Is an increase in Aid to developing countries the answer to erasing extreme poverty?

Question

Or the answer lies in the citizens of those countries? So many people in the news are advocating an increase in Aid to poor countries. Aid has been delivered in countries but evidence shows(especially in Africa) that it is really not making a dent. What do you think could be an alternative, and how do you think the world can eradicate extreme poverty ,if it can be eradicated.

Answer 1

An alternative would be to let people sort themselves out or show them how to sort themselves out. Use words instead of money. Teach the people how to think for themselves and let them decide if they want to stage a rebellion against their dictators (the ones that fraudulently receive much of that foreign aid money). Teach them also that having eight children might not be the answer to their problems. Africa has many natural resources and could be economically viable if it were not for it being separated piece-by-piece into dozens of dictatorships (there are exceptions of course). People let themselves get pushed around by their governments far too much and too often their solution to the problem is to immigrate to another society. There comes a point when people must stand up for themeselves and for their families. What Africa really needs is a good injection of courage. Also, more realistically, it is much more effective to send food to Africa than it is to send money. At least you know the food is more likely to help the people you intend it to.

Answer 2

Over the past few decades aid to Africa has increased yet the situation is undoubtedly worse. There are many factors at play here: Drought, famine, tribal warfare, brutal dictators and warlords, the AIDS epidemic, Muslim-perpetrated genocide, etc.
With these factors, doubling or even tripling the aid would be like pouring water on the ground. Much of the aid never gets to the people who need it most.

Unless the Africans themselves can find a way to stabilize basic government, this tragedy will continue for many more decades.

Answer 3

No. Aid cannot help the people because of the mounting corruption within African governments. People cannot do much either because without the government has built such dangerous armies (who depend on government corruption) that revolution is easily quelled. The fact is that poverty cannot go away, as it is a requirement in capitalism (someone always has to be "on top"), and the debt that has been created by money hungry European nations can only grow in time. Africa, sadly, is now lost in a sea of crises, and recovery is a doubt. But we live in an interesting age. Many of the more devious and depised leaders are near death. Perhaps the people will revolt effectively after his death a la Romania.

Answer 4

The pill has been invented how long ago, why is this not used as a birth control method, over there. Wouldn't that be part of aiding the struggling population somewhat rather than bringing further children into the unwanted state of hunger and desease. Would there not be more benefit to enhancing the people's cultures and talents to share with the rest of the world, by building work shops, medical facilities, etc...why hinder the people from growth. Does the government not want to see future for them. I think it is poor management here, I could be wrong, but that's my opinion.

Answer 5

Increase in aid wouldn't help at all, because it's the governments of that country that decides what to do with the money and they could very well just put it to waste and use it for their own selfish reasons. So they'll need someone not corrupt handling the money.
Those advocators are nothing but hippies who don't realize what's really wrong.

Answer 6

If you were hungry today and understood that if you were given something to eat now but it would be gone in an hour what would you do? If you were given everything you needed to successfully create your own food and prosper for the rest of your life, what would you do? Our government gives AID to other countries not to feed them for long periods of times but to keep us in good standing with them until the next time they want or need something. The immediate aid given is nothing more than a band-aid for the problem and our government knows this. But they also realize that if they were to give poor countries what they truly wanted and needed they would eventually not need open communication with richer countries. What would you do? I understand this answer is simplistic, at best, but truth always is! It's the action of the truth that is so difficult to stomach!!

Answer 7

not at all.

If I had the money, I would go to these countries and start companies where the people could work in a decent environment and make good wages. THen I would teach them how to build homes and buildings. Then I would hep them develop stores and help them establish themselves and begin to prosper. I would also teach them how to clean up the environment and teach them agriculture.

I am talking about the countries where people walk around dirt streets, try to fish from polluted waters, and so on....

As the saying goes, give a man a fish and he eats today, teach him to fish and you feed him for life.

Answer 8

There is so much corruption and civil war in these countries that money will not make a difference. After all ther is enough food to feed everyone on the planet, but there is no porfit in feeding everyone on the planet.

Answer 9

The best aid that any 3rd world country can get and use are not handouts.......but training......how cope....with life changes......Free medical care I see, but not monies....it never get to the the people who need it.......

Answer 10

if they can be taught to do things for themselves like farm the land by giving aid it will help