Foreign aid policy of the United States is a program by which the United States of America interacts with other nations and set standards of interaction for its organizations, cooperations and citizens. The policy only spends a tiny portion of America’s annual budget (about 0.1% of the Gross National Product), but the United States still spends over billions of dollars the program. There have been arguments rising for the past few years about this policy. Some people feel that it is not enough and that we should spend a lot more helping other nations. Others criticize that we spend too much and that we should spend all money addressing problems our own problems. I think that we should spend all our money to solve our own problems before helping others.
The Great Recession is an economic decline began started after Lehman Brother’s bank declared bankrupt in December 2007. The financial crisis has also been linked to reckless lending practices by financial institutions encouraged by the government in the United States. It spread around the world and affected much of the industrialized world and has caused a significant problem in the economic world. The effect of this depression has caused deceleration in economic activity across the globe. The financial crisis has caused people in America to loose their jobs and the rate of people without jobs to increase around 10%. The situation in Europe was a lot worse, with Iceland declared bankrupt and Greece announcing that it’s going to sell land to return debt. The condition of Spain isn’t so good either, with the unemployed rate up the roof, a staggering 20%. United States is one of the world’s most important economic world leaders and it should spend more money trying to improve its economics before helping others. If America improves their economy, it’s going to affect worldwide.
During recent years, Public Colleges/Universities increased tuition to support the school due to shortage in funds. Increase in tuition has caused a problem in many of the poorer families since they couldn’t afford the school anymore. This would make those who can’t afford university lose the ability to compete with others and ultimately get eliminated. The result of this would cause the poverty to increase greatly, and for these people, they might rob/steal to try to survive in this world. The crime rates are going to rise and the society is going to be in chaos. To stop that from happening, the government of United States of America should stop spending billions of dollars to help others but to try to improve the student’s ability to afford tuition for school by offering more scholarship and/or support the public university/college.
Some people might argue that foreign aid is vital for helping countries with major catastrophes and creates a safer and prosperous world to those who need help. Major Catastrophes like Haiti Earthquake that happened in the past few years is one of the most serious natural disasters that happened in January 12, 2010 with a magnitude of 7.0. This disaster has been responsible for the death of over 230,000 people. Haiti is one of the poorest countries in the western hemisphere and the earthquake has completely destroyed Haiti’s ability to relieve victims of the disaster. Although America should preserve the funds of Foreign Aid Policy to solve the problems occurring within the country, the government should still send out resources and manpower to assist the survivors of the disaster. America should act as a leader for the rescue effort, coordinating rescue attempt between countries to make steady progress and avoid miscommunication or misunderstanding.
I think that the Foreign Aid Policy should be canceled since the United States of America should spend the money on their own problems first before assisting others. We have to help ourselves before assisting anyone else or our own country will be in serious trouble. America should spend the fund from Foreign Aid policy on helping improving the economic situation and decreasing the tuition needed to go to Public college/university. After solving the issue within the states, then the country should help others with their problems.

Technorati Tags: billions of dollars, cooperations, deceleration, economic activity, economic decline, economic world, financial crisis, financial institutions, foreign aid, gross national product, helping others, interaction, lehman brother, public colleges, recession, states of america, tiny portion, unemployed rate, united states of america, world leaders

Obama could swig a Coke and smoke a Marlboro before every press conference. The FBI jackets could sell advertising space to Smith & Wesson. And govt cars could sell space for advertisers just like NASCAR. The federal govt could raise billions of dollars by doing ads!
The national debt is almost trillion, Obama wants us to go another $trillion into debt and the recession is deepening. As Obama said, we must take action now.

Technorati Tags: advertisers, amp, billions of dollars, cars, coke, fbi, federal govt, marlboro, nascar, national debt, recession, smith amp wesson, swig, trillion

I am disturbed by the bail out plan of the automobile industry under consideration. In the past, Washington had supported and granted billions of dollars to the auto industry. Today, there is little hope in the near future for the auto industry to recover. Car manufacturers from both China and India will only exacerbate the problem as those country ramps up their capabilities, making a crowded and competitive markets space worse. With all likelihood, the automakers will be back for another handout in a few years.

There is no seriousness or commitment by the automakers to change. They had approached Washington the first time without any real plan to turn things around. Obama had said he was disappointed at the automakers for approaching Washington without a turnaround plan. This is their second time back and now they come back with a cocktail napkin plan, but it is doubtful that any of the those plans will ever be put into action.

The automakers had many chances to improve and set a course for the future. Environmentalist in the United States had pushed for greener cars for years, but the auto industry had resisted and sabotaged their efforts. U.S. automakers problems are their own product. If U.S. automakers had accepted the environmentalist challenge and led the charge, the Japanese green autos would not the better selling green autos. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Some people argue that we are compelled to save the auto industry, regardless of how distasteful. If we don’t act to save the auto industry, massive layoffs will result and that will only worsen the unemployment and the economic recession. Some also argue that we’ve bailed out banks, why should’t automakers be bailed out as well. I believe the key difference is whether the automakers in their current form are sustainable. For bank bailout, we don’t expect the banks to come back year after year for more money. However, everyone believes that this will be likely case for the automakers. If the automakers are unsustainable then layoffs are inevitable and rise in unemployment are inevitable. We’re simply prolonging the agony.

For national security reasons, it is unwise to allow all of the automakers to go bankrupt. However, we should let the field shrink and support the strongest left standing. It should be noted that by allowing the antiquated automaker to pass; it is possible that a new, better suited companies may rise to take their place. For instance, Tesla motors (www.teslamotors.com) which makes green autos may have better opportunity to enter the market. In effect, we may be damaging the long-term health of the U.S. auto industry by further supporting the Big 3 automakers by preventing more innovative young upstart companies from taking their place.

Please join me by writing a paragraph to your congressman telling them that you do not support the auto bailout. Please click on the link below and choose your state to send an electronic message. It doesn’t matter if you old enough to vote or if you’re not an active voter. It is an IMPORTANT issue and you should let Washington know how you feel!! Thank you.

Click here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Also, let me know if you agree or disagree with my remarks.

Technorati Tags: auto industry, automakers, automobile industry, bank bailout, banks, billions of dollars, car manufacturers, cocktail napkin, competitive markets, economic recession, environmentalist, greener cars, likelihood, little hope, massive layoffs, ramps, second time, seriousness, turnaround plan, unemployment

I am disturbed by the bail out plan of the automobile industry under consideration. In the past, Washington had supported and granted billions of dollars to the auto industry. Today, there is little hope in the near future for the auto industry to recover. Car manufacturers from both China and India will only exacerbate the problem as those country ramps up their capabilities, making a crowded and competitive markets space worse. With all likelihood, the automakers will be back for another handout in a few years.

There is no seriousness or commitment by the automakers to change. They had approached Washington the first time without any real plan to turn things around. Obama had said he was disappointed at the automakers for approaching Washington without a turnaround plan. This is their second time back and now they come back with a cocktail napkin plan, but it is doubtful that any of the those plans will ever be put into action.

The automakers had many chances to improve and set a course for the future. Environmentalist in the United States had pushed for greener cars for years, but the auto industry had resisted and sabotaged their efforts. U.S. automakers problems are their own product. If U.S. automakers had accepted the environmentalist challenge and led the charge, the Japanese green autos would not the better selling green autos. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Some people argue that we are compelled to save the auto industry, regardless of how distasteful. If we don’t act to save the auto industry, massive layoffs will result and that will only worsen the unemployment and the economic recession. Some also argue that we’ve bailed out banks, why shouldn’t automakers be bailed out as well. I believe the key difference is whether the automakers in their current form are sustainable. For bank bailout, we don’t expect the banks to come back year after year for more money. However, everyone believes that this will be likely case for the automakers. If the automakers are unsustainable then layoffs are inevitable and rise in unemployment are inevitable. We’re simply prolonging the agony.

For national security reasons, it is unwise to allow all of the automakers to go bankrupt. However, we should let the field shrink and support the strongest left standing. It should be noted that by allowing the antiquated automaker to pass; it is possible that a new, better suited companies may rise to take their place. For instance, Tesla motors (www.teslamotors.com) which makes green autos may have better opportunity to enter the market. In effect, we may be damaging the long-term health of the U.S. auto industry by further supporting the Big 3 automakers by preventing more innovative young upstart companies from taking their place.

Please join me by writing a paragraph to your congressman telling them that you do not support the auto bailout. Please click on the link below and choose your state to send an electronic message. It doesn’t matter if you old enough to vote or if you’re not an active voter. It is an IMPORTANT issue and you should let Washington know how you feel!! Thank you.

Click here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Also, let me know if you agree or disagree with my remarks.

Technorati Tags: auto industry, automakers, automobile industry, bank bailout, banks, billions of dollars, car manufacturers, cocktail napkin, competitive markets, economic recession, environmentalist, greener cars, likelihood, little hope, massive layoffs, ramps, second time, seriousness, turnaround plan, unemployment

I am disturbed by the bail out plan of the automobile industry under consideration. In the past, Washington had supported and granted billions of dollars to the auto industry. Today, there is little hope in the near future for the auto industry to recover. Car manufacturers from both China and India will only exacerbate the problem as those country ramps up their capabilities, making a crowded and competitive markets space worse. With all likelihood, the automakers will be back for another handout in a few years.

There is no seriousness or commitment by the automakers to change. They had approached Washington the first time without any real plan to turn things around. Obama had said he was disappointed at the automakers for approaching Washington without a turnaround plan. This is their second time back and now they come back with a cocktail napkin plan, but it is doubtful that any of the those plans will ever be put into action.

The automakers had many chances to improve and set a course for the future. Environmentalist in the United States had pushed for greener cars for years, but the auto industry had resisted and sabotaged their efforts. U.S. automakers problems are their own product. If U.S. automakers had accepted the environmentalist challenge and led the charge, the Japanese green autos would not the better selling green autos. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Some people argue that we are compelled to save the auto industry, regardless of how distasteful. If we don’t act to save the auto industry, massive layoffs will result and that will only worsen the unemployment and the economic recession. Some also argue that we’ve bailed out banks, why should’t automakers be bailed out as well. I believe the key difference is whether the automakers in their current form are sustainable. For bank bailout, we don’t expect the banks to come back year after year for more money. However, everyone believes that this will be likely case for the automakers. If the automakers are unsustainable then layoffs are inevitable and rise in unemployment are inevitable. We’re simply prolonging the agony.

For national security reasons, it is unwise to allow all of the automakers to go bankrupt. However, we should let the field shrink and support the strongest left standing. It should be noted that by allowing the antiquated automaker to pass; it is possible that a new, better suited companies may rise to take their place. For instance, Tesla motors (www.teslamotors.com) which makes green autos may have better opportunity to enter the market. In effect, we may be damaging the long-term health of the U.S. auto industry by further supporting the Big 3 automakers by preventing more innovative young upstart companies from taking their place.

Please join me by writing a paragraph to your congressman telling them that you do not support the auto bailout. Please click on the link below and choose your state to send an electronic message. It doesn’t matter if you old enough to vote or if you’re not an active voter. It is an IMPORTANT issue and you should let Washington know how you feel!! Thank you.

Click here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Also, let me know if you agree or disagree with my remarks.

Technorati Tags: auto industry, automakers, automobile industry, bank bailout, banks, billions of dollars, car manufacturers, cocktail napkin, competitive markets, economic recession, environmentalist, greener cars, likelihood, little hope, massive layoffs, ramps, second time, seriousness, turnaround plan, unemployment

I am disturbed by the bail out plan of the automobile industry under consideration. In the past, Washington had supported and granted billions of dollars to the auto industry. Today, there is little hope in the near future for the auto industry to recover. Car manufacturers from both China and India will only exacerbate the problem as those country ramps up their capabilities, making a crowded and competitive markets space worse. With all likelihood, the automakers will be back for another handout in a few years.

There is no seriousness or commitment by the automakers to change. They had approached Washington the first time without any real plan to turn things around. Obama had said he was disappointed at the automakers for approaching Washington without a turnaround plan. This is their second time back and now they come back with a cocktail napkin plan, but it is doubtful that any of the those plans will ever be put into action.

The automakers had many chances to improve and set a course for the future. Environmentalist in the United States had pushed for greener cars for years, but the auto industry had resisted and sabotaged their efforts. U.S. automakers problems are their own product. If U.S. automakers had accepted the environmentalist challenge and led the charge, the Japanese green autos would not the better selling green autos. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Some people argue that we are compelled to save the auto industry, regardless of how distasteful. If we don’t act to save the auto industry, massive layoffs will result and that will only worsen the unemployment and the economic recession. Some also argue that we’ve bailed out banks, why should’t automakers be bailed out as well. I believe the key difference is whether the automakers in their current form are sustainable. For bank bailout, we don’t expect the banks to come back year after year for more money. However, everyone believes that this will be likely case for the automakers. If the automakers are unsustainable then layoffs are inevitable and rise in unemployment are inevitable. We’re simply prolonging the agony.

For national security reasons, it is unwise to allow all of the automakers to go bankrupt. However, we should let the field shrink and support the strongest left standing. It should be noted that by allowing the antiquated automaker to pass; it is possible that a new, better suited companies may rise to take their place. For instance, Tesla motors (www.teslamotors.com) which makes green autos may have better opportunity to enter the market. In effect, we may be damaging the long-term health of the U.S. auto industry by further supporting the Big 3 automakers by preventing more innovative young upstart companies from taking their place.

Please join me by writing a paragraph to your congressman telling them that you do not support the auto bailout. Please click on the link below and choose your state to send an electronic message. It doesn’t matter if you old enough to vote or if you’re not an active voter. It is an IMPORTANT issue and you should let Washington know how you feel!! Thank you.

Click here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Also, let me know if you agree or disagree with my remarks.

Technorati Tags: auto industry, automakers, automobile industry, bank bailout, banks, billions of dollars, car manufacturers, cocktail napkin, competitive markets, economic recession, environmentalist, greener cars, likelihood, little hope, massive layoffs, ramps, second time, seriousness, turnaround plan, unemployment