What we buy with foreign XXXX .

@entity10479 @entity3224
Some in the @entity10479 view foreign assistance as some type of wasteful international welfare program. To the contrary, @entity10479 foreign @entity3224 is invaluable investment in both the country's future and that of the world. 43 of the top 50 customers of American agricultural products were, for example, once foreign @entity3224 recipients. South Korea imports three times as much in @entity10479 goods each year as it received in @entity3224 during the entire 1960s. Furthermore, President Bill Clinton's recent bypass of Congress to bail Mexico from its economic morass serves both @entity10479 and Mexican interests. Helping to help the economy of Mexico afloat protected 750,000 @entity10479 jobs which come from trade with Mexico as well as billions of dollars of investments by middle-class Americans in Mexico and Latin America. It is unfortunate that the Republican-controlled Congress fails to understand that the continuation of @entity10479 foreign @entity3224 serves @entity10479 interests while at the same time helping other less fortunate populations. It is clear that @entity10479 @entity3224 over the decades has made an enormous positive impact upon the health and welfare of populations in developing countries worldwide, especially in the area of population assistance. Congressional leaders are considering cutting @entity10479 foreign @entity3224 to developing countries by 10-20%, but that won't save much money. The @entity10479 in 1994 spent  12.3 billion on foreign assistance, less than 1% of the federal budget and the lowest amount in the history of the @entity3224 program. About half of that was in military assistance, which would not be cut.
