Well folks, we the American taxpayers are once again being told to simply bend over and spread ‘em as we once more will be forced to cover more than one-fifth of the total United Nations’ regular budget next year, as well as more than one-quarter of the much-larger peacekeeping budget, for what is a grand total of approximately $2,957,000,000. You see, it was just before Christmas that the U.N. General Assembly approved a regular operating budget of $5.4 Billion for the 2016-17 period. (That budget is calculated biannually.) Of the $2.7 billion earmarked for 2016, the U.S. will account for 22 percent, or $594 Million. What a deal!
However, the sad truth regarding the full extent of just how badly we are going to really get screwed in providing funding for the U.N. system is that we will likely be forced to provide considerably more than that. You see, the $2.957 billion figure comprises the U.S. “assessed contributions” to the two main budgets, but the U.S. in addition provides much more in what’s described as “voluntary contributions” to a whole host of U.N. agencies. And the last time the administration was obliged by law to provide Congress with a full breakdown, the total for fiscal year 2010 was a whopping $7.69 Billion. Sadly that reporting requirement fell away in 2011.
And I’m sure that it will come as absolutely no surprise to anyone to hear that our incredibly imbecilic U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Ms. Samantha Power, cheerfully tweeted out her congratulations to the U.S. team involved in all of the committee haggling over the budget – or what she described as being “tough negotiations to secure more fair UN budget to slow growing costs & take steps to streamline UN ops.” What the Hell is this crazy bitch talking about? Tough negotiations, when? A fair U.N. budget, what? Streamlining UN ops, where? She’s a freaking lunatic! But then what do expect from someone nominated by the anti-America president, Barry “Almighty”?
The U.S. rate of 22 percent does remain unchanged in the latest approved “scale of assessments”, meanwhile Red China will now be liable for a bigger proportion of the total budget, although it remains very far behind that of the U.S. You see, Red China’s assessment for the regular budget has jumped from 5.148 percent to what I’m sure it sees as being a staggering amount to 7.921 percent. That means Red China will now be the third biggest contributor to that budget after the U.S. at 22 percent and Japan at 9.68 percent. And yes, I’m being sarcastic when referencing the amount paid by Red China as being staggering. Because it most certainly is not.
And it’s according to data compiled by the Heritage Foundation that we see the American taxpayers’ share of the U.N. regular budget exceeds that paid by their counterparts in 176 other U.N. member-states, combined; while the U.S. proportion of the peacekeeping budget is bigger than that contributed by 185 other countries, combined. There are 193 U.N. member-states. When decisions are made on the U.N. budget, the U.S. has the same (one) vote as does every other member, despite the size of its contribution. America’s 22 percent contribution comes with no more weight in the budget process than the 0.001 percent paid by the lowest-assessed nations.
And yet, what is it that all of this money gains for those of us in America? Actually, when you stop and look at the amount of positive return that we get it’s clearly a pretty shitty investment. Because we get very little in return for the amount that we’re forced to spend. Personally, I’ve been a longtime opponent to this pathetic cadre of dictators, tyrants and despots. It serves no useful purpose and frankly I’m not all that sure it ever did. And I would argue that it long ago got to where it simply no longer deserved to remain on U.S. soil. We should remove ourselves from the organization and provide to the remaining members 60 days to vacate the premises.