nside also. The population in Third World countries was originally controlled by lower amounts of food and disease, now we are eliminating those barriers. Without those factors in the ecosystem population has skyrocketed. Normally the environment wouldn't allow more people than it could support, we are actually causing more famine by packing the land with extra people to feed. If the fifty percent of the children don't die from disease like they used to, you now have twice as many new people to feed. When we withdraw our aid the land will not support that number of people and they will start to die off. If that ever starts to happen that compassion factor will kick in and Americans will throw more money out and start the cycle all over again.Finally, the surplus of food in this country would be more helpful in eliminating hunger in our country. If we continue to send food to starving countries we are not encouraging them to improve themselves we just make them dependant on handouts. We need to reserve the food for starving people in out country. The food sent overseas to Third World countries is also encouraging over population. People aren't starving as much anymore so they are multiplying and creating more people to starve, unless we increase our aid and its cost to us. The solution is to stop sending the food.Because it causes overpopulation, hurts foreign economies, and spends money that could be used closer to home, United States aid is not a good thing. Although the United States is known as the "helping hand" throughout history, foreign aid is not helping as much as it is hurting other countries. These countries shouldn't be given money and food, but rather be educated as to ways they can improve themselves. Once the aid runs out they will need to fend for themselves. If we were to give them some of our technologies and educate them, we would make a bigger difference. Foreign aid is not a necessary thing that the ...
