

About the other points you made... I'll try to address them later (no promises though) but unfortunately I'm a bit rushed at the moment.

Jeremy said...

I don't understand why foreign aid is abhorrent when the U.S. gov't offers it, but great when the Israeli state offers it.

And wait a second - since Israel gets billions from us, are they really even giving away their own money?

Living in Thailand said...

We have a website that was created during the Tsunami please let us know if any people there is found and we will delete themAfter the Tsunami