International Aid

Rich countries should help poor countries.

It is easy enough to say it, but how to put it into practice is horribly complicated. Grants of large sums of money sound goo don the surface (who couldn't use more money?), but are they effective? Does giving money always correlate positively with improving conditions?

What if in giving large sums of money we make countries worse, by supporting oppresive regimes, or discouraging necessary awareness of the need for reform? What if in doing so we cause monetary imbalances that hurt the very poor while piling money into the coffers of the ruling class?

This is not an excuse for inaction, but rather a call for effective action. Spending not a cent may be better than spending $5B in a way that harms people. But $5B spent in a beneficial way would be even better.

There are intentions, and there are results. Good intentions don't equal good results. But all too often, discussion focuses on the former and ignores the latter, if only because intentions can be known up front, but results are unclear until after-the-fact, when the passions of the moment have probably already shifted.