Should America help struggling countries?

[hafelife]

so I'm having a debate and i need bolth side of this question because i don't know what side I'm going to be on when i get there so hear it is

"In regards to American foreign investment, should America help out struggling countries in debt ?"

i need a pro and con side so please post your opinion tell me if we should or shouldn't

[Sullyman2007]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Edited

Personally, I do believe America should help out struggling countries with debt because it would help strengthen our diplomatic relationship with that country. A con to this however, would be that helping foreign countries with debt TO much makes them rely on us to heavily, if that makes any sense. What I'm saying is, if we help them to much, they will expect us to be there for all their other problems as well.
We should help out other countries, but to an extent. They should learn, with our help, to take care of themselves.

[devonin]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Mod Talking: This is an interesting subject, so I'm not going to close the thread off the top, but for future thread making reference, posting just a question and a request for opinions isn't really a CT quality thread. Try to have a little bit more on your end beforehand, since this reeks of "I have a school assignment and don't want to research"

Devonin talking: I think fundamentally, you can't be one of the wealthiest nations in the world and -not- be helping out the poorer nations. It would be really keen if more of their foreign aid wasn't military aid, and it would be really keen if they came a little closer to the suggested percentage of their GDP the UN reccomends first world nations be giving in foreign aid.

I think it is perhaps telling that Japan is now the global leader in giving foreign aid, at the same time that the Euro is on the way up, the US dollar is on the way down, and China is slowly but inexorably entering the first world as a strong economic power.

Perhaps more pragmatically, the US should continue giving aid if just to help deal with their terrible international reputation. If right now, with general international opinion the the US at nearly its worst ever, if not actually its worst ever, suddenly cutting off foreign aid is apt to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

I suspect that if the US decided to just cut off all of its foreign aid, a suitable response from the international community would be insisting that the United States repay all of -its- foreign debt. And since the US foreign debt currently stands at somewhere about 10 trillion dollars, they would be forced to either renege, or basically go bankrupt. I doubt there's much that could result from that except Fortress America versus the World, because they certainly couldn't repay all they owe.

What would really be nice in terms of the global economy would be more debt forgiveness, though I'm quite positive that Kilroy_X will turn up and give us all a much needed and helpful economic discussion.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Do you mean our government? I think our government should think about how it invests money like any investor would. (It should spend money differently). It needs to be handled on a country by country basis, looking at pros and cons.

Private citizens can invest however they want to. Arguably there is some sort of moral imperative to allocate resources where they result in most utility gain (a glass of water means more to a person dying of dehydration, for example).

I don't have an opinion one way or the other on debt forgiveness. If it's obvious that someone is incapable of paying a debt without cutting spending on vital resources, and it doesn't hurt you to forgive the debt, you probably should. Even if it does hurt you to forgive the debt you probably should. I think it's very rare that it ever gets to that point though.

[Sullyman2007]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Should the citizens of the United States have to help foreign countries with debt relief? The good people who pay tax money? The ones who essentially keep this country alive? We pay the government, then we also have to pay to help other nations? No, I don't think thats the peoples responsibility, but what I would like to see happen is some of that hard earned tax money go toward some sort of national relief fund.

[hafelife]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Mod Talking: This is an interesting subject, so I'm not going to close the thread off the top, but for future thread making reference, posting just a question and a request for opinions isn't really a CT quality thread. Try to have a little bit more on your end beforehand, since this reeks of "I have a school assignment and don't want to research"

Devonin talking: I think fundamentally, you can't be one of the wealthiest nations in the world and -not- be helping out the poorer nations. It would be really keen if more of their foreign aid wasn't military aid, and it would be really keen if they came a little closer to the suggested percentage of their GDP the UN reccomends first world nations be giving in foreign aid.

I think it is perhaps telling that Japan is now the global leader in giving foreign aid, at the same time that the Euro is on the way up, the US dollar is on the way down, and China is slowly but inexorably entering the first world as a strong economic power.

Perhaps more pragmatically, the US should continue giving aid if just to help deal with their terrible international reputation. If right now, with general international opinion the the US at nearly its worst ever, if not actually its worst ever, suddenly cutting off foreign aid is apt to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

I suspect that if the US decided to just cut off all of its foreign aid, a suitable response from the international community would be insisting that the United States repay all of -its- foreign debt. And since the US foreign debt currently stands at somewhere about 10 trillion dollars, they would be forced to either renege, or basically go bankrupt. I doubt there's much that could result from that except Fortress America versus the World, because they certainly couldn't repay all they owe.

What would really be nice in terms of the global economy would be more debt forgiveness, though I'm quite positive that Kilroy_X will turn up and give us all a much needed and helpful economic discussion.

sorry it not that i have a project to do it just i have a debate convention and this is the prompt so i thought it would be better to get real options then blind facts that i put together but i well heed your warning

[ogmsband]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

I would say help them but I think that we are in enough debt as it is. Or so I have heard.

[devonin]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

PROPER SPELLING, PUNCTUATION, AND GRAMMAR ARE MANDATORY ON THE ENTIRE FORUM. THIS IS NOWHERE MORE TRUE THAN IN CRITICAL THINKING.

Seriously, run your posts through a word processor's spellcheck if you have to.

[Relambrien]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

This is one subject which I've always been on the fence about.

There are several reasons or incentives for America to give copious amounts of foreign aid, such as the wealth of the country and the image that the county -wants- to have (promotion of democracy, peace, humanity, etc).

However, there are also reasons to withhold money from foreign aid. The obvious one is the national debt, which as devonin pointed out, is in the trillions of dollars. With America so deep into the red, can we really afford to be spending money on countries other than our own? Of course, the problem if America stops is that the country's international reputation suffers even further.

So my opinion is basically this: America should give as much foreign aid as it can without ruining its economy. With the national debt so high, any use of money for non-domestic purposes is risky, yet in order to keep the world from hating it even more than it already does, giving foreign aid is necessary. The country needs to be intelligent about where its money goes.

One thing I'm particularly interested in, relating to this subject, is actually what will happen in Iraq after the inauguration of the new president (whoever it may be). In the event that a rapid pullout of troops occurs, just how much money would that save America, and what sort of relief would the economy see, if any? But that's more on the general topic of the American economy, and this thread isn't really for that. I may make another thread about it later.

[Sullyman2007]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

One thing I'm particularly interested in, relating to this subject, is actually what will happen in Iraq after the inauguration of the new president (whoever it may be). In the event that a rapid pullout of troops occurs, just how much money would that save America, and what sort of relief would the economy see, if any? But that's more on the general topic of the American economy, and this thread isn't really for that. I may make another thread about it later.

I wouldn't count on there being a "rapid pullout of toops" any time soon, if at all. There will always be troops in Iraq now, for ever. Just as there are still troops in Vietnam, Guam, Japan, Germany, and all those other places.
I also don't think, even if it did happen, that it would have any effect on the economy.

[Relambrien]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

I didn't say "rapid and complete pullout," just "rapid pullout." By that I meant a significant decrease in the number of soldiers over a relatively short amount of time. Such a thing would cut military expenses by quite a bit, and I'm wondering if that part of the budget would be allocated to something that has a noticeable effect on the economy.

[Sullyman2007]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

I didn't say "rapid and complete pullout," just "rapid pullout." By that I meant a significant decrease in the number of soldiers over a relatively short amount of time. Such a thing would cut military expenses by quite a bit, and I'm wondering if that part of the budget would be allocated to something that has a noticeable effect on the economy.

I still don't think so because even if a significant percentage was cut over time, the effects probably wouldn't be noticable. It would have an effect, but probably a very small one. Actually, consider some of the negative effects. Boeing, a lead supplier of the US Air Force would suffer dramatic losses in the event of a mass pullout. Even if it was gradual, the effects would still be long term.

[hsb969acidtears]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

We are to far in debt ourselves to keep worrying about other countries right now. If we keep going the way we are, we're just going to be a barren gas drilled out land with no money because we owe trillions of dollars to other countries. First we need to help ourselves out.

[devonin]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

But my original point stands. If you start ignoring other countries, then the ones you owe ten trillion dollars to might decide to ask for their money back.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: should we help struggling countrys in debt

Should tax payer money be given away to other nations? Absolutely not. I don't think any tax payer money should leave the country. Not when 36.5 million US citizens are living in poverty. Not when 47 million American citizens don't have healthcare.