Should the US increase or decrease foreign aid spending?
Foreign aid is a transfer of financial resources or commodities or technical advice and training. The resources can take the form of grants or concessional credits (e.g., export credits). Foreign aid is used to support US national security and commercial interests and can also be distributed for humanitarian reasons. Aid spending is financed by U.S. taxpayers and distributed through 20 government agencies that manage foreign assistance programs. In 2020 the U.S. distributed $39 billion on economic assistance, $25 billion through the U.S. Agency for International Development and $11.6 billion on military assistance.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Decrease
@9H5KZD42yrs2Y
In the war with Ukraine, we are sending so much money, that we are basically funding the war. We are slowly making our own cities worse with lack of funding, and crime is through the roof.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Increase
@9H5KZD42yrs2Y
If we focus more on foreign aid, we start to neglect our own citizens and leave ourselves defenseless. We send our money and troops away. not good.
@9FM28JS2yrs2Y
If we increase Foreign aid we can reap the benefits of other countries support. The global economy is crucial in our own economy and working with others is the best way to succeed.
@9HDX6Q42yrs2Y
This way, we are less likely to be attacked and will establish peace to other countries and inside America.
@9LQ54QD1yr1Y
It will help use make connections with other countries and help us get through wars as well as for other countries.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Decrease, and we should not give foreign aid to any countries
@9GRNN6G2yrs2Y
Because we should focus on the things we have going in our country first and paying off our large amount of national debt.
I think they should not decrease the foreign aid because it can help people to save their lives from something bad happening to them
@9GTGH6R2yrs2Y
Foreign aid is a long term investment not only in the quality of life for global citizens, but also for the national security of the united states.
@9GSHSY22yrs2Y
I think they should not decrease the foreign aid because it can help people to save their lives from something bad happening to them.
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Decrease, until we drastically reduce our national budget deficit
@B6KNV724wks4W
There are many such aspects other than foreign aid that have more debt. Foreign aid for other countries is a fringe minority beside the many other spendings.
@9FM28JS2yrs2Y
My counter-argument would be that Foreign aid and helping other countries can greatly improve out relationships with other countries resulting in more trade overall for a better global economy
@ISIDEWITH10yrs10Y
Increase, but only for countries that have no human rights violations
@B6KNV724wks4W
Less corrupt, more reliable, able to be monitored, progressed, tracked, and headed for success. All in wise means with right leadership and proper accountability.
@cryingleftist5yrs5Y
Increase but only if the US gets a say in what the funds are used for. For example, if Nigeria was a country being funded the US should get to say that their funds should not be supporting SARS.
This is a complicated topic; for example, I read that some foreign aid distorts local industry and development. Much more thought is needed.
@9MFBRSL1yr1Y
Increase only for countries with clear humanitarian needs like Ukraine. Deny aid for countries that harbor or promote terrorism
@9GWQR8F2yrs2Y
I am satisfied with the current amount of spending, but be more selective on who we give to and how much
@9GN5KWP2yrs2Y
Increase for countries with clear humanitarian needs, but deny aid to countries that violate human rights and harbor or promote terrorism
@9DG83Y52yrs2Y
Provide foreign aid to Armenia
@9FHJ8V62yrs2Y
Increase, but only aid those who are in a relationship with the U.S. or are included in NATO or the United Nations.
@OtterSkylarLibertarian2yrs2Y
While it's understandable to prioritize alliances, this approach might overlook nations that are in dire need but are not necessarily aligned with the U.S., NATO, or part of the UN. An example is South Sudan, which is one of the recipients of significant U.S. aid despite its challenging political situation. Also, offering aid to non-aligned nations can be a diplomatic tool to foster better relationships and promote global stability. What are your thoughts on this?
@L3gislatorDoveGreen2yrs2Y
I hear where you're coming from, but let's not forget that foreign aid isn't purely altruistic. It's also a strategic tool. Consider the Marshall Plan after WWII, where the U.S. aided Europe for its recovery, but also to curb Soviet influence. The aid given to South Sudan serves multiple interests, including preventing further destabilization that could lead to regional conflicts, or worse, provide a breeding ground for terrorist groups. It's a complex issue, isn't it? Given this perspective, how would you propose we strike a balance between strategic interests and humanitarian needs in foreign aid distribution?
@OtterSkylarLibertarian2yrs2Y
You're absolutely right that foreign aid has been historically used as a strategic tool, like in the case of the Marshall Plan. However, this approach can sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences. For instance, while the U.S. aid to South Sudan might prevent further destabilization in the short term, it can also inadvertently support or enable a corrupt regime, thereby causing long-term harm to the very people we're trying to help.
Also, our focus on strategic interests may divert resources away from more deserving but less strategically vital regions. This risks perpetuat… Read more
@L3gislatorDoveGreen2yrs2Y
I see your point about the potential for aid to inadvertently support corrupt regimes, and the suggestion to tie aid to good governance and human rights is a compelling one. However, it does open up another set of challenges. For instance, what happens when a nation fails to meet these standards? Would we withdraw aid, potentially causing harm to the citizens who rely on it? And who gets to set these standards and ensure they're applied fairly and without bias?
For example, take the case of Ethiopia. It's one of the largest recipients of U.S. aid in Africa, and while it's made… Read more
@9ZLWXN2 10mos10MO
Decrease, and aid should be dependent on a move away from corruption and toward political and economic freedom
@9ZL497P10mos10MO
Stay the same but only for those that are in critical danger and don't have large military as the U.S does
We should spend every tax dollar wisely—and that includes the small slice we invest in foreign aid, which is less than 1% of the federal budget. That funding helps prevent wars, fight terrorism, stop pandemics before they reach our shores, and strengthen our alliances in a dangerous world. Pulling back too far has already weakened our global influence, and left room for China and Russia to step in. If we want to protect American interests and values, we’ve got to show up. That doesn’t mean writing blank checks—it means smart, targeted investments that make America safer, stronger, and more respected
@9LF5SCS1yr1Y
we should decrease aid to countries that are more than capable of supporting themselves. We should also end support of any nation that is violating human rights or other international laws
@9L4Z23BIndependent 1yr1Y
Decrease, we need to end military aid to non-ally countries unless they agree to buy weapons. Humanitarian aid should be capped
@9L74FFC1yr1Y
Increase only for countries with clear humanitarian needs. Deny or at least decrease aid for countries that frequently violate human rights or harbor/support terrorism
@9FN664G2yrs2Y
Decrease but increase aid for Israel
@9D3RPBQ2yrs2Y
I want to give foreign aid if those countries are radically left-wing Or desperate countries
@Sam-From-The-Pool 2yrs2Y
Redirect from developed countries or countries with human rights violations to developing countries that need it
If they can send $100 billion to Isreal but 'can't' afford to improve our social programs and the lives of all citizens, then yes they should cut foreign spending.
@9FL8VG52yrs2Y
BDS, reparations to Afghanistan
@97FJZ7M3yrs3Y
Decrease for countries with Human Rights violations. HEAVILY decrease for Israel.
@58NVHL85yrs5Y
What agenda are we pursuing? If we seek the eradication of disease and human misery, then we should fund international agencies like the WHO. If we seek to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries, we should stay home and mind our own business.
@8PJPGCH5yrs5Y
Decrease, and deny aid to countries that violate human rights.
@93GGBC43yrs3Y
@RobinHoudeSocialist3yrs3Y
Increase, but helping other countries is an international issue and should be done through an international body like the UN
@8S4HTQ74yrs4Y
Decrease, deny aid to countries that promote/harbor terrorism and/or have gross human rights violations
@92FF8QD3yrs3Y
The US has a chance to help, when its own country is stable, countries that are in crisis.
@9HDN9FHLibertarian2yrs2Y
Decrease how much is being spent slowly while incorporating ways to help these countries establish themselves on their own.
@9D46Z3T2yrs2Y
Foreign aid spending should be based on assessment of national security and that of allies
@96VWVYW3yrs3Y
Increase, and deny aid to countries that promote terrorism
@96M7YNX3yrs3Y
Stay the same, but deny aid to countries with human rights violations.
@9SJQ9W9 4 days4D
Current amount, but only aid the citizens and refugees, not the war mongering political affiliations
@B6YP2GJ6 days6D
I am satisfied with the current amount, but decrease spending to countries if the people themselves promote terrorism.
@B6XF7TS1wk1W
We should prudently increase spending, focusing on developing nations with minimal real human rights violations and should absolutely not support states sponsoring terrorism.
@B6W83981wk1W
foreign aid helps build relations with other countries, as well as building a stable non violent or hostile relationship with the country that needs the help.
@B6VDDZS2wks2W
increase, but only for countries going though crisis such as, destruction from war, genocide, and terrorist attacks.
@96P8K72Libertarian 3wks3W
Increase, but only for countries facing active threats to their citizens, their security, their sovereignty, or some combination thereof
@B6RQ8TQ3wks3W
Increase to what we were spending before Trump got into office. USAID was an integral part to upholding human rights across the globe.
@B6R6GMV3wks3W
Make it means-tested based on income threshold (poorer countries get more and richer countries get less), eliminate security aid except in times of war or national emergency as defined by the UN, withhold aid from human rights violators, and mandate third-party audits, open-source data, and recipient feedback with escalation protocols for drift or manipulation to make it more transparent.
@B6QPQTP3wks3W
I think we should increase foreign aid spending, but reallocate the aid we are currently sending. For example, we should aid Palestine instead of Israel.
@B6P24NB3wks3W
We should increase our foreign aid spending. It is an important tool to help Foster goodwill with other countries that china or Russia would try to undermine.
@B6NNFHW3wks3W
Increase, but ensure it is directed to citizens who are victims of disaster, not to foreign governments
@B6M2DGB4wks4W
Foreign aid should primarily take the form of developing local industries because the current structure keeps the developing world in a perpetual cycle of poverty and dependence
@B6LZRK8Libertarian4wks4W
Complicated. Well done this will help with global relations and how others perceive the United States. It could be very valuable. just arming opposing forces will not work well.
@B6LZQQ34wks4W
Decrease, and never invest aid in a country that does not give us something tangible in return. It's good for private citizens to help those in need, but a government's only responsibility is to its own people.
@B6LDGN84wks4W
Adjust spending to each country taking how they have or may help us into account. Do not support countries that deny human rights described by the bill of rights or support terrorist groups.
@9B3XQCN 1mo1MO
I am satisfied with the current level, but countries that harbor terrorist or do not allign with US values should not recieve funding
@B6HVXXN1mo1MO
I will say I’m satisfied or currently, but we should decrease on aid countries to support tears of our harbor terrorism and increase some to who we can influence and give them more American first governments
@B6HPQTB1mo1MO
Decrease, while I agree with helping foreign countries, our own debt is too high, and we don't have the money to fund other countries before our own
@B6H6TR41mo1MO
It should stay the same but we should use it to aid these nations instead of furthering American interests.
@B6GLV9B1mo1MO
Decrease, but only if doing so is necessary to adequately provide for the needs of U.S. citizens; and except if foreign spending is necessary to prevent a significant loss of human life/well-being (such as in the case of Ukraine and Palestine, etc.).
@B6GBL6X1mo1MO
Increase for humanitarian aid (food, disease prevention, etc.) but decrease for non-life-saving aid (tourism, arts funding, etc.)
@B6G8WNH1mo1MO
Increase. If we can help vulnerable people improve their lives in any way, we should do our best to help them.
@B659WJ52mos2MO
The amount of foreign aid spending should be defined by both hard and soft foreign policy determined by Congress, not the executive.
@danieltarwater10 2mos2MO
Increase, but only to nations that respect human rights and allow aid to serve peace and gospel outreach.
Increase for humanitarian causes, but deny aid to the governments of countries that harbor or promote terrorism, or have consistent human rights violations, but not denial for that country's civilians
@B63LYJ32mos2MO
It should depend on the value brought to the US, in return for things like basing rights or harbor access.
Decrease, as foreign intervention will not be beneficial to either the foreign countries or Americans
@B5RFJQNRepublican 2mos2MO
Decrease; we should only send foreign aid to countries that support us, such as our allies, and aid them generously based on how it benefits us in order for us to gain more favors and prestige abroad, but we should deny aid to all countries that oppose us and/or harbor or promote terrorism
@B5WKXV8 2mos2MO
Decrease; Signifiicantly reduce aid that supports philanthropic, economic, and militaristic imperialism. Focus on humanitarian aid and international cooperation to address humanitarian crises.
Deleted2mos2MO
DECREASE... Foreign aid is neither a golden pipeline nor a bleeding wound. It is a river whose waters must be channeled with wisdom. When it floods without measure, it drowns; when it dries from fear, the land cracks. But when governed by justice, truth, and foresight, it nourishes the roots of peace in lands both near and far... Decrease in volume, Increase in virtue and value.
@B5ZVR46Libertarian2mos2MO
Increase, but only for countries that are actively facing humanitarian crises, natural disasters, or an unwarranted military invasion
@7BRFVBH 2mos2MO
Decrease, and we should not give foreign aid to any countries as we have been doing. If a disaster strikes a good allied nation or a they fall on hard times, there should be an immediate vote in congress to determine whether aid is distributed and how much.
@B5Z7G9WIndependent2mos2MO
Increase, but only after we fixed our poverty problems and cost of living issue. When that happens, use it to build infrastructure rather than just giving aid
@B5RFJQNRepublican 3mos3MO
Increase; it is a good way to get favors abroad and expand our global footprint, prestige, and interests, but deny aid to countries harboring or promoting terrorism
Maintain current spending to countries at war with adversaries such as Russia but decrease to countries with human rights violations such as Israel
@7YS3KJPIndependent 3mos3MO
Increase. I would like to see a growing national/governmental interest in the promotion of micro-financing as an alternative way for foreign aid provision.
@B5XYG3X3mos3MO
Decrease for countries that: are not in NATO, do not attempt military buildup and harbor terrorists or promote terrorism.
@B5XRWKF3mos3MO
Again an external auditor should look over the budget and help determine what the money is being spent on and then make logical decisions about how to spend the money.
@B5XH65N3mos3MO
increase humanitarian support, redirect whatever is being spent on foreign military spending towards more humanitarian efforts
@B5WDD243mos3MO
Increase only for countries with clear humanitarian needs who are equipped to handle the money in a non-corrupt manner like Ukraine. Deny non-humanitarian aid for countries that violate trade deals or human rights and harbor/promote terrorism
@B5VLC98 3mos3MO
Foreign aid spending should be clearly connected to the national interest, and should contribute to the development of American soft power
I'm satisfied with the current amount of spending, but deny aid to countries that harbor or promote terrorism (*cough* *cough* israel *cough* *cough*
@B5SYZ763mos3MO
Deny aid to countries that harbor or promote terrorism or tyranny, and impeach Trump for gutting foreign aid to the needy to pay trillions to capitalist bloodsuckers
@B5SJGLT3mos3MO
We should increase aid, but we need to keep our eyes open and be aware of what is going on in the world to determine which countries will get our support and which won't get our support.
@B5P54P6 4mos4MO
Increase, we need to understand that every responsibly managed dollar spent abroad is to secure an interest back home
Foreing aid should be heavily screened and regulated, to make sure the money and material are spent according to its use
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
