The self-inflicted wound of US foreign aid cuts. Aid isn't charity, it's business. Ask China

[Flaxbee]

It’s not every day that foreign aid is front page news in the United States, but it is because slashing foreign aid has become one of the few areas of bipartisanship in the US Congress. Such an act of retreat is short-sighted. Given that China and other emerging markets are ramping up their overseas development assistance, the US should be revamping and increasing aid, not cutting.

When Obama took office, he put together two major reviews of US foreign assistance programs, resulting in the release of two bold reports (pdf) just last year. These reports led the administration to propose a 10% increase in foreign aid for this budget cycle, up to $59bn – but still less than 2% of the total federal budget. A key part of these reports was a focus on pursuing a long-term strategy rather than going with the latest development fad and constantly switching gears.

More at link: http://www.iqvote.com/

[pampango]

1. "...slashing foreign aid has become one of the few areas of bipartisanship in the US Congress."

republicans have always been in favor of cutting foreign aid (and UN contributions) and anything else that goes to "them" rather than to "us". ("My money is for me" is a standard republican fare whether it applies to tax cuts for the rich or aid cuts to "them".) We're coming a little late to that party. Let's hope we don't stay long.

The EU is the world's leader in foreign aid. They contribute almost 50% of the aid given by the whole world even though their per capita GDP is about 30% less than that of the US. It's not that they are richer and can afford it better; Europeans are just more generous and understand that what is good for "them" is, in the long run, good for "us" as well.

Chinese are obviously much poorer than Europeans, much less Americans. They seem to realize that foreign aid is not just the "right" thing to do, but smart business as well.