Should humanitrian foriegn aid be tied to population control

[iustitia]

I agree that we are not in a position to feed the world and the real place for this work is Charities and churches.. However, as long as we insist on providing food, medical supplies and expertise, etc. shouldn't that aid be contingent upon some kind of sustainability? Better yet reintroduce the native grains and teach them to farm instead of shipping wheat 10,000 miles. As far as how the birth rate would be limited we could provide norplants, sterilizations and education. But if you can't feed children 1 and 2 why are you having children 3 and 4?

This right here is the problem with getting involved. I in no way want to subsidize people's sex lives nor be forced to finance sterilizations. I don't want my money to bankroll contraception for American $#@!s; why would I want it for foreigners?

I understand you're looking for a real answer for your question, but for me the answer is there is no answer because it's the wrong question.

Actually, the real answer would be capitalism. Markets raise up the poor better than subsidy.

[PolWatch]

Large families are common in areas of rural poverty where they can reasonably expect the death of several children. Look at American history...while infant mortality was high, so were the birth rates. When infant mortality fell, the birth rates followed. When the number of living children has a direct effect on the prosperity of the family, they will continue to have many children.

[southwest88]

I like foreign aid. But it should only be used to our benefit. Not to those we give it to.

(My bold)

TMK, that's who benefits from our foreign aid. In fact, most of our aid is in the form of credits for grain, weapons, machinery, etc. Often (always?) physical goods have to be shipped in US merchantmen, benefitting our fleet operations. & the exports are typically of US goods, products, etc. So domestic policy has a lot to do with the aid that goes overseas - our dominance in the World weapons trade has to do with our propping up market share by sending out credits for US goods - even for Jeeps, Hummers, trucks, helicopters, aircraft, non-lethal aid & weapons.

Given our track record on a lot of our development efforts in the World, perhaps it's just as well that we don't put a lot of aid out there, in terms of percentage of GDP.

[Green Arrow]

If we're going to sit here and claim to be a global economy and a global order, then I think we need to stop $#@!ing around and get serious about it. Want to give out foreign aid? Fine, we'll give foreign aid, but the country we give that aid to is going to do every $#@!ing thing we tell them to do. If they don't, no foreign aid for them.

[PolWatch]

If we're going to sit here and claim to be a global economy and a global order, then I think we need to stop $#@!ing around and get serious about it. Want to give out foreign aid? Fine, we'll give foreign aid, but the country we give that aid to is going to do every $#@!ing thing we tell them to do. If they don't, no foreign aid for them.

I could go with that plan. If they want to tell us they have no control over the terrorist cells in their country...just tell 'em to call us when they handle their problem.

[donttread]

We are advancing vital interests of the United States. We are not playing wet nurse where we have nothing to gain.

Yes, but our interventions do more harm than good .

[Captain Obvious]

Sam Kinneson was right

[Peter1469]

Yes, but our interventions do more harm than good .

I agree that many of them are.

[donttread]

This right here is the problem with getting involved. I in no way want to subsidize people's sex lives nor be forced to finance sterilizations. I don't want my money to bankroll contraception for American $#@!s; why would I want it for foreigners?

I understand you're looking for a real answer for your question, but for me the answer is there is no answer because it's the wrong question.

Actually, the real answer would be capitalism. Markets raise up the poor better than subsidy.

The problem with the capitalism thing is that most of these places have already been raped and pillaged by the west and have no natural resources left capitalize . I do think a project to re introduce the native grains and insect farming might help though

[donttread]

If we're going to sit here and claim to be a global economy and a global order, then I think we need to stop $#@!ing around and get serious about it. Want to give out foreign aid? Fine, we'll give foreign aid, but the country we give that aid to is going to do every $#@!ing thing we tell them to do. If they don't, no foreign aid for them.

The problem with that is that governments sign over control for weapons, not food