A FOCUS online report on German development aid excited many readers. They don’t understand why the federal government supports other countries with billions, even though we have so many problems: poverty in old age, broken roads, dilapidated infrastructure.

Lack of understanding, indignation, anger, biting mockery – this is how the reactions of hundreds of readers to a FOCUS online article on German development aid can be summarized.

Under the headline “Mrs. Schulze has to save – but there is still tax money for cycle paths in Peru” we reported on the planned spending of the Ministry of Development under Svenja Schulze (SPD) for 2024. Despite the tense budget situation and significant funding cuts, the ministry has 11.22 billion euros at its disposal.

A spokeswoman for the ministry explained that some support would have to be scaled back this year, for example in the fight against global hunger. At the same time, she made it clear that certain projects remained untouched, including “investments in environmental and climate protection in Peru, Colombia and Montenegro”.

Reader Christina Horbin responds to the statements with clear resentment: “I’m just speechless and angry. “

Klaus Brinkmann wonders “when this country, its people and its politics took such a wrong turn”. “Normal people could only shake their heads” about the spending on development aid.

This attitude corresponds to the opinion of the vast majority of FOCUS online readers. In their comments they warn that Germany should also – some say first – think about itself. Reference is often made to “our own problems”: poverty in old age, desolate infrastructure, leaky roads, dilapidated schools, ailing economy and much more.

Here are some exemplary voices, some shortened:

Many FOCUS online readers consider development aid to be fundamentally questionable or doubt that the money is being used sensibly on site. Bernd Neugebauer writes: “Does someone go there and check the newly built building and the invoices? Or will the good in people be appealed to again?” Further comments:

Many FOCUS online readers cannot understand the development ministry’s argument.

A spokeswoman explained literally: “If, for example, we succeed in switching more to climate-friendly means of transport in Peru, in reducing energy consumption in Montenegro or in protecting the environment in Colombia, we all benefit.”

After all, it doesn’t matter whether the ton of CO2 is saved in Peru, Colombia, Montenegro or Germany. Every saving is equally important for global climate protection.”

Reader Peter Munk counters sharply: “Well then we might as well put our financial resources into the German infrastructure. At least when it doesn’t involve funds that have already been promised.”

Commentator Werner Friedel has a further suggestion for Minister Svenja Schulze (SPD), although the biting mockery cannot be ignored:

“Since Peru is very mountainous, the development of bicycle gears should also be subsidized.”

90 percent, dominant culture – the CDU is now Friedrich Merz. After an astonishing rise, he positioned his party as anti-Green, anti-AfD and: anti-Merkel. Anyone who votes for the CDU now knows what they are getting.

Berlin’s Senator for Integration Cansel Kiziltepe is against tight limits on the amount of cash available for the planned payment card for refugees. In her opinion, people should be able to use the money “100 percent independently and without regulation.”