Idealist Argument On Aid

Many countries around the world receive foreign aid from the United States and other developed countries every year in large sums. This money is dispersed throughout the receiving country, it is the hope of the United States that this will help to create development economically and politically as well as promote the belief of democracy in these countries. The aid is intended to enhance infrastructure within the country so local institutions will be able to create policies to enhance their country. However, this does not always occur in the countries that receive this aid. This is specifically not the case in countries in sub-Saharan Africa that have won their freedom from colonial powers in the last 50 years. The issue of foreign aid in Africa is a major debate that is taking place in the world today most likely because of the lack of developed democratic regimes that exist on the continent today, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Ever had that one friend? The one who tries to help, but no matter how hard he tries, he just aggravates the situation. This friend, Steve, insists he is helping, and those around, too, would support that he is indeed helping. But Steve is actually worsening the circumstances. He is like countries who provide foreign aid to less developed countries. Foreign aid, defined as “the international transfer of capital, goods, or services from a country or international organization for the benefit of the recipient country or its population,” can be military, economic, or humanitarian (“Foreign”). It is often granted to less developed countries in order to evoke government reforms or to stimulate economic growth. However, foreign aid neither elicits government reform, nor does it consistently and reliably stimulate economic growth; therefore, the United States should discontinue providing foreign economic aid.

On one side of the issue the supporters of developmental aid believe that the United States is doing more than a great job by offering economic assistance to countries that need help to develop. These individuals are aware of the unfortunate poverty levels in many countries abroad. They believe that it is the duty of the American people to help reduce the poverty levels in countries in which people live with less than a dollar a day. In fact, some supporters believe that the U.S. is not offering enough support to the poorer countries. Many have

The purpose of the response that supports foreign aid is to provide logical and even emotional reasoning as to why we should continue to give help to those nations that may not be as well-off as we are. In that, it is very effective, making out the role of the United States in the international playing field as a distinct

"Between 1945 and 1983 the U.S. gave away $321 billion in foreign assistance, concessional loans, military aid, and humanitarian assistance." (Cato Policy Report, 1991) The Clinton administration task force admitted that, "Despite decades of foreign assistance, most of Africa and parts of Latin America, Asia and the Middle East are economically worse off today than they were 20 years ago." (Conservative Chronicle, 1994) United States financial aid does not help the problem it stabilizes it until it's withdrawn.

Prior to doing the readings for this week, I did not know very much at all about foreign developmental aid. I only ever figured that foreign developmental aid was money that we provided to developing nations to help soothe poverty. After reading these articles, however, I now know that the intended goal of developmental aid is to alleviate poverty in the long-term, rather than as a short-term response. I also saw developmental aid as purely humanitarian, and never paused to consider that consequences of such aid, nor the possibility of the aid failing.

This dilemma raises questions regarding the motivations and beliefs behind public attitudes towards foreign aid.

Now yes, foreign aid may have a positive impact on the lives of people in third world countries, but does that really matter? I know that is a bit of a naive comment, but it is a serious one none the less. Personally, what concerns me most is not dollars spent, but outcomes achieved. Foreign aid “unquestionably saves lives,” but it also strengthens

4.3. Figure D: It is stated in the article that aid has demonstrated to be have a positive impact on development and economical growth specifically when it is targeted towards a specific objective of the country. For example aid being used towards eradicating certain illnesses. Though, when aid is presented objectively and in large substantial amounts, the overall growth of the country appears to decline. Basically, they explain that aid only works to a certain extent, and there are other solutions that also need to be implemented. The scenario presented for this was Sub-Sahara Africa’s declining

Scholars on the other side of the argument, who believe current methods of foreign aid are still

The article begins by claiming that whilst the donors receive good wages with the current aid system, and the recipients are wise in how to continue to receive sympathy and attention, some of those on the inside, and even those with little knowledge, are beginning to sense that aid has only produced paltry results in the last half-century. Gerhardt claims that the West has assumed too much

Foreign aid is offered for many purposes and ways and the dilemma of aid is not whether aid works or not, but how and when varied instrument can be made to work better in different country circumstances (Hansen and Tarp 2000, pp. 19-20). Another study conducted by Minoiu and Reddy argues that aid matters for economical growth and it can contribute significantly, but only specific kinds of aid have clear cut impact on growth and only in a long term. Overall, foreign aid has a significant effect in those cases when it ranks high in the aid quality index while geopolitical aid has been found with zero or negative effect on

The aid literature has long been accused of being Northern/ Euro centric in its focus. This accusation still stands today. There have nonetheless been important contributions to the aid debate from African scholars. There have been some general studies on the responses of aid recipients to northern ODA (Berthelemy 2005; Moon et al. 2010). As there are essentially Eurocentric studies in the literature to aid, there is a need to consider the literature on African perspectives. Some reflections on how Africans perceive aid can of course be gleaned from the critical works of scholars such as Rodney (1972) who speaks in favour of Africa and denigrates northern aid which according to him underdevelops the latter. Fanon (1994) claims that empowerment is vital for Africans to be entirely free. More recent Africa scholars include Ake (1996) who argues that African development policies should be done from within and not from without. In the same vein in her dead aid study, Moyo (2009) explains why aid is not working in Africa, while putting forward some solutions.

Every year, donors from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) give billions of dollars in foreign aid, with the United States contributing a large percentage of this sum (Eischen 2012) (Figure A). However, the amount and way in which this money is handled has given rise to heavy criticism. Books such as Dambisa Moya’s Dead Aid: Why Aid is Not Working and How There is a Better Way For Africa and the innumerable news articles lamenting the state of the corrupt bureaucracies of receiving countries not only discuss the inefficiencies of foreign aid but also accuse these programs of being harmful (Ayodele et al. 2005). One such article claimed that, due to inefficiencies and corruption, at least

Proponents of aid believe that it is because aid that the country has been able to maintain a high growth rate despite low savings (Qureshi 1968). On the other hand opponents believe that aid has no significant impact on either growth or development (Boone 1996).