They’re right. The local producers can’t compete with free stuff. That puts them out of business making everyone else more dependent on free stuff. Just more heart of mind thinking that has bad consequences.
-Washington spends an average of $2 billion on food aid programs a year, mostly funneling the help through the United Nations’ World Food Program. According to some aid groups, if the U.S. gave its aid in cash rather than food, it could support about twice as many people.-
Ahhh, but you missed the clincher. They still want free stuff, they just want our cash instead of food.
<>
In the last two farm bills, the U.S. administration called for a partial shift to cash donations instead of grain, but that was voted down by farm supporters.
<>
The European Union has spoken out strongly against U.S. food aid policy in the Word Trade Organization, accusing Washington of using such programs to skirt rules limiting agriculture subsidies.
I believe the EU statement is correct but that they do similar.
What happens if you feed 100 starving people who live in an area of the world where food crops will not grow well?. They will have more children and more free food will be needed. At what point will the demand exceed the supply?. Is it better for 1000 to starve than 100?. I wish I knew the answer.