Latest User Comments

RR.com Original

Money for Nothing: Foreign Aid For Free

Published - Aug 06 2012 02:05AM EST

By James Gibbons (Age 22, Young Republican) University at Buffalo, SUNY - Graduate

Flood victims walk to a monastery compound to receive relief food distributed by private donors as their houses were flooded by the overflow of...

(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Flood victims walk to a monastery compound to receive relief food distributed by private donors as their houses were flooded by the overflow of Bago River in Bago, 80 kilometers (50 miles) northeast of Yangon, Myanmar, Monday, Aug. 6, 2012. (AP Photo/Khin Maung Win)

Other Side
"Cutting one percent wouldn't do much, but investing more in developing countries leads to more innovation, more educated people, and lower child mortality rates."
» Read More

Young Voters Speak Out: Each day, RR.com will spotlight politically minded youth writers from throughout the U.S. speaking their minds on Election 2012. First-time voters, student journalists and new graduates will debate the Obama vs. Romney race to the White House. Young Democrats, Republicans and ‘Undecided’ Americans are eager to play politics and choose the next Commander & Chief.

Read James Gibbon's thoughts from a right-leaning perspective:


Free money, there's nothing like it especially when it's guaranteed every year. For decades, the United States has been giving countries around the world billions of dollars. This practice should stop, as there is no strategic benefit.

My argument is not to do away with foreign aid because it is expensive. In reality, it is a small fraction of the entire budget, approximately 1%. The fiscal crisis will only be resolved with addressing healthcare, social security, and military spending.

Why is foreign aid bad? Well, let's take a look back. All the way back to the time of our first President, George Washington. Everybody liked this guy. In his farewell address, he warned future Americans of the problems with meddling overseas.

Obviously, his predecessors did not always heed his advice. It's hard to remove the de facto status that the United States has as the world's policeman.

Excluding military activity, the United States should not play favorites. Government monies mustn't be thrown at countries where it can easily be skimmed off due to corruption. There is simply no accountability.

The aid is meant for infrastructure projects and health matters. What about investing those billions of dollars domestically? Would we rather a bridge collapsed in Uganda or in Dallas?

Of course we can all agree that healthcare is lacking in Africa and other developing countries. However, aid should not come from the United States government. It can get messy; remember when the George W. Bush Administration pushed for abstinence only education overseas?

The great thing about the United States is that private individuals can form organizations that can provide these services to needy countries. Federal funds can remain in America and be allocated to deserving projects.

If supporters of foreign aid truly care about helping others, let them prove it by donating to worthy organizations. How much will you give? I'm sure you can write it off.


» Click for Other Side of the Foreign Aid Debate


REACTIONS: