Wealthy Nations Have an Obligation to Provide Developmental Assistance

I will counter my opponent"s claims in the order he makes them. Rather than advocating for individualism, shouldn"t we help those in need. Of course the first world has problems, but that of course is a fact of life. We will always have problems, and we can"t wait till every problem is solved to help others. Third world nations problems are much more monstrous and grotesque than ours. We have problems with drugs and alcohol, while the third world has problems like the starvation of children, dictatorships, HIV epidemics and such. Arguably, our problems are much less significant than our theirs, and are more often than not self inflicted. Either way, did my opponent cite even one instance of a country falling into despotism and economic failure as a result of giving too much aid. He does in fact cite a rise in drug and alcohol use, but if he wants to use this, he must prove causation and not merely correlation. The first world has given trillions of dollars in developmental assistance over the past decades, and none have fallen from their position"s as a result of too much aid. As a result of the Marshall Plan, the US made sure Europe recovered, and most most of whom is now in NATO. Without NATO, there wouldn"t hardly anyone to country the USSR"s Warsaw during the Cold War besides the US. The brave soldiers that have helped fight in the War on Terror are heros, but this doesn"t mean that our anti terrorism efforts are effective. Our venture into the Middle East has lasted for more than a decade, and it still seems no closer to ending. After the fall of Al Qaeda, ISIS and ISIL took its place, and unless we do something different when ISIL falls, we can easily expect another regime to fill the power vacuum. It isn"t like WWII, where we could just topple the Third Reich and get over with it. Rather it"s like as if a Fourth Reich appeared appeared after the fall of the third, if you can forgive my analogy. We don"t have 6 of the most dangerous prisons according to the list. According to my opponent"s source, Criminal Justice Degree Hub, it"s 4, with one of them being listed is Alcatraz, which has been closed for more than half a century. Funny enough, the list doesn"t mention any of the prisons in say North Korea, which arguably could fill the top 10 list all on it"s own. It could be said the whole country is a prison. Nor does it include any of the prisons in Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, or Zimbabwe, which should be given the titles human rights abuses rather than countries. This point is completely void. As said before, our drug and alcohol problems are rather self inflicted, and much less significant than the problems of child prostitution and such in the third world. My opponent dropped my point on the Marshall Plan, health benefits and USAID points on Afghanistan. Those still stand. My point only brings up corruption to counter the benefits of aid. How is corruption increased by developmental aid? Please prove the causality between giving aid and an increase in corruptionAdditionally, how does one calculate how much corruption there is or how much of a problem it causes? My opponent cites a plethora of data and statistics but doesn"t explain how those numbers were calculated nor the methods of the studies. Till that is done, we can"t see how reliable those studies are. Corruption is only minor, and the third world clearly still benefits from the aid despite the corruption. In conclusion, the first world does have it's own problems, yet they are insignificant to the third world. We still have a moral obligation to help these people since they are our fellow human beings. For these reasons you must vote for the affirmative.