• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jim Karahalios

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    The truth is Canada and the US both spend relatively small amounts of their budgets on foreign aid. The US is at 0.2% of GNP Canada is at 0.26%.

    The US is still the largest foreign aid donor because of its large economy.

    Read the last link on the myths about foreign aid from the Brookings institute.

    How is it that people who call themselves Christians are so dead set against helping the poor in developing countries?

    Canada and the US are some of the richest countries in the world and Parsley all you can complain about is the very small amount of our wealth is used to help people who have far less than we do?

    On judgement day you better have a good excuse!



    https://foodgrainsbank.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ag_spending.pdf https://foodgrainsbank.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ag_spending.pdf

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-foreign-aid-budget-1.4556537 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-foreign-aid-budget-1.4556537

    https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/oecd-calls-on-canada-needs-to-spend-more-on-aid-to-increase-its-global-heft https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/oecd-calls-on-canada-needs-to-spend-more-on-aid-to-increase-its-global-heft

    https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/what-every-american-should-know-about-u-s-foreign-aid/ https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/what-every-american-should-know-about-u-s-foreign-aid/

    Myth #1: America spends too much on foreign aid

    Opinion polls consistently report that Americans believe foreign aid is in the range of 25 percent of the federal budget. When asked how much it should be, they say about 10 percent. In fact, at $39.2 billion for fiscal year 2019, foreign assistance is less than 1 percent of the federal budget.

    Myth #2: Others don’t do their fair share

    The U.S. provides more assistance than any other country. As the world’s wealthiest nation, that’s appropriate. There is a broad international commitment that wealthy countries should provide annually 0.7 percent of GNP to assist poor countries. Five countries (Norway, Sweden, Luxembourg, Denmark, and the U.K.) exceed that benchmark. The average for all wealthy nations is around 0.4 percent. The U.S. ranks near the bottom at below 0.2 percent.

    Myth #3: U.S. foreign aid is mainly backed by Democrats

    Foreign aid historically has been viewed more as a Democratic than Republican program. The Marshall Plan was initiated by the Truman administration, and in the 1990s, when votes in the Congress on foreign aid spending were close, the appropriations bill garnered more Democratic than Republican votes. But every president, Democratic and Republican, until the current occupant of the White House, has been a strong proponent of foreign assistance.

    In fact, some of the most rapid increases in foreign aid have come during Republican presidencies—the first term of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Since the creation in the early 2000s of President Bush’s signature popular and successful programs of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), and the President’s Malaria Program (PMI), foreign aid now also carries a Republican brand and has received overwhelming congressional support from both parties, including bipartisan rejection of the one-third cuts to international spending proposed by the Trump administration.

    Myth #4: Foreign aid goes to corrupt, wasteful governments

    Only a minority of U.S. economic assistance goes to governments. In 2018, 21 percent of U.S. official development assistance went to governments, 20 percent to non-profit organizations, 34 percent to multilateral organizations, and 25 percent elsewhere. Typically, when the U.S. wants to support a country that is ruled by a corrupt, uncooperative, or autocratic government, U.S. assistance goes through private channels—NGOs or other private entities—or multilateral organizations. Accountability of U.S. economic assistance is high—the U.S. imposes stringent, some would say onerous, reporting and accounting requirements on recipients of U.S. assistance, and the office of the U.S. inspector general (IG) investigates misuse.

    Myth #5: Foreign aid goes to autocratic governments

    There was definitely truth to this during the Cold War, when foreign assistance was often driven by the premise that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” no matter what the nature of the government. That substantially changed in the 1990s following the demise of the Soviet Union. However, there is reason to be concerned that obliviousness to autocracy is reappearing with the post-9/11 concern over terrorism.
    Myth #6: Foreign aid is wasted, inefficient, and produces no concrete results

    The U.S. government requires regular monitoring and reporting on how and whether assistance programs are working, and periodic evaluations of results. There is hard evidence that development and humanitarian programs produce considerable results, less so for programs driven for foreign policy and security purposes. While U.S. assistance is by no means the sole driver, the record of global development results is impressive. These results include:

    Extreme poverty has fallen dramatically over the past 30 years—from 1.9 billion people (36 percent of the world’s population) in 1990 to 736 million (10 percent) in 2015
    Maternal, infant, and child mortality rates have been cut in half
    Life expectancy globally rose from 65 years in 1990 to 72 in 2017
    Smallpox has been defeated; polio eliminated in all but two countries; deaths from malaria cut in half from 2000 to 2017
    The U.S. PEPFAR program has saved 17 million lives from HIV/AIDS and enabled 2.4 million babies to be born HIV-free.


    Myth #7: Foreign aid is for the benefit of foreigners and not aligned with U.S. interests

    Assistance is provided to support security as well as economic and political development of recipient countries and people. However, that assistance also advances one or all of the following three overriding U.S. interests:

    Contributing to U.S. national security by supporting allies in promoting regional and global stability and peace
    Reflecting the core U.S. value of caring for others in need—providing humanitarian assistance to victims of war, violence, famine, and natural disasters
    Advancing U.S. and recipient economic interests by building economies and markets


    Myth #8: Foreign aid is unpopular

    While the term foreign aid is not popular and polling reveals that some feel our foreign policy is overextended, Americans support U.S. active engagement in the world. A substantial majority of those polled support working collaboratively with other nations.

    Assistance for humanitarian purposes receives overwhelming approval, and support is strong for specific purposes such as improving people’s health, helping women and girls, educating children, and helping poor countries develop their economies. What receives less support is assistance for strategic purposes.
    Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 17, 2020, 08:36.

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by parsley View Post
      I like what he says. He will dump the Paris Accord which means, scrapping the carbon tax. He’s strong, strong strong.

      https://www.thespec.com/news-story/9879797-sparks-fly-in-conservative-leadership-race/
      The main focus of the Conservative party should be having a candidate that can beat Trudeau. The only one that has a hope in hell of doing that is Leslyn Lewis.

      Comment


        #43
        Originally posted by countryguy View Post
        The main focus of the Conservative party should be having a candidate that can beat Trudeau. The only one that has a hope in hell of doing that is Leslyn Lewis.
        The party will move towards the middle next election.They know they will still get the vote of the social conservatives and gain votes from other parties.A reform conservative leader is not electable in Canada now or anytime in the future.

        Comment


          #44
          Originally posted by newguy View Post
          The party will move towards the middle next election.They know they will still get the vote of the social conservatives and gain votes from other parties.A reform conservative leader is not electable in Canada now or anytime in the future.
          If the cons screw up in choosing their new leader, if they are to liberal, many of us will be voting wexit. There are choices if one has any principals at all.

          Comment


            #45
            Originally posted by newguy View Post
            The party will move towards the middle next election.They know they will still get the vote of the social conservatives and gain votes from other parties.A reform conservative leader is not electable in Canada now or anytime in the future.
            Not like, actually.

            Comment


              #46
              Originally posted by countryguy View Post
              The main focus of the Conservative party should be having a candidate that can beat Trudeau. The only one that has a hope in hell of doing that is Leslyn Lewis.
              The candidate few are mentioning. A black woman, who is against abortion, going up against a black wannabe, fake feminist pervert, who sends our money all over the planet to kill babies.

              I agree, I think she would beat him badly. I just don’t think many others see it yet.

              Comment


                #47
                So I don't see much support for Jim whats his name from other posters!

                I thought you all were going to praise Parsley for her "brilliant" choice of Jim whats his name?

                Parsley the eminent political strategist chose the 2 "most important" issues of our time to run the next winning Conservative campaign on.

                1. Out of control foreign aid. And wait for it.... 2. the imposition of sharia law by Erin Otoole's campaign manager!

                Get you wallets open. Jim whats his name is going to need your support! And don't forget to praise Parsley. She and Jim whats his name are going to lead you to the promised land! Amen to that.

                Happy St. Patricks day everyone! Stay away from the green beer! Instead have a "corona" to celebrate the new world order.
                Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 17, 2020, 13:38.

                Comment


                  #48
                  Originally posted by Sheepwheat View Post
                  If the cons screw up in choosing their new leader, if they are to liberal, many of us will be voting wexit. There are choices if one has any principals at all.
                  if extreme right votes westix Trudeau wins.If a social reformer because leader Trudeau wins.I would say social conservatives will swallow it and still vote for a middle of the road conservative leader.

                  Comment


                    #49

                    Originally posted by newguy View Post
                    if extreme right votes westix Trudeau wins.If a social reformer because leader Trudeau wins.I would say social conservatives will swallow it and still vote for a middle of the road conservative leader.
                    Which one is middle of the road? Middle of the road is too far left.

                    Comment


                      #50
                      https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-put-the-conservative-leadership-race-out-of-its-misery-before-coronavirus-does https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-put-the-conservative-leadership-race-out-of-its-misery-before-coronavirus-does


                      Chris Selley: Put the Conservative leadership race out of its misery before coronavirus does
                      No one but these candidates has a chance, and nobody has the stomach to campaign. Hold the vote and get it over with

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...