We’ve gotten some neat feedback comments to our Beckham Pushback post that really help to highlight how tricky this critical question is to answer. Here’s one from Dominik Hasek, the reader we responded to in our first pushback post, who argues that the world is already collecting billions of dollars in aid for countries like Somalia and Ethiopia:
In 2005 54.4 billion dollars was collectively gathered from these UN countries governments for world wide aid. This does not include private donations… Japan was the first on the list with 8.9 billion, UK- 7.9 billion, US 7.5 billion, Germany 5.6 billion.
Total world wide aid was 108.5 billion dollars; In 2005 the total of US Aid was 37.5 billion dollars. That is a lot of extra dollars being contributed by a county whose citizens are privileged enough to do so. These private donations by the US citizens is higher than what the US government is contributing.
And here’s one from another reader going by the name Peoples, who argues that everyone should be allowed to spend their "peanuts" however they want:
Even if there is a better use for these peanuts, these peanuts aren’t ours. It’s the soccer team’s money, and if it wasn’t used to hire Beckham it would still be used on entertainment. Shouldn’t they be able to spend their peanuts however they want? By giving this money to other people, we would be peanut thieves!
So Blurbers and Blurb Lovers….where do you stand on this issue? Should we be concerned about countries that are still incredibly poor, or are we already doing enough through our taxes and our charitable contributions?
Interesting questions, huh?
Leave a comment to share your thinking!
Bam Bam Bigelow, Editor in Chief
(Image retrieved from http://nms.csail.mit.edu/projects/slam/slam_logo2.gif on January 22, 2007)