Merged USAID: is it really a bunch of crazy leftists? / Trump Was Absolutely Right to Shut Down USAID

[catsmate]

It is odd how the American worker must be the slave to the world.

Another ridiculously silly nonsense sequitur.

 

[catsmate]

Of course. You were never actually interested in a discussion. That's only a pretense. Your only interest is in a lecture.

Pot <=> Kettle

 

[Emily's Cat]

Or not, which is why they usually are delegated.

A country in which the President literally makes all of the decisions is an autocracy. Democracy is a system whereby many of the decisions are delegated. Because how does one person have the time to make informed decisions on everything that happens in a country, especially one as large as the USA?

Not ALL decisions. But those under the auspices of the executive branch absolutely can be made by the president. That’s the actual intended function of the US president in the first place - to make executive decisions for the running of the country on a day to day basis.

I really wish you foreigners would bother to understand how US governance is designed before sharing your irrelevant opinions about how we should operate. None of you are receptive to the opinions of Americans for how your countries should operate, but you assume you have some authority to tell us what we should do without even knowing what you’re talking about. It comes across as very arrogant.

You’ve mistaken US goodwill, nonaggression, and respect for liberty as weakness.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I am in fact interested in discussion, but if people do not know how foreign aid works, or the part the US has played in it, and the supposed burden it puts on US taxpayers, then of course I try to inform them of the facts. In this case, someone seemed to have a wildly exaggerated view of the US munificence, as opposed to other countries, and a not very clear understanding of how aid, and soft power, works.

Pointing out that China is a member of WHO is still a non sequitur.

USAID was never a foreign aid institution.

Stop being mislead by the acronym. It was ALWAYS a means to interfere with the rest of the world in order to bend them to support our interests. All of you who oppose US interference abroad ought to be happy it’s gone.

 

[Emily's Cat]

So if gutting USAID is victory for the US Taxpayer it should be a lot easier to pat ourselves on the back, what with our wallets being so very much lighter these days.

Or we can reallocate those funds to domestic needs like infrastructure repair, in-country manufacturing support and investment, onshoring pharmaceutical production, supporting education and healthcare, etc. You know, instead of raising taxes even higher.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Pot <=> Kettle

You never actually contribute to discussion. All you seem to do is take middle-school level swipes at people.

 

[Helen]

USAID was never a foreign aid institution.

Stop being mislead by the acronym. It was ALWAYS a means to interfere with the rest of the world in order to bend them to support our interests. All of you who oppose US interference abroad ought to be happy it’s gone.

And you are wrong. I know exactly how USAID functioned, we have similar organisations all over the Western world, and in managing international aid projects for disabked groups, I have collaborated with several US organisations, that have been funded by, and had administrative assistance from the USAID. This is how SIDA, the Swedish Aid organisation, and the organisations of other western nations work as well. The USAID has assisted many worthwhile projects, together with other international organisations.

 

[plague311]

And you are wrong. I know exactly how USAID functioned, we have similar organisations all over the Western world, and in managing international aid projects for disabked groups, I have collaborated with several US organisations, that have been funded by, and had administrative assistance from the USAID. This is how SIDA, the Swedish Aid organisation, and the organisations of other western nations work as well. The USAID has assisted many worthwhile projects, together with other international organisations.

For the record, I wouldn't waste your time. Some people just "know" everything.

 

[dirtywick]

it seems like a lot of programs helping the poorest people in the world were really depending on that money and nobody really seems to have found any fraud, waste, and abuse and it didn't move the needle on the deficit. plus a lot of fraudsters were pardoned along the way.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

As US taxpayer, USAID was not a true burden. Not any more than the US government providing subsidies to billion dollar industries such as our auto manufacturers, and Tesla, and aa long list of industrial giants. Did USAID waste money on foolish things here and there? Yes. But USAID paid for itself in Soft Power.

See, US taxpayers pay the same rate each year no matter what USAID spent, or what the Pentagon spent, or what the Department of the Interior spent, or what the Department of Energy spent, or what any of the US government agencies or bureaus spent. When USAID showed up people got fed, people vaccines, medicine, agricultural assistance, maybe a school, or a well. USAID gave us access to the third world in a way that the CIA could never do on its best day. We made friends we've never met. Compare that with our current adventure in Iran. What is that costing the average American? My gasoline bill for 2026 will be more than triple my IRS bill. And thanks to our current POTUS, and the gutting of USAID, amongst a long list if asshattery, the world is not rushing to help us out this time.

Somewhere in the late 1980s public schools stopped teaching civics classes, which were once a prerequisite for high school graduation, and the result is a voting population that has little-to-no knowledge of how the US government is supposed to work. Worse still, we now have congressional representatives, senators, and an entire White House that is clueless of the contents of the US Constitution beyond the Bill of Rights (and even there they lack). The President cannot rule by decree. Period. Congress, when it does its job, is supposed to keep the POTUS in check, and the SCOTUS is supposed to keep both parties in check. Unfortunately congress and the senate are filled with some of the biggest morons in US history since before the Civil War. And in world history they compare to Stalin's Politburo in levels of incompetence, cowardice, ineptitude, and general buffoonery.

In short: We get what we voted for.

And that's the problem. We're told we're powerless in a country where we could, if we got our crap together, vote out all the idiots, and vote in some people with brains and direction in life. Obama didn't storm D.C., he was elected in spite of the DNC's master plan. The Tea Party didn't shoot their way into power, they ran better campaigns, and were elected into congress, and state houses across the country. There are endless examples of momentum shifts that generated excitement at the polls, yet Americans currently believe they are somehow powerless, and their votes do not count, etc. If USAID was out of control, and let's face it, it kind of was, then where was Congress? More to the point, where was the pressure on Congress by the US Taxpayer? Short answer there is the average American didn't know USAID existed...because they are lazy, and or stupid.

So if gutting USAID is victory for the US Taxpayer it should be a lot easier to pat ourselves on the back, what with our wallets being so very much lighter these days.

Plus most of the money spent by USAID was in buying surplus US produces, such as food, drugs and equipment and disbursing it to countries where people couldn't afford them and using that to bootstrap these people into greater prosperity and an ability to buy US goods through the profits of their own labours.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

You can’t possibly be serious with this. The rest of the world isn’t subsidizing the US.

Ah, so you do NOT have a massive debt with the rest of the world. Got it.

 

[arthwollipot]

Is anyone going to answer my question?

 

[Axxman300]

You can’t possibly be serious with this. The rest of the world isn’t subsidizing the US.

Sure about that? What does the Treasury Department say?...

...this:

https://ticdata.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/slt_table5.html

About 24% of our debt is funded by foreign governments with CHINA being the number one. At least until this past month when China and other countries began dumping bonds due to our fiscal mismanagement. This will drive up interest rates making borrowing money more expensive resulting in all kinds of slowdowns.

And our friends, the Saudis are signaling/threatening to back away from the petro-dollar model, which will make for all kinds of fun.

 

[MostlyHarmless]

I don't know Arth, and honestly haven't looked it up, but I bet it's not too much. I bet it cost me less last year than what I spent on pepsi today, probably a lot less.

 

[arthwollipot]

I don't know Arth, and honestly haven't looked it up, but I bet it's not too much. I bet it cost me less last year than what I spent on pepsi today, probably a lot less.

Since nobody else seems to be interested in giving their estimate, I'm going to say you're right. It usually hovers just below half of one percent of a developed country's national budget is spent on international aid. In the case of the USA specifically, prior to the current administration I believe it was around 0.02%. Somewhere around there, anyway.

So yeah, in terms of the cost to you in the form of tax dollars, it's less than a cup of coffee. Really puts this in perspective, doesn't it?

Why should that be the forever burden of the US taxpayer? When do we get to say were done? We've already paid out billions, and billions, and billions. Why is there this assumption that the American worker is obligated to pay for the world?

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Is anyone going to answer my question?

Without Googling, I would say that 2% of the budget goes to foreign aid, and that may be on the high side.

If I see some burning embers at my neighbor's house, and I call the fire department, is that an act of altruism or self-interest? If I don't put the fire out, my own house may catch fire. Therefore, it's a little bit altruistic and a little bit self-interested. Money spent on fighting diseases in foreign countries is similar.

 

[arthwollipot]

Without Googling, I would say that 2% of the budget goes to foreign aid, and that may be on the high side.

An order of magnitude on the high side. But most people without skin in the game estimate around 10% so there's that.

 

[Trausti]

That is exactly the argument that Joe Rogan makes. And we know exactly where he got the idea from, too. Can anyone guess? Yes, that's right, it was Elon Musk, the driving force behind DOGE and the total evisceration of USAID.

Musk actually takes the crazy conspiracy theory further by postulating that NGOs in California run "drug zombie farms" that they harvest for cash.

Yeah, it's a Rogan/Musk conspiracy theory.

L.A. shelter provider has paid CEO who lives in Hawaii $1.6 million in salary, vacation over two years

 

[Trausti]

In short: We get what we voted for.

And we voted to end paying lavish salaries to politically connected NGOs.

 

[Trausti]

I'm questioning your source. I don't have a claim to defend.

I was not married to that source, simply did a search. You could do that, too.