concerning concern

"Let us suppose that the great empire of China, with all its myriads of inhabitants, was suddenly swallowed up by an earthquake, and let us consider how a man of humanity in Europe, who had no sort of connexion with that part of the world, would be affected upon receiving intelligence of this dreadful calamity. He would, I imagine, first of all, express very strongly his sorrow for the misfortune of that unhappy people, he would make many melancholy reflections upon the precariousness of human life, and the vanity of all the labours of man, which could thus be annihilated in a moment. He would too, perhaps, if he was a man of speculation, enter into many reasonings concerning the effects which this disaster might produce upon the commerce of Europe, and the trade and business of the world in general. And when all this fine philosophy was over, when all these humane sentiments had been once fairly expressed, he would pursue his business or his pleasure, take his repose or his diversion, with the same ease and tranquillity, as if no such accident had happened. The most frivolous disaster which could befal himself would occasion a more real disturbance. If he was to lose his little finger to-morrow, he would not sleep to-night; but, provided he never saw them, he will snore with the most profound security over the ruin of a hundred millions of his brethren, and the destruction of that immense multitude seems plainly an object less interesting to him, than this paltry misfortune of his own." --- Adam Smith

This was posted on a forum relating to the process of charitable giving following disasters. Americans have traditionally given millions of dollars of foreign aid of their own money, not through government agencies. This does lead to some confusion in media, but the amounts have considerable variation based on the source of the disaster and the coverage it warrants.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/how-pure-is-your-altruism/more-2615

Something not delved into in the referenced studies (but astutely pointed out in the forum) is the relative decrease in disposable income Americans have had from wealth depreciations since Katrina/Banda Aceh. But given the relatively paltry sum donated to Pakistan following the 05 earthquake there (and I do remember seeing the ridiculous tolls of damage/death, though not with great fanfare), this decrease probably doesn't amount to much as far as how it will be handled. Probably linked in is the 'q factor' as to how coverage of a disaster is handled. New Orleans and the various resorts destroyed by the tsunami are much more appealing than places in Central Asia or inland China. Media will follow stories that people want to hear about.. and people don't want to hear about devastation in countries ruled by: Muslims, Communists, or Juntas.

Or at least, they don't really care all that much, like Smith says.