Does America really need to support the relief effort in Haiti? Have we ever been as generous to...
other countries disasters?
Whoa. Yes, we have. We have been overly generous to many failing economies and oppressive regimes for a very long time. And yes we do need to support Haiti now. What we should have done is pulled their aid years ago so they could develop on their own or used it ourselves to build roads and infrastructure over there. The Dominican Republic is on the other side of the same island and it is thriving without our aid. We don't prop up their government, they have their own exports, and enjoy a higher quality of life. Haitians could be doing the exact same thing had it not been for the aid we made them dependent on.
Regardless of all that, they need help now. We help.
I was talking more about the aide we supply during disasters, for example,although many celebs donated for the tusami(sp?), the government gave limited help & America itself is in economic ruins, is it smart to fork over billions of dollars when even companies such as Wal-Mart are starting to go under?
Christopher gave an interesting answer. First, he stated that our aid is largely responsible for the problems in Haiti (to which I agree). Then he said we should give more aid. (Yes, I know. Their problem this time was a natural disaster. But still...)
I think the bigger question here (and what I think VampKisses is sort of leading to) is:
While we're seeing more pleas for help for Haiti, and more ways to donate money, than for any prior disaster, shouldn't we donate the same amount of effort, advertising space, and energy to solving OUR OWN problems? What if Michelle Obama made commercials to help the soup kitchens across America? What if we saw plastered over the entire football stadiums and during every third playoff commercial a plea with a simple "Text TEACHER" option to donate $10 to a teacher's salary fund?
We spent millions upon millions to hopefully raise millions for Haiti. I think we should spend millions upon millions to strengthen the United States, thus making it easier to for disaster relief in the future.
mintinfo -says -
All aid is economic driven. In the past the banks gave aid in return for economic control of developing countries (IMF). It is a process that maybe beyond the understanding of the average person. Money is given out but in return American corporations are paid by that same money to aid in development.
The aid being given now by ordinary citizens is mostly through peoples good will but it is filtered through aid organizations which means Americans are being put to work one way or another. Materials are bought with that money which boosts manufacturing, etc. Imagine the scale of re-development that will take place. The money will return right back into US banks The bottom line is any kind of war and disaster is good for the economy.
My response --
There is a book out written by a man from the east coast titled "The confessions of an economic hitman". He says he was part of a scheme to take control of third world countries through the lending of money from the I.M.F. to these contries to build infrastuctures such as dams to provide power,and roads.However,they Inflated the numbers concerning those countries ability to be able to payback those loans on purpose,in order to use that as leverage in forcing those countries into giving up their countries natural resources,and land ,to The I.M.F.In fact the money that was lent to those countries was used to employ the services of the very people who had a vested interest in getting the money those loans provided.The company this economic hitman worked for claimed to be a construction company,when in fact they didn't even own any construction equipment.They simply outsourced the work to American construction companies,with whom they were working.He admits that he was instrumental in setting up these countries in conjuction with the full knowledge and consent of the I.M.F.in order to gain some economic control over them.The projects they worked on helped only a few of the wealthy rulers and their friends,and caused many poor native people to lose their homes due to dam construction and the like.They weren't trying to help these people ,they were only interested in helping themselves.They are just using money instead of bullets to subjugate these people.If,that doesn't work,then they use the bullets.On,their leader,who doesn't want to coperate.Like they tried to do with fidel Castro in Cuba.
John Perkins confessions of an economic hitman
if the relief is going to the needy yes. but it has been a consistant thing in countries like haiti where the dictator gets the money and lives well(better than ross perot) and the masses get the shaft.we should not send cash but hand deliver goods and equipment to those in need.
America is very generous throughout many parts of the world. If you'll look back into our recent history even, during the Clinton administration we basically used our military forces as humanitarian forces rather than military ones. I know you are speaking mainly in terms of disasters. I think our aid goes beyond that, but even in 2006 we spent over $3 billion helping out other countries. There was Sri Lanka of course as well.
I think it is important to be compassionate as a people. I also think its good for the USA brand, if you will. Too often we get noted for our military efforts and not our humanitarian ones.
I think its worth every penny.
VampKisses you may want to check your sources. During the Tsunami America gave 950 million dollars (Government Money) The amount earmarked for Haiti has been 365 million dollars.
A statement from your previous President
"I will seek $950 million as part of the supplemental appropriations request to support the areas recovering from the tsunami and to cover the costs of relief efforts to date. This amount includes an additional $600 million above my initial commitment of $350 million. We will use these resources to provide assistance and to work with the affected nations on rebuilding vital infrastructure that re-energizes economies and strengthens societies."
First of all, the quake in Haiti is one of the worst natural disasters in quite some time. Although i do agree that our government should come to the aide of other countries more. but at the same time, our government doesn't do a very good job meeting the needs of our own people, but that is due to poor resource management.
950 million could go along way here America need help getting homeless off the street and stoping foreclosure Helping fellow man is good but not when your own country suffers. You dont have to always send financial aid There are other ways to help
by Stephen J Lawson 3 years ago
Poor people are black, black people are poor. Why does America believe this?
by Scott Belford 2 years ago
In both the Federalist Papers AND the Constitutional Convention, it is extremely clear the distaste most of those involved in creating today's America had for democracy, which they saw as mob rule which allows "emotion" rather than "reason" to drive important decisions.Friday's...
by Casey Coulter 7 years ago
Does America have the ability to overthrow our own government in a peaceful manner?With our Country not fairing so well and pretty much heading in a direction that is not the best. Is it crazy to think maybe we could take our country back and turn it back into what it used to be. Or even try to...
by Jack Lee 18 months ago
Do you agree or disagree?The American people support the wall yet Congress, especially Democrats are against it.The democrats on the other hand has threaten to shut down the government if funding for Planned Parenthood is taken away...
by Credence2 12 months ago
Sorry, folks, the content here is rated PG.http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-sh … ies-2018-1So, this is what he thinks of Africans and residents of the Caribbean? And all these conservatives are telling me that he does not have "racial issues"?Why doesn't this man put a muzzle...
by AdsenseStrategies 9 years ago
There is much controversy, even within the non-developed world, as to whether aid helps or not.Western nations promised to give (a tiny) 0.7 percent of their GDP's to aid a number of years ago, but only a couple actually do that.If aid could be properly monitored, so it does not end up in the wrong...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|