About time to give up on international aid?

Discussion in 'General Off-Topic Chat' started by cwstjdenobs, Jun 21, 2011.

  1. cwstjdenobs
    OP

    cwstjdenobs Sodomy non sapiens

    Member
    1,757
    1
    Mar 10, 2009
    Ankh-Morpork
    We have enough problems of our own in the "developed" world that carry on getting worse while we pump money into countries that can afford things we can't. Is it about time we stopped just dishing out money to others that could fix our problems? I mean it's not like it would affect the charities working in these regions, there are plenty of qualified people who would still offer free advice and consultation to the right places, and we could offer some of the things we give the money for (especially with development aid) at NFP prices, which would still also pay peoples wages (getting them out of poverty, fixing our problems at the same time, and make it more possible to give full aid again at some point in the near future) and give these countries a better, real sense of "doing it for themselves".

    As an upside it would also mean more money in the disaster relief pot, meaning better/less stomach turning lack of help when another Haiti, Pakistan, or even New Orleans or Japan happens again.
     
  2. emigre

    emigre Has complex motives

    Member
    7,973
    11,498
    Jan 28, 2009
    London
    Considering International Aid is used for strategic political reasons rather than helping developing nations than I say no.
     
  3. cwstjdenobs
    OP

    cwstjdenobs Sodomy non sapiens

    Member
    1,757
    1
    Mar 10, 2009
    Ankh-Morpork
    What does it get us though? Embarrassing entanglements with tyrants, despots, and people who want us all dead but are happy to smile and talk nice to get the money?

    And seriously if you can point out the good things it gets us I'd love to know.

    EDIT: That sounds trollish but I can't think of a better way to put it. And I'm not just aiming it at the UK. And anyone from the countries that receive that help can tell us of any real help they've got, or not getting that they should from International Aid would be greatly appreciated.
     
  4. emigre

    emigre Has complex motives

    Member
    7,973
    11,498
    Jan 28, 2009
    London
    International aid is used for political reasons.My favorite example is Egypt and US relations. The US spent a hefty sum on international aid to Egypt and Mubarak was a willing alley. Jack shit of that aid went on Egypt.

    I don't think looking at international aid in terms of helping the poorest people int he world is the right way to do it. There's ulterior motives, it is politics. If we really wanted to help developing nations, we would cancelling international debt. If you want political favors than keep up international aid.
     
  5. cwstjdenobs
    OP

    cwstjdenobs Sodomy non sapiens

    Member
    1,757
    1
    Mar 10, 2009
    Ankh-Morpork
    And I bet they're popular in Egypt right now. But TBH we, the people, are sold this as doing our part to help the poorest of the world. When we hear about these people getting aid we reduce charity donations. But the "deception" about it's real use is also one of the reasons I'd like to see a stop to it.
     
  6. emigre

    emigre Has complex motives

    Member
    7,973
    11,498
    Jan 28, 2009
    London
    The issue is "how do you help the developing nations?" I agree international aid is sold as "we shouldn't let the poorest people in the world suffer," as Cameron likes to say. Personally I agree with that. However I prefer the "cancelling the debt," idea. International Aid is vulnerable going to questionable politicians and officials as well as Western governments using it as a bargaining chip, i.e. you make the developing nation accept neo-liberal economic policy.
     
  7. cwstjdenobs
    OP

    cwstjdenobs Sodomy non sapiens

    Member
    1,757
    1
    Mar 10, 2009
    Ankh-Morpork
    To some extent yes, but like I said we're also screwing over our own people to play these political bargaining chips that more often than not get abused or backfire. Now I don't agree that it's a purely liberal tool, look at the USAs past in this matter for that. I think it's a big business/end of timer special interest lobby thing more than anything else.

    EDIT: Didn't mean the bold bit in a religious sense, meant in a "this is the last chance we've got, won't be able to get away with it much longer" sense.
     
  8. emigre

    emigre Has complex motives

    Member
    7,973
    11,498
    Jan 28, 2009
    London
    I didn't it was a liberal tool I said it was a Neo-liberal tool, free market economics, the Chicago boys. The US are good examples of this. And having political bargain chips is arguably good for us, if it means you buy allies than that could be useful regarding international crime and terrorism. Also if make "insert developing nation" adopt certain economic conditions regarding their aid than that helps us for example they have to spend x amount of their GDP on let's say British plastic.
     
  9. Sterling

    Sterling GBAtemp's Silver Hero

    Member
    4,023
    645
    Jan 22, 2009
    United States
    Texas
    Okay, I see. Basically it's a policy that lets the "Aid" be paid back through forced economic policies. That's in terms of under developed countries receiving the aid. Although they're still subject to bad backfires.