The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
What's the point in foreign AID
BlackbeardonGuitar
regular
regular
The US and other developed nations have been giving it for years and half the countries it goes to continue to be fucked up and seemingly getting worse.
Yeah I get it a few million people get some rice and some medication but what's the point. If things aren't actively getting better and it appears they aren't in countries like Somalia (over 40 million from the US in 2005) a country that doesnt have a government and stones women to death for getting raped, or numerous other countries in Africa some of which have HIV rates that re nearly 50%. I just don't get it. It seems ultimately like wasted money. I'm not arguing whether or not we can afford it (apparently we or by us I mean the loans we take from China can afford it) I'm just not sure what the point is?
Yeah I get it a few million people get some rice and some medication but what's the point. If things aren't actively getting better and it appears they aren't in countries like Somalia (over 40 million from the US in 2005) a country that doesnt have a government and stones women to death for getting raped, or numerous other countries in Africa some of which have HIV rates that re nearly 50%. I just don't get it. It seems ultimately like wasted money. I'm not arguing whether or not we can afford it (apparently we or by us I mean the loans we take from China can afford it) I'm just not sure what the point is?
BlackbeardonGuitar on
0
Posts
On the other hand, sending money to a country like Israel that clearly doesn't need it is a tremendous waste of resources.
The OP is a horrible, horrible human being.
Face Twit Rav Gram
The main problems aside from the ones Zimmy has mentioned are stupid rules about what can and can't be given. Charities and foundations from the US dominate reproductive education in Africa, for instance, but are banned from discussing termination and frequently self-ban from even discussing contraception and STI prevention. They hand out bibles instead, which at best may be addressing the continent's shortage of toilet paper. A lot of charities also push mothers into using formula when they're perfectly capable of breastfeeding (its a good idea if mum is actually starving, but when she's not its just another expense for an already poor family, and not as good for junior). Things like this don't actually help, they just give the people involved in the charity that warm glow of self-righteousness they so crave.
Large-scale food aid is also commonly used as a bribe to keep local warlords from going completely mental, with varying degrees of success.
If you lift a few million people out of dire poverty, and do so thanks to handouts/hand ups from Uncle Sam, you provide a bunch of people who are now able to generate their own wealth, and might just use some of that wealth to buy shit from the nation that helped them.
But seriously, cry moar - 40 million? Fuck me, that's like the tiniest drop in the ocean. If that amout is true (and I suspect it's vastly under-represented) then it's only a few cents per US citizen.
Seriously, moth ball a few stealth bombers and use the money you just saved on maintenance and you could donate more than 40 million.
I haven't heard about the pushing formula thing. What's the reasoning for that?
Throwing rice at starving people aint going to help them in the long run if they're unable to become independent due to any number of factors.
So yes it's nice to feed starving people, but it's a better idea to make sure they're able to feed themselves afterward.
Roads and running water would be a nice start. Haliburton to the rescue! Oh, wait...
That's perfectly reasonable and completely counterproductive. It's hard to drive out the corrupt fuckers when you're too weak to lift a gun.
Yeah, I've heard that giving out food devalues the food they grow and discourages agricultural independence.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
This is another issue with aid. Aid driven by donations (or the like) make them accountable to the people that donate, which is great. However, in many instances what is required to meaningfully erect change in an LDC is the building of infrastructure. But building infrastructure isn't something flashy a doner wants to get out of their charity, so said charities have to focus on smaller local impacts, which while nice, never address the systemic problems plaguing an LDC.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
This heavily Americanized every-man-for-himself mentality completely ignores the situation surrounding the people we're trying to help in some of these countries.
Here, let me toss your spoiled, self-ritgheous ass out into the fucking desert and see how long you last without help. Do you really thinking these people don't know how to feed themselves? They've been farming for fucking centuries, living from their own means, and then some dictator comes and sweeps away their ability to do that, so we have to do whatever we can to get them some fucking food. Food is a fucking "hand up" when you don't have any god damned means to get it.
'cause you can sell formula milk; you can't sell breast milk.
The point you are missing is how destructive just giving a large amount of food/clothing/materials to these countries can be. It is highly corrosive to the local economy if it is cheaper to get food/clothing from a charity then it is to produce it locally.
Those who cower from tyrants deserve their chains."
-unknown
I'm unaware that we're undercutting prices that the regular populace can afford anyway, thus defeating the idea of foreign aid.
I didn't know if it was a corporate effort or a religious one, or a misguided attempt to stem the tide of infection. Although I'm sure if it is "marketing" they use the health issue as an excuse to push their stuff.
And yeah the #1 issue with these countries is infrastructure by 100 million miles. Everything else is dependent on roads and communications to distribute goods and for poor people to go where the jobs are.
Also yes it is true that food aid suppresses local agriculture, but that's nothing compared to the damage done by domestic agricultural subsidies in developed countries. Africa can't export shit because we prop up our farmers with nonsensical entitlement programs. Nothing kills starving Africans faster than American corn and French... well, French everything.
If you had to try to farm in those countries, you'd take the gross porridge instead, too. Its an issue, but not so much as you'd think. Outright food aid goes largely to places where there's no possibility of growing your own. Deserts. Refugee camps. War zones. A lot of agricultural advancement is coming out of Africa, and has in the past. Food aid helped that happen.
Makes sense. Is fucking horrible, but makes sense.
God the Swiss are awful, aren't they?
There's been some literature in the area that in fact for African development to proceed like China or The Five Dragons/Tigers they'd have to insulate themselves more from China et. all than the West, simply due to the stage in development those countries have reached at this point.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
I never got the "Five Tigers" thing. It must be a Western trope, because it doesn't make any sense. Byakko/bai hu represents the West. Seiryuu/qing long guards the East.
KNOW YOUR AUSPICIOUS MOTIFS GODDAMNIT
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
And anyway if you actually believe in that crap technically Africa should be rising up to annihilate us all in a nuclear fire any day now.
For everyone insinuating that Aid is unabashedly good, do you know how much gets missappropriated and going to the warlords or dictators? Seriously, its not like Throwing money at countries solves problems.
Part of me wants to say send in the troops, kill the local warlords, built the roads, needed infrastructure, add a Wal-mart, a 7-11, a Taco Bell, and then host a party on an aircraft carrier with a bunch of mission accomplished signs.
Part of me wants to say fuck it, and hope the situation declining because we stopped throwing money at it motivates us to actually do something about it.
The last part of me is curious to see what would happen if we solicited government contracts for the feeding and infrastructure. Might be interesting to see what how the private sector would handle it.
It is a bit more complicated. The west (and Japan) produce a lot agricultural product for two reasons - technological productivity and Government subsidies. Because of this, the West (not Japan, special case) produces a lot more food than is needed for its domestic populace (with the exception of Britain, which has been a net food importer for centuries). The abundance of food has generally depressed worldwide prices of corn (corn being whatever carbohydrate staple you choose to eat in your part of the world) and such, which is a good thing if you happen to not grow food as your income. Unfortunately (or fortunately if you're a farmer), the West has increased the subsidy value of ethanol, so that many fields that were once devoted to creating food now create the biofuel (which is dastardly inefficient and wasteful - I consider it morally repugnant). This has resulted in the dramatic rise in the price of food worldwide. Of course, in the United States, if the price of rice goes from $2-$3 for a 4 pound bag, no one cares. Such increases are disastrous in communities where the average income is less that $1/day.
On the topic of egregious farm subsidies, cows in Japan earn about $2/day, which is more than what the average person on the planet earns.
Doha needs to go through.
Like it handles everything else? Maximizing profit by taking advantage of people.
Bad idea. Always.
If the food is free then yes we are undercutting the local production.
That's not to say that there are conditions where free food is not needed... there are extreme cases where food should be just given. But any situation would have to be under constant review to ensure that the given aid is not damaging the local economy.
Those who cower from tyrants deserve their chains."
-unknown
That's because the money isn't being sent to stop cultural practices, but in response to shortages of money/food/medicine/etc?
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
I just think a government's priority should be its own citizens.
Yes, I realize our countries are more fortunate, and it can be seen that we have an obligation, but that's what private charity is for.