Shove my disk in that mouth and make spout jazz and some *gluck* *gluck* *gluck* my phone went to town on auto correct, I love it
I am sure this is true for many countries, but aid is often self-serving as well, and is a complex issue. The US actually significantly damages the local farming in Haiti via its "food aid" which has been argued to be designed to benefit US farmers more than help Haitians. It's complex, but basically, you can see it as the Government buying stuff (mostly rice and corn) from US farmers, and gaving it away to Haiti. This floods their market, making local farming noncompetitive and stifling local economic growth.
Also aid causes a recurring problem in many countries, the horn of africa can no longer support the population so there is a famine, we send food. people survive and reproduce, local farms cannot sustain population, famine. aid will not stop the hunger only make the problem bigger wich is sad. the republic of samoa being barred from the North American trade association untill they withdrew their ban on turkey tails is ridicullous (fattest part of turkey, a leftover the US exports)picture a samoan ( he's fat right? be honest) yeah his ancestors survived on whatever was on the island and fish, not whatever fat meats US-ians wouldn't eat.
Not causing, but not solving either. It has nothing to do with "liberals" either, as anyone who fits the name of "liberal", that is one who supports freedom, would send that aid, too. The solution would be helping them grow their own food or to aid them with emigration or population control. No economic interest at all in that though.
Unfortunately, a lot of aid is short-sighted, focusing on fixing whatever problem is happening now, rather than trying to come up with a solution that addresses the needs of the region in the long term. Of course, the latter is much harder to do (and even to measure), which is why most people just focus on the $$$ of aid, rather than the effectiveness of it.
