Natalia Vasileva (PRO)We are used to think that donating to charity, helping those in need is always a good thing to do. Limiting the amount of food aid to the developing countries where people starve could be regarded as greed and lack of sympathy for our fellow earth people. But looking deeper we start to see that the things are more complicated than they seem to be at first glance.
In general, people are lazy and not willing to do more than they have to. The history shows that those facing severe weather conditions developed faster than those living in the fertile soil areas. The need and the threat of starvation motivates hard work and ingenuity, while getting free aid could easily provoke taking it for granted and thinking it will last forever. Why bother to develop then?
Moreover, being unable to serve themselves makes developing countries dependent on the aid, which leads to social distress and hatred when the aid comes to an end. A better solution here could be giving the people in need tools and teaching them how to provide themselves. This is much harder than just giving away food, but it gets repaid in the long run for both sides.
The next argument is that in reality something very rarely goes without price. Countries giving the aid get the ability to dictate their own rules that usually include allowing the receiving nations to develop only those industries where they have absolute global competitive advantage. Usually they are the industries with the least value added, for instance resource extraction. Preventingcapital and technology intensive industries from development makes the poor nations even more dependent on imported goods, further leads to lower employment, stagnation and even worse problems in the long run.
To summarize all above, I should say that even having the best intentions in mind, people should always consider the consequences. Despite it could sound cruel and selfish, limiting the amount of food aid that developed nations could freely provide could in reality serve the developing countries much better.
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-02-12 08:41:08
| Speak Round
Echo Four (CON)Round Forfeited
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-02-14 08:42:01
| Speak RoundNatalia Vasileva (PRO)It could be the case, my opponent didn’t have enough time to write his argument.
Echo Four, please, feel free to post now.
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-02-14 23:06:47
| Speak RoundEcho Four (CON)Round Forfeited
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-02-16 23:08:02
| Speak RoundEcho Four (CON)Round Forfeited
Return To Top | Posted:
2018-02-18 23:08:04
| Speak Round
How a judge can give a win to somebody who has not posted a single word is beyond me. Perhaps the admin could start looking at the many people here who register different profiles. There should be strict rules for allowing people to judge. For example, you cannot judge if you have not participated in a debate. Posted 2018-02-21 10:43:45