I know this is way the heck OT, but...........

Donations to the hurricane relief fund!

  • I have already donated

    Votes: 25 59.5%
  • I am going to donate

    Votes: 17 40.5%

  • Total voters
    42
  • Poll closed .

randylud

Member
Join Date
Oct 2002
Location
Greensboro,NC
Posts
933
How many of the PLCs net members have made a donation to the hurricane relief effort for our Gulf coast region?
Yes I have or
I am going to are the only options that I can see. Especially all of us here in the US.
 
I have not and can not darnit! I can barely afford my meds and chemo.

I wonder how many countries the USA has and is still helping in their times of crisis with our monies and blood will even bother to help us.

I'm waiting...............(hint, you will not rquire a pocket calculator)

Rod
 
I think the only country that paid it's WWII debt was Denmark uh was it(??). I may (and probbly am) wrong but that is what my memory says.

When I get a job and recuperate from income loss I'll send a few bucks their way.

Dan Bentler
 
For those strapped for cash, donating blood is an option.

I would like to see some other countries offer help - for all I know they may have. But let's face it - we can take care of our own, and we should.
 
I forget which news station I was watching the other night, but they announced that there were approximately 13 countries(probably more by now) that were formulating relief efforts very similar to those that were formed for the tsunami victims.
 
Last edited:
I seem to be invading a US only thread here, but let's face facts - The USA can afford to bale itself out here.
I AM IN NO WAY PLAYING DOWN THE DISASTER AT ALL THOUGH - IT IS TRULY AWFUL.
If the only reason one donates to charity is to get it back, then the original sentiment is lost.

Please don't leap on me here, I don't want to divide the board into US members and 'rest of the world'

That said, can I offer my heartfelt sympathies to everyone concerned.
 
I agree with you, Paraffin. As I said, we have been so blessed that we can take care of our own, and we should. We have been so blessed that we can help others as well, and we should.

The sentiment expressed by Dan is a common one over here. It is understandable, because some of the people the US has helped over the years have in essence spit in our faces for our efforts. That makes us a little sensitive about things like this.

We realize that most places in the world are not at all like that, with the Commonwealth countries conspicuously proving long and faithful friends. Under stress, though, we sometimes lapse into feeling a little sorry for ourselves.
 
OK, here's some more to stir things up a bit -

- a chart and table showing economic aid provided per $ GDP
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_gdp

- a chart and table showing economic aid provided per capita
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap

- a chart and table comparing economic aid and military expenditure
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_com_to_for_aid

I don't think the UK's got anything to be proud of, so I'm not pointing fingers at any one in particular. And , if people continually spit in your face when you think you're helping them, maybe it's time to check on what kind of help they actually want before you insist on them having it?

Ken
 
Good neighbors help each other in times of need

I wonder if this would be a good time to settle the softwood lumber trade war between the US and Canada. I am sure the rebuiding effort could use some lumber. The US is currently holding some 4 billion dollars in tarrifs collected since 2002. Canada could agree to donate that money to the rebuilding fund to purchase building materials from Canada in exchange for removal of the anti-NAFTA tarrifs.

To get an insight on the problem read the following....


Canada's continuing inability to resolve its softwood lumber problems with the United States recently prompted former free-trade negotiator Gordon Ritchie to warn that President George W. Bush's protectionist pit bulls are threatening to destroy the entire binational dispute-settlement system.

Despite Mr. Bush's conciliatory rhetoric at last week's meeting of North American leaders, it was naive to think that he would commit any of his political capital to settling the softwood lumber dispute. Still, Canadian exasperation is understandable. For two decades, this country has fought U.S. trade actions. It has fought them under NAFTA, at the World Trade Organization and at its predecessor, the GATT. It opted for a negotiated settlement in 1986 to avoid aborting the free-trade negotiations and, in 1996, to avoid changes to U.S. trade law that neutralized Canada's earlier victory.

In the current lumber round, now in its fourth year, the U.S. trade agencies have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid complying with rulings in Canada's favour. The Americans have refused to return the $4.25-billion (Canadian) in tariff revenue collected from Canadian exporters since 2002 - an amount that's growing by $150-million a month. Senior U.S. officials are saying they will distribute it, instead, to their U.S. competitors as directed by the 2000 Byrd Amendment (which said the United States could redistribute tariffs collected on allegedly unfair imports as payouts to the very U.S. companies that brought the complaints - rather like a bounty). The Byrd Amendment, an irritant for all of America's trading partners, has been declared illegal by the WTO. Canada says it also runs afoul of the North American free-trade agreement. But the Americans say that, because of an arcane legislative provision, U.S. law now trumps NAFTA panel decisions.

The lumber dispute has dramatically exposed the NAFTA dispute system's flaws. The U.S. has invoked a mechanism known as the Extraordinary Challenge procedure (which was only supposed to be used in the most exceptional of circumstances) six times - twice in the lumber case. Despite NAFTA, Congress has changed U.S. law several times to reverse dispute losses. NAFTA panel disputes now take 700 days on average to resolve - more than twice as long as they were supposed to, and longer than disputes settled at the U.S. domestic trade court.

Canadian companies have taken their fight against the lumber tariffs back to the U.S. court, where they at least have a chance of having the duties returned to them if they win; under the NAFTA process, according to U.S. officials, they now have no chance of getting their money back. This leads to the perverse outcome that companies from Mexico and Canada going through the NAFTA dispute process are treated worse than, say, a French company going through the U.S. court process.

The final irony is that the Canadian government is also preparing to head to the U.S. domestic trade court to challenge the Byrd Amendment - which is the very process it sought to replace with the binational dispute panels.

The stakes in the softwood lumber dispute are high - for companies, workers and resource-based communities across the country. But this dispute is about more than lumber. It is about the very integrity of the commitments that Washington made under NAFTA and the wisdom of the concessions Ottawa made to secure them.

Canadian governments and industry should continue to fight the legal battle through to its conclusion. They should not cave in to U.S. pressure for an early (and unfavourable) settlement. A legal win will not solve the problem, but it will help improve Canada's bargaining position in the inevitable negotiation that will result in some form of managed trade agreement. Government should provide adequate support to affected workers and communities, and assistance to the industry to help offset its enormous legal costs.

The U.S. is dragging this out, trying to cripple the Canadian companies financially and force them to settle on American terms. Any indication that we are anxious to settle will be interpreted as a sign of weakness and an incentive to continue bully tactics.

If, as expected, Canada wins the legal battle and the U.S. still refuses to remove the duty and return the duties collected from Canadian producers, if it persists in asserting that U.S. law trumps NAFTA, then Canada should invoke a little-known, but powerful and as yet unused NAFTA provision: Article 1905.

Article 1905 would allow Canada to trigger a bilateral consultation process on the grounds that the U.S is violating the agreement. A win, which is likely, would give Canada the right, as trade lawyers have told a House of Commons committee, to withdraw benefits it has extended to the United States under NAFTA. The most obvious candidates for the withdrawal of benefits are the investment provisions - for example, national treatment for U.S. investors, and the energy-sharing provisions.

Mr. Ritchie, in his memoir Wrestling With The Elephant: The Inside Story of the Canada-U.S. Trade Wars, made it clear that Canada would never have signed the free-trade deal without the dispute-settlement system, certainly not if our negotiators thought that the Americans would show such contemptuous disregard for their commitments.

U.S. trade officials believe they can act with impunity because dependent Canada will not walk away from the agreement no matter what. If Canada continues to cave in, the Americans will continue to trample over us whenever they have an important interest to protect.

Canada must draw a line in the sand. We do have alternatives. Despite the continuing efforts of our continentalist elites, we still have the capacity to assert ourselves and flourish as an independent nation.
 
I will be donating this afternoon. The country will get thru this and hopefully have learned somthing from it.
God bless all those in need of help at this difficult time.

Bob
 
The US is currently holding some 4 billion dollars in tarrifs collected since 2002. Canada could agree to donate that money to the rebuilding fund to purchase building materials from Canada in exchange for removal of the anti-NAFTA tarrifs.

In the current lumber round, now in its fourth year, the U.S. trade agencies have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid complying with rulings in Canada's favour. The Americans have refused to return the $4.25-billion (Canadian) in tariff revenue collected from Canadian exporters since 2002 - an amount that's growing by $150-million a month. Senior U.S. officials are saying they will distribute it, instead, to their U.S. competitors as directed by the 2000 Byrd Amendment (which said the United States could redistribute tariffs collected on allegedly unfair imports as payouts to the very U.S. companies that brought the complaints - rather like a bounty).

I quoted you to ensure we aare talking the same thing. I am from Seattle and not presently associated with the timber business but should (annd don't) understand more of this issue since it is a major issue in both our regional economies.

Here is what I understand
1. USA has collected several billion from Canada lumber
2. So USA has the money.

Why should Canada donate the money? They already paid it.

If we in USA don't like the deal with Canada and their lumber maybe we should tell the tree huggers and fish folk we are gonna cut our own.

I understand Weyerhouser has emigrated into Canada to do business. YOu guys should have told them to stay home and cut their own trees.

Let Canadians cut Canadian timber. Keep the USA out of your business. If the USA is so stupid not to use their own resource then it is fine by me for the Canadians to make some money.

And then we (USA?) put a tariff on it?

Dan Bentler
 
Tom, Ken & Parrifin,
You guys have no clue whatsoever as to the total immensity of this catastrophe. There is over 100,000 square miles of total devistation. Thousands are dead. Forget the news reports of a few hundred, there's hundreds of floating bodies that nobodys had the chance to count let along pick up. There are hundreds of unseen dead trapped in their attics and drown. The only reason the body count isnt high is because we dont have the current capacity/ability to count them.

Even though the loss of life will not reach the numbers of the tsumi, the loss of property will likely be greater. The only blessing is that there was a warning. If not the death toll would have been in the hundreds of thousands.

Dont B.S. yourself. America needs help. If we didnt we wouldnt still be trying to rescue people 3 days after the event. No country has the resources on hand to deal with such am immense disaster.
 

Similar Topics

Hello all, I have a Controllogix 1756-L61 with some RIO. There are a couple of 1734-OB4E's that have gone bad. (no output voltage) My boss found...
Replies
10
Views
1,011
Hello I am new here and new to PLC's, I wrote this program for a class that I am taking and my local tech school. The description is switch 7 will...
Replies
0
Views
391
Hello I am new here and new to PLC's, I wrote this program for a class that I am taking and my local tech school. The description is switch 7 will...
Replies
10
Views
1,905
I'm trying to save a project as an L5X and I need to uncheck the "Encode Source Protected Content" checkbox, but it's grayed out. How do I get...
Replies
1
Views
916
Hello. I have been working on my first plc project for a while now. I just ordered all the parts that I need and before I did that, I created the...
Replies
10
Views
1,998
Back
Top Bottom