I feel like you might have some other issues besides that... feiging a disability to make fun of and put down someone that is simply happy he has done well, and wants to share it..
I guess I don't know enough about politics, but why does foreign aid even exist? Why don't countries take care of their own citizens instead? That 30+ billion from USA could be used to get clean water to Flint Michigan or to care for military veterans who are dying every day due to inadequate medical care.
The US GDP is $20 trillion. We easily have enough money to provide for our own citizens, with plenty left over to give as foreign aid. If people aren't getting clean water in Flint, it's not because of foreign aid its because of lack of political will and bureaucratic incompetence.
Improving development around the world is clearly beneficial to Aid Donors, too. It lowers the amount of refugees, helps battling environmental problems like Climate Change, that affects the whole globe, makes it harder for extremist organisations to gain recruits. Not to talk about all the Doctors, Scientists, Artists, etc. that are now prevented to flourish by their social situation.
@QRU thats what I say to people on both sides of our immigration argument. Rather than blocking immigrants who need asylum, or rushing in people who are ungrateful, just solve these crises around the world. People will stay put in a nice place.
Pork (who says he doesn't know enough about politics), QM, and QRU are all right. In addition to the things already brought up.. though it greatly benefits everyone in the world, efforts of the US to maintain global stability greatly benefit the USA, too. The economy of the US is inextricably connected to the world economy. It's too complicated to get in to all the many many ways economics and standards of living have an impact that is felt globally- but it's definitely in the interests of the US to see other countries around the world be prosperous, stable, healthy and peaceful. A disease outbreak that isn't contained in Cameroon can spread to the US. A war in Indonesia could shut down shipping lanes vital to US trade. Revolution in Saudi Arabia could spark a global energy crisis. One in Pakistan could end with nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists. Economic collapse in Mexico could bring down the US economy with it. And so on and so on.
Further to this, it can act as an almost Keynesian stimulus to the home economy. For example, small developing country needs to improve its rail infrastructure: UK agrees to pay for building new tracks from it’s aid budget. It will then contract a British firm (Balfour Beaty e.g.) to carry out the work, thereby creating jobs both at home and in the recipient country. Provided this has plenty of oversight this can be mutually beneficial to both donor and recipient countries.
Also vitally important is maintaining the system of strategic alliances that the US has been carefully building and nurturing since the end of World War 2 and even before. This network is incredibly valuable to the US and also to maintaining global stability and peace and the balance of power. Of course Trump is too ignorant and/or stupid to understand any of this, as he busily offends and alienates all of America's most important allies even while cozying up to her most dedicated enemies.
In a way that 600 billion should also be counted as international foreign aid as without it it's very plausible that the world would be engulfed in war.
The logic of the "hegemony stability theory" is identical to the claim that autocracy is the best government form (see Hobbes' Leviathan). The premise is that the holder of absolute power wants to enforce peace (in order to get legitimation but also in order to subtract the "peace dividend") and the subordinate will not dare to oppose this absolute power. However, in reality Leviathan more than often failed because absolutistic monarchs or dictators are not that benevolent as required and abuse their power.
Dave: you're welcome. and while it's true that the United States is extremely safe you may be surprised that there is no consistent correlation between rates of gun ownership and safety (positive or negative).
Fish: it's a silly and tired strawman this argument that the US isn't "benevolent." They don't have to be benevolent to be a force for good (though, in large part, they actually are), they only need to pursue their self-interests to benefit the world, as the self-interests of a hegemonic power (peace, stability, prosperity, trade, containment of threats to the status quo) usually coincide with the interests of the world in general. There are exceptions, but I did say generally.
I refuse to join in the general US-bashing, but sometimes you guys come across as less than intelligent, emotionally attached to damaging policies. If you were stood over here, it would seem clear to you how abysmal your gun laws really are. The fact that it is apparently a “matter of opinion” is terrifying, when placed next to the cold hard facts and staggering numbers of violent death victims. Are you really that thick?
Semi-illuminating, as in perhaps more is obscured than revealed. US aid, which (to the surprise of many) is not nearly as generous as Americans like to believe, is often tied to the procurement of US goods and services. No, they don't just "give them money." And a good chunk of it is destined to Israel. How much (Israel and elsewhere) is really anything remotely connected to humanitarian or development assistance? The EU is itself a major source of aid, apparently not counted here, but would increase the totals of member states. And finally, much that originates in particular countries, but is transferred via other agencies (sometimes religious) is likewise not counted. But overall, I think it's been a good lesson in surprises.
Before you get all high and mighty these are the numbers produced by a single organization regarding the standards that they count. Which only count national government donations that fit specific criteria. The vast majority of international relief outside of the US is given by national governments. While a very large chunk of the American international donations are given through charities. Just because it isn't given through threat of detention doesn't mean that it's not international aid. The linked page includes UAE even though they are not part of the group that is the source of the quiz's information. Curiously China which would be the highest total donor is excluded from the list even though it is listed in a separate table with the UAE.
Of course other countries than the US, especially European ones, give away money for purely altruistic reasons. We're simply better people. The fact that China is Germany's highest foreign aid recipient has nothing to do with economic interests.
Okay, that is an extraordinary claim. I looked it up. It seems that Germany DOES give about 1 billion dollars a year to China. As of 2017, this makes China the third largest recipient of German aid, but it still accounts for a small percentage of the total. I'd say Germany's aid is mostly altruistic in nature, but it's possible there is some cynical dealmaking involved as well. It's hard to say without doing more research.
Interesting fact: If America cut half of its annual military budget, then every person on this planet could have clean drinking water with the money saved.
The ignorance underpinning these comments is staggering. Why is it that people always decry the ignorance of Americans, and then expose their woeful ignorance about a topic like this when trying to bash Americans? Do you people really not understand how complicated international relations are? It's not like these countries are all handing out money just to be nice.
Though people may despise america for giving to less(percentage wise) or giving a lot (total amount wise), the reason why america gives foreign aid especially during the cold war was to help a dictatorship and rarely to help the citizens of the country.
Glad you included % of GNP!, it gives a much better image imo :) (lots of stats are overshadowed by mere size of countries)
Didnt expect uae, and also had some trouble coming up with south korea, the others I found eas(il)y enough. Actually, it is all western europe, plus the usa, canada, and australia. And Uae, turkey and southkorea.
I guess sweden has a much lower GNP than the netherlands., since it is more than 10 times bigger than the netherlands, I expected the netherlands to end higher in the 2nd column than sweden ( not meaning first, but just higher than sweden).
But yea it is not surface area that matters most, amount of inhabitants play a bigger role, and we sure have cramped a lot of people in the small space we have haha.
It should also be noted that the EU is one of the largest donors, in addition to EU members own contribution. If you sum the EU + its members, it is by far the largest funder of ODA.
Fish: it's a silly and tired strawman this argument that the US isn't "benevolent." They don't have to be benevolent to be a force for good (though, in large part, they actually are), they only need to pursue their self-interests to benefit the world, as the self-interests of a hegemonic power (peace, stability, prosperity, trade, containment of threats to the status quo) usually coincide with the interests of the world in general. There are exceptions, but I did say generally.
EU - no guns = no gun deaths
USA - lots of guns = how many gun deaths?
You got it, well done Junior…
I refuse to join in the general US-bashing, but sometimes you guys come across as less than intelligent, emotionally attached to damaging policies. If you were stood over here, it would seem clear to you how abysmal your gun laws really are. The fact that it is apparently a “matter of opinion” is terrifying, when placed next to the cold hard facts and staggering numbers of violent death victims. Are you really that thick?
another fact: that would cause WW3, so then all the people with nice fresh water will promptly die.
keep trying.
Two wrong!
No. Most people don't have the first clue how complex international
relations are. Nor do many of them understand how ridiculously silly they sound as they perpetuate inaccurate stereotypes that have been
fed to them by their anti-American media.
I
I hate how America doesn't give enough foreign aid!!
zzzzzzzzz it gets old
Didnt expect uae, and also had some trouble coming up with south korea, the others I found eas(il)y enough. Actually, it is all western europe, plus the usa, canada, and australia. And Uae, turkey and southkorea.
But yea it is not surface area that matters most, amount of inhabitants play a bigger role, and we sure have cramped a lot of people in the small space we have haha.