Hmm, I'm curious how to feel about this. The tone of the article suggests that any sort of cutbacks to international aid is immoral as it contributes to (implied as causing) death. Not only does this suggest any sort of cutbacks to international aid is wrong, but also that we are causing additional deaths by not funnelling all non-critical resources towards international aid. Not doing so is responsible for potentially hundreds of millions of deaths each year.
Following this logic, is there really any justification for not allocating the vast majority of government funds towards international aid? It would make the situation in western countries worse for sure, but still better than in the countries receiving that aid.
I can't find it but Michael Huemer wrote an interesting piece where he argues that if taxation is justified, it should be almost entirely spent on international aid for people who are much worse off than in western countries. This article seems to suggest the same thing, it just simply doesn't go far enough.
Effective Altruism would probably argue that aid should be equalized until foreign aid and domestic welfare reach the same marginal value per dollar spent. I agree that it would probably lead to increased foreign aid since billions of people worldwide are worse off than "poor" Americans.
I've heard on good authority from euros and the global south that the U.S is a horrible country that can do no right, so this doesn't really change anything because those people were never saved by us to begin with. Phew!
Hmm, I'm curious how to feel about this. The tone of the article suggests that any sort of cutbacks to international aid is immoral as it contributes to (implied as causing) death. Not only does this suggest any sort of cutbacks to international aid is wrong, but also that we are causing additional deaths by not funnelling all non-critical resources towards international aid. Not doing so is responsible for potentially hundreds of millions of deaths each year.
Following this logic, is there really any justification for not allocating the vast majority of government funds towards international aid? It would make the situation in western countries worse for sure, but still better than in the countries receiving that aid.
I can't find it but Michael Huemer wrote an interesting piece where he argues that if taxation is justified, it should be almost entirely spent on international aid for people who are much worse off than in western countries. This article seems to suggest the same thing, it just simply doesn't go far enough.
Effective Altruism would probably argue that aid should be equalized until foreign aid and domestic welfare reach the same marginal value per dollar spent. I agree that it would probably lead to increased foreign aid since billions of people worldwide are worse off than "poor" Americans.
I've heard on good authority from euros and the global south that the U.S is a horrible country that can do no right, so this doesn't really change anything because those people were never saved by us to begin with. Phew!