West African: Trump is Right, Africa is a Continent of Sh*t

Townhall ^ | January 12, 2018 | Katie Pavlich

[EdnaMode]

President Donald Trump is under heavy fire today after allegedly making candid comments during an immigration meeting at the White House Thursday, calling countries like Haiti and many in Africa "sh*tholes."

“Why are we having all these people from sh**hole countries come here?” Trump said, according to these people, referring to African countries and Haiti. He then suggested that the United States should instead bring more people from countries like Norway, whose prime minister he met Wednesday.

Trump denies he used that exact terminology but Democrat Senator Dick Durbin, who was in the room, claims the word was used multiple times.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Never said anything derogatory about Haitians other than Haiti is, obviously, a very poor and troubled country. Never said “take them out.” Made up by Dems. I have a wonderful relationship with Haitians. Probably should record future meetings - unfortunately, no trust! 8:48 AM - Jan 12, 2018

"The exact word used by the President, not once but repeatedly," Durbin told reporters Friday morning.

But a West Africa sociologist from Guinea agrees with President Trump. From Yahoo News:

"President Donald Trump is absolutely right. Africa is a continent of shit," says Mamady Traore, a 30-year-old sociologist in the West African nation of Guinea. "When you have heads of state who mess with the constitutions to perpetuate their power. When you have rebel factions that kill children, disembowel women as saints, who mutilate innocent civilians. Frankly, it must be said that it's crap."

Fox News' Tucker Carlson is also tamping down the outrage.

“So if you say Norway is a better place to live and Haiti is kind of a hole, well anyone who’s been to those countries or has lived in them would agree. But we’re jumping up and down, ‘Oh, you can’t say that.’ Why can’t you say that?” Carlson asked following amid bipartisan criticism of Trump’s remarks. Meanwhile, the White House rejected a proposal from Capitol Hill on DACA and the debate over comprehensive immigration reform continues.

[Lurkinanloomin]

This is OUR country.

We should decide who gets to come here.

We do not have to turn our country over to them to turn it into what they are fleeing.

[Liz]

<><> Nobel laureate Sir Angus Deaton argues that foreign aid (from wealthy countries like the US) gives a lifeline to corrupt governments, insulating them from the political pressures that would create a better functioning state.

<><> Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo writes that more than $1 trillion in aid has flowed to Africa in past decades, but real per capital income on the continent has not improved since the 1970s.

<><> The ten-largest recipients of US economic and development aid are in Africa, including Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Ethiopia. Regionally, Africa receives 32 percent of all U.S. aid, followed by the Middle East at 31 percent and South and Central Asia at 25 percent.

---

Source CFR.com

How Does the U.S. Spend Its Foreign Aid? / Backgrounder by James McBride / April 11, 2017

EXCERPT-——Though aid remains a small percentage of the overall U.S. budget, some politicians and economists have criticized the spending as ineffective. Others have urged the United States to expand its international aid commitments.

What is foreign aid?
The current foreign aid system was created by the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act, which attempted to streamline the government’s efforts to provide assistance around the world. The statute defines aid as “the unilateral transfers of U.S. resources by the U.S. Government to or for the benefit of foreign entities.” These resources include not just goods and funding, but also technical assistance, educational programming, and other services. Recipients include foreign governments, including foreign militaries and security forces, as well as local businesses and charitable groups, international organizations such as the United Nations, and other non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

How much does the United States spend on it?
Given the many agencies, funding methods, and categories of aid associated with U.S. foreign assistance efforts, estimates can differ. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS), which uses the broadest definition of aid [PDF], including military and security assistance, total spending was nearly $49 billion in 2015. This accounts for roughly 1.3 percent of the federal budget.

Aid funding levels are at their highest since the period immediately following World War II, when the United States invested heavily in rebuilding European economies. In the 1990s, in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, aid levels were cut to barely half of what they are today, falling to less than $20 billion in 1997, or 0.8 percent of the overall budget. Aid rose again in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, surpassing 1.4 percent of the budget by 2007, which analysts say was driven largely by assistance to Iraq and Afghanistan as well as President George W. Bush’s global health programs.

What are its objectives?
As former State Department official and aid expert Carol Lancaster pointed out in her book, Foreign Aid: Diplomacy, Development, Domestic Politics, modern U.S. aid originated in Cold War geopolitics: the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe was designed to blunt the influence of rising Communist political forces on the continent. National security concerns have continued to drive U.S. assistance policy, aiming to provide stability in conflicted regions, bolster allies, promote democracy, or contribute to counterterrorism and law enforcement efforts abroad.

How is the money spent?
U.S. aid policy seeks to achieve its aims through a diverse array of programs, which can be organized into several major categories. According to CRS calculations, foreign aid spending in 2015 broke down as follows:

Long-term development aid (38 percent) provides ongoing funding for projects to promote broad-based economic growth and general prosperity in the world’s poorest countries. More than half of this goes to bilateral global health programs, including treatment of HIV/AIDS, maternal and family health, and support for government health-care systems, mostly in Africa. About 15 percent of this goes to multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the UN Development Program.

Military and security aid (35 percent) primarily goes toward helping allies purchase U.S. military equipment, training foreign military personnel, and funding peacekeeping missions. A smaller slice goes to “non-military security assistance”, which includes counter-narcotics programs in Afghanistan, Colombia, Peru, and elsewhere, as well as nonproliferation and counterterrorism efforts.

Humanitarian aid (16 percent) is spent to alleviate short-term humanitarian crises, such as those resulting from famine, earthquakes, war, failed states, or other natural or man-made disasters. This includes State Department and Defense Department disaster relief efforts, as well as purchases of U.S. agricultural goods and funding for organizations such as the International Red Cross and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Political aid (11 percent) is intended to support political stability, free market economic reforms, and democratic institutions. Programs include governance and justice system reforms, backing for human rights organizations, and support for peace talks and treaty implementation.

Which agencies manage it?
U.S. foreign assistance is managed by a complex ecosystem of agencies, with over twenty federal agencies involved in either funding or implementing foreign aid policy.

The 1961 Foreign Assistance Act created the U.S. government’s primary aid organization, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The agency administers the bulk of U.S. development and humanitarian aid, managing [PDF] over $20 billion in funds and employing more than nine thousand staff around the world.

USAID is a semi-independent agency, operating under the policy guidance of the president, the State Department, and the National Security Council. It receives its funding through the State Department budget. In 2006, in an attempt to streamline what some policymakers considered a dysfunctional aid system, the Bush administration created a new role, the Director of Foreign Assistance, in the State Department with a mandate to coordinate all U.S. aid activity.

The Department of Defense plays a major role as the agency primarily responsible for implementing traditional military aid, though the State Department also funds and influences many security assistance programs. The Department of Health and Human Services implements many health-related programs, including the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). The Treasury Department helps manage funding of global financial institutions, as well as programs for debt relief and economic reforms in poor countries. There are also a plethora of other agencies and autonomous organizations, including the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the African Development Foundation, involved in aid work.

Which countries receive the most aid?
More than two hundred countries receive U.S. aid. It disproportionately goes to a few, however, with the top five receiving [PDF] over $1 billion per year as of 2015: Afghanistan ($5.5 billion), Israel ($3.1 billion), Iraq ($1.8 billion), Egypt ($1.5 billion), and Jordan ($1.1 billion).

As a Washington Post analysis points out, this is largely due to the concentration of military aid in a few countries: Afghanistan receives $3.7 billion in security aid, all of Israel’s $3.1 billion is military aid, and the vast majority of aid to both Egypt and Iraq is security-related.

More than two hundred countries receive U.S. aid. Aid disproportionately goes to a few, however.

—SNIP—

[River_Wrangler]

Never been to West Africa...but I've seen a good part of East Africa.And *that* part of Africa is very much a poophole.

I spent 8 years up and down the coast of west Africa from Nigeria to Cape town and most places in between. (I also traveled to several countries in east Africa and the middle east)

I am trying to think of one that doesn't meet President Trumps description.

I was in Haiti in 1995 and don't think it has gotten any better since then. It certainly qualified at the top of the dung heap.

[bgill]

Don’t muzzies get a divorce by saying it three times and Dorothy clicked her shoes together three times to come home so maybe we could shut it down.

[TigersEye]

Probably should record future meetings - unfortunately, no trust!

Do it!

[lee martell]

To hear that phrase allegedly come from Trump was deeply shocking and disturbing,
However, the more i mull the essence of his rhetoric,
I am at ease with it. This is an important question that needs public airing and full discussion. We can’t allow empathy and sentiment to be our guides at every turn.
When using public taxes, one is supposed to be prudent with each expenditure.
I didn’t think the president could still surprise me, but yes, he can.
Let’s talk about it, openly.

[ZULU]

Trump denies he used that exact terminology but Democrat Senator Dick Durbin, who was in the room, claims the word was used multiple times.

And we can ALWAYS trust that s*** Head Dick Turban.

[TheTimeOfMan]

"I am trying to think of one that doesn't meet President Trumps description."

Exactly so. To use a fairly common Liberian expression. Shit hole aint a race - it's a place. There are places in Europe and even the US that are shit holes. It is just that the appellation doesn't apply to entire countries in Europe (mostly) like it can in Africa, Latin America, Asia and the ME. And Asia - not many countries left there these days I would slap with that generalization.

Africa these days is just one giant, festering, shit hole. If people don't like the truth - shout it louder.

[Hugh the Scot]

James Shikwati, Kenyan Economist, states that “if the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape.

Huge bureaucracies are financed (with the aid money), corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa’s problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn’t even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid.

...before long, several thousands tons of corn are shipped to Africa and at some point, this corn ends up in the harbor of Mombasa. A portion of the corn often goes directly into the hands of unsrupulous politicians who then pass it on to their own tribe to boost their next election campaign. Another portion of the shipment ends up on the black market where the corn is dumped at extremely low prices. Local farmers may as well put down their hoes right away; no one can compete with the UN’s World Food Program. And because the farmers go under in the face of this pressure, Kenya would have no reserves to draw on if there actually were a famine next year. It’s a simple but fatal cycle.”

Unintended consequences?

[sparklite2]

Please don't export your primitivism

Under colonialism, advanced cultures export their governance to relatively primitive societies, gradually bringing them into the modern world. This was found to be exploitative and disrespectful of primitive values.

So we stopped, if not always voluntarily.

Primitive societies generally have proved unable on their own to produce modern culture without colonial masters, but feel they have a right to that culture. Their solution to the problem is to export the people to the governance, illegally if necessary, bringing primitivism's degradation to advanced societies.

It seems better for all concerned if the primitives stayed at home while upgrading to modernity under control of advanced culture. Call it neocolonialism.

Come to think of it, Bush's New Wilsonian dreams of exporting democracy at gunpoint were a step in that direction.

Something has to give. There isn't room in the northern hemisphere for everyone in the southern.

[Bender2]

[Lopeover]

Good to know. Thanks.

[4Liberty]

Congo bump

[RinaseaofDs]

Spent some time in Nigeria. The assessment is correct, figuratively and literally.

[chief lee runamok]

Every time I see “durbin” I think “turdbin”.

[kearnyirish2]

No, intended consequences; Africa is living through The Hunger Games. The Ethiopian famine years ago exposed that, when food aid was steered towards areas supporting the Marxist government (and everyone else starved).

[Thank You Rush]

What was his “supposed” ACTUAL statement? Does anyone have that verbatim? Did he point to African countries and only named Haiti? I’d sure like to see the REAL thing...

[Hugh the Scot]

Africa should have no problem feeding Africa... But Africans have to do it. Feeding Africa frees up Africans who should be feeding themselves to build Marxist shuttles and feifdoms, and commit genocide. That’s the point.

[Thank You Rush]

Thanks - looks interesting....

[justa-hairyape]

Leftist have yet to realize they are demanding that the President lie to them.