America The Generous: The Evidence

U.S. foreign aid goes far beyond what is budgeted by the federal government. That figure, which in 2000 totaled $9.9 billion is the basis for designating the US a "stingy" nation.

This figure accounts for just 18% of total U.S. assistance to developing countries. If one expands the definition of "humanitarian assistance" to include, for example, government aid to Israel and other items in the federal budget more closely related to military assistance, one can add an additional 12.7 billion to the total. But the largest amount of money that can and probably should be included in any measure of US "generosity" would come in the form of donations by individuals to private charities doing various kinds of humanitarian work around the world.

Next in line are grants provided by US foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or the David and Lucille Packard Foundation: 1.5 billion in 2000 and growing each year. In addition, many US corporations have charitable giving programs; private voluntary organizations such as Doctors Without Borders contribute voluntary work by medical personnel; American universities provide scholarships to foreign students; and religious organizations conduct missionary activities, including, for example, providing medical care in clinics.

Finally, people come from many different countries around the world to work in the US; these people send part of their earnings back to their families who remain in underdeveloped countries. These contributions to family members living abroad are called "remittances:" total in 2000, 18 billion. Or nearly twice the official figure in our earlier graph of US foreign aid. Adding all these categories together, the total amount of money flowing from the US to the underdeveloped world totaled $56.2 billion in 2000.

Now, if we take all these additional amounts into account, how does the US stack up against other donor nations? The US still ranks seventh on the list, behind Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, for example. And to reach this more respectable position, it is necessary to ignore private contributions from individuals and organizations in other donor nations. Taking a wider view of their, contributions would push the US, once gain, further from the top of the list. There are additional problems with this more liberal view of the facts. (To continue, return to the first page of this article.)

Charles Henderson

You are invited to join our Forum
and discuss any issues
pertaining to faith or the search for it.
Your comments are published here instantly.
CrossCurrents Forum

(To see the current list of topics your browser must allow Active Content)

CrossCurrents

Recent Discussions

Please take a moment to let us know you were here!
Just send us an email to subscribe to our free newsletter.

Email Charles Henderson at The GodWeb

For those who prefer a form: Click here to subscribe.
If you want to talk with someone in person, please feel free to call 212-864-5436
The Rev. Charles P. Henderson is a Presbyterian minister and Executive Director of
CrossCurrents.
He is the author of God and Science (John Knox Press, 1986).
A revised and expanded version of the book is appearing here.
God and Science (Hypertext Edition, 2005).
He is also editor of a new book, featuring articles by world class scientists and theologians, and illustrating the leading views on the relationship between science and religion:
Faith, Science and the Future (CrossCurrents Press, 2007)
For more information about Charles Henderson.
Subscribe to the GodWeb Site Feed