Sometimes I wonder why we're ok with calling welfare welfare, corporate welfare welfare, but foreign welfare is called "aid".

Given this and this, I'm curious to know what y'all would cut.

I know these numbers are a few years old, but let's say we were at 2009 levels. What would you cut and why?

The .pdf lists each country, and the other link allows you to get details on a country or welfare program.

And why does Israel need so much damn welfare???

I am for an entire stoppage of all aid/welfare to countries, corporation (both those who are and aren't people ), and personal welfare.

That was easy...

another ancap thread hijack...

I agree. it is easy, but why is something that is so easy for us, so apparently so difficult for elected officials. Someone has to agree with this chart...

There should be a different approach to military 'aid' as opposed to development aid. I'm not going to agree to zeroise all kinds of assistance - I do question why so much money to countries that should be able to afford their own defence. Of course a lot of that goes into American arms companies...

There you go, Guapo. Asked and answered...

Guapo wrote:Someone has to agree with this chart...

No one has to agree with that chart because it includes both military and development aid. You'll have the hawks and corrupt politicians who want to push for more military "aid", and others who are in favour of more effective development aid, but you'll rarely find someone who is in favour of both.

Targeted, effective development aid can have benefits for the donor country. It creates the development of improved economies and thereby creates more markets for the donor country's already advanced economy to take advantage of. Development aid doesn't have to be a game of just throwing money out there without the intention of getting a return.

Case in point, micro-loans have proven to be a great kickstarter for local economies in developing countries. A relatively small investment of capital can start up hundreds of small businesses and result in a return on investment when those loans are repaid, not to mention a growth in the target market's economy.

Another easy example is building a well. If you're spending 4 hours a day walking too and from the "local" water source, and perhaps another 1-2 hours purifying that water throughout the day, that's 6 hours of manpower being lost. Building a well gives ~5 of those hours back to other industries within the local economy.

Unfortunately, development aid has become a game of big numbers and empty-hearted protests about how that aid is spent. Which country can claim to have sent the most aid? Which is promptly followed by people saying that we need to have effective aid without actually knowing what to do about it.

And the result is ammunition being given to those who complain about development aid.