It removes surplus food products from the supply and helps maintain a strong selling price for farmers, we give the food to countries who can't afford it so it doesn't affect existing demand, it is also good for public image
2007-01-31 11:39:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
perhaps you do no longer understand the term catastrophe. If everyone seems to be waiting for something that could circulate incorrect, this isn't any longer a catastrophe, that's an inconvenience. Katrina does no longer have been as undesirable if the Louisiana nationwide guard hadn't been in Iraq. It grew to become right into a catastrophe. The wealthiest united states on earth botched it. We had the climate. We did no longer have the knowledgeable people waiting via fact of judgements made by skill of folk we envisioned to do their jobs. alleviation must be well timed with a view to save lives. It wasn't. Is California waiting for a 9.0 earthquake? no longer even close. Will there be one? Oh yeah!
2016-09-28 06:18:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by truesdale 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because most rational people in the US (getting fewer all the time) realize that the citizens of a country, even a country that we are not on friendly terms with, are filled with people that do not really know who we are. They are subject to even more warped media that we are force fed and America is full of generous and kind people. It always amazes and saddens me when I read on here how many kids (I know they are young folks by the lack of even basic knowledge they have) hate the USA; they truly have no idea how lucky they are and who to thank for their freedom.
2007-01-31 11:30:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
People are more important than governments. It can also be used as a good political tool further down the line. The only problem I have with it is when those same corrupt governments use that money to buy weapons or to spruce up their own palaces, toys, etc. And when you give them aid instead of money, sometimes they steal it and use it as leverage over their people's heads.
2007-01-31 11:29:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by zzzzzzzzz27 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
eh....to promote goodwill. The people of Russia weren't responsible for what their leaders were doing, any more than I'm responsible for what GW Bush does. Remember: The Russians were one of the largest consumers of American grain. They BOUGHT that grain, and it supported American farmers. Actually, Americans don't give anywhere near the amount of aid that we think we do. We're wayyyyy down the list (Denmark spends the most per capita), and even with that aid, most of it is in the form of military aid to Egypt and Israel.
2007-01-31 16:47:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kal H 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that we don't know everything about what other country's do or don't do for us. Even thou we may in general don't like some country's. It's like trying to get a divorce but you have 40 kids with that person. There is going to be support. And there is two sides of every story. Best not to worry or watch the news, your just going to trouble yourself. Learn to love life as it is.
2007-01-31 11:31:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Tiger Crane Master 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
to keep a hold on local issues? espionage? dumping ground for excess? I mean, it's all politically motivated. It isn't charity by a long shot- never was, never will be. During the cold war, Russia would give aid to it's communist allies on the African continent too.
2007-01-31 11:28:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
When my daughter was two she made me the most delicious pot of imaginary stew ever made. I enjoyed it so much. But as I got to the bottom of the pot underneath the imaginary gravy and carrots and peas and potatoes I noticed the words embossed in the plastic pot "This is a Toy, DO NOT USE ON ELECTRIC OR GAS RANGE" I knew then that we had become a nation of IDIOTS. That is why we continue to give aid.
2007-01-31 11:29:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by pretender59321 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Who says we want them dead? Sure our governments were at odds, but that doesnt apply to the human beings those governments serve...or dis-serve for that matter. I hate to tell you, but by your reasoning most of the rest of the world wants us dead.
2007-01-31 11:32:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Chris J 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
haha good question, we really shouldnt. and im not trying to sound way harsh, but why do we give so much money and aid to places that are (and i know this probably sounds mean) beyond hope? take africa for example, most of the population has HIV or AIDS, cannot be cured, dont believe in aids and therefore disregard the concept of safe sex, and where there has been an ongoing famine and civil wars for GOD only knows how long? i mean really, africa is just beyond hope, sad but true. and many dont appreciate american and other foreign aid. im sure other places are the same.
2007-01-31 11:28:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋