Foreign aid - good or evil?

[SadisticNature]

I find it extremely condescending to assert in the face of significant evidence to the contrary that the default distribution of wealth is the equal one. Many people have attained wealth through great accomplishments without which we would not be having this conversation. Microsoft has consistently innovated computing over the past 3 decades and has created products that people want, encouraging them to spend their money.

Wealth is generally earned, not given by the wealth fairy, and without a culture that protects it and grows it, it is generally wasted. This has been shown time and again with bad businesses and bad governments. Yet instead of attempting to generate a culture that protects wealth and investment in Africa you claim we should perpetually and repeatedly donate wealth as a form of equalization, with no plan of ever achieving improvement.

Furthermore, you think this should be done with what is largely other peoples money. I think there is some merit to going out and creating the next Microsoft or the next Google, changing the world, making your fortune then using it how you please (which generally seems to be solving the problems of the third world at least for wealth generated in computing).

[MMI]

I find it extremely condescending to assert in the face of significant evidence to the contrary that the default distribution of wealth is the equal one. Many people have attained wealth through great accomplishments without which we would not be having this conversation. Microsoft has consistently innovated computing over the past 3 decades and has created products that people want, encouraging them to spend their money.

Wealth is generally earned, not given by the wealth fairy, and without a culture that protects it and grows it, it is generally wasted. This has been shown time and again with bad businesses and bad governments. Yet instead of attempting to generate a culture that protects wealth and investment in Africa you claim we should perpetually and repeatedly donate wealth as a form of equalization, with no plan of ever achieving improvement.

Furthermore, you think this should be done with what is largely other peoples money. I think there is some merit to going out and creating the next Microsoft or the next Google, changing the world, making your fortune then using it how you please (which generally seems to be solving the problems of the third world at least for wealth generated in computing).

Much of Microsoft's success was due to a strategy that prevented other firms from competing on equal terms. I understand the court cases are still being heard, and that, in Europe at least, things aren't going too well for Bill Gates's team.

I cannot think of a better or fairer system for distributing wealth than equal shares. In my observation wealth is rarely earned. It is frequently passed on from one person to another, either through inheritance or marriage or some similar arrangement. And there's taxation, of course, a much under-utilised tool.

Where wealth accumulates through enterprise, you will generally find the seed capital came from the already-wealthy, and the returns go back to the same people. Bill Gates is the exception, not the rule.

As for a plan to develop Africa, I would love there to be one, but while the West is unwilling to give enough to ensure even bare survival for many, such a plan cannot be contemplated. I do not accept your criticism - you cannot complain about the absence of a plan for reconstruction when such a thing is currently impossible. (There are, however, many under-funded organisations whose objectives are to assist in developing African nations.)

Yes, I want to use other people's money. To be honest with you, I am reluctant to give all of my own, and, somehow, I don't think it would be enough anyway. I want to use your money, and everyone else's ... not all of it, but a reasonable amount. Maybe your standard of living will fall a little, but the standard of many other people would rise a lot. I think that's justification enough. So international aid by national governments working together is what is necessary in my view, and no-one can say it won't work, because it's never been tried - not seriously anyway.

[Thorne]

Yes, I want to use other people's money. To be honest with you, I am reluctant to give all of my own, and, somehow, I don't think it would be enough anyway. I want to use your money, and everyone else's ... not all of it, but a reasonable amount. Maybe your standard of living will fall a little, but the standard of many other people would rise a lot. I think that's justification enough. So international aid by national governments working together is what is necessary in my view, and no-one can say it won't work, because it's never been tried - not seriously anyway.

Sure. Everyone's standard of living drops a little, and the desperately poor will get a little money. And next week, or next month, or next year, when all the money is gone and they are still desperately poor we'll do it all over again. Nothing is gained, but so much is lost. And the criminals, who prey on the poor, and the tyrants and dictators who prey on their own people, will get a little richer as they steal the money you so politely give them for redistribution. Great plan.

[MMI]

Sure. Everyone's standard of living drops a little, and the desperately poor will get a little money. And next week, or next month, or next year, when all the money is gone and they are still desperately poor we'll do it all over again. Nothing is gained, but so much is lost. And the criminals, who prey on the poor, and the tyrants and dictators who prey on their own people, will get a little richer as they steal the money you so politely give them for redistribution. Great plan.

Lives are gained - at least for a little longer, and nothing is lost, because when the money is spent it goers back into the economy. Hell, even when the criminals spend it, it goes back into the economy! I value those lives more highly than a tiny percentage of your salary, and I see no reason to stop paying while those people need our support in order to live. So to my mind it's a fantastic plan.

And if we can't outwit the criminals who divert aid for their own purposes - and it's happening far too much - it's our own fault for not making sure that the aid is handled by people and organisations which are accountable. If ever ther were a reason to effect a regime change, it's in the circumstances you describe. And none of us western nations are above a little regime change here and there are we?