What would happen if the U.S completely stopped giving foreign aid? (Israeli, fence)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...and our share of the global GDP has been shrinking.
Everything was thrown into the spin-cycle during the Great Recession. The US share of world GDP has however been increasing since 2011 according to World Bank data.
There are few countries in the world that like us in the USA, and often feign it in order to get a free handout. But if you feel obligated to help, here is a list of charities you can give your income and savings to: (many of these are for the US, but you don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs for other countries)
United Way Worldwide, $3.708 billion.
Task Force for Global Health, $3.154 billion.
Feeding America, $2.150 billion.
Salvation Army, $1,904 billion.
YMCA of the USA, $1.202 billion.
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, $1.181 billion
Food for the Poor, $1.156 billion.
Boys & Girls Club of America, $923 million.
Catholic Charities USA, $921 million.
Goodwill Industries International, $902 million.
Habitat for Humanity International, $829 million.
World Vision, $825 million.
American Cancer Society, $810 million.
Patient Access Network Foundation, $801 million.
Compassion International, $799 million.
Direct Relief, $775 million.
Americares Foundation, $740 million.
Lutheran Services in America, $723 million.
Nature Conservancy, $646 million.
American Heart Association, $634 million.
American National Red Cross, $624 million.
Samaritan's Purse, $565 million.
MAP International, $545 million.
Step Up for Students, $#521 million.
Cru, $514 million.
United States Fund for UNICEF, $509 million.
Wounded Warrior Project, $473 million.
Feed the Children, $446 million.
Mount Sinai Health Systems, $439 million.
Save the Children Federation, $379 million.
CARE USA, $378 million.
Good 360, $377 million.
Catholic Relief Services, $372 million.
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, $354 million.
Doctors Without Borders USA, $338 million.
Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, $331 million.
Make-a-Wish Foundation of America, $305 million.
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, $298 million.
Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, $298 million.
Boy Scouts of America, $296 million.
Cross International, $291 million.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, $285 million.
Catholic Medical Mission Board, $281 million.
Alzheimer's Association, $278 million.
Population Services International, $271 million.
Mayo Clinic, $271 million.
Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, $269 million.
Marine Toys for Tots Foundation, $268 million
American Kidney Fund, $265 million.
Operation Blessing International Relief & Dev., $256 million.
American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, $255 million.
Entertainment Industry Foundation, $255 million.
Shriners Hospitals for Children, $248 million.
Susan G. Komen, $242 million.
Project HOPE, $240 million.
Brother's Brother Foundation, $237 million.
American Civil Liberties Union and Foundation, $233 million.
ChildFund International, $230 million.
International Rescue Committee, $228 million.
Young Life, $224 million.
World Wildlife Fund, $222 million.
Easterseals, $221 million.
National Multiple Sclerosis Society, $215 million.
Public Broadcasting Service, $212 million.
Metropolitan Museum of Art, $209 million.
Helen Keller International, $207 million.
Foothill Land Conservancy, $206 million.
JDRF, $199 million.
Smithsonian Institution, 198 million.
UJA/Federation of New York, $195 million.
Teach for America, $194 million.
Scholarship America, $192 million.
Paralyzed Veterans of America, $191 million.
Children International, $188 million.
Matthews 25: Ministries, $185 million.
Harlem Children's Zone, $184 million.
Medical Teams International, $184 million.
ClimateWorks Foundation, $184 million.
Robin Hood Foundation, $183 million.
Wycliffe Bible Translators, $182 million.
March of Dimes Foundation, $181 million.
Humane Society of the United States, $180 million.
United Service Organizations, $179 million.
New York-Presbyterian Hospital,$178 million.
Metropolitan Opera Association, $176 million.
American SPCA, $173 million.
Christian Broadcasting Network, $173 million.
United Negro College Fund, $171 million.
Houston Food Bank, $169 million.
Educational Media Foundation, $162 million.
Project Orbis International, $160 million.
PATH, $158 million.
Museum of the Bible, $156 million.
The Arc, $153 million.
Junior Achievement USA, $150 million.
Smile Train, $150 million.
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, $149 million.
Cleveland Clinic Foundation, $148 million.
American Museum of Natural History, $140 million.
American Diabetes Association, $140 million.
Thanks for these suggestions. I hope others will find them useful and act accordingly.
Everything was thrown into the spin-cycle during the Great Recession. The US share of world GDP has however been increasing since 2011 according to World Bank data.
You are looking at a fluctuation, I am looking at the long term trend since 1950.
You are looking at a fluctuation, I am looking at the long term trend since 1950.
For one thing, while recovery in Europe and to some extent in Japan was well underway by then, 1950 was still part of a special situation. For another thing, the so-called "trend" has bounced around considerably over the past six decades. For a further thing, your original claim was not qualified by any of this, and on that basis was flawed, as the US share of world GDP has increased every year since 2011.
Wealthy people and nations each have an obligation to give back as they can. The US has long and justly been criticized for its shabby performance in terms of Official Development Assistance as a percent of GDP. We have a long history as a global under-performer in the area of such foreign aid.
Personally I think it's a great idea. Not necessarily a permanent thing, just for a few years to see how many things we could do for our own poor and needy.
But, rest assured, there will be plenty of posters here to tell you that what we send in foreign aid is "miniscule" compared to other budgets.
Lol. You're assuming that money would go to people who need it rather than people who would just take it, since foreign aid disbursements are legislated by those pesky politicians.
The nature of foreign aid is misunderstood by many. First of all, it's a tool of foreign policy, not random freebies. It's part of a carrot-and-stick approach to getting other countries to do what we want, and secondarily to some extent, an effort to achieve or maintain some stability among populations that could turn hostile, due to poverty, marginalization, etc. You can see how well that approach worked for Saudi Arabia in winning friends and influencing people in the Middle East, when we weren't looking. They have more money to spend than we do, too.
Secondly, a significant portion of the foreign aid money actually goes to pay contracts with US companies, to support US airlines and other service providers. It gets cycled back into the US economy. People (Americans) and US-based organizations, whose international projects are funded through AID grants, for example, are required to use US carriers for air travel and shipping, and American technology and expertise in the field, to the extent possible. The grants come with those strings attached.
The US already cut back drastically in foreign aid in the mid 1990's, when the Gingrich Congress slashed the foreign aid budget, sending the government "area foundations",--as the organizations tasked with carrying out foreign aid projects with federal funds were referred to (Asia Foundation, Africa Foundation, Inter-America Foundation),-- were cut loose from federal funding, and were forced to literally go begging in order to continue functioning. They now are non-profit organizations funded by private foundations and private and corporate donations. This is an interesting development, because it means that in theory, they're no longer beholden to the government to comply with and support the US' political goals and strategies abroad.
I have an idea; instead of the rich looking for still more sectors of the national economy to rob and distribute to themselves, why don't they figure out how to earn more money by their own honest efforts? Hey, wouldn't that be a novel concept?
The nature of foreign aid is misunderstood by many. First of all, it's a tool of foreign policy, not random freebies. It's part of a carrot-and-stick approach to getting other countries to do what we want, and secondarily to some extent, an effort to achieve or maintain some stability among populations that could turn hostile, due to poverty, marginalization, etc. You can see how well that approach worked for Saudi Arabia in winning friends and influencing people in the Middle East, when we weren't looking. They have more money to spend than we do, too.
Secondly, a significant portion of the foreign aid money actually goes to pay contracts with US companies, to support US airlines and other service providers. It gets cycled back into the US economy. People (Americans) and US-based organizations, whose international projects are funded through AID grants, for example, are required to use US carriers for air travel and shipping, and American technology and expertise in the field, to the extent possible. The grants come with those strings attached.
The US already cut back drastically in foreign aid in the mid 1990's, when the Gingrich Congress slashed the foreign aid budget, sending the government "area foundations",--as the organizations tasked with carrying out foreign aid projects with federal funds were referred to (Asia Foundation, Africa Foundation, Inter-America Foundation),-- were cut loose from federal funding, and were forced to literally go begging in order to continue functioning. They now are non-profit organizations funded by private foundations and private and corporate donations. This is an interesting development, because it means that in theory, they're no longer beholden to the government to comply with and support the US' political goals and strategies abroad.
I have an idea; instead of the rich looking for still more sectors of the national economy to rob and distribute to themselves, why don't they figure out how to earn more money by their own honest efforts? Hey, wouldn't that be a novel concept?
Wow, what a change from the usual ramblings of the CD misinformed. American corporations do indeed get a lot of mileage from the ruse of "foreign" aid, along with TANF, and most of the military contracting for our ostensible "defense." There's no free lunch when Uncle Sam has his wallet out..
I've given up trying to convince others of this bit of American truth, and I'm never certain of the outcome should people ever come to a better understanding of these corporate handouts. Some would undoubtedly be just as angry at the truth as they were of the myth, while others would most likely rejoice at the thought of American corporate entities getting da gubmint's money instead of those pesky foreigners..I've always enjoyed the humorous wisdom of Jim Hightower who cautioned us to, "follow the money," and when it's coming from government that money usually winds up in a US corporate till..
Say, theoretically, the U.S completely stopped giving foreign aide to anyone, regardless of who it was and regardless of the circumstances, no more foreign aide to Israel, to Europe, to any 2nd or 3rd world countries.
I'm not a mind reader but when you are talking about "foreign aid" your really talking about giving money to African countries. Right ?
But the fact is
There is no such thing as aid
What there is, is a system were the world bank gives out credits to African countries (
The African countries are held hostage through debt.
The debt payback is done by getting more resources at low prices. Meanwhile local infrastructures are crumbling, social programmes and local developments are cut because of the paybacks.
The debt relief comes with a price. The African resource producing countries have to sell everything for a special discount price which opens the doors to all sorts of speculations from foreign investors demanding high returns.
Another by-product the west is expecting from their ‘generous gestures’ is to get positive votes at the next UN assembly. Any African who goes against it ? They threaten the local authorities to pull their funds out or threaten them to initiate another government turnover.
White supremacist don’t want African in charge of their own destiny.
Look at what happens to Africans who have tried ? Colonel Gaddifi was trying to create a central African bank and an African communication network. Africa is a massive source for mobile phone networks and internet. Africans make billions for the white supremacists. Gaddifi plan went against there wishes just as would have an African bank. So he had to be killed.
Robert Mugabe trying to return the land back to Africans in Zimbabwe. Julius Malema in S.Africa doing the same.
Black people in Africa had to fight a long civil war for their freedom, and now they are being fought tooth and nail by the international community for wanting to take back the soil that is rightfully theirs.
Patrice Lumumba, one of the greatest black leaders was killed by the Belgians with the aid of US. So that the white international community could get the puppet government that they wanted in the Congo.
Another two things
1) White supremacists acts of aggression are always followed by white supremacist acts of compassion.
2) White supremacists LOVE a starving negro.
Your post support white racist ways of thinking :
Whites are better.
Africans need their help.
Americans are not better than Africans but they are more powerful.
And they use that power to screw up them up in the process who then become objects of pity in need of saving.
But they play both sides.
It’s the scorched earth thing. They (the white supremacist) mess up the water over there. They mess up the earth so they cant grow anything and then and then give them a bag of rice in exchange for a bag of diamonds.
The mobile phone or I-phone you have in your pocket, or laptop would not even work without congolese coltan
Who controls Coltan deposits over there ? Apple (The biggest company in the world)
Africa has the biggest stores of
Gold and diamonds
Oil
Cocoa
Timber
Not to mention Iron, Platinum, Uranium, Chromium. Even Cement is exported from Egypt and Morocco. Also Africa is one of the most diverse geological continents.
To be honest the constant poverty in Africa is shown with a purpose. It’s used to show that Africans are messed up. They need foreign control on their resources.
I have only one thing to say to those who point towards the poverty and wars in Africa.
Protest against your government policies. Stand up against the wars that your countries wage against others (Libya used to be one with a good HDI before Obama & Co. bombed it to the ground, and yes, sponsored the killing of blacks in Libya by the rebels).
If you don’t, then stop whining and shove your charity up your backside. Don’t use poor people as an excuse to feel good without doing anything good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
