4 ms·
How Many Lives Does US Foreign Aid Save?
- AdieuToLogic 2y agoAnd here is the comparatively minimal cost for same in 2023 and 2024: https://oig.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/0-000-25-001-C.pdf https://oig.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/0-000-25-0...
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y ago$2200 to save a human life, ah well, flush it, we need to reduce the national debt over here without touching other areas prone to fraud (DoD).
- watwut 2y agoDebt will go up due to tax cuts.
- demarq 2y ago[flagged]
- rat87 2y agoWhy not both? Why not save more people while making world a better place and improving country's image and influence at a relatively minimal cost?
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y agoThey do, with help from USAID.
- demarq 2y agoThey don’t
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y agoYeah? This report says otherwise.
- hattmall 2y agoOk, but why can't they do it without that? Why are billions being spent on providing supplies to countries instead of developing their domestic industries? In fact doesn't providing them with supplies make it impossible for their domestic industries to fill their needs?
- acdha 2y agoThey did both, but if people don’t have food or medical care you can’t expect them to participate in the economy as much. Here’s an example of what USAID did to help develop economies: https://crookedtimber.org/2025/03/08/usaid-my-next-to-last-project/ https://crookedtimber.org/2025/03/08/usaid-my-next-to-last-p... That kind of stuff is really cheap compared to military intervention - consider how much money we spent dealing with piracy after Somalia lost control of its territory – so even if you’re a sociopath who only cares about making stock prices go up, increasing the size of Africa’s economy means a whole lot of new customers and suppliers.
- nextts 2y agoI mean I wish that could do what you suggest as if they could it is the end of poverty. But how?
- hattmall 2y ago>But how? By making it more profitable to cure instead of treat. The only real way to do that though is to severely disincentive rent-seeking activities. IMO that should be the primary function of the government. Instead we have a government that generally entrenches rent-seeking.
- AdieuToLogic 2y agoIn public pools and many public beaches, there are lifeguards assigned to monitor same. These are people in excellent physical condition and trained in rescue operations. Furthermore, they are paid for their services by government entities. > Ok, but why can't they do it without that? Why are billions being spent on providing supplies to countries instead of developing their domestic industries? Why can't people swimming in pools or oceans not put themselves in distress? Why are monies spent on providing lifeguards to swimming areas instead of developing their ability to not drown? > In fact doesn't providing them with supplies make it impossible for their domestic industries to fill their needs? In fact, doesn't providing them with lifeguards make it impossible for their developing the ability to not drown? Helping others does not limit what they can become.
- whatshisface 2y agoWhat keeps happening in these countries is, somebody makes a lot of huge promises to the disaffected, they vote for him, but then it turns out (surprise, surprise) that all he wanted to do all along was carve up the government's property and resources to distribute them to his most significant supporters. After this happens a few times nothing is left.
- demarq 2y agoExactly!
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y agoEvidence? The report says 150k lives are saved per year on HIV work alone due to this program? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_for_AIDS_Relief https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_f... Which is where most of the spending went.... They cite Nigeria and South Africa as being the major success stories? Any comment on those governments?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- whatshisface 2y agoIf you go to the Wikipedia pages for those two countries and ctrl-F for corruption you'll see the story in a better way than I could cut and paste here.
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y agoI did that, and there is nothing directly related to this program. If you have something better, please let me know. Is this report misreporting data? Are you saying these conclusions are forcefully faked? Do you have evidence? Or is it just 4chan level "LOL, Africa corrupt"?. If you are saying it can be done cheaper or with better heuristics for safe guards, that is one thing, but just advocating for destroying it, and understanding what that entails, is another.
- anon7725 2y agoA question asked in such bad faith that it deserves explicit acknowledgment. And here is the answer: many of these countries lack the resources to start and sustain programs such as the ones mentioned in the article. The resources needed include money, supply chains and expertise. The U.S. provides a conduit for all 3 of those needed resources: stable funding, stable supply chains for food, medicine and manufactured goods and expertise though local training and partnership with U.S. and global experts for setting up, running and reporting on the programs. The US also provided a way to deliver programs that was more resistant to corruption than many local efforts. Note that I did not say “free from corruption” because that is probably impossible, but much better than the alternative.
- demarq 2y agoWhy do they lack the resources?
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y agoI dunno, you seem to lack resources to see others' suffering as a worthy target of assistance. Maybe its something similar?
- demarq 2y agoPlot twist, I’m from one of the countries in question that “need” aid. So I ask again
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- N2yhWNXQN3k9 2y ago> Plot twist, I’m from one of the countries in question that “need” aid. Nice appeal to origin (genetic fallacy), but that doesn't compensate for the complete lack of concern for others represented in your comments? What would make you want to contribute to others foreign to your country (if you aren't from the US)? Why do you have a concern for how we spend money? Or are you a permanent resident or a citizen now? What scenario makes it a worthwhile endeavor to you?
- burkaman 2y agoThis is an impossibly broad question. It's like asking why food banks exist, why can't the parents of those families feed their kids? Why does poverty exist?
- demarq 2y agoNot the same
- AlecSchueler 2y agoExplain the error in the metaphor? From my reading it seems valid.
- demarq 2y agoIn the analogy the parents are simply victims of circumstance not criminals. What we are dealing with here is criminal enterprise. Have a look at some of the links I’ve added https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43395036 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43395036
- burkaman 2y agoThanks for doing the work to try to answer your own question, it looks like your links support what most people are telling you. One of the many problems in countries that USAID helped is that their governments tend to be full of corrupt officials, that's why USAID often sent actual personnel or directed money to NGOs independent of the local governments. Obviously there is still risk, that's why they spent a lot of time closely monitoring how their money and aid was used. Unfortunately that can't happen anymore now that everyone has been fired, so we can expect a lot of the money they had already disbursed to be wasted.
- demarq 2y ago> it looks like your links support what most people are telling you. ?
- latentcall 2y ago“These countries aren’t poor. These countries are rich! Only the people are poor! They’re not underdeveloped, they’re overexploited!” - Michael Parenti
- quantified 2y agoI'll take a wild guess and say corruption and mismanagement. It can be vigorously argued over as to how much is due to European colonizers vs homegrown tendencies. Nonetheless, it's not a cycle that the elites see any reason to break. Regardless of cause, there is still a need to treat people there. Forget saving their lives. These are rich reservoirs of diseases that people in other countries can contract, there is a good selfish case for showing up. And if we need some goodwill, it's relatively inexpensive.
- quickslowdown 2y agoBecause we have the resources to support suppressing diseases that can outbreak and spread back home. I'm sure you can find a selfish reason to frame any one of these global aid programs, most of them are a fraction of the cost versus the alternative, diseases & unnecessary mortality have far reaching effects.
- hsyehbeidhh 2y ago[dead]
- dralley 2y agoEven if you're a selfish bastard completely uninterested in the inherent value of human life wherever it is, keeping a lid on HIV and Tuberculosis (and other diseases) in Africa is tremendously positive for the world. The money invested in prevention and treatment is absolutely tiny compared to the costs over decades of letting them spread unmolested, and probably ends up saving lives at home too.
- two_handfuls 2y ago*did (sigh)
- rl3 2y agoJust a few million extra deaths in the world as a direct result of some tech egomaniac acting on a petty grudge, no big deal. Fortunately, this submission is off-topic for Fascist News and has been flagged accordingly.