The Ethics of International Aid

[2ndRateMind]

So, in my not so very humble opinion, international aid is a thoroughly good thing.

Not only are many in the developing nations absolutely poor (too poor to sustain their lives, and those of their families) and deserve succour on secular humanitarian grounds, let alone the expression of Christian love of neighbour, but if these poor were not so poor, they would have a reasonable chance of an economically productive life, and a chance to help grow the world economy, which means we all would get richer.

Fortunately, the UN agrees with me, and has set a target for 1st world nations to spend 0.7% of GDP on aid. I am proud to report that the UK, my country, has enshrined this target in legislation, so it would be illegal for any British government to spend less than this.

Here are a few disparate rankings:

Sweden spends over 0.95% of GDP on international aid. Germany spends around 0.41%. Australia spends 0.27%. The US spends 0.18%. Russia spends 0.08%.

So, my question to the forum is this; do such rankings of aid/GDP indicate a ranking of national morality? If not, why not?

Best wishes, 2RM.

[2ndRateMind]

Do you not think, then, that if these organisations and entities (not to mention private philanthropy) were sufficient to the task, that there would be no poor among us, and that government has a valid role to play in righting that wrongful deficit?

Best wishes, 2RM.

What wrongful deficit? Who is keeping the ledger and on what basis does that authorize a government to extort money from it's citizenry for the sake of giving it to people who are not only not citizens, but don't even live within that government's jurisdiction?

It is, of course, in the enlightened national self-interest that the whole world becomes stable, secure and prosperous. Only if it does can trade flourish to its fullest extent, enriching us all.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[bluethread]

What wrongful deficit? Who is keeping the ledger and on what basis does that authorize a government to extort money from it's citizenry for the sake of giving it to people who are not only not citizens, but don't even live within that government's jurisdiction?

It is, of course, in the enlightened national self-interest that the whole world becomes stable, secure and prosperous. Only if it does can trade flourish to its fullest extent, enriching us all.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Nice platitudes, but there is not evidence that redistributing goods does any of that, especially with regard to things beyond a countries jurisdiction.

[2ndRateMind]

What wrongful deficit? Who is keeping the ledger and on what basis does that authorize a government to extort money from it's citizenry for the sake of giving it to people who are not only not citizens, but don't even live within that government's jurisdiction?

It is, of course, in the enlightened national self-interest that the whole world becomes stable, secure and prosperous. Only if it does can trade flourish to its fullest extent, enriching us all.

Best wishes, 2RM.

Nice platitudes, but there is not evidence that redistributing goods does any of that, especially with regard to things beyond a countries jurisdiction.

OK, I would have thought this common sense, but if you insist I'll do some reading, and see if I can't dig out some evidence for you. So bear with me; I may be gone some time.

Best wishes, 2RM.