By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
highwaystar101 said:

I'm going to get warned for this, I can feel it. But stay with me.

We just stop the aid.

In "The descent of man" by Charles Darwin he wrote about how supporting the weak and forcing them to survive will be limiting our progression as a species by actually providing money and food and allowing them to reproduce. Natural selection is taken out of the equation.

He had a point.

By supporting those worse off and subsequently allowing them to reproduce and multiply then we are adding to the problem in the future instead of stopping it now.

For example. If we give one generation food now, and then they have four children per couple because we facilitated it, then we would have to give twice as many people food the next generation, and the one after that, and the one after that, and the one after that and so on. Before you know it, you've wasted all your money and the problem is 64 times larger.

So the logical step would be to stop aid and stop them reproducing. I know it borders on Eugenics and I too, like all of you, find that sick. But it would be a solution that could work.

(Although I would never support it personally)

While I don't support your reasoning, there are many people who argue that certain regions of the world (primarily Africa) have not developed primarily because of foreign aid. Foreign aid often protects and empowers dictators because it prevents the people from overthrowing these governments, and foreign aid is often stolen by the government to distribute how it sees fit (which typically means based on maintaining political power).