The failure of aid

Yesterday in The Daily Mirror we again found about the failures of giving aid.
Hundreds of thousands of pounds of aid for Africa became "phantom funds" wasted on luxury hotels and meals, it was claimed yesterday.
The Government was accused of spending more than £700,000 of taxpayers' money on expenses for US consultants.
A BBC investigation alleged a huge chunk of cash for a relief project in Malawi, the world's 10th poorest country, was squandered.
The US consultancy agency spent £586,423 on hotels and £126,062 on meal bills from a £3million donation from the UK Department for International Development it was said.
As we can see when we give aid a lot of the aid is just wasted anyway and when it isn't wasted it is useless anyway because it doesn't get to the people and when it does it can do more harm than good and when it does good it is only good for the short term as over the years africa has received half a trillion in aid and they have yet to get any better.
As I have said in a previous entry into this blog aid in the majority of cases does more harm than good. In the year 2000 World Bank aid destroyed the Mozambique cashew and sugar industries. Mostly, though, aid is simply wasted, producing nothing of value for anyone. The developing world is littered with the wreckage of ill-conceived aid projects, such as the salt mine in Uganda financed by the European Union. The site was so isolated, no one would live there and no salt was ever mined.
even some aid recipients are asking for an end to aid. In February, the New York Times Magazine published a fascinating interview with Yousif Kowa, leader of a poor tribe living in the Nuba Mountains of Sudan, possibly the poorest nation on Earth.
Mr. Kowa rejected foreign aid for his people because he said it would destroy their self-reliance. He said he had seen many cases where previously productive farms were destroyed by food aid and did not want to see it happen to his people.In other cases, the withdrawal of aid has been a blessing.
In May, the Atlantic Monthly reported that Mogadishu, Somalia, has boomed since aid was cut off in 1995, due to the breakdown of civil government. Without governments, both foreign and domestic, mucking things up, local entrepreneurs were able to make things happen without interference. The reporter was forced to conclude that "the lack of large-scale foreign aid might have benefits as well as drawbacks."
This is why we should cut off aid. It isn't good for anyone. The third world should start relying on themselves and not anyone else so that they can progress by themself and we can stop wasting our money on useless aid projects.


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm_objectid=15907184&method=full&siteid=94762-name_page.html