Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chickentribs
It's not all charity, samcol, think of it like this:
1) What is the likelihood we would see that money in our lifetimes anyway? Much of this debt was written off a long time ago. It becomes a game of politics. - That doesn't make it right, just reality.
2) By helping build a little bit of infrastructure (roads, bridges, schools) we give them the tools to become a productive trading partner of products or food that can be cheaper or possibly bartered with excess food (wheat, grains) we would have destroyed anyway.
3) This is classic "teach a man to fish vs. give a man a fish" A little today could avoid a much worse situation tomorrow.
I know that the people who we can't even sell on the need for basic healthcare in the US are laughing at the idea of this right now. But the economy and free trade requires that you feed it a bit to open new markets that will in turn feed you.
Why do we require the military to spread the ideas of democracy and capitalism?  This is something we could do for $1 or $2 billion and help just as many people as we did in the Middle East! |
1) Not much to dispute here-there's little chance of this money being repaid anyway, so it is mostly politics.
2) By creating a trading "partner" we are helping develop competition which will yet again undercut our manufacturing as another continent will be open for extremely cheap labor.
3) If any monies we gave came with advice, it would be denounced in the world, not only by other contries, but by those who recieve aid themselves. We would be seen as buying influence. Also, oftentimes a benefactor grows to be resented by the one(s) who are the beneficiaries of goodwill.
And there is no way to ensure that the aid given would go toward the intended purposes, or that any respectable democracies would take hold. Look above for examples of humanitarian aid diverted into the personal bank accounts of despots. Or look at the recent Oil for Food fiasco.
And again, there would be a low chance of actually gaining a trade partner, it would most likely be another China/India/Indonesia etc. where people are exploited for cheap labor to fuel the gains of the government. By simply giving aid we have no way to ensure that these countries would abide by any minimum work standards.
I think it's human nature more than anything else that makes a military necessary for the export of democracy. Dictatorships are often present only due to force, it takes a greater force to get those organizations out of power. Because without the threat, there is no viable reason for any autocracy to spontaneously disband.