Global economic justice is a set of moral principles and obligations that guide economic policy. If implemented thoughtfully, it will produce the best possible economic outcomes for all inhabitants of our planet.
The U.S and other developed nations should share resources with poor nations. Through a framework of common economic goals and open borders, global suffering will decrease and world peace will begin to take shape. The U.S and other developed nations have a moral obligation to decrease global economic hardships, since the adequate resources are available.
It is in the strategic interest of the U.S to cooperate with underdeveloped nations. By remaining indifferent to the poverty in 3rd world countries, the U.S is sacrificing its national security and influence on the world stage. For instance, imagine a situation where we stopped providing a poor country with aid. If this poor country has a monopoly on a recourse like oil, it could use it as leverage to its advantage by increasing its influence over the U.S.
From an ethical perspective, we have a moral obligation to help poorer nations due to policy mistakes that helped drive these nations into poverty in the first place. Through colonization, rich nations have arranged an exchange of goods that has basically nurtured this economic imbalance from developed to underdeveloped countries. Economic aid and anti-poverty initiatives would be the best way to correct previous mistakes.
It is vital for the U.S to ensure this aid is distributed to the people instead of dictatorships that promote the interest of the wealthy. Unfortunately the U.S has historically done the opposite.
By correcting these previous mistakes, the U.S will gain popularity and anti-western extremism will decrease. Providing aid and flexible immigration policies will demolish “us vs them” narratives, therefore, our world will become truly cosmopolitan.
In regards to the problem of population growth in developing countries, there are remedies that can help make global economic justice more sustainable. For instance, through birth control technology and other forms of natural human intervention, there is no need to rely on natural population cycles.
The removal of aid will affect food production, sanitation and medicine negatively, therefore, growing populations in developing nations will live in misery, therefore increasing the death rate. Considering the mere scale of food waste and unused resources in developed nations, it is unjust not to attempt to distribute unused wealth in poorer nations.
Foreign aid is sustainable for developed nations. For instance, if it was the year 1974, 5 billion a year could provide family planning services to poor nations and a health care program for mothers and infants (excluding China), and a five year literacy program for all adults and children.
There is no doubt that the costs of the proposals mentioned above have increased substantially since then, however, with the expansion of new technology and a decrease in defense spending, developed nations can do a great deal to help poorer nations with sustainable costs.
At the same time, the U.S must engage in a balancing act. This balancing act must ensure that foreign immigration and aid won’t disadvantage the poor and working class at home. If these policies were to disadvantage U.S citizens, nationalism and racism will rise, then preventing useful aid related legislation from being passed in the next election cycle.
A remedy that would ensure all groups be equally satisfied is a universal basic income in the U.S. This approach will ensure health care and basic needs for everyone, therefore, no one group will feel disadvantaged. The most responsible approach is to help all impoverished people, since no one group should have a monopoly on suffering.
In regards to immigration, it is a matter of pure luck that we were born in a developed nation instead of a underdeveloped one. If those who disfavor aid and immigration put himself in an immigrants shoes, they may view the situation differently.
Second, there are benefits to immigration. For instance, immigration provides cheap labor for jobs that native inhabitants don’t do. The more cheap labor there is, the more economic growth, since projects can be done faster.
Immigration causes the U.S to become more cosmopolitan. Immigration to the U.S increases cultural, technological and artistic innovations. Third, many on the right are uninterested in exploring solutions to their immigration concerns. For instance, a stable vetting process that will prioritize the most productive and in need immigrants could be a desirable remedy for people concerned about immigration. For the last 100 years, immigration policies in developed countries have nowhere near helped fuel tragedy in the U.S.
The U.S and other developed nations have a moral obligation to attempt to provide aid and flexible immigration policies to the best of their abilities. First, due to colonization, many developed nations are partially at fault for poverty in 3rd world countries.
Second, providing aid and flexible immigration policies will bolster U.S influence and security abroad. Third, there are sustainable solutions to global poverty that the U.S and other developed nations can achieve through moderate funding and technology, but these initiatives should not disadvantage native citizens.
A balanced and flexible immigration policy is desirable since everyone deserves a fair chance to freedom. Flexible immigration policies will ensure that western nations become diverse and cosmopolitan in a variety of domains such as culture and innovation.