On
March 14, 2002 President Bush announced an increase in foreign assistance to
developing countries through a new Millennium Challenge Account (MCA). The MCA
funds will be distributed to developing countries that show good governance,
attention to the health and education of their people, and put forth sound
economic policies. As well as the MCA, President Bush announced a 50% increase
over the next three years in foreign aid, an increase amounting [to] over $5 billion
in worth. Nevertheless, the United States cannot afford to increase its
commitment to foreign aid; although, the Millennium Challenge Account is a step
in the right direction to decreasing the level of poverty.
The
United States has their heart in the right place with increasing foreign aid,
but there is little reason to actually increase it. While 81% of Americans
support increasing foreign aid to fight terrorism, there is little proof that
increasing foreign aid would actually help. Furthermore, almost every country
that has suffered an internal catastrophe has collected abundant foreign aid. As
seen in Ethiopia, Somalia, and Zaire, foreign aid actually helped aggravate and
create problems, subsidizing the tyrannical rule of their representative
dictators. Increasing foreign aid to countries has never shown noteworthy
evidence that it helps. The money often lent to countries through loans has
disappeared out of sight and most likely will never be paid back. History has
shown that sound economic policies in countries experiencing debt and poverty
have helped copiously more than foreign aid ever has. After World War II,
countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong were ill stricken with debt
and poverty. The aforementioned countries have now become some of the most
successful countries in the world thanks to economic policies, not foreign aid.
Increasing foreign aid is a generous and philanthropic idea, but useless all the
same. The United States’ debt is above $6 trillion, thus, increasing foreign
aid by 50% would only add to that number.
On
the other hand, the MCA is a step in the right direction, and a far better plan
than increasing foreign aid. The MCA will only admit and help countries that
govern justly, promote due health and education for their people, and propose
sound economic policies. Through these three admittance requirements, poverty
can be rightfully taken care of, rather than just increasing foreign aid and
throwing away money. After World War II had ended, Japan, Hong Kong, South
Korea, and Taiwan were all poorer than Latin American countries, yet, they’re
now doing much better, all thanks to a difference in economic models they
adopted. Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea all focused their economy towards the
open market and promoted open trading; in other words, adopted some form
Aside
from foreign aid and the MCA, international trade plays a substantial role as
well. Currently, the United States assists through government-to-government
action, which impedes any growth for countries at all and has often been shown
to support corrupted regimes. Moreover, many countries are blocked from
international trade by barriers concocted by the United States; this action
further halts any growth by poverty stricken countries. Furthermore, the arousal
to increase foreign aid was spawned after September 11th, 2001; the
day the United States felt the wrath of terrorism. An increase in foreign aid
will not prohibit terrorism, and neither will it extinguish terrorist regimes
from taking over [poor] countries.... Increasing foreign aid will not stop
corrupt, poor nations, as leaders...often [find] it in their own selfish
interest to be dependant. While increased foreign aid is a nice thought, it’s
useless, unneeded, and the MCA economic policies will be far more affective.
The
Millennium Challenge Account is a move in the right direction, but increased
foreign aid is not needed and not affordable. The United States debt is far too
high and foreign aid has been proven to be useless. The MCA puts forth sound
economic policies and justly governed states, tactics that have proven to work
effectively. The United States would be far better off increasing their
assistance on economic policies in other countries and helping them develop
justly, rather than throwing money away. The MCA doesn’t need increased
foreign aid to work; rather, the level of foreign aid is adequately fine right
now, as well as one of the best in the world.
1.
President
Bush claimed that most funds for development do not come from international aid.
He mentions three things that do fund development. What are they?
They are:
Domestic Capital, Foreign Investment, and Trade.
2.
President
Bush reminded his audience that successful development in a third world country
requires more than funds. What two items did he mention in this regard?
President Bush
mentions financing and literacy.
3.
When
is money sometimes counterproductive, according to President Bush?
Money
is counterproductive when it is not accompanied by legal and economic reform,
according to President Bush.
4.
Describe
the Millennium Challenge Account and include in your description what is
anticipated from donors and recipients.
The
Millennium Challenge Account is a proposition put forth by President Bush to
link greater contributions from developed nations and greater responsibility
from developing nations for an economic reformation where donors and recipients
root out corruption, respect human rights, and adhere to the rule of law, so
that economic freedom may reign forth and diminish poverty, hunger, and increase
education.
5
5.
What
are the three broad standards that President Bush expects the leaders of the
developing nations to adopt?
Reforms,
policies, and to provide up to half of the funds devoted to poor nations in the
form of grants.
6
6. Describe
President Bush’s challenge to development banks and explain why or why not you
favor it.
I
favor President Bush’s challenge because it helps to provide more funding to
help the cause, even if it does seem a little fascist.
7
7. What
percentage of our national income (GNP) do you think the United States
government committed to foreign aid in 2002?
About
1%.
8
8.
Describe
and defend a “Me First” attitude.
I
believe a “Me First” attitude, is an attitude one proposes putting oneself
ahead of everyone else. I defend on the grounds that it is human nature.
9
9. Describe
and defend a “Mutual Benefit” attitude.
I
believe a “Mutual Benefit” attitude is an attitude where everyone receives
benefits based on working together. I defend it on the grounds that no one’s
ahead of any other person, even if they are a dirty communist and think
everything should be equal.
1
10.
Describe
three unsuccessful foreign aid programs operated by the U.S. government
or private American citizens.
Basically
every foreign aid program operated by the U.S. is unsuccessful. (inadequate
answer)
1
11.
Describe
three successful foreign aid programs operated by the U.S. government or
private American citizens.
There
are none. (inadequate answer)
1
12.
Steve
Radelet, Senior Fellow at the Center for Global Development, believes we can do
both take care of our own people and lend a helping hand to citizens of less
developed countries. Explain why you think we can or cannot offer aid to both.
I
believe we can since we are America and the most prosperous country in the
World. If we can’t do it, who will?
1
13.
What
do you think about Mr. Radelet’s assertion that “the administration is
leaning towards a system in which eligible countries would write proposals (or
business plans) describing their objectives and strategy, how they would use the
money, the benchmarks used for evaluation. Giving recipient countries this
responsibility is a revolutionary change in US foreign assistance.”?
I
believe it is a pretty cynical statement and cheap comment at the United States,
trying to make them look like Germany in World War II. He should be lynched,
publicly.
1
14.
Which
of Mr. Radelet’s three concerns regarding the MCA concerns you and why?
3.
the separation of US foreign assistance into two agencies could lead to a lack
of coordination and overlapping functions. It concerns me because the riff
between agencies could cause another Civil War and I’m too lazy to fight if
that happens.
1
15.
There
is evidence of an increase in negative world opinion towards U.S. foreign
policy, not necessarily of the American people. To counter this negative
perception of the U.S. some people want the U.S. to concentrate more on weapons
of mass assistance (WMA) and less on weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Please
comment.
I
believe the view of using WMAs is completely ignorant and utterly stupid. I
believe we should focus our attention on using WMDs and annihilate any country
that opposes our totalitarian regime that should be called ‘The Fourth
Reich’. Only this way can we achieve peace because there would be no one
to oppose us. Then we don’t have to worry about whiney countries and how their
people are starving and dying, they’ll already be dead. We should also
eliminate the communists and Jews, too.
1
16.
What
does the World Bank recommend as the United State’s “just and appropriate
share” to reach the Millennium Development Goals by 2015? Do you think our
citizens can afford that kind of increase? Defend your views.
The
World Bank proposes an additional $40-60 billion a year. I don’t believe our
citizens can afford that kind of increase because we’re forced and taxed just
to pay welfare. If the government has to tax lottery winners just to fill their
pockets, then how can the normal citizens afford the increase?
1
17.
What
do you think about the request of Faith Action for People Centered Development
Policy’s request that tax dollars be used to fund, not only
government-sponsored foreign aid programs, but “that funds also go to NGOs and
grassroots organizations.”?
I
think it’s stupid. We shouldn’t even be sending money or aid to any other
country.
1
18.
How
many countries would be affected positively health-related investments according
to the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health (CMH)?
83
countries
1
19.
According
to the CMH, how much would be gained annually between 2015-2020 due to saved
lives and increased economic growth, if an increased investment were made in
global AIDS and other health services?
$360
billion
2
20.
Use
the Internet for your research and name the two congressmen who introduced H.R.
4524. Give a 2-line synopsis of that bill.
Chris
Smith and John LaFalce. It will
provide an additional $1 billion in debt relief for impoverished countries and
is a first step in addressing some of the shortcomings of the current debt
relief initiative.
Back