The United States ought to focus on domestic aid, rather than foreign aid.

DefinitionsFocus-to pay particular attention to. This is somewhat similar to the defniton that con offered. I contend, though, that for the purpose of this debate, focus will be regarding which type of aid would need priority if spending was increased (which aid should get more money) or which will recieve priority in the case of spending cuts (which should get cut the least). Aid will be defined as spending that is related to the development of industrial potential, the improvement of living standards, or military assisstance. What is ought will, indeed, be based on net benefits. For this debate, the resolution implies that domestic aid must be the focus of all kinds of aid spending. As domestic aid currently occupies the majority of federal spending (figure 1), the resolution therefore is a defense of status quo. Pro must argue that current spending levels for domestic aid are favorable to lower spending levels in favor of foreign aid. Pro may also argue for the benefits of cutting foreign aid in favor of domestic aid. Con must argue that current foreign aid spending ought to be raised in favor of raising domestic aid spending. Figure 1 Medicare and medicaid in this debate qualify as domestic aid. Defense qualifies as both foreign and domestic aid, and therefore will require in depth data in order to distinct how much is being spent by defense as foreign aid, and how much is domestic. Foreign military aid spending is defined as any US military base/establishment/group/operation that is currently active in a foreign country. With my objective established, I will now tout the benefits of domestic aid. PROS CASE(I) America is in need of developmentSubpoint A: US medical technology is falling behindThe United States is falling behind in our medical technology. A very common litmus test for the medical tech development of a nation is the countries infant mortality rate. The United States is ranked 34th on the UN list of nations rated by their infant mortality rate, number one being the nation with the lowest infant mortality rate. (1) Obviously, some countries report their infant mortality rates in such a way that skews their statistic favorably, but most of these are accounted for in the UN list. The US is behind developed countries, like Canada, Germany, Spain, The UK, and France, but the US is also behind smaller, less developed countries, like South Korea, Slovenia, Singapore, Ireland, Israel, and Cuba. The United States can garner much bnefit for it's citizens by improving the type of care available to its citizens. Improving the technology can also reduce cost, making care cheaper for the citizens of the US. This improves the standard of living, and can also be a good source of jobs, and economic prosperity. (2)Subpoint B: The US Education system is not competitive US students fall further behind every day. In 2012 PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment), a member of the OECD, tested students worldwide and published the results, ranking students by country, and their scores. The results are illustrated here. The scores here are specifically for math, a core subject, and arguably the most important. NPR reports, "American Education Secretary Arne Duncan called the PISA findings a 'picture of educational stagnation. ' He told The Associated Press that America needs to 'invest in early education, raise academic standards, make college affordable, and do more to recruit and retain top-notch educators. '"(3) An educated population is very beneficial to the country as a whole. It can increase economic productivity, and increases the standard of living. "According to the U. S. Department of Labor, educated citizens are more employable and tend to have higher incomes throughout their working lives. The more educated a community's population is, the better prepared it is to aid in the education of its youth, either by assisting its own children, or through mentoring programs within the community. Educated adults are better prepared to understand the complexities and necessities of bond issues, education reform, economic factors, and the political process, just to name a few. "(4)Subpoint C: US Transportation Infrastructure needs improvementIn 2013, the ASCE published a "report card" as they do every 4 years, in order to gauge the relative effectivness of US infrastructure. In 2013, the card reported an average "D+" on our GPA, and they have been reporting these near failing grades since 1998. US infrastructure is in dire need of major improvement. The ASCE estimates that over 3 trillion dollars need to be invested before 2020 or we will see massive economic drag due to failing infrastructure. "Investing in infrastructure is essential to support healthy, vibrant communities. Infrastructure is also critical for long-term economic growth, increasing GDP, employment, household income, and exports. The reverse is also true – without prioritizing our nation’s infrastructure needs, deteriorating conditions can become a drag on the economy. " (5) (II) Foreign spending will ultimately benefit from increased domestic spending Subpoint A: With a stronger economy the US can put more funds towards foreign aidImproving the US domestically will, in many cases, greatly improve the economy, as my previous point has shown. With a stronger economy, the US government would then have the resources to maintain very high levels of domestic aid spending, while still increasing foreign aid spending. This is much better for those foreigners in need of aid, as the US (with it's domestic problems sorted) will be able to provide better aid to foreigners. With domestic aid prioritized, foreign aid will indeed benefit, but this benefit can only be garned by prioritizing domestic aid. If foreign aid was increased at the expense of domestic aid, the US economy would weaken, and spending in both categories would shrink. (6)Subpoint B: With a strong domestic environment, the US can act strongly as a world leaderWith a strong economy, and a very high standard of living, the US will hold more leeway as a world leader. Countries would be more likely to follow the example set by the US, and accept their aid. This means that the US would be able to more effectively aid those in need. SummaryI believe that I have clearly shown that there are many aspects of domestic aid that could yeild very great benefit, thus the net benefits of domestic aid outweigh those of foreign aid. VOTE PRO! Sources 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://advamed.org...;3. . http://www.npr.org...;4. . http://www.bizjournals.com...;5. . http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org...;6. . http://en.wikipedia.org...