4 ms·
The pedestrian "right", which I encounter on a day-to-day basis the months I visit client sites a couple hundred miles inland of the Gulf of America, will look
by honestSysAdmin 2y ago
The pedestrian "right", which I encounter on a day-to-day basis the months I visit client sites a couple hundred miles inland of the Gulf of America, will look at climatelinks.org and say something like: "all I see are foreign countries, why are we spending money on this instead of citizens of the United States?".
- cscurmudgeon 2y ago[flagged]
- harimau777 2y agoIMHO, we should do it because the person who pays tends to have more power over what happens. Just like how in high school the kid who drives everyone tends to have a higher than normal say in what the friend group does.
- honestSysAdmin 2y agoSmart.
- kergonath 2y ago> Why should US fund WHO ~5-6 times more than China [0] (and more than EU) The base contributions are a function of GDP. The extra contributions are voluntary, and the US did it because it was in the US’ interests. It’s a founding error in the US foreign policy budget and was a good investment in terms of goodwill and data for American health research institutions. WHO must focus where it is needed most. Public health is much better in the EU (and even in Europe, accounting for places like Belarus and Ukraine) than in China, and there are much fewer epidemics that emerge in Europe in general. The whole idea is that if we limit the emergence of epidemics where they are likely to happen, we end up with fewer pandemics after these epidemics spread worldwide (which includes Europe and North America). The whole world is better without another COVID, Ebola, or Polio. > only to have the WHO be controlled by China This is bullshit. The WHO is not controlled by China any more than other UN institutions. What is certain, though, is that the US won’t have any say whatsoever once they are out.
- Auracle 2y ago“The whole idea is that if we limit the emergence of epidemics where they are likely to happen, we end up with fewer pandemics after these epidemics spread worldwide” I realize I’m arguing against a negative but has that actually been accomplished? I don’t argue that they (I assume) probably help with things like Ebola outbreaks but that’s almost certainly never going to become a pandemic.
- crusty 2y agoPrior to 2014, it was thought that ebola outbreaks were naturally self limiting to an extent. Woops.
- sanp 2y agoWe wouldn’t know this if the information isn’t shared? So, aren’t you making a case for not removing this information?
- neaden 2y agoThe US provided 14% of the WHO funding but is 25% of global GDP, so proportionately we don't contribute as much as many other countries.
- bamboozled 2y agoYeah, what has avoiding another plague ever done for the USA.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago"We're America, we wait until it's too late and then react!" A rough paraphrasing from Boondocks, said by the richest man in that neighborhood.