Should the government increase or decrease foreign aid spending?

Neither and cut foreign aid form the United States and give it to NATO and the United Nations so they can provide for nations across the world

Increase, but only once we have our country's debt under control. We have a long way to go within our own country before we have the means to send aid elsewhere.

Yes, but allow there to be civilian oversight on the operations which USAID engages in to make sure there are no subversive actions taking place

I think we should give government aid spending to countries that are being at war with greedy countries.

Deny aid to countries which harbor or promote terrorism unless they are willing to make strides to not harbor or promote terrorism, increase aid to those who have no human rights violations with particular care with the economy to allow US manufacturing to actually be capable again.

Decrease, until we have a stable domestic front, if our national budget has a huge surplus, and if we reduce the national debt.

Satisfied with current but re-allocate current spending to reduce aid to countries that harbor or promote terrorism and reduce aid to countries that have human rights violations.

Yes and No — “Foreign Aid” is such a general statement and too general for blatant overuse. Coining the phrase “Foreign Aid” to mean, “aid to x/y/z (disaster, military, health crises, and/or etc.),” is deceptive in practice. This is a broad spectrum question and the issue at hand, if it’s to change, should come with well-regulated informative disclosure. If Federal Aid as it exists is to change even in only one way, the change should present in the democratic creation of legislation outlining its own set of checks and balances. Otherwise the ter…  Read morem is easily misused and misconstrued, leading most to believe that it is truly AID — that is, that it’s assistance for dire circumstances out of the control of a given power or people. Aid for famine, natural disaster, homelessness, starvation, lack of education systems; lack of basic human necessities such as food, shelter, water, renewable energies, the means to recover from devastation outside of the control of the general population resulting in severe disruption, destruction, death, danger, or harm — those are the things a country or power should elect to assist (by way of a true democratic election by the people, for the people, with liberty and justice for ALL) if a nation is to send aid at all. We should not be funding wars, providing weapons nor weapons systems NOR ammunition to undue wartime aggressors, and we certainly should not be funding genocides when we are in such debt that our large powers can’t even find a dollar in their hearts worth giving to save their own neighbors, nor their own people. This system as it exists today is dangerously faulted and flawed, and goes far beyond what the majority of citizens want to pay taxes for. I know that my tax dollars should never go to funding global death and destruction when my own national family is suffering and struggling to simply stay alive without war on our doorsteps.

For now, we should decrease spending on foreign aid, but once we absolve some of our national debt, we can increase it again (we need allies).

I feel that they shouldnt add or subtract the spending, there are other things that we need to spend our money on.

We should only give aid to countries that cooperate with us and are aligned with the goals of the United States.

Continue to give aid, but again, audit use of funding and monitor budget and resources as needed for the protection of US borders and peer-to-peer conflict.

We should only increase resources like food, shelter, and medical aid but not funding the expense of any militarization

Increase for humanitarian aide, but decrease (with the aim to eventually end) aide to countries where military regimes use it to run the country while they line their pockets with their own government funds.

Decrease, until issues of American finances are resolved- then only fund countries that actively need assistance. Once stable, a country should be weened off of U.S funding.

Increase but only provide true aid, such as food and resources to better the lives of people rather than supplying more arms to belligerent governments. Also, we need to invest in bettering the lives of everyday Americans as well.

Increase because it is less than 1% of our annual budget but no longer give belligerent nations that are committing war crimes, human rights abuses, and genocide arms.

Decrease, and save it for countries that actually need our support and not get involved in other countries wars.

In some cases. The US should not fund countries that promote terrorism or threatening action, but should fund countries in need.

Fund humanitarian efforts rather than governments themselves

We should not give more foreign aid to any country than what the US gives to its own citizens (e.g., Ukraine is getting a bigger pay-out in social services from the US than Americans are).

Decrease, reduce national debt and deny to terrorist harboring/promoting nations

Increase after we get rid of the deficit.

the when the me then so i then the

Increase but the foreign aid should be focused on encouraging democratic ideals and education

eliminate all foreign aid. we are trillions of dollars in debt, and we shouldn't be sending money to ukraine either.

Decrease, the United States could use that money elsewhere.

Only give aid when a sovereign nation is invaded by another.

I don't understand this topic.

Increased for our allies

Increase but only if USAID is abolished and no strings are attached

The government should stop funding terrorism itself, and keep funding global citizens in need no matter where they are.

Long-term goal should be to eliminate foreign aid.

End foreign aid and all foreign entanglements.

Decrease, how much sense does it make to provide so much spending to other countries when we are having trouble with their own poverty homelessness and debt. Domestic spinning policies are more reasonable and make more sense.

This is a why question not a yes or no question

If we can't even take care of our own people then we shouldn't be sending money to other country.

Decrease so that money can be used for homeland infrastructure

Stop taking money from Americans and giving it to people in other countries.

Decrease, until we fix our budget deficit, our economy, and our education.

Yes, but only for countries that truly need help

Decrease, untit the budget is balanced

Increase, but only to friendly nations

Increase, but ban funding for abortion and contraceptive aid.

Decrease, help our country out before someone else's

I’m neutral or unsure on this

I don’t have enough information.

Need to be more educated in this subject

decrease, but aid during an immediate need of help

give aid to countries that are in need

Decrease and instead work with missions groups and non profits to distribute humanitarian aid

Invest in more sustainable ways of supporting foreign countries

change how we support them by providing services that can increase foreign stability and economies

Yes, If it benefits the US in some manner.

Neither satisfied or dissatisfied.

i think it should just stay as is

Neither. But cut all aid for countries with human rights violations.

We need to first focusing on our domestic spending, so that later on, we can help the world as a whole.

Foreign aid should be completely ended.

The current funding is sufficient, but distribution should be adjusted frequently to adhere to changing circumstances.

It depends on a case-by-case basis

Decrease tax-paid foreign aid to nothing at all. Remove any and all barriers and impediments to voluntary donations of whatever sort.

If it is necessary for the situation.

Maintain current spending with a 100% boycott of nations with links to any human rights violations and/or terrorism.

Increase, but only for low-income countries.

Decrease until we drastically reduce our national budget deficit. Furthermore, only provide foreign aid to those countries that strive for no human rights violations.

Decrease, and we should not give foreign aid to any countries. Politicians are getting under the table money sent back from these countries. This has been a money laundering scam for FAR too long. Hitler may have been evil but he was a nationalist and Germany's people thrived under him - these are facts that mainstream history forgets to include. The Germans were targeted by the rest of the world to steal the hidden technology they were in possession of. People are too lazy to actually look into this.

Depending on the situation of each county.

The us should increase for the foreign countries that are important to us.

It depends on usage.

“Foreign aid” is predatory.

Increase, but only for countries that are severely struggling and oppressed.

Yes, if the countries we are aiding have not done anything to threaten us.

I don’t have much knowledge on this subject

Decrease to only humanitarian aid.

Stop all foreign aid spending and refuse any requests for more.

Cease spending for imperialist causes, increase spending done in good faith

Yes, but only to help countries with civil issues, not to win wars

Increase for the countries that need it the most

Do not increase but do not provide aid to countries with human rights violations or who harbor or promote terrorism.

We need to assess our aid strategy, maybe look into direct investment and local solutions to many development questions

Only aid countries in crisis

Increase, but attach conditions to ensure the aid goes to the right recipients and/or causes