It is true that prioritizing investment overseas has become a prevalent approach adopted by many governments. However, some people are of the opinion that this tendency can bring about severe problems for domestic citizens, such as the unemployed and homeless. Although this school of thought is valid to a certain extent, I totally disagree with this notion based on various reasons explained in this essay.
Admittedly, there are two main reasons why national improvement should be above global aid on the priority list of governmental investment. Firstly, money can be used to minimize several nation’ current pressing issues. Many countries are still in a state of poverty and lack basic treatments and amenities, leading to poor living standards and eventually numerous health issues. Therefore, vast sums of money would be needed to organize poverty eradication programs and incentives for individuals rather than funding foreign aid. Furthermore, overseas money assistance can work as a political manipulation strategy because the recipient has to obey the regulations set by the donor. For example, China helped Sri Lanka build a port, paid entirely by the Chinese loan. However, the South Asian country failed to pay the debt, so they had to lease the port to China for 99 years.
However, I believe that providing money as assistance for other countries would be more beneficial. The first advantage would be the promotion of humanity around the globe. Since politicians in wealthy countries can display their sympathy and nation’ care by offering financial investment for people in less economically developed ones, thereby enabling them to elevate living standards and address threat issues. To illustrate, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the US government financially supported in the form of providing free Moderna vaccines for Vietnamese citizens as they faced a great health threat, saving thousands of people and being praised for their kindness. By the same token, a positive economic outcome would also result. More specifically, financial resources spent across the globe can foster solid relationships between countries, resulting in numerous donations and strengthening transactional financial and investment activities. Therefore, it is justified that national prospects should not take precedence over international aid.
In conclusion, although there is an inherent need for governmental funding for domestic to alleviate joblessness and homeless populations, I firmly maintain that foreign aid would be more meritorious by intensifying the bonds and economic progress among nations.