"Myth, Lies & Downright Stupidity"

[Dr Mordrid]

a book by by John Stossel of ABC NEWS's "20/20" program. This is one of the best anti-politically correct reads I've had in quite a while

Excerpts here, starting with foreign aid;

http://www.abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=1955664&page=1

More in left sidebar.

Stossels main page;

http://www.abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/

[cjolley]

Myth?
This is just right wing political correctness.
And another straw man.
If you asked the average person in the US if they thought forgein aid would "cure" poverty in Africa they would say no.
By far the biggest myth about foreign aid believied by most Americans is that it constitutes a large percentage of our federal budget.

[Dr Mordrid]

Size should have nothing to do with judging effectiveness, and neither should political affiliation

Who is the straw man; Stossel who is reporting, the Africans who are exposing a boondoggle that even many in the liberal establishment & UN have documented or those who are in denial?

Even the NY Times, a liberal bastion, has reported on this;

http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/News_flash2005/06%20July%20The%20Hidden%20Scourge-NYT.htm

The Hidden Scourge | Wrestling With Corruption: Africa Tackles Graft, With Billions in Aid in Play

By SHARON LaFRANIERE
Published: July 6, 2005
>
>
>
In Nigeria, even children understand corruption's menace. Increasingly, so do the donors that have poured more than $300 billion into African nations since 1980 - and watched too much of it vanish into a sinkhole of fraud, malfeasance and waste.

Now the efforts of reformers like Mrs. Akunyili are being scrutinized at meetings where donor countries consider aid to Africa, as leaders of the Group of 8 industrialized nations will do this week at Gleneagles, Scotland.

The summit meeting has been billed as a turning point for Africa, where the billions have begun to flow again. Foreign aid to the continent reached a 17-year low in 1999, but in May, the richest nations agreed to write off $40 billion in loans owed by the world's 18 poorest countries, all but four of them in Africa.

No African nation points up the challenge quite like Nigeria, a country that is both hampered by corruption and trying to control it. Awash in oil and gas that has flooded its treasury with $300 billion in the past 20 to 30 years, Nigeria remains utterly destitute, in no small part because of waste and graft. Officials like Mrs. Akunyili have scored some victories, but few corrupt officials have been convicted and millions of aid dollars still go astray. So donors are confronted with the question in Nigeria, as in much of Africa, of how much improvement is enough.

Corruption has not only robbed Africa of money to help lift some of the world's poorest people out of poverty. Around the world, it has also stalled economic development and tarnishes people's faith in government and, often, democracy itself.
>
>
>

The question now should be how many 2nd chances do we give direct aid to these corupt governments before the obvious fix reported in Stossels piece is implemented: move all aid to those NGO's that have shown over time that they keep a tight reign on what goes where??

This isn't a liberal or conservative solution....it's a commom sense solution.

This, the guarantee of property rights and easing the paper chase involved in starting small enterprises (did you even watch the video report?) are the only cure for what ails much of Africa....

[cjolley]

...
The question now should be how many 2nd chances do we give direct aid to these corupt governments before the obvious fix reported in Stossels piece is implemented: move all aid to those NGO's that have shown over time that they keep a tight reign on what goes where??
...

That's NOT the solution Stossel advocates.
Read his conclusion.
He wrote this right after the paragraph about fixing foreign aid.

...
It's good to help. I'll contribute to a charity like "The Free Africa Foundation," which builds malaria-free villages from individual contributions. Charities are much more likely to keep a close eye on the money. If they don't, donors stop giving.
By contrast, foreign aid often just makes politicians rich — but leaves their people poor.

He is advocating the elimination of foriegn aid and complete reliance on charity.
An idea put forth only by the far, far right.

This simply obscures the point and makes the fix you and I both agree on more difficult to impliment politicaly.

PS And I still say that he misuses the word myth because nobody believes "foreign aid can end global poverty" as a flat statement the way he put it.
That makes it a straw man.

[edit]sp[/edit]

[Dr Mordrid]

Firsy you argue that he isn't advocating dependence on NGO's (such as charities), then you reverse field in the next paragraph and argue that he (overly) supports charity-reliance in his conclusions.

Make up your mind

[cjolley]

Firsy you argue that he isn't advocating dependence on NGO's (such as charities), then you reverse field in the next paragraph and argue that he (overly) supports charity-reliance in his conclusions.

Make up your mind

...
He wrote this right after the paragraph about fixing foreign aid.

He was arguing against Jeffrey Sachs that foriegn aid could be fixed.

He has two arguments.
1, Give to NGOs when the government of the target country is corrupt. (this makes sense)

2, End foreign aid from our government and rely on charitable contributions.
(this wouldn't work, but it is a popular idea with the far right)

He never advocates reallocating foreign aid to in country NGOs to fix the corruption leakage, which is what you seemed to be in favor of.

You, he and I all agree on the nature of the problem.
You and I agree on a solution (I think).
His stated solution is far outside the mainstream.