During the White House Summit on International Development, which focuses on increasing good governance, fighting disease, and enhancing economic growth in developing countries, President George W. Bush said prosperous nations must help less fortunate countries now more than ever.
Yesterday, Bush said:
During times of economic crisis, some may be tempted to turn inward — focusing on our problems here at home while ignoring our interests around the world. This would be a serious mistake. America is committed and must stay committed to international development for reasons that remain true regardless of the ebb and flow of the markets.
Bush took the time to take a trip-down his administration's memory lane, touting its aid accomplishments. In part thanks to the Millennium Challenge Account — which helps nations that embrace democracy and free markets build schools, treat those with AIDS, and feed their people — the US has given more foreign aid in the last eight years than during any other president's tenure of the last 50 years.
Do relatively rich countries have a duty to continue their commitments to the poor in other nations during tough times? Perhaps contributing to stability in friendly developing nations means that there's some self-interest in caring for the world's poor.
Jaeger
Dress for Less
Cheap Monday
socialist!
1You took the words right of my mouth, Liberty! I completely think (at least in this instance) there is some self interest at work here.
2I'll pass the word to anyone I meet here in the US that needs HIV drugs that can't afford them... go to foreign country on our payroll and get it.
3...Didn't "aiding" these other "ailing" countries help put us into the debt that we are in now? You know, aiding those countries that don't have natural resources (like oil) and that have been begging for the U.S. to step in and help them.
But on a serious note: why are there STILL people displaced from Hurricane Katrina?
SMH. Bush has 2 weeks left in office. I will throw a party in honor of his vacating the white house.
4bush does something bad, everyone hates him. he does something good, everyone still hates him. he could be a lot better. but he could be a lot worse too!
5I'm all for aiding other countries, without preconditions, but only if that aid is a concentrated effort fit into a budget. We are in a recession that looks like its going to get worse before it gets better. What the F*ck is Bush's problem?
Just Donna, Bush is stupid and evil...so yes he could be worse, he could be smart and evil. Lets not lower our standards to the point where we are counting our blessings over him not being worse. That is not the kind of expectations we should have for the PRESIDENT of the United States.
6So if you live in the United States you do not deserve any help from this government, but if you live in OTHER countries you do? Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend as long as it doesn't help the people paying the taxes to support the spending.
7As great as it would be to be able to continue giving aid now as we have in more flush times, unfortunately that aid does have to be squeezed into a budget in which our domestic problems come first. It makes me sad to say so, but I believe it's true.
8I agree Jude. We have serious issues to work out in our own country right now. This is a time that private donations and charities should take up some of the slack that our government usually provides these other countries.
9"He does something good, everyone still hates him." Oh, so going off to help others when you can't even help yourself is considered "good"?? Is he having a laugh????
10Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.