Who gets U.S. Foreign Aid?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by LilOlLady, Jan 30, 2011.

  1. LilOlLady
    Offline

    LilOlLady Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    7,841
    Thanks Received:
    660
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Ratings:
    +761
    Who gets U.S. Foreign Aid?
    December 14, 2008

    The U.S. will give an estimated $26 billion in foreign aid in 2008—70% more than when President George W. Bush took office (the figure doesn’t include funds related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). More than 150 countries get financial assistance from the U.S. Here are the six that received the most this year.

    http://www.parade.com/news/intelligence ... n-aid.html

    Where does this money come from? How do we manage to do this and cannot take care of our own? And we have a deficit of what? $1.5 trillion?
     
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    How much did we give when bush left office though?
     
  3. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    When exactly did you learn about this? It's been going on for like a century now.
     
  4. kaz
    Offline

    kaz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    42,867
    Thanks Received:
    4,358
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Independence Hall
    Ratings:
    +14,041
    Yes, foreign aid is a huge problem. The people should give to where they want their money to go, government shouldn't confiscate it and give it to who the politicians want to give it to. The people give to accountable charities who provide services they support, the government endlessly gives it for political interest and endlessly has it stolen by corrupt government and militant insurgencies because they don't really care where it goes, they just want to use that they gave away other people's money in their campaigns.
     
  5. Misty
    Offline

    Misty Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    7,137
    Thanks Received:
    1,897
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,308
    We have to pay everyone out of guilt or to keep them from bombing us in some cases.

    Huge waste of taxpayer money. This is my biggest beef with the way our money is wasted lining the pockets of other corrupt polticians and world leaders.
     
  6. kaz
    Offline

    kaz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    42,867
    Thanks Received:
    4,358
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Independence Hall
    Ratings:
    +14,041
    Sounds like we're in agreement over aid, but I didn't understand your point on "to keep them from bombing us." Who doesn't bomb us because we give them aid?
     
  7. LordBrownTrout
    Offline

    LordBrownTrout Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    15,490
    Thanks Received:
    2,962
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    South Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,352
    10 billion in 2000, 28 billion in 2005, 23 billion in Bush' last year.
     
  8. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,145
    Thanks Received:
    10,164
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,697
    We need to cut off all foreign aid. A. Because we're broke, and B. Because it does zip zero nada,, zit good.. check out Haiti,, money pissed away.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    27,779
    Thanks Received:
    4,334
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +10,743
    It's a good question. When we could afford it it might have been a good idea to send extortion money to countries to keep them happy and friendly toward the US but we can't afford it anymore and the countries don't seem to be all that grateful. We haven't made good foreign policy decisions in a century and our "intelligence" sources are a waste of money also.
     
  10. Londoner
    Offline

    Londoner Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    3,142
    Thanks Received:
    977
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    *Some* people in this thread have been terribly misinformed by Talk Radio.

    They think foreign "aid" is a form of compassionate welfare for the "needy", prompting them to re-litigate the "War-on-Poverty", i.e., "you can't help people by simply giving them money (while not addressing the very lack of discipline that made them needy in the first place. Giving people something for nothing rewards and thus perpetuates the behavior the caused the problem in the first place"). We get it. We all passed 3rd grade (I hope).

    But "aid" has never been about "helping" anyone. A superpower doesn't have time to think about such simplistic fantasies. We "help" nations in the 3rd world when it is in our perceived economic interest. For instance, we do not want the globe to contain failed states (especially in our hemisphere), because this would increase the likelihood of said failed state falling into enemy hands, or being a breeding ground for terrorism.

    The point of "aid" and "humanitarian intervention" has always been about stabilizing vital resource regions upon which we depend [FYI: by "resource" I don't simply mean oil or precious metals, but labor markets, trade routes, and territory that could otherwise be used by our enemies to train insurgents and plan attacks].

    The reason we described the Iraq War as "helping" the citizens of Iraq "escape tyranny" is because it would be against any nation's self-interest to openly declare the motives/strategy behind strategic intervention. [The Brits didn't say they were in India for the spices; no, they were civilizing the world] Listen children: If our enemies got control of the middle east and (say) blocked the Straight of Hormuz, it would destroy the oil market, and gas prices would sky-rocket, thus causing economic shock waves across the globe (which would harm everyone).

    It's very hard to discuss this stuff with people who get the majority of their information from popular media (talk radio, TV, newspapers, and the blogosphere). Hannity, Savage, Levine, and Limbaugh don't talk about geopolitics. They give their audience a very simplistic and paranoid narrative about evil islamo-fascists hiding in the closet or liberals stealing their money in order to "save the world". And then the audience rushes to message boards and says the government is wasting their money by helping the needy or stuffing the coffers of foreign politicians. Granted, there is absolutely corruption and incompetence -- the Iraq War is a case in point. But, one some levels, the strategic goal made absolute sense (and it still makes sense to gain more control of the region. This is what Talk Radio Republicans don't get: in most cases, we depend deeply on the global regions which are targeted for "aid" or "humanitarian intervention").

    Talk Radio is raising a generation of paranoid angry morons who know nothing about policy (because the government doesn't want them involved in the actual decision making. This is why Washington talks about "evil-doers" rather than oil geopolitics. The willingness of people to be seduced by talk radio allows our leaders are get away with destroying the country, that is, citizens can't hold government accountable if they don't understand the logic of their decisions.)

    The ideological system is churning out an army of Jared Loughners who see government devils hiding in the closet, manipulating their minds and money without rhyme or reason. WRONG. There is a reason for why government acts. It's called self-interest.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2011

Share This Page