"Maybe "humanitarians" oughta be raising awareness and money from aprivate donor base -instead of the US Treasury," Bo Snerdley tweets. "There are plenty of rich nations in the world, and many wealthy people with generous hearts."
Maybe "humanitarians" oughta be raising awareness and money from aprivate donor base -instead of the US Treasury. There are plenty of rich nations in the world, and many wealthy people with generous hearts.
— Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) February 9, 2025
Humanitarians warn of dire consequences if US foreign aid ends…
The treasury of the United States is not designed to bankroll the rest of the world.
It is not fantasy land to suggest, as Bo Snerdley does, that many generous people are ready and eager to do many generous things to provide aid where needed and helpful. But raiding the public treasury of the U.S. is not the right (or even the best, most practical) method of marshaling needed assistance. The argument that it is, that no other means will suffice, leaves wide open the possibility that those arguing for it are more obsessed with government spending than aid.
The United States is one nation, not a support system for the rest of the world. Private American donors and other nations can and should be the sources of humanitarian assistance, but it is unfair to burden the U.S. treasury, which operates for the benefit of its national interest, with what feels like bottomless support of other countries. It is not heartlessly inhumane to point out that sending gobs of monetary zeros all around the world is a perversion of the U.S. taxpayer's dollar.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member