Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

5 Bumps

When the hell will they get it??

As Congress struggles to negotiate a budget deal to keep the government running, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told lawmakers Wednesday that the GOP version of the budget bill would result in the deaths of at least 70,000 children who depend on American food and health assistance around the world.

"We estimate, and I believe these are very conservative estimates, that H.R. 1 would lead to 70,000 kids dying," USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah testified before the House Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee.

Can we continue to support the world??

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/31/shah_gop_budget_would_kill_70000_children

 
Carpy

Asked by Carpy at 6:05 PM on Mar. 31, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (114,053 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (34)
  • Just pure hate propaganda to intimidate the uninformed to release more funds to be used by tyrants. Years ago, through liberal pressure, DDT was banned and MILLIONS of people have died from malaria because of that debacle. The less the US listens to the UN, the better for our country. The UN is not our friend. Shah is a UN puppet in USAID disguise.
    annabarred

    Answer by annabarred at 8:34 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • No, we cannot continue to support the world. It's very sad that children in other parts of the world will suffer but on the other hand, their own governments should be doing more to help them instead of depending on us to support them.
    meriana

    Answer by meriana at 6:14 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • Where do they get the figure of 70,000?
    tinamatt

    Answer by tinamatt at 6:14 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • As sad as it is, until our debt is paid off, we cannot afford any excess spending. Supporting other countries falls into that category. I'm sorry that it has come to that, but we cannot continue to rack up debt to pay for the responsibilities of other nations.

    Yes, I know I will be voted down for this. I haven't stopped my personal charity contributions (not that it's your business), but I think that the federal government should not be handing out charity donations.
    May-20

    Answer by May-20 at 6:24 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • This kind of crap hits my hot button. "Your trying to kill babies!!" At what point do we focus on our own country? Our country is starving and drowning in debt. We can't donate to other countries when we can't pay our own bills.
    sopranomommy

    Answer by sopranomommy at 6:35 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • Let's try this again, for janet and minn.nice -- We are so broke that we are in debt way up to our hairline. There is no money to spend on anything beyone the barest necessities. It does not matter what good work the USAID is doing. It does not matter how our international aid compares to other countries. We CANNOT borrow from one country to charitibly give to another. That is just plain STUPID. Everyone in this nation must understand that there is no money to spend. At all. No pet projects. No special pork. No extra anythings. If it is not absolutely essential, do not spend. And this charity is not absolutely essential. I don't understand why anyone is even entertaining this proposal. There is no money.
    May-20

    Answer by May-20 at 9:59 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • My husband and adult son support two girls in another country with their schooling and other needs through Compassion International. The GOPs are just trying to deal with the deficit. Perhaps more Americans should become involved in programs like this if they want to help feed the hungry in other countries.
    CoffeeWriter

    Answer by CoffeeWriter at 6:16 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • If we'd quit trying to wage so many wars at one time, we would have more than enough.
    adnilm

    Answer by adnilm at 7:55 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • Charity starts at HOME. We shouldn't be helping any other country until America has no starving or homeless, and we all have access to good medical coverage.
    vbruno

    Answer by vbruno at 6:08 PM on Mar. 31, 2011

  • I always get a chill when I hear such figures. They throw around figures like that with the complete confidence that the American people can't do math. In 2005, there were 2.2 billion children in the world. I do believe that the 70,000 they worry about are disbursed enough so that their home country can care for them. But, why should they? The American pocketbook will open up and do the work for them.


    http://www.unicef.org/sowc05/english/poverty.html

    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 7:10 PM on Mar. 31, 2011