...and now we give $2,000,000,000 to Egypt?

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110519/wl_nm/us_obama_mideast_aid

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama will unveil an economic aid program for Egypt and Tunisia on Thursday as part of a broad effort to support democratic reform in the Middle East and North Africa, U.S. officials said.
Senior advisers to Obama, previewing parts of his speech, said Wednesday the United States would offer debt relief totaling roughly $1 billion "over a few years" to Egypt through a debt swap mechanism that would invest the money to boost youth employment and support entrepreneurs.
Washington would also loan or guarantee loans up to a total of $1 billion through the Overseas Private Investment Corp (OPIC) for Egypt to finance infrastructure development and boost jobs, the officials told reporters on a conference call.
Several billion dollars in additional financing would come from multilateral development banks as well.
The administration would also seek to foster trade and economic development throughout the region and encourage private sector investment, the officials said.
"We think these initiatives will help Egypt and Tunisia as they undertake the twin challenges of economic transformation and democratization," one official said.
The officials dodged a question on whether the debt relief package was enough.
"Egypt has, I think, a very good prospect of accessing private capital markets, and that's important to Egypt's future economic vibrancy, and that's something that we know economic leaders in Egypt want to reinforce," one official said when asked why the country's full debt was not canceled.
In his widely anticipated speech Thursday, Obama aims to present a coherent approach for dealing with unprecedented political upheaval that has swept the region and upended decades of U.S. policy.
Part of that approach will include boosting economic fundamentals to spur democratic reform.
"We ... know from our study of the past that successful transitions to democracy depend in part on strong foundations for prosperity, and that reinforcing economic growth is an important way of reinforcing a democratic transition," one official said.
ECONOMIC PUSH
The United States would form "Egyptian-American and Tunisian-American Enterprise Funds" to promote investment from the private sector, the White House said in a statement laying out some of its proposals.
Washington would also work with allies to reorient the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development to support the Middle East and North Africa region just as it helped countries in Central and Eastern Europe.
U.S. officials are concerned about the economic outlook in Egypt and Tunisia after democratic revolutions swept out long-ruling autocratic leaders.
Growth forecasts have been revised downward to 1 percent in Egypt and gross domestic product growth in Tunisia is expected to be close to zero this year, the White House said.
The White House hopes to send a message to other countries in the region that they, too, could benefit from economic backing if they pursue a democratic path.
"Part of the purpose of this economic program ... is to reinforce not only positive change in Egypt and Tunisia, but a positive model that can empower and incentivize democratic change and economic reform in other parts of the region," one official said.

Sigh...when will we learn that we don't have money to do this stuff? We can't keep handing out billions of dollars every time some nation asks for it. Matter of fact....did Egypt even ask for this?
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
In theory, this might be one of those situations where the future costs of not doing anything today (which could include Egypt becoming another terror breeding ground or radical islam area) are much higher than the cost of the money today.

Investing some money now to help ensure a stable Egypt could be a good investment, but that remains to be seen. I'll give the president the benefit of the doubt on this.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
^ Sen. Graham seems to think so:
“I am willing to take the bruises and stand by Obama to engage countries like Egypt and Tunisia and stay involved in Libya and finish the job in Iraq,” Graham said. “I am willing to take American dollars at a time when we’re flat broke, go back home and suffer the consequences of sending aid to Egypt at a time when South Carolina has 10 percent unemployment because I believe the Egyptian revolution is about a new way of doing business that’s better for us.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/19/obama-middle-east-speech-republican-reactions_n_864455.html
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Hey, what's a few billion here and there, this administration has the printing presses ready to print a few trillion more.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
In theory, this might be one of those situations where the future costs of not doing anything today (which could include Egypt becoming another terror breeding ground or radical islam area) are much higher than the cost of the money today.

Investing some money now to help ensure a stable Egypt could be a good investment, but that remains to be seen. I'll give the president the benefit of the doubt on this.

Islam is radical. Not sure why qualifier is needed.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
I like the idea of a "democracy dividend" that rewards nations for transitioning to democracy, but they really should fund it via cuts to other non-democratic nations.

A lot of people say that if NATO had provided a Marshall Plan to the ex-U.S.S.R. nations (including Russia itself) when the Soviet Union collapsed, a lot of our current troubles could have been avoided. I can see some truth in that.
 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,781
4,689
136
Isn't that accounting 101? Debits have to have a matching credit somewhere and vice versa?

Since the USD is used internationnaly, the necessary
counterpart will be a little more inflation worldwide
by the grace of the US PrintPress inc.
 

OlafSicky

Platinum Member
Feb 25, 2011
2,364
0
0
So on Monday US reached it's debt ceiling yet it's spending money like a rich uncle.
Pleas explain to my why a country with the highest debt in history that is basically bankrupt is borrowing money to give it to it's enemies?
How it's creditors even allowing it to give money away.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,011
9,113
136
I like the idea of a "democracy dividend" that rewards nations for transitioning to democracy, but they really should fund it via cuts to other non-democratic nations.

Don't worry, we'll be feeding North Koreans shortly. Heard the news? They're starving yet again. Guess nuclear weapons aren't so good to eat.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
So on Monday US reached it's debt ceiling yet it's spending money like a rich uncle.
Pleas explain to my why a country with the highest debt in history that is basically bankrupt is borrowing money to give it to it's enemies?
How it's creditors even allowing it to give money away.

I'm not sure I support sending money to Egypt in this case, but you guys really have to keep this incident in perspective. The US hands out, as a percentage of our overall money, peanuts and there are much, much bigger fish to fry in the deficit than the 24 billion per year we give out as foreign aid.
 

OlafSicky

Platinum Member
Feb 25, 2011
2,364
0
0
24 billion is not peanuts. What do you think 24 billion would do to a place like Detroit or Chicago? How many free clinics, schools, nursing homes could stay open and how many people would be helped in the US? How about student debt?
How about the 24 billion for research for energy independence?
Why do Americans think that it's OK to help people in countries they will never visit or see but it's not OK to help out the poor in this country ?
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Until we went into Iraq and Afghanistan, Egypt was #2 for foreign aid for years. And even after that, Egypt was still one of the top countries to get aid from us.

I'm not justifying it, but this is hardly new.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
24 billion is not peanuts. What do you think 24 billion would do to a place like Detroit or Chicago? How many free clinics, schools, nursing homes could stay open and how many people would be helped in the US? How about student debt?
How about the 24 billion for research for energy independence?
Why do Americans think that it's OK to help people in countries they will never visit or see but it's not OK to help out the poor in this country ?

You're missing the boat. Big time.

In terms of our federal budget and the long-term health of the government and government spending, foreign aid is not worth its time in debating. Why? Because most Americans have a completely misguided perception of how much money our government sends abroad and most of them are very passionate (for or against) where that money goes. The amount of fervor that would be stirred up over axing the foreign aid budget just plain isn't worth it right now.

Foreign aid isn't going to bankrupt this country. Medicare, Social Security, and Defense are the three biggies that need to be dealt with. Medicare and SS are slowly draining away an ever-increasing amount of money that needs to be spend on infrastructure improvements, educational improvements, and the things that have kept this country competitive over the last sixty years.

In an ideal world, maybe adjusting the amount of foreign aid makes sense, but it makes zero sense to even worry about it right now. Fight the fights that need to be fought in order to ensure the long-term solvency of this country, not the fight that is over less than .1% of the federal budget.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
This is fine but does it say where the 2 billion will be cut from?

You are obviously a mean-spirited, non-caring, ahole to suggest cuts.


I'm taking bets on how quickly this $2B ends up in the pockets of the Muslim Brotherhood.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,011
9,113
136
24 billion is not peanuts. What do you think 24 billion would do to a place like Detroit or Chicago? How many free clinics, schools, nursing homes could stay open and how many people would be helped in the US? How about student debt?
How about the 24 billion for research for energy independence?
Why do Americans think that it's OK to help people in countries they will never visit or see but it's not OK to help out the poor in this country ?

Obviously Americans are not in need.

Who are you going to elect who believes otherwise? How can we possibly drop foreign aid and take care of ourselves in our time of crisis?
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
24 billion is not peanuts. What do you think 24 billion would do to a place like Detroit or Chicago? How many free clinics, schools, nursing homes could stay open and how many people would be helped in the US? How about student debt?
How about the 24 billion for research for energy independence?
Why do Americans think that it's OK to help people in countries they will never visit or see but it's not OK to help out the poor in this country ?

Because what you're talking about is socialism. When we give it to other countries, it's charity.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
24 billion is not peanuts. What do you think 24 billion would do to a place like Detroit or Chicago? How many free clinics, schools, nursing homes could stay open and how many people would be helped in the US? How about student debt?
How about the 24 billion for research for energy independence?
Why do Americans think that it's OK to help people in countries they will never visit or see but it's not OK to help out the poor in this country ?
24 billion is peanuts if you're spending it or giving it away...but it's an entirely different story if you're talking about 24 billion as a budget cut...we're told its a "dangerous" and "unacceptable".

Go figure.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
24 billion is peanuts if you're spending it or giving it away...

24 billion dollars amounts to less than .1% of government revenue. To put that in perspective, it's like arguing about spending $50 for a family that pulls in about $50,000 / year when the amount of money you must borrow to stay solvent is $25,000 / year.

but it's an entirely different story if you're talking about 24 billion as a budget cut...we're told its a "dangerous" and "unacceptable".

Go figure.

You'll never eliminate all foreign aid, so talking about it as a 24 billion dollar budget cut is completely fallacious. At best, you'd halve it and, when you're borrowing a trillion dollars a year to stay solvent, you're talking about 1.2% of what you're borrowing.
 

OlafSicky

Platinum Member
Feb 25, 2011
2,364
0
0
24 billion dollars amounts to less than .1% of government revenue. To put that in perspective, it's like arguing about spending $50 for a family that pulls in about $50,000 / year when the amount of money you must borrow to stay solvent is $25,000 / year.



You'll never eliminate all foreign aid, so talking about it as a 24 billion dollar budget cut is completely fallacious. At best, you'd halve it and, when you're borrowing a trillion dollars a year to stay solvent, you're talking about 1.2% of what you're borrowing.

It's not like spending $50. That can buy you a single trip to a fast food place. 24 billion is not $50 , that amount of money can make a real impact in this country if you look at it on a smaller scale and kick it at a small problem. There are many cities suffering, kick that amount of money for example at Buffalo one year and then the next year at Boston etc.
Just because it's a small percentage of a large budget doesn’t mean it's meaningless. What have places that received it done with it? what do they have to show for it? Just look what the $3 billion a year had accomplished in Pakistan $3 billion over 10 years = $30 billion payed to harbour America's #1 enemy.
Once the foreign aid money is given away there is no control over it you might as well burn it. If you burn it you will at least know that some corrupt politician or your enemy won't get it.