Please Send Cash: UN Demands $29 Billion for 2020 “Extreme Weather” Humanitarian Aid Programmes

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Shutting the UN bar at 5pm and cutting back their first class air travel budget has failed to close the projected budget shortfall.

U.N. Cries Poor [Again]: Issues Unprecedented $29 Billion Emergency Funding Appeal

The cash-strapped United Nations has issued an unprecedented global appeal for funds, claiming Wednesday it needs an immediate injection of $29 billion of global taxpayer money as “climate change” and global conflicts pressure existing budgets.

The world body’s Global Humanitarian Overview estimated some 168 million people worldwide will need emergency assistance in 2020, with demand a direct product of “more extreme weather events, notably drought and flooding, which trigger humanitarian emergencies,” U.N. emergency relief coordinator Mark Lowcock said.

His plea for cash comes just two months after a series of cutbacks began at the U.N.’s New York headquarters, starting with the heating being turned down, the diplomats’ bar shuttering early at 5pm and meetings canceled along with diminished first class global travel budgets.

Read more: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/04/u-n-cries-poor-again-issues-unprecedented-29-billion-emergency-funding-appeal/

The solution is obvious; do your job, stop blowing the budget on political grandstanding.

Advertisements

97 thoughts on “Please Send Cash: UN Demands $29 Billion for 2020 “Extreme Weather” Humanitarian Aid Programmes

  1. Wasn’t the UN supposed to go broke this month, since President Trump stopped the American tax slave gravy train?

    • Hell, why not give them their whole continent. I propose dedicated a small portion of Antarctica for them to develop anyway they chose along with an almost unlimited supply of snow shoes and cross country skis. Plus evict them from NYC destroy that monstrous building and turn the ground into a small park dedicated to preserving a few endangered species.

  2. LOL!!! Sure, I just wrote a check. Unfortunately, no one wants to sign it. The next time a beggar on the street asks you for a dollar, give him the dollar and be glad he didn’t just take everything you have.

  3. LOL!!! Sure, I just wrote a check. Unfortunately, no one wants to sign it. The next time someone begs you for a dollar, give him the dollar and be glad he didn’t just take everything you have.

  4. They all fly first class 😐 The “diplomats” have a bar 😐 God damn thieves!!!

    How did they come to the conclusion that just “168 million” people need help in 2020, and that just $29 billion will be enough to help them 😐??

    How utterly Stupid are the people who believe this utter rubbish…

    • Sunny
      If I did it right, that works out to an average of $173 per person. It doesn’t seem like it would be very helpful, especially when one takes into account overhead for the administration of the disbursement.

  5. Take the 26 Billion and divide by the number of members (193) in the UN. The United States will pay after other members has chipped in. In other words, never.

    • David S: “Try contacting the Venusians.”

      Ummmm, they’re out to dinner. Won’t be back for three to four millennia, and when they get back here, they’re gonna really be pissed off that the megafauna are gone.

  6. The US should place a fund of $4 per person (our portion of the Climate Funds per capita) into a local holding account and claim it is for use as Humanitarian Aid Programs for Drought and Flooding Within the US Boarder. We will look out for US and not place claims against the UN funds (so no need to add to their funds)

  7. Ok, responding to “extreme weather” events and their aftermath is credible. Perhaps they hope to save face through compromise. Baby steps.

  8. Wealth. Transfer.

    Call it for what it is. It has nothing whatsoever to do with … the weather. Extreme, or extremely mild.

  9. ”cutbacks began at the U.N.’s New York headquarters, starting with the heating being turned down”

    This makes me feel all good inside….

  10. In other words, we can add “— has made the UN poor” to the exponentially growing list of things blamed on climate change.

    Got it!

  11. Not a a good idea for a Country to fund its enemies. The UN does not endorse American efforts and the IPCC is a den of thieves. The UN needs to reduce in size and activity to operate within available funding. Reducing its scope by 50% would be a good place to start.

  12. Giving money to the UN is like throwing it into a black hole. What happened to the $500M Obama gave them for AGW funding on the last day he was in office? It was probably used to fund more propaganda and CC meetings and poor nations never saw a penny of it. The UN is the source of the CC hysteria and should be held accountable for the damage they’re inflicting on the world because of it. But then again, that’s their goal. Bring Western industrialized nations to their knees economically and convince the world they can save it by becoming the One World Government. Agenda 21 is their guide and AGW is their scam to pull it off.

  13. The United Nations has had their chance, we need to cut funding and redirect them into a new, non-supranational, but co-national institution.
    Something similar to the Society of Nations, but in a different and more independent way.
    With all the money they received, they could finance infrastructure projects in Africa or for refugees.
    With all the money they received, they could finance infrastructure projects in Africa or for refugees.
    In Turkey alone there are 4 million illegal immigrants who have been waiting to go to Europe since 2014, and live in refugee camps.
    With all the money the United Nation makes, they could have solved the problem in 7 years.
    Not to mention all those research donations that organizations linked to the United Nations request each year.
    How can they not have the funds?
    Shouldn’t the United Nations finance this or are they more likely to use our funding for other issues?
    Now they are asking for money for the disasters caused by what the Lisenkists call “man-made climate change?”
    States and nations have always been able to help each other in the event of disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, fires, etc.
    They can continue to do it as has always happened.
    As I said: cutting the funds and leaving the United Nations would solve many more problems for everyone.
    Above all, creating a new non-supranational institution.

    • The United Nations has passed their critical threashold as an organisation able to function effectively. Cut the United Nations back to just diplomacy. Anything else needing to be undertaken supernationality, such as World Health needs to be in a separate organisation with their own budget. Up to them to convince countries of the need, and demonstrate the effectiveness of their transnational organisation.
      There is a human limit to organisations be they public or private (General Motors) remaining effective and efficient. Then the dead hand of red tape and middle management kick in and the organisation becomes self serving.

  14. Since China is so far ahead on it’s “climate” goals, I say they should put the $29 billion on their tab. And don’t let them try to weasel out of it. They can afford it.

  15. I don’t get all the “climate justice” protestors nothing like that is even under discussion, talk about flogging a dead horse. At best a few poor countries might be able to sell carbon credits using article 6 and they might get increased aid because some funds might get some offset treatment under article 6.

  16. Give no money to the spendthrift UN. Rather identify a small charity with a good track record and channel your giving via them. It is often better to support someone with useful skills from back home who goes and works in these poor areas for a few years and shows them in small projects how to help themselves.

  17. Sounds like a quid-pro-quo or extortion to me (provide funding or else get more extreme weather). Guess we should impeach the UN !!

  18. The USA does not have any money to give to the UN for anything. Our federal government has huge annual deficits and a huge National debt. The USA federal government needs to pay off its huge National debt before it can consider funding anything outside of the country. The USA must also fix its annual trade deficit as well. The USA is really a debtor nation. Maybe countries like China can provide the requested funds.

  19. If you want to do something really useful to combat “seasonal climate change”, send me $500 so I can get a decent snowblower. Using a $15 shovel has lost its joy.

  20. “His plea for cash comes just two months after a series of cutbacks began at the U.N.’s New York headquarters, starting with the heating being turned down, the diplomats’ bar shuttering early at 5pm and meetings canceled along with diminished first class global travel budgets.”

    That’s basically why they turn up every event. With these cutback maybe most will simply not bother and stay at home and let the climate be for a change.

  21. Close the U.N. bar at 5PM to save money? It must be an open or highly discounted bar if it looses money. My powerful brain has thought up a solution to the bar-losses problem. I will reveal it to the UN for only $1 Million. The rest of you doubtless know the solution already.

  22. “…with demand a direct product of “more extreme weather events, notably drought and flooding, which trigger humanitarian emergencies,”

    That CO2 molecule is truly amazing. It can cause drought and flooding, rain and no rain. Gee, I do wonder how it manages that and what caused both of those things before fossil fuel use took off?
    Has the IPCC ever answered that question or, even asked it?

  23. Real estate in NYC is very pricey.
    Maybe the UN should sell the building and property? That would bring in some cash.
    Then move out of the US to, I don’t know, Grrreta’s hometown?

  24. Time has shown that there are many charities willing to respond to emergencies and actually help the people in need.
    Put the money in their hands from hands that are willing to give.
    (Those hands would have more to give if less was taken by Government to support things like the UN and “free stuff” to buy votes.)

  25. Only “diminished” first class travel? Well there’s a pretty good indicator of how seriously they are trying to save money imho.

  26. Methinks it rather appropriate that the heating is turned down. A few times more of the same in the coming years and we may see the delegates clamouring for more coal.

  27. Perhaps they will need to reduce the heating bill yet again. Perhaps more than once again. Perhaps there comes a point when they start demanding more coal or gas.

  28. Meanwhile in the real world, the actual situation is below.

    https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters#number-of-deaths-from-natural-disasters

    The UN know this and so do the IPCC but it gets buried deep in their reports because the Green idiots have control, and because their disaster scenarios play to our basic human instincts.

    Since Civilisation began we have always believed our actions affect the Weather, we are no different to our ancestors.

    “Natural disasters kill on average 60,000 people per year, globally.

    Globally, disasters were responsible for 0.1% of deaths over the past decade. This was highly variable, ranging from 0.01% to 0.4%.

    Deaths from natural disasters have seen a large decline over the past century – from, in some years, millions of deaths per year to an average of 60,000 over the past decade.

    Historically, droughts and floods were the most fatal disaster events. Deaths from these events are now very low – the most deadly events today tend to be earthquakes.

    Disasters affect those in poverty most heavily: high death tolls tend to be centered in low-to-middle income countries without the infrastructure to protect and respond to events.”

  29. The most deadly, most destructive supposed climate disaster being the California fires recently why do I suspect there won’t be any UN money forthcoming?

  30. They have lied about global warming for 30 years, they lie about disasters, their scientists lie about research so why not lie about their lack of funds? The first commenter summed it up best FU UN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *