And a little research (and I mean a very little) reveals…….

A few comments about sources, methodologies:

1) The dollar figures come from the MSNBC article mentioned below. They include only what the Governments have pledged, not what private citizens of those countries have pledged.

2) Qatar is the clear winner of the “per capita” game – coming in at over US$15 aid/person. Because their contribution was an order of magnitude greater than any other countries, it made all of the other bars too small to read if I included them. They were also excluded from my calculation of the “average” per capita aid figure, since they were such and extreme outlier (>5 standard deviations from the mean).

3) Population numbers are from the world UN database. Interesting that Taiwan is not in that database, but that the “occupied Palestinian territory” is. But I digress.

4) Japan has announced that it intends to pledge US$ 500 million to the relief effort. This would place them at over $4 per capita spending – the new leader of the non-Qatar pack. I did not make this change, since I wanted all of my numbers to come from the MSNBC research of governmental aid promised.

(click for bigger)

A few observations:

1) The US is well above (almost twice) the average for the countries reported. Twice the average is stingy and mean-minded? Well, maybe we should take a little peek at those below the average, then.

2) Scandanavia has been held up as a model for us to emulate. As you can see, some scandanavian countries are well above the average, while others are significantly below.

3) Some exceedingly wealthy Muslim countries seem to be well below the average. How -stingy- curious is that?

4) Canada, France, and Germany (especially _Germany_) are all well below the average. I suppose France and Germany get a free pass because of their war opposition and anti-Americanism. Canada must get a free pass because everyone knows she is going broke trying to live up to Kyoto.

5) I had to add an extra decimal point to the database for poor Egypt’s contribution to show up on the list.

6) I wonder if it bothers the Guardian columnist I mentioned below that the UK only has a per capita contribution that is 1/3 that of the country she just called mean-minded and stingy? Probably not, because she’s an idiot and the irony would completely escape her.

So, what does it mean? Beats the hell out of me. When people criticize our generosity, it’s usually because we’re not spending as much as they would like, or not spending it on what they would like for us to spend it on. And, refresh my memory again – how many countries came to our aid after Florida got bashed by 4 consecutive hurricanes?

*UPDATE*

A commenter takes umbrage at my conclusion regarding Scandanavian giving. The point was definitely not to belittle the efforts of these nations, and the 2 of the 3 countries the commenter wants to limit Scandanavia to _are_ well above the average. My definition of Scandanavia came from “here.”:http://www.phrasebase.com/countries/index.php?cat=248

The data show that Finland is right at the average, and Sweden is well below average(I didn’t show data for Sweden, but they have pledged US$ 750,000 from a country of 8.9 million – you do the math). So I think the point made is valid, even though I didn’t do a very good job showing you the data supporting my contention. Again, I wasn’t trying to belittle anyone’s efforts, but rather to point out the data behind the “stingy Americans” facade. Well, actually I was trying to belittle the efforts of the rich Muslim countries and France and Germany – but that’s how we “mean-minded” individuals on the right do things, don’t ya know?

A final question – do you think Muslims mind being helped by Christian or atheist infidels?