The Instigator
aomirbekov
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Juris
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Foreign Aid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Juris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/26/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,755 times Debate No: 38147
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

aomirbekov

Con

From my perspective the United States of America and European Union should stop giving foreing aid to the developing states, because negative consequences of such help outwieght positive ones. Most of the foreing aid given by Developed States are missused by the government of develeping states. Over 1 trillion dollars has been given to Africa over the last 60 years, however there are no real results to show improvement. Presidents, Dictators use those money in their own interests. One of the best examples of this is Mobutu, who is famous for leasing Concorde to fly his daughter to her wedding in the Ivory Coast shortly after negotiating a lucrative aid deal with Ronald Regan in the 1980s. Furthermore, foreign aid causes conflicts such us civil war to get access to unlimited aid. Moreover, limitations created by foreign aid harm states. For instance: aid reduces savings and investments or aid can be inflationary. Finally, foreign aid leads to aid dependency which of course negatively affects Africa. Aid dependency makes African people lazy; it leads to lower tax revenues because revenue is already coming from foreign donors. It also makes Africa dependent on foreign donors which give them some control over Africa.
Juris

Pro

President Ronald Reagan said about U.S. international engagement, “We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent.”

Foreign Aid is important
Reasons:
1. To augment economic development of the recipient country.

Bangladesh and India where foreign aid appears to have played an important role in the development process. For instance, 100 percent of Bangladesh’s development budget depends on aid which has made a significant contribution to the reconstruction of its economy. In India, foreign aid has financed over 8 percent of the domestic investments and about 15 percent of imports.


2. To establish better ties with other countries.


A country like United States will develop strong relationship with other countries because of foreign aid. This would widen the strategic advantage of the US as so far as other countries are concerned. Similarly, as relationship improves, the US may demand that the recipient countries will make purchases only in US, which subsequently would benefit our economy.

3. To give aid for humanitarian grounds

It is everyone’s nature, whether a country or a person, to help people affected by natural calamities. As economically advantaged country, US should support the people of other countries when they are hit by natural disaster because their own government alone cannot do it. In fact, It might come as a surprise to learn that less than one percent of the U.S. budget is spent on foreign assistance. It might even be shocking to discover that, despite this relatively small amount, these funds are literally saving millions of lives and improving the lives of many more millions of people. We need to save humanity! We need to help them!
Debate Round No. 1
aomirbekov

Con

Of course aid worked very well in some countries, esspically in Aisian countries ( Asian tigers). However, the word foreign aid is mostly associated with Africa. In africa foreing doesnt show any significant results. I believe that the US shoud better anaylize their aid policy. The reason why it worked in Asian countries is that Asian government provided good enicironment for developement. They supported exports by helding contests among firms, they invested in human capital. But African states' governments are curropted, therefore governments do not intervene enough and interested more in filling their own pockets.
Institutions which are responsible for giving foreign aid are not interested in effectivness of those aids. It is more important to them just to work accroding to the plan set by the US governemnt and send spicific amount of foreing aid during spicific time period. Aids will be effective only if good government intervent ion occur. That is why the US should find an alternative option to help African states.
Juris

Pro

(Of course aid worked very well in some countries, especially in Asian countries. In Africa foreign aid doesn’t show any significant results.)

-So you are well aware that foreign aid works effectively in some countries, and if that’s the case, it is really necessary. In some countries, however, foreign aid does not work as you said. Well, the solution is not to diminish foreign aid as it would affect other countries, but only to improve transparency of foreign aid spending in African countries.

(Aids will be effective only if good government intervention occurs. That is why the US should find an alternative option to help African states.)

-If it can be made effective by government intervention, then there is no need to abolish foreign aid or find alternative in helping other countries. No need to go extreme, but only to improve current conditions by making reforms. Clearly, if something can be done without affecting other countries who benefit from foreign aid, then it should be done.

Arguments for Foreign Aid:

1. To augment economic development of the recipient country.
2. To establish better ties with other countries.
3. To give aid for humanitarian grounds
Debate Round No. 2
aomirbekov

Con

aomirbekov forfeited this round.
Juris

Pro

Let us vote!
Debate Round No. 3
aomirbekov

Con

aomirbekov forfeited this round.
Juris

Pro

My opponent has abandoned the debate.

Please vote!
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cermank 3 years ago
Cermank
aomirbekovJurisTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: A clear win to Pro. He explained quite convincingly why the foreign aid has been beneficial, and addressed Con's concerns by proposing a solution. Perhaps he could have gone into the bad effects of scrapping the foreign aid already being given. Con didn't define his resolution clearly, for the next debates, if he decides to continue with the site, he should probably define the terms in his resolution so as to have a better batting field.