Do you think there is a different or better way to handle this situation? If you think there is a better way, what is it?
America is in debt, that's a known fact, yet billions of dollars are sent over seas every year to help people in poor countries. I'm not against helping people in other countries, I believe they need help and a better life too, but if we are going to go farther into debt, shouldn't we start here at home first and make sure all of our people are taken care of first, then help take care of the other countries? I know we have homeless shelters and welfare but is that really enough? Is there more we could do to help our own people?
2007-01-03 15:25:51 · 12 answers · asked by T.K. 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I think the first thing that needs to be established is to decide if the US is to be capitalistic or socialistic or some blending of each and to what degree.
What the US has done since the 50's is buy friendship, which doesn't work because another country may be able to overprice our bid. Instead of shipping food and money to despots and hope it reaches the people as intended, the US needs to expand the Peace Corps to teach others how to do for themselves as in growing food, creating buildings, bridges, health care, etc.
The idea is that giving a man a fish feeds him for a day; teaching him HOW to fish feeds him from now on.
This would employ many unemployed US citizens and assist in helping other countries citizens in being more productive in their own specific civilization, whatever that is, but it must be done without trying to remake them into OUR vision of propriety.
2007-01-04 03:30:38 · answer #1 · answered by Phil #3 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your damn straight!!
Social welfare should outway corporate welfare all day long. There is nothing wrong with helping out the poor abroad either, but that enables their population to grow and the globalists in charge now want exactly the opposite. An informed society is a dangerous society to those at the top. Every since Vietnam ended the Republicans (mostly) have been on a campaign to defund our educational system and keep the middle-class at the status quo or worse. You can look at every major piece of legislation passed under Bush and not find one middle-class benefitor--it's sickening, it's all part of the Grand Scheme to eliminate opposition to some kind of World Order and be thankful that those of us in the know voted in Nov. to put the kabash on it.
2007-01-03 23:57:57 · answer #2 · answered by scottyurb 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Poverty is a necessity for the functioning of capitalism, as it is a product of capitalism. For good or bad, we are a capitalistic society. As long as we are that, we can not and should not eliminate poverty in our country.
That said, we also have the socialistic activity such as Medicaid, Social security, and other gov subsidies for poor. Which is OK to ensure the people are not dieing of hunger.
As far as helping other countries, there is nothing wrong with it. It is the cheapest investment in building customers, friends, security, and democracies. All other forms of doing this, including wars, will cost a lot more.
2007-01-04 00:04:59 · answer #3 · answered by K2 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Giving charity to other countries is about 2% of our GNP. Not that much %wise. As far as helping others in a Capitalistic society, we will always have street people and homeless. Its the Capitalistic way. Why does one finish Graduate school and the next guy finish only High School. We have that choice in our great Country.
2007-01-03 23:44:15 · answer #4 · answered by HairyBack 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think our own people need to learn how to help themselves. They have all the resources to do that in America, if they only want to. Homeless shelters and welfare are not the answer. But in other nations, the people are beyond any primitive poverty we could imagine, and have no way to rise above it. $1.00 would feed a whole family....here it's not even enough to buy a coke.
2007-01-03 23:29:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are assuming that debt is a horrible, deadly condition. In reality, some debt is good for America.
The use of money to buy friends in other countries and to assist them is not necessarily bad. If we cut it off and ignored them, then those who may do them harm will step in and influence them. Which is better?
2007-01-03 23:33:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes I for one think society can begin to be more generous and compassionate towards the homeless and that will change to the point that there are no more homeless families...the whole population has to be more less judgemental and only then will u start seeing the difference.
2007-01-03 23:30:11 · answer #7 · answered by angie angelbody 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I agree totaly, we need to start taking better care of our own before we worry about everyone else. I have been complaining about this for years. I guess it is better politics to ignore our own starving, homeless, poverty stricken people.
2007-01-03 23:36:56 · answer #8 · answered by kittycat lover 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
America is as they say the land of opportunity, whereas other countries are not so fortunate. Some countries cannot help themselves, but American citizens could if they wanted to.
2007-01-03 23:34:43 · answer #9 · answered by Veridian 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
We don't need to stop the international aid. Just divert the $350 billion that Bush owes us for the Iraq invasion and occupation. Whatever you can't squeeze out of him, get from Halliburton and Cheney.
2007-01-03 23:29:24 · answer #10 · answered by Joe D 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋