The foreign aid program is created to bring an end to poverty, conflicts and other difficulties that poor-developed countries are enabled to solve it. Everything is not about money, but it is about power, political view or group society. In many well-developed countries, corruption and political control are being reviewed by the UN and other governance, because they could be penalized or have sanctions. In a less-developed country that are already being helped with foreign aid, the governance and other aid programs must have their hands tied when it comes to penalized or sanctioned, because they are already in need, therefore corruption is created in those less-developed countries and hunger follows. There is the end of hungriness that is currently trying to be solved in the world, but there are still conflicts with political control that keeps the foreign aid to cause hunger in …show more content…
Deaton makes this argument by stating that the rich are corrupting the poor countries and slowing their growth. Supporters of this argument state that receiving foreign aid leaves the governments and citizens of these countries with a strained relationship because when countries are receiving aid the government isn’t getting its money from taxes imposed on their citizens, rather from the aid given to them. Deaton’s overall argument is that developed countries should let poorer countries learn how to develop on their own (Swanson). According to this argument, foreign aid is keeping developing countries poor and perpetrating the idea that developed countries should have some sort of power or control over the developing countries. This also goes hand- in- hand with the idea of foreign aid keeping warlords in power; if the only way for aid to get to the citizens of a country is through it being given to the rulers, warlords will stay in