Reproductive health in developing countries in ‘chaos’ after Trump aid freeze

I'm not at all in favour of cancelling contraceptive programmes in the developing world overnight, that's disgraceful.

But it would be really helpful to see a recent analysis of the global aid economy; in the 2000s there were a few books about the ways in which it perpetuated injustice rather than addressing it (e.g. Dead Aid by Dambisa Moyo) but I haven't seen much since. Does anyone know anything good?

$600 million would go a long way to help those who lost everything in North Carolina floods.

Oh right, is that what Trump is doing with the saved money then? I'm assuming not, since he said he wanted to abolish FEMA.

Do you really believe it is the job of the American taxpayer to be funding this stuff?

Nicked from another thread on MN, but this little excerpt talks about what a racket foreign aid is:

s

In 2021 the US foreign aid budget was about 46 billion and in 2023 it was 71.9 billion mainly due to the war in Ukraine (16.6 billion). Even without Ukraine it has risen by around 9 billion since 2023.

That's an insane amount of money! Just think of all the infrastructure improvements you could make with that lot - and the US needs it. There are multiple articles online about the terrible state of US roads, bridges, tunnels, etc.

In 2021 the US foreign aid budget was about 46 billion and in 2023 it was 71.9 billion mainly due to the war in Ukraine (16.6 billion). Even without Ukraine it has risen by around 9 billion since 2023.

I guess there was going to be a backlash to this from the US citizens at some point and a wish for more funding for domestic projects- health care, schools and welfare.

It seems like the problem is the way that the cuts are being implemented is too fast and without much care, hopefully the most deserving projects will be protected.

‘get what you're saying regarding looking after your own first (brilliant take down of Vance and "Christian values" by Rory Stewart ‘

😂😂 that would be Rory Stewart whose wife got a ton of money from USAid for teaching ‘Africans’ about modern art, including the famous urinal picture, now terminated.

Completely unbiased view there, then.

Exactly, we know this happens - in fact corruption of all kinds happens around aid donated by well-meaning developed nations. Bags stamped with USAid are regularly found for sale in markets all over the world - food that should be handed out for free - but which people are getting rich from stealing and selling.

Also, if the USA is prepared to fund healthcare in places like Zimbabwe, where is the motivation for that country's government to step up and provide it?Zimbabwe is a country that COULD be rich if its corrupt leaders didn't plunder the country's wealth and condemn its population to poverty. Where is the anger about that? Why is it all that the developed world is mean for saying 'No more!' to nations that could well afford to provide healthcare for their own people? There wouldn't need to be all these NGOs in many places if the governments of those countries were held to account for their corruption.

It's worth remembering that money is fungible, and a corrupt person can benefit greatly from aid, without actually touching the funds given by the party providing aid. So, say you are the health minister of a country in the developing world. The population of the country have some basic needs and expectations, which ought to be met by the country's health service. By skimming money out of the health budget, and putting it in your pocket, the country cannot fulfil these needs and expectations, but you can carry this out without upsetting the population too much, because an NGO, funded by an overseas country, steps in and ensures that the health needs of the population are met.

Thank you both for replying.

Fraud and corruption are clearly issues that must be stopped wherever it is identified.
I’ve read of issues in the past where for example various regimes have skimmed off Aid and sent it to tax havens. If ‘checks and balances’ is what the US is doing then I can’t criticise them.

Starmer has said that the defence of this country has to take precedence over donating money to worthy causes in other countries - and since it's UK taxpayer money I think many UK taxpayers will agree with him.

And whether you agree with Trump or not, all he and his administration are doing is asking a question that a lot of US taxpayers want answering and it's: 'Where is all this US taxpayer money going and how is it benefiting the US?'

Some people are objecting, a minister has resigned in protest.

I think the level of outrage is likely to be less as Starmer hasn't said this will be with immediate effect. I expect projects will be swiftly closed down.....rather than having the plug pulled today.

Can someone kindly explain why Starmer is cutting aid and why there doesn’t appear to be any outrage? I know our contribution is tiny in comparison to USAID but still…

I get what you're saying regarding looking after your own first (brilliant take down of Vance and "Christian values" by Rory Stewart if you're interested in a religious counter arguement) but aid really is that ultimately. We all benefit by the poorest people being supported, because the alternative is mass migration, famines and wars.

For example, whilst it seems counter intuitive to say health care in remote DRC will benefit people in the UK, it really will. There's a haemorrhagic fever similar to Ebola kicking off there at the moment. Without funded health care it could spread, it could (and this is a very small possibility, I'm not scaremongering) go global. Trump has stopped funding the WHO and health care programmes, so what's to stop this disease?

Society is very different from a company, which Musk is willfully ignoring. We don't have a single issue/product to flog, it's complicated and chaotic. Maintaining a tiny proportion of GDP as aid pays dividends in the longer term. National debt interest is way higher than the international aid budget, but i must have missed the discussion on negotiating loan better rates?

I agree, clearly and simply put, the UK is also on the bones of it's arse, all our credited cards are maxed out and the bailiffs are at the door. Foreign aid is a self-indulgent luxury we can no longer afford. We have to start living within our means or we'll be the country that needs handouts, and China doesn't do Aid.

I don’t think that the poster necessarily meant they’re siphoning it - that’s a pretty emotive thing to say and just tries to make anyone with a different opinion look like a mean racist. That’s not fair nor a positive way to debate.

I absolutely despise trump so I’ll start with that. But if you want to think about how people feel and WHY they’re (ordinary people including women not just Tate types) voting for him, you need listen to their fears and pain points without judgement.

Im also going to state that I believe in a free world and borders etc seem so unnatural to me, But as we DO have borders and countries, with governments we vote into look after us in our country, obviously people are not going to be happy about having shit medical care, shit living, crap education etc but money going to these things in other countries.

it really is the put your own mask on first - if the country didn’t have problems left, right and centre, people dying in poverty on the streets, people paying hundreds of dollars just to cover basic medicine, then absolutely everyone (except the ACTUAL racists) would be happy to give money to overseas projects.

what trump is doing is awful, and pulling support with no warning and no replacement in place is disgusting. And I don’t believe he is doing it for the benefit of American people because he’s got Elon in there firing them all so they’re jobless left right and centre. But as long as he is addressing people’s pain points, he’s going to keep receiving support.

calling people names and refusing to hear them doesn’t do anything but drive hatred and division up though.

What do you mean by wealth distribution?

I'm sorry. I don't understand the point you are making and how it relates to what I said. Could you be more specific? Who is siphoning money for whom? Who do you think is profiteering? Who are the people in the big house? I don't understand the reference to the UK. Do you think your argument would convince the average American taxpayer?

Thanks for posting @IwantToRetire and @DogDaysNeverEnd – although it's too depressing for me to even know what to say.

This will impact people I know. I can do some mitigation of the impacts on people close to me (because they have foreign friends like me, ie "wealthy" by the time money has gone through currency exchange ), but the people at a further remove I won't be able to help much.

Also healthcare, general and reproductive, is one of those things where the lack has huge ripple effects.

Wealth Distribution.

There. Solved it for you.
Not a hard choice at all. But not at all what those hideous men are interested in doing.

These are entirely different buckets of funding. USAID would have used a different siphon to anything acute and local.

USAID stands for US Agency for International Development and that sounds different to me than providing foreign aid or charity. Taxpayers of any country have every right to prioritize where their money is going. Americans need to get their financial house in order. $600 million would go a long way to help those who lost everything in North Carolina floods. There will be many more worthy causes than the money to fund them.

NGOs have become too reliant on government largesse instead of donations from individuals. They have become part of "the swamp". Calling it heartless, disgusting and lacking in empathy is just emotional manipulation without actually addressing the hard choices that have to be made.

Just one thing to add, I believe this is a feminist issue for two reasons. The first is that women and children are disproportionately affected by what's happening and by extreme poverty in general. Secondly the cuts are due to fellas who are so desperate to show how alpha they are that they are flying in their very own master misogynists (Tates).

Oh and to correct myself in my earlier post, almost 10,000 programmes, not quite over.