Foreign aid can be a wise investment as well as it can be a waste of money. The success of foreign aid depends on how it is used. As Kristof explains, foreign aid often lacks effectiveness, and depends on additional factors, such as governance. If money is just given to the governments of poor countries, chances are that it will be used “corruptly, ineffectively, and wastefully” (Kristof, 2006). A large sum of money alone cannot solve problems that stem from decades of history. To be effective, the problem has to be tackled from within by using various approaches, such as providing health care, education, creating jobs, and the like. Only healthy and educated people can begin to “earn and invest their way out of extreme poverty” (Sachs, 2006). Therefore, donors have to make sure that their projects are on the right track by listening to and working closely with the local people. Dambisa Moyo’s has a good argument when she says that aid should be invested with domestic producers, which in turn creates jobs for the locals. In my opinion, simply donating goods produced by rich corporations is not the right approach and does little for the locals. Rather, we should support local businesses so that they can grow and do not have to rely on foreign aid anymore. As Easterly says, poverty ends “by homegrown political, economic, and social reformers and entrepreneurs.” By putting foreign aid in the right places and working closely with locals, we can support those countries on their way to the end of poverty, but we have to assure that they become self-sustainable and independent of foreign aid so that they will eventually be able to get out of poverty by themselves.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document