Monday, April 26, 2010

Gotta Love Cato!

Chapter 63 of the Cato Institute's Cato Handbook for Policymakers, 7th edition says this:


Congress should

-- abolish the U.S. Agency for International Development and

end government-to-government aid programs;

-- withdraw from theWorld Bank and the five regional multilateral

development banks;

-- not use foreign aid to encourage or reward market reforms in

the developing world;

-- eliminate programs, such as enterprise funds, that provide

loans to the private sector in developing countries and oppose

schemes that guarantee private-sector investments abroad;

--privatize or abolish the Export-Import Bank, the Overseas Private

Investment Corporation, the U.S. Trade and Development

Agency, and other sources of international corporate welfare;

--forgive the debts of heavily indebted countries on the condition

that they receive no further foreign aid; and

--end government support of microenterprise lending and nongovernmental



Now, they give very good reasons for their lack of support of these foreign aid disasters, such as everyone's favorite Horny Hick Bill Clinton admitting that most of the developing countries in Latin America and Afirica are actually worse off than before the aid began. Now, I'm just a layman and there's no way I can keep up with these intellectual behemoths, but I'll give one very solid reason why I'm against foreign aid: It's simply international socialism.

As a taxpayer, you have two choices: Pay your taxes or go to prison, regardless of what Wesley Snipes thinks. (However, if you're going to be appointed to head the Treasury Department, it's optional.) That money is then doled out to hell holes the world over, like the latest money pit, Haiti. Now, I may not have any fancy schmancy degrees from Haw-vard like Chairman Obama, but how in God's green and not to mention scientifically proven cooling earth is that not the redistribution of wealth that's called for in the tenets of socialism ? The money is taken from me by gunpoint and is handed to someone else that the government deems more worthy of it. Let's go out on a limb and say the money isn't pocketed by some corrupt bureaucrat and actually does something useful, like repair a road damaged by the earthquake, which was not caused by the failure of the Climate Change conference in Copenhagen like noted scientific mind Danny Glover claims. To that, I say: Cui Bono ? Who benefits ? It sure as hell wasn't the taxpayer, who will never travel on it, recieve goods or services on it, or for that matter, ever know it was repaired.

Now, another reason to oppose foreign aid is the all-but-in-the-books VAT tax, which is the the most regressive tax ever proposed in American history. Can we, as a society, truly take money from senior citizens, who thanks to Progressivevik lies and failures were forced into becoming wards of the state by Social Security ? How is that even remotely fair ? How is it fair to take that money and hand it over some Third World hell hole ? Here's another question: How is that even Constitutional ? How can Congress even think to do this ? (You're in need of many years of psychotherapy to believe that money collected from the VAT will be used to pay down the debt. See the Social Security Lockbox for further details.)

As for the recommendations from the Cato Institute on foreign aid, they're all fairly self explanatory. The one I like best is forgiving the debt of foreign nations on the condition they recieve no further aid. This is, by far and away, the most humanitarian way to end foreign aid, since it builds the self-reliance necessary to move a developing country foward. It gives them a fair chance, without having to be a puppet to the Big Mommy Regime in Washington. (For all you Ron Paul types out there: I have a new buzzword for you: Economic Imperialism.)

Now of course, our elected officials will do their best to pretend the Cato Institute and spewers of common sense like me don't exist. (We're unpersons to them.) so---

God help us all.

No comments: