Should Wealthy Nations Be Helping Poorer Nations?
Written Assignment 5 Week 5
Eco 301
Should Wealthy Nations be helping Poorer Nations? I would say that if the wealthy nations want to give grants to the poorer nations then that should be there choice. I don’t agree with it because I feel that in the end there will be no stopping point, that the nations that are poor are going to take until there is nothing left. America is always helping other countries and I am not saying it is a bad thing but we have people in our own backyards that are unemployed, homeless, and starving. I think that sometimes no matter how much you want to help other Countries you should first take care of your own, so to speak. In the article I read in the New York Times it does tell about how aid has bettered not just the countries that are being helped but as the world as a whole benefitting from the aid. I see that and I think that is great and the facts that were presented I know is true like the examples they give about health issues. The argument that I would say would be for the grants being given to the poorer countries for me would be on the health front. The grants have helped smallpox be eradicated, infant mortality rates lowered, and illnesses such as diarrhea and river blindness have been widely treated. Aid programs have improved women's access to modern contraception in Bangladesh and Egypt and helped increase school enrollment in Uganda and Burkina Faso. Aid also pays for much of the access to AIDS medicines in poor countries. In the last decade, aid has helped restore peace and order after conflicts in places including Bosnia, East Timor, and Sierra Leone. In addition, aid can be a vehicle for policy advice and dialogue between recipients and outsiders. There have even been macroeconomic successes, such as the $1 billion grant that allowed Poland to establish an exchange-rate stabilization fund in 1990. By stabilizing the Polish currency, this relatively small amount of financing provided valuable
Eco 301
Should Wealthy Nations be helping Poorer Nations? I would say that if the wealthy nations want to give grants to the poorer nations then that should be there choice. I don’t agree with it because I feel that in the end there will be no stopping point, that the nations that are poor are going to take until there is nothing left. America is always helping other countries and I am not saying it is a bad thing but we have people in our own backyards that are unemployed, homeless, and starving. I think that sometimes no matter how much you want to help other Countries you should first take care of your own, so to speak. In the article I read in the New York Times it does tell about how aid has bettered not just the countries that are being helped but as the world as a whole benefitting from the aid. I see that and I think that is great and the facts that were presented I know is true like the examples they give about health issues. The argument that I would say would be for the grants being given to the poorer countries for me would be on the health front. The grants have helped smallpox be eradicated, infant mortality rates lowered, and illnesses such as diarrhea and river blindness have been widely treated. Aid programs have improved women's access to modern contraception in Bangladesh and Egypt and helped increase school enrollment in Uganda and Burkina Faso. Aid also pays for much of the access to AIDS medicines in poor countries. In the last decade, aid has helped restore peace and order after conflicts in places including Bosnia, East Timor, and Sierra Leone. In addition, aid can be a vehicle for policy advice and dialogue between recipients and outsiders. There have even been macroeconomic successes, such as the $1 billion grant that allowed Poland to establish an exchange-rate stabilization fund in 1990. By stabilizing the Polish currency, this relatively small amount of financing provided valuable