Should We Spend Less on Foreign Aid? - TLDR Opinionated

Share
Embed
  • Published on Sep 13, 2019
  • TLDR News Merch Store: teespring.com/stores/tldr-autumn
    TLDR Pin Badges: www.tldrnews.co.uk/store
    The UK spends about 0.7% of its income on foreign aid, which isn't a trivial amount of money. So in this video, we discuss wether or not the UK should reduce that amount, choosing to spend more domestically. We also examine what our audience had to say on the topic in our Opinionated survey.
    Follow TLDR on Facebook: tldrnewsuk
    Follow TLDR on Twitter: tldrnewsuk
    Follow TLDR on Instagram: tldrnewsuk
    TLDR Podcast: www.tldrnews.co.uk/toolong
    Support TLDR on Patreon: www.patreon.com/tldrnews
    Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
    Learn About Our Funding: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
    TLDR is all about getting you up to date with the news of today, without bias and without filter. We want to give you the information you need, so you can make your own decision.
    TLDR is a super small company, run by one person with the help of some amazing volunteers. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, following and backing on Patreon. Thanks!

Comments • 644

  • Jacob Kristensen
    Jacob Kristensen 19 days ago

    Hello! Fan from Denmark here. I have some suggestions for future videos:
    I suggest the focus becomes more general than focused on the UK, because a lot of fans are from around the world as well; drawing examples from the UK is fine, but a focus could be more international.
    I also suggest that you break down the demographic of the voters, because it is definitely possible for there to be tendency. A lot of young participants from the UK might vote differently than a middle-aged fan from the US.
    Love the videos, I appreciate the work! Keep it up.

  • Jon-Scot Burns
    Jon-Scot Burns 19 days ago

    4:47 Jack, I'm sorry but smaller countries are not necessarily poorer countries. In fact some of the wealthiest nations in the world are small countries.

  • If x then why
    If x then why 19 days ago

    I'm not someone who is usually against foreign aid but some of those comments you showed in the video make some very good points. Like India, a country that has the 2nd biggest population on the planet, has a space and nuclear program yet they wont fix their poverty problem. I can guarantee much of the foreign aid (or the majority that goes to the local government anyway) simply lines the pockets of the corrupt rich people that caused all the problems in the first place.

  • Thor M
    Thor M 22 days ago

    Foreign aid is fine. If it has a time and money limit. Continual aid to the same countries for forever, is NOT a good thing.

  • Huzayfah M
    Huzayfah M 22 days ago

    Yemenis are under siege in Yemen, not in Saudi Arabia
    Just correcting a pedantic factual inaccuracy

  • Patrik Szabó
    Patrik Szabó 23 days ago

    Looking at how the top list of foreign aid recipients correlates with the top list of where refugees are coming from, two things are very clear. One is that developed countries had better spend more on foreign aid in their own interests because it could help avoid another refugee crisis. The other is that the way all that foreign aid is spent is terribly ineffective and requires some scrutiny.

  • Ok Write
    Ok Write 24 days ago

    The UK has a moral obligation to mind its own business. Slavery and Colonisation were sold as something humanitarian. All aid does is benefit wealthy countries and hold poorer countries back.

  • Joel Feila
    Joel Feila 26 days ago

    a classic version of this I see brought up in america is this.
    We send lots of clothes over to poor countries
    these clothes are cheaper then domestic ones
    So no one over makes a clothing factory.
    My response is "Why don't we build the factory for them and teach them how to run it?
    Answer is at best n one want to spent the money if they don;t get anything out of it.

  • Syilver Wors
    Syilver Wors 27 days ago

    Absolutely great video

  • Syilver Wors
    Syilver Wors 27 days ago

    Great video

  • Steve Spain
    Steve Spain 27 days ago

    Did I miss the bit where it is explained how foreign aid is used to siphon money back into donor countries' businesses, and how donor countries often use their experts over local ones? Some argue that the recipient countries don't have the expertise required, and as far as is my experience in the South Pacific, this is untrue. So say a donor country gives x million to improve roads - great idea, roads improve access for farmers and other industries in getting their goods to market. However, the contract will be awarded to a company from the donor country meaning a substantial amount of that money will go back to the donor country, and that company will use experts from the donor country at 'expat rates' rather than local rates. Locals will be used for things like manual labour, but rather than being paid at the expat rate like the executives, they will be paid at the much lower local rate. Furthermore, even when recipient countries introduce laws which require contractors to train up locals to take over the position it is questionable as to how much this actually happens. Another example is food production. The donor country will donate y amount to the country to move from manual intensive farming to mechanised farming, again this has a number of merits to it, except in the way it is executed. The donor country will require the recipient country buy the machinery from companies in the donor country, even though there may be a local option which is as effective and much cheaper (as well as helping stimulate local industry). This rather than aiding the country puts a further burden upon them. This can be then further exacerbated when the donor country requires farmers grow crops desired by the donor country, reducing the production of crops for local production. There are many other examples of this. There was a book published a long time ago called "How the other half dies" by Susan George which is still relevant today, and has been reprinted a number of times. It's available for free if anyone is interested in the problems specifically about food supply in impoverished countries. For me the discussion about the percentage of foreign aid in a budget and aid dependency miss the greater points briefly expressed herein.

  • Péter Sebők
    Péter Sebők 27 days ago

    English people are the most vicious, greedy and mean people of the world. It's time for the British Empire to collapse

  • Vik London
    Vik London 28 days ago +1

    for China, its 'Foreign Aid'
    but totally altruistic foreign aid for uk.

  • Daniel McLaughlin
    Daniel McLaughlin 28 days ago

    Wait. Trump is going to cut foreign aid, but Johnson's figure gets used?!

  • Jake L
    Jake L 29 days ago +1

    Omg this video is a response to my comment!!!!

  • David Pierce
    David Pierce 29 days ago

    Yes!

  • Lenny Robinson
    Lenny Robinson 29 days ago

    For me charity starts at home But also it all depends which religions you give it to and what country Don't for get some will bit the hand that feeds them which has been proven time and again

  • J BULLIONAIRE
    J BULLIONAIRE 29 days ago

    I prefer lemon aid...

  • THX 91
    THX 91 29 days ago +4

    How can a a conservative government hell bent on austerity and making the lives of many vulnerable and worse off UK citizens miserable, spend so much on foreign aid?
    £14Bn could help fund the NHS, homelessness, welfare and disability cuts, public services to name but a few.
    Sort out the UK first and if there’s a surplus, then of course help those in other countries who are less fortunate.

  • Jake CE
    Jake CE Month ago

    Liked. I enjoyed this video, please do more. How do you go about responding to a survey request please?

  • Tony Becker
    Tony Becker Month ago

    Should We Spend Less on Foreign Aid?
    No. We should spend more. We are a rich nation, we need to not be greedy and to help those less fortunate than ourselves.
    That should not deflect from the problem that our wealth is unfairly distributed. There is more than enough money, the problem is that it is in the hands of too few, too selfish people. That's what we need to address. I'm not talking socialism of anything but there are too many people struggling while the wealthy have more than they could ever spend.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      Tony Becker No we should be spending nothing on foreign aid as it’s hard to say for even under a Conservative Government with austerity that the UK is still running a deficit while complaining about lack of spending in Britain, I don’t think we should be funding the third world, we give aid to Pakistan and unclear power with terrible human rights abuses, India a nation with a space and nuclear program. We can spend this money better on our own people.

  • 6Man666666
    6Man666666 Month ago +1

    Absolutely we should spend less money on foreign aid. There is no responsibility to less wealthier nations. It harms recepients from developing independently. And the wealth produced in a country should stay with its constituency.
    Even if it helped there is no reason to give wealth away. If a country cannot be governed by the its own wealth it means it isn’t governed correctly or helped by keeping the country underdeveloped while they spend it on their own military when they should be reaching out to make alliances with countries next door.

    • Paul Moran
      Paul Moran 26 days ago

      Well you could consider it retribution, making up for the brutal atrocities committed by the Brits anywhere you went to steal land and resources.

  • Michael Lewis-Shermer
    Michael Lewis-Shermer Month ago +1

    We spent several thousand of foreign aid on an Ethiopian pop music band with a TheXvid that has less than 5,000 subs.
    Every year we start spending stupid sums on things that aren't needed because departments try to hit the 7% no matter what.
    I'm all for aid going to projects that will help. But the arbitrary figure and wastefulness is a problem. Especially when some of that money goes to India still. A country that is no longer listed as requiring aid. We have been told to give away x amount of money and every year we throw whatever we have left away just to hit 7 %
    Why not say that whatever isnt spent at the end of the financial year carries over or is donated to UK charities or something that makes it genuinely useful. Maybe it could go into a foreign disaster relief fund. I don't know I just can't see how some of the spending improves the lives of the poorest in third world countries, or makes the planet safer or cleaner. We probably spend 4 or 5% wisely and the rest is waste.

  • Brandon Link
    Brandon Link Month ago

    The line I always see is 'Why are we spending money feeding children in Africa when there are starving children here in the US?' The answer is because we chose not to help our own starving children and if all foreign aid stopped tomorrow that money would go to defense contractors or another tax cut for Jeff Bezos and not to the homeless starving American children.

  • FriedEgg
    FriedEgg Month ago

    It's a tricky one. The soft influence is important. But if you liken relationships between countries to relationships between people; you might buy your friends drinks, ice creams, birthday presents, whatever, but you wouldn't indefinitely subsidise their food, or fuel. You might help them out financially if they got into trouble, but probably not if that was a regular thing.

    It seems like some people really want Pakistan to keep its head above water. But I imagine some would be worried about what might happen if aid was withdrawn and China took over completely, or there was a humanitarian disaster and fingers of blame were pointed. What a mess.

  • AThomas Mathew
    AThomas Mathew Month ago

    Any country rich enough to have their own nuclear arsenal, space program and state of the art fighter jets needs to penalized 0.7 % of their military budget !!

  • StreetSoulLover
    StreetSoulLover Month ago +1

    lol@thinking that foregn aid is spent on impoving the lives of people all over the world.
    Basically it's given to dictators in crap holes (like shitholeistan who attack british troops in Af-craphole-istan)
    Pakistan is not our ally!

    • William Shakespeare
      William Shakespeare 29 days ago

      You have no idea how foreign aid works or the scrutiny our aid spending receives. It's some of the most scrutinised spending by the British government - Google ICAI (the Independent Commission for Aid Impact). The aid budget is just 0.7% does so much good for healthcare and education of people in poor countries. It makes the world a safer place, it makes Britain's streets a safer place. If children are given a good education there is less chance of them being radicalised. It also helps our trading opportunities if other countries are conflict-free and economically prosperous. It's probably one of the most effective ways a government can spend money to help its own safety, its interests in the world, and help other countries

  • haloharry97
    haloharry97 Month ago

    ? I thought I seen this before, is this video re-uploaded

  • Tea Lover
    Tea Lover Month ago

    Foreign Aid is useful for bribing a poor nation to do your bidding. No don't stop it!.

  • Ovidiu Tiță
    Ovidiu Tiță Month ago

    Why don't brexiters and other reactionary types go to mother Russia they so admire? Get themselves some nice oblast for the ethnostate, rule the waves, troll and whatnot and leave the rest of us alone to go back to being a normal country.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      Ovidiu Tiță Why should we, you lost. Go to Europe and have you dying multicultural garbage while your precious Europe falls to far right groups.

  • Leo James
    Leo James Month ago

    Pakistan shouldn't receive any aid from the uk whilst it maintains a nuclear deterrent and supports terrorism at a state level. Yemeni don't need our aid, they need us to stop selling weapons to the Saudi's. Aside from this, yes keep giving, but let's not pretend there is a moral sentiment. We give to receive. It's so frustrating to see people complaining that the money should be spent on homelessness in the uk etc. We have the money to do that but as the UN declared in their report on poverty in the UK, austerity is a political choice. On top of the UN mandating what percentage of GDP we spend on foreign aid it should mandate the level of spending that countries like Pakistan apportion to their own social inequities, that way the reliance argument would fall apart.

  • Stephen Odey
    Stephen Odey Month ago

    Excellent 😀

  • johnyv473
    johnyv473 Month ago

    I'd like to mention a concept that was not talked about here in detail. I believe there is some truth in the idea that the UK could see itself as even more responsible than other entities to provide foreign aid, due to the legacy of the British Empire. Albeit it seldom discussed in the UK, a great many geopolitical conflicts in the 'developing' world are direct results of the mishandling and poor governance of imperialist Britain. Although often viewed as taking place long ago, in the context of history these events are remarkably recent. Therefore, the argument to help a country such as say, Pakistan, may just gain some additional credence. Thanks for the video tldr!

  • A. Inai
    A. Inai Month ago

    Despise the free lunch

  • Elliot Watson
    Elliot Watson Month ago

    Famine is affected by a natural disaster

  • Mitchell Smith
    Mitchell Smith Month ago

    Half the people leaching off the NHS shouldn't have it, most illnesses are the persons own fault. Proper nutrition and the strict elimination of sugar and crappy foods, would make the NHS effective and smooth.
    We owe the money to developing countries because we legitimately screwed em with loans they couldn't pay back. We also fucked their countries up with historical events, they'd be fine otherwise.
    Foreign aid is something you do because it's what's right, you sometimes have to do what you dont like because guess what, people need help.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      Mitchell Smith For one why should these people pay taxes for the NHS if they don’t benefit from it when they need it? And no we don’t owe the third world anything, if they are foolish enough to ask for a loan they can’t pay back then it shows how subjective the loans needs were made on. And how poor they are at risk assessment. The third world also wasn’t fucked by historical events. Ireland has been separate from Britain for less than 100 years and yet despite them being a colony and subject to regular repression they are doing far better than any other colony in the third world. Foreign aid is something you do because you want to show you care, yet as polls show the popular opinion is against this, it’s scandalous when the people are told to tighten their belts at home while increasing spending to nations who are So corrupt and mismanaged no amount of money is helping them.

  • Gamenetreviews
    Gamenetreviews Month ago

    Boris Johnson cartoon as Trump lol

  • RB Insurance
    RB Insurance Month ago +1

    Foreign aid often comes back in the form of political donations and wind up in a dictators bank account. In the case of China, we give them money and they buy treasury bonds and collect interest.

  • Melias Clarkson
    Melias Clarkson Month ago

    2:10 That's the Boris Johnson figure. And also you should be saying "naught point one two percent" instead of "naught point twelve percent".

  • Drachnon
    Drachnon Month ago

    What stats did you use? Because wikipedia's stats for 2016 has the UK listed as spending only 0.67% of GNI

  • Sormon
    Sormon Month ago

    I think a topic missed in this video should of been about South Korea and Poland. Two recipients of Foreign aid who are now able to give aid themselves. Showing how Foreign aid success story.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican 29 days ago

      Sormon Poland doesn’t get anything other than what it’s already entitled to from the EU such as CAP subsidises. That’s not Really aid, they pay into the EU.

    • Sormon
      Sormon 29 days ago

      @Cromwellian Republican Polands aid came from the EU after it joind it after the fall of the estern bloc. It only just came self sufficient.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      William Shakespeare South Korea also isn’t a good example, South Korea and North Korea were economically on par after the war for decades, and that didn’t change until they also liberalised the economy in which the two saw massive divergence away from each other.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      William Shakespeare Poland didn’t get aid, nor did any of the eastern bloc nations, Russia suffered more than any nation in the war and yet became the second manpower and economically powerful nation in the world after the war without the need of aid. The role of the Marshall plan in recovery is also very minimal as it was made by America to halt the spread of communism and the nations in Western Europe closer to them, all the whole the aid accounted for 3% of the GNP at the time of the economies that got it, and less than half a percent in growth. The massive divergence in performance for nations was based on what economic policies they pursued, Britain for one nationalised the commanding heights of the economy which led to stagnation, whereas west Germany liberalised trade, economy and government role in the economy which led to rapid recovery.

    • William Shakespeare
      William Shakespeare Month ago +1

      Britain was also a recipient of foreign aid after world war 2 from the USA in the form of the Marshall plan. Now we give aid too. People often forget this! South Korea and Poland are good examples too.

  • Luredreier
    Luredreier Month ago

    There's a lot of effects of humanitarian aid that was ignored in this video.
    Things like how the increased stability of a country benefiting from such aid may reduce the number of refugees causing tension in the western world and increase the potential for economic growth in those countries and therefore open up new markets and new corporate opportunities.
    More education in the third world also tends to increase the available pool of highly educated people arriving in the west (brain drain), also benefiting us economically as well as create good will abroad improving the soft power of a country.
    All of that is possible even *without* forcing a country to please you in some way or other in order to get your support like that.

  • SPAM .03
    SPAM .03 Month ago

    How can I be included in the poll of viewers?

    • Aaron Okeanos
      Aaron Okeanos Month ago

      Go to their website maybe? It's in the description.

  • John Smithe
    John Smithe Month ago

    Most foreign aid isn't a free handout. It's mostly loans that we make in interest over time. We also get most of the money straight back to us in the form of arms deals so really, foreign aid is a net benefit to our economy.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican 29 days ago

      Aaron Okeanos The only way to fix migration is to discourage it, you can easily clamp down on migrants as Italy, Hungary and Denmark have all done. Aid also generate conflicts, it tends to be the already unstable political situations in Middle Eastern and African nations. Stagnant economic performance and ethnic tensions.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican 29 days ago

      Aaron Okeanos Colonialism was never about aid nor even influence, for one the term colonialism is very much misused. For one most territories of the British empire such as those of Africa, and Asia were not colonies which would imply a large population of the British population or whatever nation contorted that territory. Most of Britain’s colonies were the dominions like Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Africa was dominated by protectorates, that being territories which were not managed by the colonial office but the foreign office.

    • Aaron Okeanos
      Aaron Okeanos 29 days ago

      @Cromwellian Republican Look. I won't say foreign aid can't also be good, but not all forms are. And especially in sight of Egoistic Altruism and future economic and political opportunities and for preventing immigation by making the home more livable and more save or by helping in case of natural desasters or fallout of conflicts or in case of real development e.g. by building hospitals and schools, infrastructure projects like bridges, streets, railroads whatsover foreign aid can do a lot of good.
      But there was and is also another form of "aid" which is a cynical opposit of this and it had another name in earlier times: Colonialism. Used to influence, control, making money, create dependencies, fueling or even pushing conflicts. It's a form of capitalism combined with politics. And this kind of "aid" is practised since sailing was invented. And it is still in use across the globe. The hole world is paying the costs of this by prolonged conflicts, violence, poverty, immigration and refugees. It may even be the root problem why the world has so many problems today, because it was done so long, so often, so widespread that now the costs of these years coming back to the developed countries. And the only way to fix this, is the other forms of foreign aid mentioned in my first paragraph.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      Aaron Okeanos You really don’t know how aid works do you?

    • Aaron Okeanos
      Aaron Okeanos Month ago

      @Cromwellian Republican Or I found the right spot and you just are in fear somebody might come behind your dirty little secret.

  • James Daugherty
    James Daugherty Month ago

    7:52 IT'S NULCEAR NOT NUCULAR
    Sorry, I love your channel but that is one of my biggest pet peeves

    • Al Mack
      Al Mack Month ago

      bitch pls! develop some sense of hunour ffs!

  • LouGar
    LouGar Month ago +3

    Dont Pakistan have nuclear weapons? Can someone explain how they can afford nukes but need foreign aid?

    • SuperCunthunt
      SuperCunthunt 28 days ago

      Like in North Korea.
      The leaders don't care about their people

  • OPEN DISCUSSIONS
    OPEN DISCUSSIONS Month ago

    Whilst the idea is good, money should be primarily given to solve the issues that prevent countries in becoming developed countries or stop civil unrest. But you do not give a child money to buy vegetables and eat healthier, (s)he will just spend it on candy.

  • MrNotadream
    MrNotadream Month ago

    It would be cheaper to build a wall /s

  • Taye Trotman
    Taye Trotman Month ago

    It depends what countries we are giving it to. Some countries need it more than others, and in some cases it might be better for the govt to give it to NGOs because some governments are corrupt and may misuse it.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      Taye Trotman Yes we know this, but the state of the matter is you can’t directly distribute to the poor because of the overbearing state in these countries, it’s not unknown for charities to bribe government officials just to get around the regulations and actually give the aid.

  • barrelwolf
    barrelwolf Month ago

    Although I appreciate this is called opinionated, I didn't realise this meant we were going to get the writers opinion without facts. By all means push your own views and agendas but please don't be disingenuous by acting like The people's Republic of China gave Pakistan money to help itself yet the western block are doing it for mostly altruistic reasons. Personally I believe we should reduce our "foreign aid" spending and the UN should move to a more sponsoring based programme where by there is an incentive to help. Reality is if this much money was been funneled correctly we would need to continue to do it! Countries like Pakistan and large African States have used this to their advantage and instead of helping those in need they have kept the money and continued to let there own suffer while pushing clear terrorist programmes. People deserve help but its not right to continue to give money to the right people but if we continue to fund terrorism and tyranny we can't then complain when it comes to our doors

  • HornetGamer
    HornetGamer Month ago +1

    I've always supported the 0.7%. But that's always been on the assumption that the UK is a growing economy, and structured so that someone working full time on the minimum wage can support themself, and two adults working full time on the minimum wage can support themselves and a couple of children. While I don't buy into the pull up the drawbridge approach, if those qualifiers are not met - i.e. there are question marks about how wisely the UK's wealth is being spent in the UK, then similar questions have to be raised about how wisely it's being spent elsewhere.

  • OceanLily
    OceanLily Month ago

    After raping Africa for centuries I think we should continue aid. Although I do think it should be reward based i.e no dictators, no harboring terrorist groups, actually growing their economy.

    • Cromwellian Republican
      Cromwellian Republican Month ago

      OceanLily I think you mean decades. And when you look at the lost developed nation in Africa they are the longest colonised, such as South Africa, whereas Liberia and Ethiopia were never colonies they are still poorer than the average African state. Ireland was a colony for nearly a millennia and yet they are one of the most developed nation in the world today and only gained their independence a couple decades before the African colonies.

  • Aesma
    Aesma Month ago

    Often times you will see someone in the UK is benefiting from that aid. "Food aid" for example is really aid to your farmers, and death for the "aided" farmers. Give Pakistan "aid", Pakistan buys your weapons. Give a country "aid" to build roads, have a UK company build the roads. Etc. I think aid should only cover education and health, education so that people can help themselves, health because it's needed in the interim.

  • Russell Jackson
    Russell Jackson Month ago +1

    Foreign Aid is charity, therefore it shouldn't be compulsory via taxation. Inn my opinion, the foreign aid budget should consist of 100% voluntary donations, possibly via an "opt in" system. If people don't trust the government to spend aid money on worthy causes, they can donate to private charities instead.

  • Ian McCormack
    Ian McCormack Month ago +1

    If a country has a nuclear and/or a space program...as Pakistan does. Foreign aid should not be given. End of. If you can afford to create either of these, the money would be better spent on your own people, so why should we prop them up?
    Africa is run by warlords, fascists and dictators, so the 'Foreign aid' never gets where it's meant to be anyway, coz it's funneled off by corrupt leaders...we know this. So why are we paying? For the moral feel good of 'well we've done our bit'? 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

  • Botany 500
    Botany 500 Month ago

    It's a scam. Business contracts awarded for those tied in with the government. Doesn't matter which party is at the helm.
    The UK gave 53 million to India last year. A country that has nuclear weapons and a space program. And the UK gives aid to China and so on.

  • Alan
    Alan Month ago

    Of course we give away far too much in foreign aid. It doesn't help the poor but it does help dictators grow their huge and corrupt army.

    • William Shakespeare
      William Shakespeare Month ago

      You have no idea how foreign aid works or the scrutiny our aid spending receives. It's some of the most scrutinised spending by the British government - Google ICAI (the Independent Commission for Aid Impact). The aid budget is just 0.7% does so much good for healthcare and education of people in poor countries. It makes the world a safer place, it makes Britain's streets a safer place. If children are given a good education there is less chance of them being radicalised. It also helps our trading opportunities if other countries are conflict-free and economically prosperous. It's probably one of the most effective ways a government can spend money to help its own safety, its interests in the world, and help other countries.

  • MaxiTB
    MaxiTB Month ago +1

    Ehm, you forgot the biggest reason why western countries pay foreign aid: To reduce migration.

  • Hassan Ali
    Hassan Ali Month ago

    Pls make merch 4 that Pakistan country with shoes

  • Radical Rainbow
    Radical Rainbow Month ago

    No!!!