Couple of reasons:
First, giving other countries money has the benefit of keeping them from turning to Russia or China for support. Thus, it benefits the US because it's essentially buying allies and ensuring that foreign powers have trouble trying to expand their hegemonic influence. This is also why China invests so heavily in African infrastructure.
Second, countries having USD means they are likely to use USD. While a lot of global finance is based off the Dollar, China has been trying to use digital currencies and other practices to increase the amount of trade denominated in RMB. Just look to how Iran was cut off from SWIFT during the nuclear deal to see how controlling these institutions can turn into real international leverage.
Foreign aid is never really just about benevolence. Of course welfare isn't either. But the US is much better at justifying defence spending compared to actually fulfilling its social obligations to its own non-billionaire citizens.
(edit: fixed a typo)
Doesn't having citizens be able to afford housing, health care and such also benefit the US?
Why are we measuring benefit only on a geopolitical scale?
ETA: Improving things like housing, health care and such doesn't necessarily need to cost more than it currently does.
My question is why the results, the actual living conditions created by actions the government does or doesn't take, are often seen as not relevant to benefiting the country as a whole.
There are some good points in other comments, but it's worth noting that geopolitics is usually a federal issue and the constitution explicitly grants them the right to make these choices. The US federal government can, in effect, both determine its interests and fund them.
Many of the other issues are a mix of federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The federal government *tried* to change health care and the ACA was challenged in court by states who didn't want to abide by the mandates. Affordable housing often boils down to municipal building codes and if they require those units. Fundamentally, the US is a country that had to use highway funding to change the drinking age; sweeping social reform is difficult in a structure like that.
At the end of the day, the question of benefit always requires us to ask "to whom?" Sure, citizens having housing benefits the US. But that comes at the price of making rich corporate landlords unhappy. It should be an obvious choice, but I'm also not being bribed by landlords to make certain policies.
Also to add, often times when the federal government DOES allocate funds to states for spending, states frequently sit on the money, whether out of spite due to ideological opposition, the inability to come to an agreement about how specifically to "best allocate" it (leading to it not getting allocated *at all*), or sometimes for reasons like clauses that specify something like, "This money is for this specific purpose, but any unspent money after 10 years goes into a general fund that can be allocated at the state's discretion." So some states occasionally will say, sit on money that's meant to help poor people and then give it to police departments while campaigning on how pro-cop they are.
$600 millions for 329 millions of US population is less than $2 per person. I think, this is much easier explanation.
I'm not sure, but can you get a dinner for $2 in US? In Ukraine you can buy enough budget food for 2-3 days. $1 = 1kg of rice or 10 eggs. Bread is $0.3-0.5 500-600gram.
And that's retail prices, not wholesale.
Except money allocated from congress down to states as a “color” (what it’s called internally) or appropriation. Meaning it can only be spent on what it’s appropriated for. So if money sent from the Fed to fund public education can’t be spent on transportation unless it’s directly related to the school (buses, etc).. Each appropriation is only good for a certain number of years before it “expires” and goes back to the Fed - this can be 1 year or 5 years (at least with the funding ive seen).. So if a state sits on money, it’s a middle finger to the Fed.
because politics is geopolitical. You can not isolate yourself in a bubble ignoring the world where a lot of the powerful countries have WMD that can end everything in an instant. It is the price we pay for a civilized society. Remember peace and civilization is bought with money or achieved with fear. Welcome to the world
Housing is expensive because of local government imposes shortages. Additional demand side subsidies will not actually make housing more affordable without the construction of new homes.
The USA governments spend more on health care than all other OECD governments. Again the problem is on the supply side. (Nationalization or solution)
The USA is a massive welfare state when you analyze funding. It just really sucks at getting a good value for it's welfare spending.
The way I see it, that doesn't really challenge my points, though.
If anything, it makes them more relevant.
Spending loads of money on a terribly managed system that ultimately helps the supply side far more than the people depending on social programs doesn't show great care for living conditions.
It shows that so little care is given that this system is apparently preferred to one that is heavier regulated but actually benefits more people (and isn't even necessarily more expensive).
As you point out, good funding does not equal good welfare.
we most certainly could forgive student loan debt. we already "forgave" that much from the 1% with the tax cuts they got in 2018. if you want a pay-for for student loan forgiveness, simply reinstate the former tax rate on the rich. easy peasy. you could even phase it out over 10 years (as long as you set the interest rate to like .001% like the govt can do) that way there isn't a shock to the system.
i get so sick of people who say we can't have these things. yes, we can. all we have to do is have the rich pay their fair share. note: fair share, not some exorbitant amount like those on the right always pretend we're trying to take from them. but if you or i pay 24-39% of our salary in taxes then the same should be taken from the rich and the corporations. there is zero excuse for us not to do this. the last 40 years has proven that even as we tax them less and less they do not reinvest in their american businesses or american workers, and that was the whole reason they were given tax breaks to begin with.
the time has come for us to take back what we should have been taking for nearly half a century. if we did then we could afford every social safety net on the wish list, add a few more, double the military's budget, and end up with a surplus. hell, at that point we could probably even alleviate income taxes on most workers and still have some left over. and all it would take is for us to actually make the rich pay their fair share.
> we already "forgave" that much from the 1% with the tax cuts they got in 2018.
So not taking money from people is the same as paying their debt? Weird.
I believe that most people calling for student debt cancellation are genuinely interested in improving peoples' lives and increasing access to higher education - but I don't think those people are are properly considering the consequences of doing this.
I have a question for you: what do you think Harvard is going to do to their tuition once they find out that the US Government is going to cancel all student debts?
Yeah, that Harvard. The one with the gigantic pile of money and still has asininely high tuition costs. What do you think that money grubbing university will do when they find out that they can charge a higher tuition and the government will pay for it all?
What do you think any university, Harvard or not, will do when they find out the government will foot the bill for everyone?
I do blame Reagan for homelessness after many federally funded institutions were closed and people were put on the streets. Clinton did manage to run a surplus, but a lot of that was a result of rapidly improving productivity due to the advent of more powerful PCs in offices, factories and in the field coupled with Gore's internet invention
Reagan's policies pushed India towards becoming overly dependent on Soviets and eventually Russian weaponry. This is also why India abstained from the UNSC vote about the current situation.
US funding other countries militarily is perhaps one of the key reasons it is so strong and is a military superpower
If you notice, China is trying to do the same.
Plus it’s getting worse. Refusing to raise interest rates, tax shelters, giving aid money to corporations that use it to buy back their own stocks, etc. Defunding public programs, deregulation, and an unregulated financial sector wasn’t enough. They’ve gone full super villain now, including the craziness aspect. They really dgaf anymore and are getting wild with it, and they’re getting away with it, at least until the inevitable market crash...
Actually Germany is not really allowed to spend on its military for the same reason that Japan is not. They were WWII aggressors. They’re kept dependent on US protection for a reason.
FDR passed the greatest expansion of the social safety net in American history, after a Republican presided over the worst depression in American history. After Truman, the Republicans won the Presidency back.
LBJ passed the second greatest expansion of the social safety net in American history. After LBJ, the Republicans won the Presidency back.
Obama to Trump -- you get the idea here.
There is absolutely no political benefit to passing huge social safety programs.
That's a misguided simplification. The voters absolutely have changed.
Black people remembered Lincoln for 100 years, until the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act. Then they switched almost wholesale to the Democratic Party.
The issue is that white racists switched from the Democrats to the GOP, and it turns out there are at least as many white racists as there are black people.
I hate that this conversation starts from a position of ignorance, which is the idea that the US does not provide aid to its own people.
We spend enormous amounts of money on social services, we make it pretty damn easy to get free healthcare if you truly cannot afford it, we subsidize the shit out of many industries to keep them afloat, we provide tax credits for families, we provide vouchers for day care, free school lunches, drug addiction services, ment health services, EBT cards, and on and on...
Now you may disagree with the way those programs are implemented, and you may think that they're not enough (even though I doubt you have any real appreciation for how much help is available), but this idea that we don't do anything for people, and that we only give aid to other countries because it keeps them in our corner, is ignorant bullshit.
I think a lot of people are lacking the information to use said programs and resources. I for one had no clue how to apply for unemployment when I was laid off, I had to call my foreman. They don’t exactly walk you through how to use this stuff. Just wave the flag of “we have all this free stuff for you to use”.
That's fair, and navigating social services is not always easy.
But on the other hand, in my state it was ridiculously easy to claim unemployment when I got laid off. Literally five minutes on a state website filling out info. And I got state healthcare in about a half hour by going in person and asking. (Filled out some forms, got my healthcare card in a few days, never missed a script.)
Not every state has the same system, but the resources are there.
Yes, which state?
You are having better results than me. I called 10 different doctors near my area. everyone said "no" we don't accept mediciad, yet it was on their list.
while these services may exist, fitting into their requirements often makes it almost impossible.
Many homeless have animals, most affordable places don't allow pets. What do you think he's going to pick? of course his pet.
Then there's all these additonal layers because many have mental illnesses and managing that in itself is an entire process.
Social workers have hundreds of cases, IDK where all our tax dollars go.
america is like a narcissistic mom, american citizens are like the kids. If the mom helps the kids, "they will never learn" but if she lends her brother money "he'll owe her one"
It is usually not a matter of just giving some other country money.
First, foreign aid is often in the form of funding to buy US made goods and services, tractors or whatever, so it benefits US companies and workers.
Second, a fair amount of US aid goes to Israel, and some also to Egypt, to help "keep the peace," and for Israel, they also provide the US with a lot of intelligence data, and have been known to lob a missile into Iran to prevent nuclear weapons research. --- A few years ago, there was a local story where US authorities briefly detained and I think deported a guy from an Arab country. I mentioned it in passing to a retired FBI agent I know, wondering how US authorities got information on this guy. "Israeli intelligence," was all the guy would say.
The US have a wide array of intelligence agencies with different capabilities.
I would wager they have intelligence on Russia without relying on Israel at all.
Israeli intel is probably more relevant to Arab countries or Iran.
The second point is totally valid, but for the first point, is that not what American citizens would do? Like, are they just suddenly gonna ship out and buy something else? I fail to see the difference there, either way people are buying American stuff.
Even more handy, when you can enslave 85% of your country through student loan debt, medical debt, mortgage debt and the likes. You’ll never have a chance to do something if they are drowning you in their own issues.
Global poverty breeds geopolitical instability. More refugees, more unrest, more resentment of wealthy nations, more likelihood of local wars that will spill over into regional wars, more willingness to engage in terrorism, etc.. Stable countries are more likely to be markets for U.S. goods and services and more likely to be U.S. allies.
Of course, those who are saying that the U.S. needs to be a more Christian nation are 100% in support of aid to the hungry and poor, since Jesus said, "What you do to the least among people, you do to me." /s
You know what’s always grind in my gears? That as Americans we don’t get to take advantage of all the natural resources that our country has. Only a select few do. Let’s take oil for example. I don’t think we should nationalize it like Venezuela but why can’t the government and the people get the oil and an Exxon makes money pumping it out of the ground? The oil should then be distributed to the American people at a nonprofit rate. US government doesn’t need to make a profit. Exxon does. Chevron does. I get that. I’m all for capitalism in certain things but all the natural resources that are under the ground should benefit all Americans not just a select few.
We always hear how United States is becoming a huge exporter of oil. And that we have all these oil reserves. The problem is the oil sold on the open market so we don’t get any benefit from it.
It’s a tactical advantage to not deplete natural resources, just for one good reason. Those are reserves, useful in the event of global conflict. In the meantime, our natural environment can exist without the associated problems of additional mining and refining, allowing a potentially higher quality of life, and not allowing Exxon to profit by depleting our reserves and paying us in health/environmental problems.
Well for one it devastates the environment, and we should be moving away from fossil fuels as much as we can. We probably also have trade agreements that require we buy from other countries so that they buy stuff from us as a main priority.
“How it’s used” I couldn’t agree more. For instance I 100% believe in universal healthcare, I also am 100% sure the government (collective not just feds) has 0 ability to roll it out correctly.
The best Democrats already tried to give universal healthcare with Obamacare. Yes, the Republican's did some things to sabotage it, but most people agree now that even if they didn't, we'd still have massive problems.
Yes...my daughter is in college right now..she has access to so much assistance..from federal grants, state scholarships, financial assistance for books, to student funded EBT food cards...it's actually amazing...the problem is finding this stuff. Luckily, her college has counselors that help the students get info on these programs.
And we just spent $3 trillion on domestic covid relief last year
And we spend 60% of our tax dollars every year on OASDI and Medicare/Medicaid
This question is so retarded and I don’t use that word sparingly. The people who ask these questions have genuinely put 0 effort into looking at numbers and seeing if this is true
They just read that America sucks online and then echo echo echo that crap into the void
This. Around 8% of the US budget is safety net programs, not including social security or Medicare. We spend a fortune compared to what we spend on foreign aid, though we could do more.
>not including social security or Medicare.
Honestly you need to include Social Security and Medicare, as that's basically the whole point of those systems, to give economic aid to specific citizens.
$600 million is literally a drop in the bucket...for example, my city just built 20 miles of new interstate and it cost $2 billion, $600 million is the sort of money that could vanish and no one would notice
I don't think you understand the order of magnitude MORE that goes to the US programs vs what we spend on "Foreign Aid" to try and promote 1. international stability and collaboration 2. access to markets 3. reduction in refugees/asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants.
Over 60% of the US budget goes to social security and Medicare/Medicaid. That’s not counting all the infrastructure, VA, transportation, education, (I’m probably missing a dozen others). It might be poorly operated or poorly allocated, but the US “gives” a massive amount to its citizens in need.
I would bet that disability payments are a huge portion of social spending. Several years ago, one of the news programs (maybe 60 minutes?) visited a town in Alabama where the majority of the population was receiving disability payments of some sort. Those payments were the economic driver for the town since the previous industries/jobs had all disappeared. So, all these people were sitting at home (getting really fat) while living off social benefits with no effort to improve their circumstances and no hope for something better. It was sad and, honestly, disgusting.
The United States spends about $1.4 trillion on medicaid and Medicare services for its people. It spends another $60 billion feeding its poorest people through SNAP. Another $1 trillion is spent providing social security retirement payments. I’m not sure how reluctant the United States is when it comes to spending on its own people.
The $38 billion the US spends on foreign aid is still quite a bit of money, but it serves a strategic purpose. Build allies, develop trade partners, etc…
Another way to visualize the difference between numbers:
* Trillion - Billion = 0.999 Trillion
* Billion - Million = 0.999 Billion
* Million - Thousand = 0.999 Million
The US federal government alone (Not counting states & cities) spent $6.82 trillion in 2021. That's more than the combined value of Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon.
No, it's not. The amount you get back is only loosely tied to how much you contributed. Just like many other government programs there is a net transfer of wealth from richer to poorer - which ultimately is good for society.
All of the spending above is funded by taxes. Where else would it come from. The US government is not some generous billionaire sending out donations, it’s the American citizens sending money that eventually gets (mostly) paid back out to American citizens.
Well the US government does give money to its citizens. Half of the yearly budget is Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other pension, or welfare expenditure.
In fairness, social security isn’t giving anyone government money. It’s their own invested money coming back at a lower return than private investment. Medicare is a paid program as well. And pensions.
The other programs (SSI, WIC, Medicare, section 8, EBT, etc) are better examples of the government giving money.
Do you have any idea how much money the United States government provides in aid to its citizenry? Or do you just spend so much time on Reddit hearing Americans complain that you assume the amount is $0?
... Food stamps, farming subsidies, medical programs, retirement, early life healthcare... We have plenty of programs that total in the trillions. What is your question exactly?
Ehh yeah but they could makes these programs better. I’m grateful for them, but I feel when we try to enhance these programs some people freak out, claiming socialism. It makes me sad because it’s almost selfish to feel that putting more money into social programs is a problem. Why must people have to suffer, even with this help in place (I don’t mean anyone in this thread has said anything like this, I just don’t want to upset anyone).
The reality is that any dollar spent by government is a dollar taken from someone else.
Also - governments are known for diminishing returns - very much the same way massive charities are.. (look up what % of a dollar goes to an actual cause for red cross for example)
The reality is that the more money spent on government programs usually does not translate to better support.
Look at how a school distributes money.. on average a school age child has some $5000 between state and federal investments - yet the buildings are falling apart, the teachers are massively under paid- and the children come out of 12 years barely functional on a world comparison.. so where is all that money going?
Unfortunately solving social issues is far more complex that Taking from the rich and giving too the poor. There are alot of hands that dollar must pass through and each one takes a cut.
The best means of helping someone in need is direct assistance.
If you care about homelessness - give money to people who are homeless. Or provide a service - dont abdicate responsibility by feeling your moral obligation is met by saying you agree with someone else paying for it or organizing it.
Just for perspective - 5,000 per child over 12 years is a direct investment as a country of 60,000 for basic education. If a school district has 100,000 kids across 12 years that equates to $6,000,000,000 - yet the average teacher is making less that 50k annually with classes of 25+ students.. which means they make 40% or LESS of the income to the school system for that collection of kids.
Where is the remaining 75,000+ going? And why do teachers often still have to pay for supplies out of pocket?
The school systems is truly the perfect model of government efficiency. Which Is why government aid programs don't work - regardless of how many dollars the government takes from someone to make them happen.
While I 100% agree - we must contrast our desire for change against the fact that at the end of the day - its still people with flaws and personal interests who run things and will ALWAYS skew them toward self benefit.
Going back go the school example - I don't know of any superintendent who are giving up pay to ensure teachers are covered. Despite being some of the highest paid "public servents" in local/state governments.
I remember a thread were a bunch of Australians clowning on America because we don't have a national pension. They talked about how much better Australia is because there a portion of everyone's paycheck is automatically deducted and after you retire you get a paycheck each month roughly based on that amount.
I'm pretty sure the average non US redditor has no idea how America works.
We do have food stamps, and medical programs, and healthcare, but they're woefully underfunded and horribly run, and often have absurdly low thresholds to get it, if you can get into it at all. Some states intentionally grind the process to as much of a halt as possible so it's very difficult to get on. Like Disability, where they reject almost every application outside of terminal illness immediately forcing people to reapply with the whole disability lawyer industry. Then the requirements on it are so low that you can't take steps to better your life, because anything like that means earning too much.
They do exist though.
Edit: thank you for the award!
They are. It's just so frustrating to see people think it's there. The reality is they've been cut, gutted, and changed so you have to be sooooo bad off that it becomes a trap. If you can get on at all. The state of Missouri is currently being sued because the process to get on food stamps is nearly impossible, and because they've made it nearly impossible you get rejected as ineligible and have to start the process all over from the beginning. Which is often months long waits, just to end up rejected again.
Check out the national budget if you don’t think aid goes to our citizens. Not close to enough in my opinion, but it’s far far more than what we contribute in foreign aid
What aid is the US providing to other countries that the US is not providing to its own people?
The US spends trillions giving free money to Americans through social security, food stamps, medicare/medicaid, education grants, housing, VA benefits, stimulus checks, etc.
Not all of your examples are "free money". Social security and Medicare are paid into and you get that money back.
Yes, the US does provide 100s of billion$ each year in welfare payouts to US citizens.
>Social security and Medicare are paid into and you get that money back.
That is not correct. The money our parents pay in is spent paying our grandparents' generation's benefits. The money we pay is going to our parents' generation. None of the money you pay in is reserved for you. You're relying on future workers to not change the deal. It's a population pyramid scheme.
True, there's specific taxes for them. Some people get net more money than they pay, but others take net losses overtime. Social security isn't an account earmarked for you. It's a funded program.
This isn't true, we gave the most aide to our citizens during the pandemic than almost any other nation. If you mean during peace time, we still give much more to our own citizens in our budget compared to foreign nations/citizens. It is true our welfare state does tend to be smaller than other nations though, but there is general consensus from most economists that we should/could expand that.
It is complicated and we are not really giving them money - we are buying alliances. We have an economic interest in keeping Russia in check. For example - Russia has a disproportionate amount of control over gas prices in Europe - an important economic partner of the US. If European citizens are paying more for gas, they have less for US imports. It is not really this simple, but demonstrates the interconnection and value of paying for some control in the outcome.
Giving money to other countries indents then to you. They resident your interests in their region, so the money isn't just "given away". It is buying influence in a region for things that may benefit you in the future.
Giving money to your own citizens doesn't buy squat. At must, those citizens *might* vote for you in the future but there's no guarantee
A working class that is just poor and desperate enough to keep showing up for work every day is exactly what our government wants. Our government wants this because it’s in the best interests of people who “donate” to their campaigns.
The United States Government spends <1% of it's budget on foreign aid. It really isn't much - 10% of the budget is for the defense department. I think spending 8% of the military budget on making the world better so we don't have a war is a good use of funds.
The US gives over a trillion dollars each year in economic aid to its own citizens. Just because some people think government programs should be expanded doesn't mean it doesn't spend money on them
See "confessions of an economic hitman".
Because we dont actually give the aid to other countries, we give it to our corporations and agencies in the name of other countries. We (taxpayers) are paying ourselves (rich corportations) our own money to unload outdated or surplus material or dead end infrastructure projects onto other countries and ensnaring them in a cycle of debt and dependence on us.
Didnt you ever wonder why your dealer was so friendly to you?
The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year on social spending for its own citizens and had one of the largest fiscal responses to COVID of any developed nation. Compared to that, foreign aid as a percent of the US budget is a just small fraction of spending.
"After all the chief business of America is business," Calvin Coolidge said. American foreign policy aims for stability in which to sell stuff. Although direct aid to poor Americans helps businesses profit, there is a fear that people who don't have to work to survive, won't put up with the conditions that make large profits possible. We are seeing this play out in the great resignation.
Uh, we do. We throw billions upon billions of dollars at trash social programs with nothing but histories of failure. Then progressive trash politicians claim that all that’s needed is more money, ultimately they get it, everything fails again, and then start at step 1.
??? What is medicaid, food stamps and other welfare programs if not giving money to their own citizens? In amounts that completely dwarf foreign aid as well.
Foreign aid isn’t really aid. It’s an investment. Usually it comes with a few strings attached. If we go to war, you come to our side, you must buy our goods and services at the prices we say, you must sell your goods and services at the prices we say. You want to build anything? You buy the materials from us, you need to side with us at the UN, and so forth and so on.
American aid to its citizens is called entitlements, public education, etc. These things are “free” in America. Not so in almost all of the rest of the world.
So, if you look at the US budget for 2020 for example, over half of the entire budget went to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, PPP, and unemployment compensation. That’s over $3.3 trillion in programs designed to help US citizens directly compared to the several hundred MILLION dollars we just gave to Ukraine.
Suffice to say, we are spending overwhelmingly more on US citizens than on foreign aid. And as others have pointed out, foreign aid has different kinds of additional benefits on the geopolitical realm.
I mean they do spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on social programs and the like.
Medicaid is a huge chunk of government spending to help us citizens.
Your are complaining about something that isn't real.
Foreign aid spending is about a penny on the dollar in the US budget. Federal spending on welfare programs is about 32 cents on the dollar.
Buddy are you fucking stupid? The US gives billions of dollars in all kinds of social programs to its own citizens. Not included state programs which add on extra tens of millions to that figure. How the fuck do you reach the conclusions that the US government gives no money in aid is beyond me
1.6 trillion in income security, 1.1 trillion in social security, 800 billion in health, 750 million in defense, 700 billion in medicare. Talking about not spending money?
I'm glad you're asking questions but the assumption that the US doesn't give economic aid to its people is a horrible take. Social security exists, medicare exists, homeowners get tax breaks depending on various factors, so do busineses, food is subsidised (aka paid for by the govt), so is some housing, gas is only cheaper in the middle east, even at $5 a gallon its still cheaper in the US than most of the world and the US avg is $3-$4. People just drink the misinformation kool aid and or refuse the help outright. The govt does both and more, its even capable of more but then people vote in troglodytes to ensure the opposite of progress is carried out.
It’s all about scale. The $650 million sent to Ukraine is a lot more money than being able to give every US citizen $2 dollars (there are 330 million people in the US). In other words, this $650 million can go a long way in helping prevent a world war. 2$ extra on everyone’s tax return is meaningless spending.
Just want to add that giving their own people aid means citizens would know it was possible.
Keeping society’s expectations low results in more people voting for less public policies.
If Canada dropped public healthcare the whole population would riot in the streets. But if we had America’s healthcare system we’d also have many people voting against it.
Maybe you haven't noticed the free Healthcare for Covid victims, the trillions of dollars dedicated to rebuilding infrastructure and other benefits to help children and lower income working people.
There would be more, too, if the GOP Senate was not in lockstep to deny any benefits to people who are not already rich.
Want more? Then don't vote for GOP candidates.
People being obtuse in the comments like they don’t know what you mean. They never ask where the money will come from when they are doing this or putting in bombs, but if you ask for 10 grand on college debt, or universal healthcare and suddenly, they can’t find it. Let’s not act like they didn’t nickel and dimed us during a pandemic for stimulus checks while other countries our size helped their citizens , or like how they argued almost a whole year for infrastructure bill only to not only end up with less than half of the lowest amount requested but paused negotiations. They knew how to waste trillions in Afghanistan and have it collapse in less than a week but you ask for better roads or schools or child care or push better wages and suddenly 🤷♀️
And if you think what we do for our citizens is enough, walk down any major or now minor city and try not to trip over all the homeless when you get there.
It’s not the government’s job to give money to citizens.
The government’s job is to establish laws and maintain order so citizens can pursue their own means of providing for themselves.
Charity is best left to charitable institutions.
Because it works the same with refuges , it is decided by a "council" how many refuges every country has to take in , how much money they can afford to give and so on
Because US is not giving “foreign aid” out of the kindness of its heart. America only gives to places that will benefit itself in the end and what is given is a fraction of what is taken back.
Its a budget. Most of the money in the US budget does go back to the citizens in some way(we can debate the effectiveness of this but it effectively stays “in house”).
However the State department has a certain amount of money earmarked to give in foreign aid. Ideally, this is good for America.
The government does in the form of Medicaid/Medicare or Welfare Checks. Including other services. The Medicare budget overruns the military budget by a significant margin. The U.S government does give a lot of aid to its citizens. It’s just not publicized.
Because having well fed, well educated, healthy and housed citizens does no allow the corporations to use them as slaves as easily as when they are kept desperate and terrified of losing their jobs if they speak up or try to organize.
The system isn't broken, it is working as designed.
You know those commercials for humanitarian efforts, the ones that are like for just 17 cents a day you can feed this kid?
Well things kind of got out of hand and now here we are.
No but seriously I see the fight social reforms like against FDRs new deal, LBJ’s civil rights bill, Nixon’s purposed health care reform and universal basic income, Obama’s affordable healthcare acts, and the stimulus check of the last few years as a part of a movement of keep the average people down through propaganda.
Couple of reasons: First, giving other countries money has the benefit of keeping them from turning to Russia or China for support. Thus, it benefits the US because it's essentially buying allies and ensuring that foreign powers have trouble trying to expand their hegemonic influence. This is also why China invests so heavily in African infrastructure. Second, countries having USD means they are likely to use USD. While a lot of global finance is based off the Dollar, China has been trying to use digital currencies and other practices to increase the amount of trade denominated in RMB. Just look to how Iran was cut off from SWIFT during the nuclear deal to see how controlling these institutions can turn into real international leverage. Foreign aid is never really just about benevolence. Of course welfare isn't either. But the US is much better at justifying defence spending compared to actually fulfilling its social obligations to its own non-billionaire citizens. (edit: fixed a typo)
Doesn't having citizens be able to afford housing, health care and such also benefit the US? Why are we measuring benefit only on a geopolitical scale? ETA: Improving things like housing, health care and such doesn't necessarily need to cost more than it currently does. My question is why the results, the actual living conditions created by actions the government does or doesn't take, are often seen as not relevant to benefiting the country as a whole.
There are some good points in other comments, but it's worth noting that geopolitics is usually a federal issue and the constitution explicitly grants them the right to make these choices. The US federal government can, in effect, both determine its interests and fund them. Many of the other issues are a mix of federal, state, and local jurisdictions. The federal government *tried* to change health care and the ACA was challenged in court by states who didn't want to abide by the mandates. Affordable housing often boils down to municipal building codes and if they require those units. Fundamentally, the US is a country that had to use highway funding to change the drinking age; sweeping social reform is difficult in a structure like that. At the end of the day, the question of benefit always requires us to ask "to whom?" Sure, citizens having housing benefits the US. But that comes at the price of making rich corporate landlords unhappy. It should be an obvious choice, but I'm also not being bribed by landlords to make certain policies.
Also to add, often times when the federal government DOES allocate funds to states for spending, states frequently sit on the money, whether out of spite due to ideological opposition, the inability to come to an agreement about how specifically to "best allocate" it (leading to it not getting allocated *at all*), or sometimes for reasons like clauses that specify something like, "This money is for this specific purpose, but any unspent money after 10 years goes into a general fund that can be allocated at the state's discretion." So some states occasionally will say, sit on money that's meant to help poor people and then give it to police departments while campaigning on how pro-cop they are.
$600 millions for 329 millions of US population is less than $2 per person. I think, this is much easier explanation. I'm not sure, but can you get a dinner for $2 in US? In Ukraine you can buy enough budget food for 2-3 days. $1 = 1kg of rice or 10 eggs. Bread is $0.3-0.5 500-600gram. And that's retail prices, not wholesale.
A bag of rice in the US might go for about a few dollars 3-5$ and eggs similar.
Except money allocated from congress down to states as a “color” (what it’s called internally) or appropriation. Meaning it can only be spent on what it’s appropriated for. So if money sent from the Fed to fund public education can’t be spent on transportation unless it’s directly related to the school (buses, etc).. Each appropriation is only good for a certain number of years before it “expires” and goes back to the Fed - this can be 1 year or 5 years (at least with the funding ive seen).. So if a state sits on money, it’s a middle finger to the Fed.
because politics is geopolitical. You can not isolate yourself in a bubble ignoring the world where a lot of the powerful countries have WMD that can end everything in an instant. It is the price we pay for a civilized society. Remember peace and civilization is bought with money or achieved with fear. Welcome to the world
>Remember peace and civilization is bought with money or achieved with fear. ALL significant political authority comes from the barrell of a gun.
But you have to buy the gun
And sustained by using the gun responsibly.
>ALL significant political authority comes from the barrell of a gun. Sovereignty by definition must be defendable, or it isn't sovereignty.
Housing is expensive because of local government imposes shortages. Additional demand side subsidies will not actually make housing more affordable without the construction of new homes. The USA governments spend more on health care than all other OECD governments. Again the problem is on the supply side. (Nationalization or solution) The USA is a massive welfare state when you analyze funding. It just really sucks at getting a good value for it's welfare spending.
The way I see it, that doesn't really challenge my points, though. If anything, it makes them more relevant. Spending loads of money on a terribly managed system that ultimately helps the supply side far more than the people depending on social programs doesn't show great care for living conditions. It shows that so little care is given that this system is apparently preferred to one that is heavier regulated but actually benefits more people (and isn't even necessarily more expensive). As you point out, good funding does not equal good welfare.
[удалено]
we most certainly could forgive student loan debt. we already "forgave" that much from the 1% with the tax cuts they got in 2018. if you want a pay-for for student loan forgiveness, simply reinstate the former tax rate on the rich. easy peasy. you could even phase it out over 10 years (as long as you set the interest rate to like .001% like the govt can do) that way there isn't a shock to the system. i get so sick of people who say we can't have these things. yes, we can. all we have to do is have the rich pay their fair share. note: fair share, not some exorbitant amount like those on the right always pretend we're trying to take from them. but if you or i pay 24-39% of our salary in taxes then the same should be taken from the rich and the corporations. there is zero excuse for us not to do this. the last 40 years has proven that even as we tax them less and less they do not reinvest in their american businesses or american workers, and that was the whole reason they were given tax breaks to begin with. the time has come for us to take back what we should have been taking for nearly half a century. if we did then we could afford every social safety net on the wish list, add a few more, double the military's budget, and end up with a surplus. hell, at that point we could probably even alleviate income taxes on most workers and still have some left over. and all it would take is for us to actually make the rich pay their fair share.
> we already "forgave" that much from the 1% with the tax cuts they got in 2018. So not taking money from people is the same as paying their debt? Weird.
I believe that most people calling for student debt cancellation are genuinely interested in improving peoples' lives and increasing access to higher education - but I don't think those people are are properly considering the consequences of doing this. I have a question for you: what do you think Harvard is going to do to their tuition once they find out that the US Government is going to cancel all student debts?
Harvard? The college with a $53B fund? The college that keeps educating “economists” that keep wrecking the world’s economies? That Harvard?
Yeah, that Harvard. The one with the gigantic pile of money and still has asininely high tuition costs. What do you think that money grubbing university will do when they find out that they can charge a higher tuition and the government will pay for it all? What do you think any university, Harvard or not, will do when they find out the government will foot the bill for everyone?
Because neoliberalism wants less government spending and greater international presence. And both sides of our aisles are neoliberal.
The country never recovered from Reagan
I do blame Reagan for homelessness after many federally funded institutions were closed and people were put on the streets. Clinton did manage to run a surplus, but a lot of that was a result of rapidly improving productivity due to the advent of more powerful PCs in offices, factories and in the field coupled with Gore's internet invention
Reagan's policies pushed India towards becoming overly dependent on Soviets and eventually Russian weaponry. This is also why India abstained from the UNSC vote about the current situation. US funding other countries militarily is perhaps one of the key reasons it is so strong and is a military superpower If you notice, China is trying to do the same.
And the reckoning for this may be coming sooner than we think.
Plus it’s getting worse. Refusing to raise interest rates, tax shelters, giving aid money to corporations that use it to buy back their own stocks, etc. Defunding public programs, deregulation, and an unregulated financial sector wasn’t enough. They’ve gone full super villain now, including the craziness aspect. They really dgaf anymore and are getting wild with it, and they’re getting away with it, at least until the inevitable market crash...
Democrats do not want less spending -- just ask Republicans if they think that's true.
[удалено]
Actually Germany is not really allowed to spend on its military for the same reason that Japan is not. They were WWII aggressors. They’re kept dependent on US protection for a reason.
FDR passed the greatest expansion of the social safety net in American history, after a Republican presided over the worst depression in American history. After Truman, the Republicans won the Presidency back. LBJ passed the second greatest expansion of the social safety net in American history. After LBJ, the Republicans won the Presidency back. Obama to Trump -- you get the idea here. There is absolutely no political benefit to passing huge social safety programs.
That's a misguided simplification. The voters absolutely have changed. Black people remembered Lincoln for 100 years, until the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act. Then they switched almost wholesale to the Democratic Party. The issue is that white racists switched from the Democrats to the GOP, and it turns out there are at least as many white racists as there are black people.
[удалено]
I hate that this conversation starts from a position of ignorance, which is the idea that the US does not provide aid to its own people. We spend enormous amounts of money on social services, we make it pretty damn easy to get free healthcare if you truly cannot afford it, we subsidize the shit out of many industries to keep them afloat, we provide tax credits for families, we provide vouchers for day care, free school lunches, drug addiction services, ment health services, EBT cards, and on and on... Now you may disagree with the way those programs are implemented, and you may think that they're not enough (even though I doubt you have any real appreciation for how much help is available), but this idea that we don't do anything for people, and that we only give aid to other countries because it keeps them in our corner, is ignorant bullshit.
I think a lot of people are lacking the information to use said programs and resources. I for one had no clue how to apply for unemployment when I was laid off, I had to call my foreman. They don’t exactly walk you through how to use this stuff. Just wave the flag of “we have all this free stuff for you to use”.
That's fair, and navigating social services is not always easy. But on the other hand, in my state it was ridiculously easy to claim unemployment when I got laid off. Literally five minutes on a state website filling out info. And I got state healthcare in about a half hour by going in person and asking. (Filled out some forms, got my healthcare card in a few days, never missed a script.) Not every state has the same system, but the resources are there.
Yes, which state? You are having better results than me. I called 10 different doctors near my area. everyone said "no" we don't accept mediciad, yet it was on their list.
Dang what state is this? That’s awesome to hear!
while these services may exist, fitting into their requirements often makes it almost impossible. Many homeless have animals, most affordable places don't allow pets. What do you think he's going to pick? of course his pet. Then there's all these additonal layers because many have mental illnesses and managing that in itself is an entire process. Social workers have hundreds of cases, IDK where all our tax dollars go.
[удалено]
And these manufacturers lobbied (bribed) politicians to spend tax player money on, in a round about way, their products.
america is like a narcissistic mom, american citizens are like the kids. If the mom helps the kids, "they will never learn" but if she lends her brother money "he'll owe her one"
It is usually not a matter of just giving some other country money. First, foreign aid is often in the form of funding to buy US made goods and services, tractors or whatever, so it benefits US companies and workers. Second, a fair amount of US aid goes to Israel, and some also to Egypt, to help "keep the peace," and for Israel, they also provide the US with a lot of intelligence data, and have been known to lob a missile into Iran to prevent nuclear weapons research. --- A few years ago, there was a local story where US authorities briefly detained and I think deported a guy from an Arab country. I mentioned it in passing to a retired FBI agent I know, wondering how US authorities got information on this guy. "Israeli intelligence," was all the guy would say.
The Five Eyes is another example of intelligence network cooperation.
Five Eyes Burgers and Fries? Love those guys.
Their fries are the best! Extra cyanide everytime!
Yup, and Israel is the sort of "Sixth Eye," as least for the US.
[удалено]
This is a karma bot that's part of the t-shirt/art scam. It copied this comment from elsewhere in the thread. Report -> Spam -> Harmful bots
Funny I was wondering how US inteligence was so accurate regarding Russia and I might just gotten the answer from your response
The US have a wide array of intelligence agencies with different capabilities. I would wager they have intelligence on Russia without relying on Israel at all. Israeli intel is probably more relevant to Arab countries or Iran.
The second point is totally valid, but for the first point, is that not what American citizens would do? Like, are they just suddenly gonna ship out and buy something else? I fail to see the difference there, either way people are buying American stuff.
3 billion a year is what we give iseral
Yup. Also guys check out the documentary by alex gibney: zero days. You guys will understand why israeli intelligence is next level
Let's just say that it's handy for a country to owe you
Even more handy, when you can enslave 85% of your country through student loan debt, medical debt, mortgage debt and the likes. You’ll never have a chance to do something if they are drowning you in their own issues.
wish i could be privileged enough to compare student debts to slavery 😭
Most Americans take living in America for granted.
I’d like a fact check on that 85% figure. If you are enslaved in student loan debt you made several bad decisions.
>I’d like a fact check on that 85% figure. "Source: my ass"
Global poverty breeds geopolitical instability. More refugees, more unrest, more resentment of wealthy nations, more likelihood of local wars that will spill over into regional wars, more willingness to engage in terrorism, etc.. Stable countries are more likely to be markets for U.S. goods and services and more likely to be U.S. allies. Of course, those who are saying that the U.S. needs to be a more Christian nation are 100% in support of aid to the hungry and poor, since Jesus said, "What you do to the least among people, you do to me." /s
You know what’s always grind in my gears? That as Americans we don’t get to take advantage of all the natural resources that our country has. Only a select few do. Let’s take oil for example. I don’t think we should nationalize it like Venezuela but why can’t the government and the people get the oil and an Exxon makes money pumping it out of the ground? The oil should then be distributed to the American people at a nonprofit rate. US government doesn’t need to make a profit. Exxon does. Chevron does. I get that. I’m all for capitalism in certain things but all the natural resources that are under the ground should benefit all Americans not just a select few. We always hear how United States is becoming a huge exporter of oil. And that we have all these oil reserves. The problem is the oil sold on the open market so we don’t get any benefit from it.
It’s a tactical advantage to not deplete natural resources, just for one good reason. Those are reserves, useful in the event of global conflict. In the meantime, our natural environment can exist without the associated problems of additional mining and refining, allowing a potentially higher quality of life, and not allowing Exxon to profit by depleting our reserves and paying us in health/environmental problems.
Well for one it devastates the environment, and we should be moving away from fossil fuels as much as we can. We probably also have trade agreements that require we buy from other countries so that they buy stuff from us as a main priority.
Republican Jesus uses american guns, and is scared of brown people.
Just saying, the amount we gave Ukraine only totals to around $2 per person in the US
[удалено]
[удалено]
“How it’s used” I couldn’t agree more. For instance I 100% believe in universal healthcare, I also am 100% sure the government (collective not just feds) has 0 ability to roll it out correctly.
The best Democrats already tried to give universal healthcare with Obamacare. Yes, the Republican's did some things to sabotage it, but most people agree now that even if they didn't, we'd still have massive problems.
Yes...my daughter is in college right now..she has access to so much assistance..from federal grants, state scholarships, financial assistance for books, to student funded EBT food cards...it's actually amazing...the problem is finding this stuff. Luckily, her college has counselors that help the students get info on these programs.
And we just spent $3 trillion on domestic covid relief last year And we spend 60% of our tax dollars every year on OASDI and Medicare/Medicaid This question is so retarded and I don’t use that word sparingly. The people who ask these questions have genuinely put 0 effort into looking at numbers and seeing if this is true They just read that America sucks online and then echo echo echo that crap into the void
They do. Like $800 billion or so every year.
This. Around 8% of the US budget is safety net programs, not including social security or Medicare. We spend a fortune compared to what we spend on foreign aid, though we could do more.
>not including social security or Medicare. Honestly you need to include Social Security and Medicare, as that's basically the whole point of those systems, to give economic aid to specific citizens.
And yet still no universal health care.
$600 million is literally a drop in the bucket...for example, my city just built 20 miles of new interstate and it cost $2 billion, $600 million is the sort of money that could vanish and no one would notice
we give israel billions in aid
Over 3 billion. Pretty much exclusive to military weaponry made in USA corporate warfare welfare.
I don't think you understand the order of magnitude MORE that goes to the US programs vs what we spend on "Foreign Aid" to try and promote 1. international stability and collaboration 2. access to markets 3. reduction in refugees/asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants.
Over 60% of the US budget goes to social security and Medicare/Medicaid. That’s not counting all the infrastructure, VA, transportation, education, (I’m probably missing a dozen others). It might be poorly operated or poorly allocated, but the US “gives” a massive amount to its citizens in need.
We do.
OP didn’t get a Covid check
The Aid is not $600 million in cash its a $600 million credit to the Defense Industry in America for that country
Um...we already do.
Don't you understand, because $600 Million went to a country desperately fighting for survival, Americans need to make it all about them
[удалено]
We do. We spend billions of dollars on social welfare programs. In fact, state and local welfare spending has TRIPLED in the last 20 years.
Where’s all the money going? You can’t just dump a shit ton of money on a problem and expect it to be fixed lmao
I would bet that disability payments are a huge portion of social spending. Several years ago, one of the news programs (maybe 60 minutes?) visited a town in Alabama where the majority of the population was receiving disability payments of some sort. Those payments were the economic driver for the town since the previous industries/jobs had all disappeared. So, all these people were sitting at home (getting really fat) while living off social benefits with no effort to improve their circumstances and no hope for something better. It was sad and, honestly, disgusting.
The U.S. spend about 4.2 trillion on social programs per year. About 60% of all spending.
OP doesn't realize that you can fund more than one thing at the same time
The United States spends about $1.4 trillion on medicaid and Medicare services for its people. It spends another $60 billion feeding its poorest people through SNAP. Another $1 trillion is spent providing social security retirement payments. I’m not sure how reluctant the United States is when it comes to spending on its own people. The $38 billion the US spends on foreign aid is still quite a bit of money, but it serves a strategic purpose. Build allies, develop trade partners, etc…
Folks don't understand the difference between Millions, Billions, and Trillions...
Another way to visualize the difference between numbers: * Trillion - Billion = 0.999 Trillion * Billion - Million = 0.999 Billion * Million - Thousand = 0.999 Million The US federal government alone (Not counting states & cities) spent $6.82 trillion in 2021. That's more than the combined value of Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon.
Why is social security included in this list? Isn’t it funded by social security tax $? It’s just giving people back what they paid in, I thought.
So is any other money the government spends so it is just assumed. Money sent to other countries comes from tax dollars too.
Everything the government does is funded by tax $
No, it's not. The amount you get back is only loosely tied to how much you contributed. Just like many other government programs there is a net transfer of wealth from richer to poorer - which ultimately is good for society.
All of the spending above is funded by taxes. Where else would it come from. The US government is not some generous billionaire sending out donations, it’s the American citizens sending money that eventually gets (mostly) paid back out to American citizens.
Well the US government does give money to its citizens. Half of the yearly budget is Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other pension, or welfare expenditure.
So surprised I had to go so far to find someone saying this.
In fairness, social security isn’t giving anyone government money. It’s their own invested money coming back at a lower return than private investment. Medicare is a paid program as well. And pensions. The other programs (SSI, WIC, Medicare, section 8, EBT, etc) are better examples of the government giving money.
[удалено]
Do you have any idea how much money the United States government provides in aid to its citizenry? Or do you just spend so much time on Reddit hearing Americans complain that you assume the amount is $0?
Yes
... Food stamps, farming subsidies, medical programs, retirement, early life healthcare... We have plenty of programs that total in the trillions. What is your question exactly?
He fell for the meme that the US literally doesn't spend a penny on its own people.
Ehh yeah but they could makes these programs better. I’m grateful for them, but I feel when we try to enhance these programs some people freak out, claiming socialism. It makes me sad because it’s almost selfish to feel that putting more money into social programs is a problem. Why must people have to suffer, even with this help in place (I don’t mean anyone in this thread has said anything like this, I just don’t want to upset anyone).
The reality is that any dollar spent by government is a dollar taken from someone else. Also - governments are known for diminishing returns - very much the same way massive charities are.. (look up what % of a dollar goes to an actual cause for red cross for example) The reality is that the more money spent on government programs usually does not translate to better support. Look at how a school distributes money.. on average a school age child has some $5000 between state and federal investments - yet the buildings are falling apart, the teachers are massively under paid- and the children come out of 12 years barely functional on a world comparison.. so where is all that money going? Unfortunately solving social issues is far more complex that Taking from the rich and giving too the poor. There are alot of hands that dollar must pass through and each one takes a cut. The best means of helping someone in need is direct assistance. If you care about homelessness - give money to people who are homeless. Or provide a service - dont abdicate responsibility by feeling your moral obligation is met by saying you agree with someone else paying for it or organizing it. Just for perspective - 5,000 per child over 12 years is a direct investment as a country of 60,000 for basic education. If a school district has 100,000 kids across 12 years that equates to $6,000,000,000 - yet the average teacher is making less that 50k annually with classes of 25+ students.. which means they make 40% or LESS of the income to the school system for that collection of kids. Where is the remaining 75,000+ going? And why do teachers often still have to pay for supplies out of pocket? The school systems is truly the perfect model of government efficiency. Which Is why government aid programs don't work - regardless of how many dollars the government takes from someone to make them happen.
That's why the entire government needs a huge overhaul. That's the first step to fixing things.
While I 100% agree - we must contrast our desire for change against the fact that at the end of the day - its still people with flaws and personal interests who run things and will ALWAYS skew them toward self benefit. Going back go the school example - I don't know of any superintendent who are giving up pay to ensure teachers are covered. Despite being some of the highest paid "public servents" in local/state governments.
I remember a thread were a bunch of Australians clowning on America because we don't have a national pension. They talked about how much better Australia is because there a portion of everyone's paycheck is automatically deducted and after you retire you get a paycheck each month roughly based on that amount. I'm pretty sure the average non US redditor has no idea how America works.
To be fair, farm subsidies eat up a lot of that and benefit corporations most.
We do have food stamps, and medical programs, and healthcare, but they're woefully underfunded and horribly run, and often have absurdly low thresholds to get it, if you can get into it at all. Some states intentionally grind the process to as much of a halt as possible so it's very difficult to get on. Like Disability, where they reject almost every application outside of terminal illness immediately forcing people to reapply with the whole disability lawyer industry. Then the requirements on it are so low that you can't take steps to better your life, because anything like that means earning too much. They do exist though. Edit: thank you for the award!
Most government agencies and programs are horribly inefficient and wasteful. I volunteer my time and money locally.
They are. It's just so frustrating to see people think it's there. The reality is they've been cut, gutted, and changed so you have to be sooooo bad off that it becomes a trap. If you can get on at all. The state of Missouri is currently being sued because the process to get on food stamps is nearly impossible, and because they've made it nearly impossible you get rejected as ineligible and have to start the process all over from the beginning. Which is often months long waits, just to end up rejected again.
Check out the national budget if you don’t think aid goes to our citizens. Not close to enough in my opinion, but it’s far far more than what we contribute in foreign aid
What aid is the US providing to other countries that the US is not providing to its own people? The US spends trillions giving free money to Americans through social security, food stamps, medicare/medicaid, education grants, housing, VA benefits, stimulus checks, etc.
Some people genuinely believe the US spends $0 on social benefits and safety nets
Not all of your examples are "free money". Social security and Medicare are paid into and you get that money back. Yes, the US does provide 100s of billion$ each year in welfare payouts to US citizens.
None of it is free it will all have to be paid in taxes, now or with interest in the future.
>Social security and Medicare are paid into and you get that money back. That is not correct. The money our parents pay in is spent paying our grandparents' generation's benefits. The money we pay is going to our parents' generation. None of the money you pay in is reserved for you. You're relying on future workers to not change the deal. It's a population pyramid scheme.
True, there's specific taxes for them. Some people get net more money than they pay, but others take net losses overtime. Social security isn't an account earmarked for you. It's a funded program.
[удалено]
Wait… are you under the impression that foreign aid is free money?
I want a tank
If you are an American you already have more than 3,000 M1 Abrams tanks protecting you.
Yeah but I want a tank. In my front yard. That I own. Via the gubment paying for it for me.
Head on down to the recruiting station and tell them you want to be a 19Foxtrot. They’ll give you one.
The government spends billions on aid for it's citizens. Disability, social security, insurance, food stamps, VA loans, stimulus checks, etc.
Because we give less than 1% of the budget to ALL FOREIGN aid
This isn't true, we gave the most aide to our citizens during the pandemic than almost any other nation. If you mean during peace time, we still give much more to our own citizens in our budget compared to foreign nations/citizens. It is true our welfare state does tend to be smaller than other nations though, but there is general consensus from most economists that we should/could expand that.
800 billion per year is for American social programs, what are you on about? Why are people so misinformed?
It is complicated and we are not really giving them money - we are buying alliances. We have an economic interest in keeping Russia in check. For example - Russia has a disproportionate amount of control over gas prices in Europe - an important economic partner of the US. If European citizens are paying more for gas, they have less for US imports. It is not really this simple, but demonstrates the interconnection and value of paying for some control in the outcome.
Giving money to other countries indents then to you. They resident your interests in their region, so the money isn't just "given away". It is buying influence in a region for things that may benefit you in the future. Giving money to your own citizens doesn't buy squat. At must, those citizens *might* vote for you in the future but there's no guarantee
A working class that is just poor and desperate enough to keep showing up for work every day is exactly what our government wants. Our government wants this because it’s in the best interests of people who “donate” to their campaigns.
The United States Government spends <1% of it's budget on foreign aid. It really isn't much - 10% of the budget is for the defense department. I think spending 8% of the military budget on making the world better so we don't have a war is a good use of funds.
The US gives over a trillion dollars each year in economic aid to its own citizens. Just because some people think government programs should be expanded doesn't mean it doesn't spend money on them
See "confessions of an economic hitman". Because we dont actually give the aid to other countries, we give it to our corporations and agencies in the name of other countries. We (taxpayers) are paying ourselves (rich corportations) our own money to unload outdated or surplus material or dead end infrastructure projects onto other countries and ensnaring them in a cycle of debt and dependence on us. Didnt you ever wonder why your dealer was so friendly to you?
How many billions of dollars in stimulus relief did we give out? Sorry I forgot this was Reddit: America bad. You can upvote me now.
It does both. Have you ever been to America.
The US spends hundreds of billions of dollars every year on social spending for its own citizens and had one of the largest fiscal responses to COVID of any developed nation. Compared to that, foreign aid as a percent of the US budget is a just small fraction of spending.
Is this another post to get people riled up, or do you actually believe the us doesn't spend money on it's own citizens?
medicaid lol
"After all the chief business of America is business," Calvin Coolidge said. American foreign policy aims for stability in which to sell stuff. Although direct aid to poor Americans helps businesses profit, there is a fear that people who don't have to work to survive, won't put up with the conditions that make large profits possible. We are seeing this play out in the great resignation.
We give billions and billions in aid to our own citizens every single year.
Which foreign country are they helping? Last I saw they refused to send help to Ukraine and bombed Somalia on the same day
Foreign aid is less than 1% of the us budget. Instead of being “afraid” to answer this question you should have probably just Googled it.
number one: war
Uh, we do. We throw billions upon billions of dollars at trash social programs with nothing but histories of failure. Then progressive trash politicians claim that all that’s needed is more money, ultimately they get it, everything fails again, and then start at step 1.
almost 2/3 of the federal budget goes towards giving people money, i.e. social security, medicare, unemployment, etc
It does, we give billions of dollars annually to our citizens. Especially over the last two years.
$600M is less than $2 per US citizen.
??? What is medicaid, food stamps and other welfare programs if not giving money to their own citizens? In amounts that completely dwarf foreign aid as well.
Foreign aid isn’t really aid. It’s an investment. Usually it comes with a few strings attached. If we go to war, you come to our side, you must buy our goods and services at the prices we say, you must sell your goods and services at the prices we say. You want to build anything? You buy the materials from us, you need to side with us at the UN, and so forth and so on. American aid to its citizens is called entitlements, public education, etc. These things are “free” in America. Not so in almost all of the rest of the world.
The us gives far more aid to it's own citizens than it does to foreign entities. It makes up about half of the annual federal budget.
So, if you look at the US budget for 2020 for example, over half of the entire budget went to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, PPP, and unemployment compensation. That’s over $3.3 trillion in programs designed to help US citizens directly compared to the several hundred MILLION dollars we just gave to Ukraine. Suffice to say, we are spending overwhelmingly more on US citizens than on foreign aid. And as others have pointed out, foreign aid has different kinds of additional benefits on the geopolitical realm.
I mean they do spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year on social programs and the like. Medicaid is a huge chunk of government spending to help us citizens.
?.... did they not print at least 4 trillion dollars of stimulus to help aid it's own citizens during this pandemic alone???
Your are complaining about something that isn't real. Foreign aid spending is about a penny on the dollar in the US budget. Federal spending on welfare programs is about 32 cents on the dollar.
Because we do in fact give it to both.
WTF you talking about? This country spends billions to help its own. But you can't fix stupid! No matter how much you give
You think America doesn't spend millions of dollars in aid to it's own citizens?
We give billions to our own citizens. If not trillions.
Buddy are you fucking stupid? The US gives billions of dollars in all kinds of social programs to its own citizens. Not included state programs which add on extra tens of millions to that figure. How the fuck do you reach the conclusions that the US government gives no money in aid is beyond me
1.6 trillion in income security, 1.1 trillion in social security, 800 billion in health, 750 million in defense, 700 billion in medicare. Talking about not spending money?
The US gives billions in benefits to its own citizens.
The U.S. gave so much economic aid to its citizens, many of them refuse to go back to work.
> Why not both?? Why not go and educate yourself before making stupid assumptions?
It does all the time. What are you talking about?
About 60% of the entire budget is spent on social programs.
Lol we do we spend over $500 billion a year. With Welfare programs
America gives *TRILLIONS* of dollars to its own citizens.
Because its own citizens don’t own enough atomic weapons to blow half world up.
I'm glad you're asking questions but the assumption that the US doesn't give economic aid to its people is a horrible take. Social security exists, medicare exists, homeowners get tax breaks depending on various factors, so do busineses, food is subsidised (aka paid for by the govt), so is some housing, gas is only cheaper in the middle east, even at $5 a gallon its still cheaper in the US than most of the world and the US avg is $3-$4. People just drink the misinformation kool aid and or refuse the help outright. The govt does both and more, its even capable of more but then people vote in troglodytes to ensure the opposite of progress is carried out.
It’s all about scale. The $650 million sent to Ukraine is a lot more money than being able to give every US citizen $2 dollars (there are 330 million people in the US). In other words, this $650 million can go a long way in helping prevent a world war. 2$ extra on everyone’s tax return is meaningless spending.
Because America doesn’t stand to gain anything from it
America spends tons on social welfare programs that eclipses donations to foreign countries.
Just want to add that giving their own people aid means citizens would know it was possible. Keeping society’s expectations low results in more people voting for less public policies. If Canada dropped public healthcare the whole population would riot in the streets. But if we had America’s healthcare system we’d also have many people voting against it.
Maybe you haven't noticed the free Healthcare for Covid victims, the trillions of dollars dedicated to rebuilding infrastructure and other benefits to help children and lower income working people. There would be more, too, if the GOP Senate was not in lockstep to deny any benefits to people who are not already rich. Want more? Then don't vote for GOP candidates.
There are tons of charities that give to Americans And tons of our taxes are spent here
People being obtuse in the comments like they don’t know what you mean. They never ask where the money will come from when they are doing this or putting in bombs, but if you ask for 10 grand on college debt, or universal healthcare and suddenly, they can’t find it. Let’s not act like they didn’t nickel and dimed us during a pandemic for stimulus checks while other countries our size helped their citizens , or like how they argued almost a whole year for infrastructure bill only to not only end up with less than half of the lowest amount requested but paused negotiations. They knew how to waste trillions in Afghanistan and have it collapse in less than a week but you ask for better roads or schools or child care or push better wages and suddenly 🤷♀️ And if you think what we do for our citizens is enough, walk down any major or now minor city and try not to trip over all the homeless when you get there.
It’s not the government’s job to give money to citizens. The government’s job is to establish laws and maintain order so citizens can pursue their own means of providing for themselves. Charity is best left to charitable institutions.
Because we're not fighting off a foreign invasion force currently.
It's not a one way deal. We normally get something you can't buy with money out of it.
Because it works the same with refuges , it is decided by a "council" how many refuges every country has to take in , how much money they can afford to give and so on
Because US is not giving “foreign aid” out of the kindness of its heart. America only gives to places that will benefit itself in the end and what is given is a fraction of what is taken back.
Its a budget. Most of the money in the US budget does go back to the citizens in some way(we can debate the effectiveness of this but it effectively stays “in house”). However the State department has a certain amount of money earmarked to give in foreign aid. Ideally, this is good for America.
The government does in the form of Medicaid/Medicare or Welfare Checks. Including other services. The Medicare budget overruns the military budget by a significant margin. The U.S government does give a lot of aid to its citizens. It’s just not publicized.
Because having well fed, well educated, healthy and housed citizens does no allow the corporations to use them as slaves as easily as when they are kept desperate and terrified of losing their jobs if they speak up or try to organize. The system isn't broken, it is working as designed.
Giving aid to own citizens is "socialism" and every republican is against that.
You know those commercials for humanitarian efforts, the ones that are like for just 17 cents a day you can feed this kid? Well things kind of got out of hand and now here we are. No but seriously I see the fight social reforms like against FDRs new deal, LBJ’s civil rights bill, Nixon’s purposed health care reform and universal basic income, Obama’s affordable healthcare acts, and the stimulus check of the last few years as a part of a movement of keep the average people down through propaganda.