Jim Hlavac
| Poliitics Home The Practicalist The Socialist Era Politics Re-Explained Fundamentals Domestic Affairs Economic Theory Foreign Affairs Libertarian Ideas Political Theory Philosophy Royalty & Theology |
Foreign Affairs
| Foreign Affairs Sections |
Complaining about Foreign Aid is often done by people who also complain about
immigrants. And more so, by people who want to spend the money at home. But
this ignores the reality that a little spent at some foreign shore is like an
investment in our future. The more we can to help the worst off in the world then
they will move themselves up the economic ladder, and thus they will have to buy
American foods and products.
Foreign aid comes in three broad categories.
One is food aid, direct shipments of excess food to the starving around the
world. What is the point of keeping the food warehoused to rot? It's like the
person who throws out a pound of pasta while the neighbor next door is on food
stamps. Far better from a moral perspective to give the food away. We're not
going hungry so that others might eat. And until we eliminate farm subsidies we
should give this excess food away.
Another is military aid, and this could be cut -- but only if we then go in with our
own military to prevent the slaughter that's bound to come. In some ways our
military aid goes to countries that are on our side against more insidious foes.
There can be no doubt that giving Western Europe some military aid in the past
helped us beat the Russians. And look, the Russians are now coming into their
own and we are both engaged in commerce and the people are peaceful.
So sometimes military aid is good in the short term.
Another form of military aid is actually having our troops there, and keeping
these countries essentially pacifist. This is good for the overall trade in the
world. Libertarians who decry military overseas miss the point that the only way
we are going to create the markets for our products, and the only way we are
going to get their products is through the active positioning of our troops all over
the world. Sometimes it's just better to do things yourself if you want them done
right.
Cash grants to other countries are problematic. Because we give money directly
to a government we are often fostering anti-liberty measures. So the argument
can be made that this amount of money, whether direct or through the world
bank or the IMF should be curtailed. On the other hand, we should in fact be
more liberal with our money grants to individuals and companies, so that they
can begin to develop the economy that fits the modern world. Micro loans to
Bangladeshi woman can only be good..
If we have as our moral goal the betterment of all mankind, than a little foreign
aid is only going to help us.
We are not disconnected from the world, and we can't be. The American
consumer values products from around the world too much, and the needs of
many industries is predicated on getting the raw materials from far away lands.
Thus is it in our interest to give some of these countries foreign aid. The Bush
program to tie Aid to more liberty is a better way to manage the aid.
immigrants. And more so, by people who want to spend the money at home. But
this ignores the reality that a little spent at some foreign shore is like an
investment in our future. The more we can to help the worst off in the world then
they will move themselves up the economic ladder, and thus they will have to buy
American foods and products.
Foreign aid comes in three broad categories.
One is food aid, direct shipments of excess food to the starving around the
world. What is the point of keeping the food warehoused to rot? It's like the
person who throws out a pound of pasta while the neighbor next door is on food
stamps. Far better from a moral perspective to give the food away. We're not
going hungry so that others might eat. And until we eliminate farm subsidies we
should give this excess food away.
Another is military aid, and this could be cut -- but only if we then go in with our
own military to prevent the slaughter that's bound to come. In some ways our
military aid goes to countries that are on our side against more insidious foes.
There can be no doubt that giving Western Europe some military aid in the past
helped us beat the Russians. And look, the Russians are now coming into their
own and we are both engaged in commerce and the people are peaceful.
So sometimes military aid is good in the short term.
Another form of military aid is actually having our troops there, and keeping
these countries essentially pacifist. This is good for the overall trade in the
world. Libertarians who decry military overseas miss the point that the only way
we are going to create the markets for our products, and the only way we are
going to get their products is through the active positioning of our troops all over
the world. Sometimes it's just better to do things yourself if you want them done
right.
Cash grants to other countries are problematic. Because we give money directly
to a government we are often fostering anti-liberty measures. So the argument
can be made that this amount of money, whether direct or through the world
bank or the IMF should be curtailed. On the other hand, we should in fact be
more liberal with our money grants to individuals and companies, so that they
can begin to develop the economy that fits the modern world. Micro loans to
Bangladeshi woman can only be good..
If we have as our moral goal the betterment of all mankind, than a little foreign
aid is only going to help us.
We are not disconnected from the world, and we can't be. The American
consumer values products from around the world too much, and the needs of
many industries is predicated on getting the raw materials from far away lands.
Thus is it in our interest to give some of these countries foreign aid. The Bush
program to tie Aid to more liberty is a better way to manage the aid.