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.
Enlisting means having no freedom over your life and putting yourself in harm's way and isn't a solution for everyone especially for older people who can't always enlist!
I am not trying to sell the idea, I am just saying that is one of the main reasons rich countries give foreign aid.
And if we were rolling in money it might be a good idea on a limited basis, we aren't and until we are the only aid I would consider is for humanitarian reasons.
And if we were rolling in money it might be a good idea on a limited basis, we aren't and until we are the only aid I would consider is for humanitarian reasons.
Often times investments like that create jobs and bring in more money that the investment itself. That's the whole idea.
For the first hundred years of the United States' existence as a country, government aid was practically nonexistent. It was generally considered that the Constitution did not authorize the government to use the people's money for foreign charity............
The link provides a list of countries that we gave foreign aid to in 2012 and the dollar amounts. In 2003 we provided $29.5 billion in aid. In 2012 we provided $48.5 billion, mostly to third world nations (but that also includes $440 million to Russia interestingly enough).
My question is why are we still providing aid when the nation is deeply in debt and when many of those countries hate us? There were starving children when I was a kid and there will be starving children decades from now. Our money does not prevent waste and fraud and corruption internationally, does not change the overall political or economic landscape in any of these countries, does not stabilize nations, does not bring democracy or peace.
It's not a whole lot of money in the grand scheme of things, and when we so easily talk about trillions of dollars nowadays, as opposed to billions. But what's the point, when we could use the money here to take care of our own? We can't afford to simply be altruistic anymore, so what (tangibly) are we actually getting from our international-aid investment?
They use the money to purchase U.S. made goods. Establishes connections and dependency on U.S. companies and their goods.
There are usually controls in FA.
Jobs where? We outsource more and more jobs, I would guess many of those jobs would be in China and India.
Some may be in India and China, but since the goal is to promote US companies, a lot of the jobs would also be in US. I hate outsourcing, but it would be dishonest to say US does not benefit at all from foreign aid. We do benefit.
They use the money to purchase U.S. made goods. Establishes connections and dependency on U.S. companies and their goods.
There are usually controls in FA.
Exactly, and that also explains why smaller countries, like the Nordics, invest heavily in foreign "aid". The real aid is for their own countries, because the aid creates markets for the products their nations produce.
Caterpillar was interviewed by NPR during the lean years and they indicated that foreign orders were a significant part of their business. Made in the USA in IL.
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.
