The federal government’s stimulus package could have bought almost one million schools, at least if it had been spent in Bangladesh.
Ethical Investments is one of the most consistent supporters of On Line Opinion through its onsite advertising. According to the media release that I have just received they have donated $140,868 to the community.
The largest grant of $45,000 made to CO-ID will build a combined primary and secondary school in one of the poorest areas of Bangladesh.
Funding was also given to 24 other social and conservation community organisations working throughout Australia and overseas.
After a difficult period in which many companies are cutting back on philanthropy, Australian Ethical continues to set the benchmark for corporate giving. Each year Australian Ethical donates ten per cent of its profits to conservation and charity organisations. Over the last decade Australian Ethical has donated nearly $1 million back into the community.
Even given the low labour costs and the lower cost of materials, as well as the different construction standards, that is a stunningly low figure to build a whole school.
A friend of mine says that the average building cost of a new housing unit in Australia is $300,000, so that amount of money would be unlikely to buy much more than the wet areas in an Australian dwelling.
You can read the whole release here. If you want to check out their investment performance you can find it here.
Agreed Graham.I was stunned to find out that the annual USA defence budget back in 2001 was $10 trillion or $24,000.00 for every person in the USA.How is it possible?
Presently the USA is building a new generation of aircraft carriers when they are stone motherless broke.
If this money was spent on education/infrastructure,the world would not have the population problems with the environmental problems we now all face.Education reduces the need for large families.
The real environmental problems are pollution like mercury that are making our seafoods toxic.
Kevin Rood as Bill Clinton refers to,wants to make the G20 the Governors of the “New World Order”.What sort of self determining democracy does that leave to poorer countries?
Comment by Arjay — September 24, 2009 @ 8:44 pm
Agreed.
But the middle class welfare and the political bribery and financial indulgence of the Howard govt undertaken solely in the cause of re-election could equally have done wonders in the third world.
This blog was strangely silent on this issue.
Comment by Barney Langford — September 28, 2009 @ 11:07 am
All the world’s problems could be solved if the military was shrunk to reasonable size, even Australia’s, but mainly the US’s spending on armaments. That is the elephant that will eventually trample them, and maybe us.
Comment by Karin — September 28, 2009 @ 12:33 pm
Barney ,which financial indulgences are you referring to?The Howard Govt paid off back then $90 billion of labor debt back then,which would be double in todays terms.
Kevin wants to put us into $315 billion debt plus interest.Kevin is my view has over reacted.Much of the credit could have been created here without all the debt.
Comment by Arjay — September 28, 2009 @ 10:02 pm
Graham,
* No means testing on any handouts;
* reduction in capital gains tax.
* the pacific solution
* The baby bonus
* The private health subsidy
* The public service IT outsourcing
debacle
* the Helicopter refit disaster
And that’s just off the top of my head.
But don’t take my word for it. The person who was/is most critical of the waste and profligacy of Howard is Peter Costello.
Obviously Glen Stevens has a different view to you on the matter of debt.
Comment by barney langford — September 29, 2009 @ 1:22 pm