TYT: Rand Paul - Cut Foreign Aid (Is He Right?)

[The Northerner]

Run time: 03:59 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmIXQctMcDg   Posted on YouTube: February 05, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheYoungTurks Views on YouTube: 15181   Posted on DU: February 07, 2011 By DU Member: The Northerner Views on DU: 1310

 

[sasha031]

1. can't stand Paul, but we can't afford it anymore

[AlbertCat]

9. but we can't afford it anymore

Pul-eeze!

We still waste plenty on a more than bloated Defense budget, corporate welfare and tax cut for the wealthy. Cut these things first. Our aid.... not just arms sales, should be important because it helps define our relationship with the rest of the planet we live on.

Rand Paul and everybody else who does not advocate large cuts in defense spending and some oversight and rethinking of how we do business there, or that corporations pay too many taxes or anyone who thinks tax cuts are useful, is simply not serious about reducing the deficit in any meaningful way.

Period.

[leveymg]

2. No. He's far, FAR RIGHT. . .

This isn't the place to promote Rand Paul.

[Poll_Blind]

3. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day and Paul is right about this.

I watched the interview he did with Wolf Blitzer and he really didn't single out Israel when it came to his proposed foreign aid cuts. His view is cut all foreign aid. That's my view as well. Foreign aid sounds like a good idea but in practice it is a chair leg used to prop up our absolutely insane military/industrial complex. So we borrow money from China, at interest, so we can give it to countries like Israel and Egypt with the stipulation that they turn right around and spend most of it on military hardware, munitions, or other armaments. This is absurd and we do it to keep the last of our failing empire propped up. Bad news: It's not going to help us. We are done as an empire.

It was AIPAC shill Wolf Blitzer who specifically refined the question to be about denying aid to Israel.

At least on this topic, it shows that Rand is an idealist. And while I agree with his bottom line about cutting all foreign aid, I still don't believe he's an idealist in a "good" way. While his reasons for wanting to cut foreign aid are somewhat in line with other fiscal conservatives across the spectrum of right and left, his reasoning to actually come to the conclusion is at least partially poisoned by his view of the Middle East or Africa in general.

So it's a mixed bag. I've seen few politicians who had either the balls or the naivete to cross the Israeli Machine, so we'll see how long he can keep his job.

IMO, the government will be cutting two billion off school lunches before it cuts 2 billion to Israel. I can't see a world where anything else happens.

PB

[Jeneral2885]

6. Sigh

Why are the majority of Americans even Democrats anti aid while across the Atlantic, both Labour and Conservatives (proper conservatives) have been very much using aid almost properly--most as a tool to alleviate poverty although security concerns is always a matter. Aid works if the conditions that come with it are changes. American aid has failed because of an outdated Foreign Assistance Act (1961), a myriad of uncoordinated agencies--from State to HHS--and mostly because of the <b>neoliberal</b> and security ideas that come along side with aid.

That does not mean aid does not work. SIDA (Swedish International Development Agency) and the UK's Department for International Development (DFID) have modified aid to work towards poverty goals--along mostly short term--and embracing the catalyst for development, the MDGs. In contrast, under Clinton, US aid was cut, development was always about market liberalisation. Under GWB, aid rose dramatically--most to states of national security interests--new mechanisms were formed--such as the Millennium Challenge Cooperation.

The crux is aid works if you reform the policy. Aid of course doesn’t mean final development but without aid, the means of exhibiting soft power (Joseph Nye) (this is the Obama doctrine after all) and a new moral stance--isnt that what most of the people here in DU want after the GWB era?

I suggest books like Riddell, R., 2008, Does Foreign Aid Really Work? Oxford: Oxford University Press and the articles by ODI (www.odi.org.uk) and not poorly written books like D Moyo's Dead Aid.

[Poll_Blind]

8. I don't necessarily disagree. But the policy will NOT be reformed, so cut it.

Blunt but I don't think overly dramatic. Reform will not happen. We are in lala land. We should be cutting the shit out of defense but that's not going to happen. I think the most crazy insane slice defense congressman was like cut it by 3-4%. When it's growing by 6% this year, at least.

PB

[Jeneral2885]

10. Not reformed?

Rajiv Shah is leading the charge. Your pessimissm merely srves to leave no angle for US soft power and moral authority in the world. I can say the same thing for the economic situation:the idea of regulation will never come about in America, so why bother to reform? Same with Afghanistan, it will never be peaceful so why intervene? Frankly, a weak argument.

And to clear up some more stuff from my post, it was under a Democrat President (Clinton) thaat the MDGS wre signed. It was also under GWB that the Monterrey Consensus was signed pushing for a focus on international development. Cutting aid would be like defying the UN resolution 1441.

Did you protest against Bush increasing foreign aid in during his second term? Or when Dick Lugar and John Kerry agreed to provide a substantial amount to the the World Bank's IDA?

[Poll_Blind]

12. "...serves to leave no angle for US soft power and MORAL AUTHORITY in the world."

Spare me the imperial pep talk.

I did bother to carefully read the rest of your message, including making sure I understood the references you used. I wanted to, for whatever reason, at least let you know that I did consider what you took time to write. But someone else is going to have to take care of the free world. Philanthropy is the luxury of the monied and we are nolonger monied by any stretch of the imagination. We borrow enormous sums from the Communist slave nation China in a futile attempt to push away the spectre of reality: That we are, at best, a shadow of our former selves. I give Mr. Shah the honor of turning out the lights as he leaves. We didn't spend ourselves into the ground by paying out foreign aid alone. I make no such claim and I do not know of any poster here or any public individuals including congressmen who have.

But when you can't afford the water bill or the grocery bill, the cable tv has got to go.


PB

[Jeneral2885]

13. A longer look at the myths of US aid and aid giving

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x378225

[JDPriestly]

4. When we have to cut aid to inner cities, aid that helps the homeless

and very poor, then we have no business providing weapons to leaders of other countries. That makes no sense.

Put shoes on your children's feet and then help your neighbor. But make sure your children and your sister's children have shoes first. Your obligation is to carry out your responsibilities to those close to you. We do not have to provide every poor family with a vacation in Spain, but we do need to make sure that the poorest among us have food and a roof over their heads and the basic things they need before we provide arms to countries like Iraq or Egypt or Israel. If they really want to buy stuff from us, that is their decision, but we should not take money that could put a roof over a homeless guy in New York who lost his job a few years ago in order to give arms to someone like Netanyahu or Mubarak.

[A Simple Game]

5. Well said.

If a country can spend their aid on weapons, then they don't need the aid.

The only foreign aid we should be giving is food and shelter, no money or weapons.

[EvilMonsanto]

7. I'd Have To Agree With Rand

The only reason why Egypt had a 30yr dictatorship is because of foreign Aid
People NEED to understand this

Young Turks is my favorite show, almost as good as my man Stephen Colbert btw

Otherwise I cannot say i'm much of a fan of Rand
He does seem sincere in his opinion but we need Social Security
We are nothing if we do not support our elders

[Jeneral2885]

14. Sigh

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/pdf/20110203%20Harriet%20Harman%20transcript.pdf

http://www.dfid.gov.uk

Learn from you special relationship cousin.

[Jeneral2885]

15. A longer look at the myths of US aid and aid giving

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x378225

[Dokkie]

11. my rule is

If we need to borrow money for insert --- bank bailout, foreign aid, tax cuts even for the middle class endless wars --- then we cannot do it. Just that simple. The govt have avenues to raise funds and they should use it i.e raising taxes and reducing it when the need is meet.