|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 19:44:24 GMT
In an interview on TV this morning, he was asked, in a roundabout way, whether he thought that Britain should be considering it's own difficulties, as a priority over some Foreign Aid.
His answer basically stated that Foreign Aid was key for places like Syria, with the issues over there at the moment; and then went on to say that by, for example, investing in Education in Pakistan, we stand to benefit in the long-term.
I'm struggling to see the connection here, what does he mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 20:02:57 GMT
He means he'll get a free chicken tikka masala on saturdays
|
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Oct 2, 2013 20:15:25 GMT
Despite the difficult economic climate in the UK we are a very wealthy country , foreign Aid is something we have A moral obligation to continue with . I don't have a problem with properly targeted aid
|
|
|
|
Post by lastoftheldk on Oct 2, 2013 20:18:46 GMT
Sending money to Pakistan and they have nuclear weapons ,,
|
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Oct 2, 2013 20:29:09 GMT
Overseas aid doesn't always go direct to governments it helps funds charities, UN programs and other projects
|
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Oct 2, 2013 20:49:12 GMT
Overseas aid doesn't always go direct to governments it helps funds charities, UN programs and other projects ...and some of the money goes straight back to British arms manufacturers, which is why Blair was so keen on increasing overseas "aid". |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:12:38 GMT
Overseas aid doesn't always go direct to governments it helps funds charities, UN programs and other projects ...and some of the money goes straight back to British arms manufacturers, which is why Blair was so keen on increasing overseas "aid". That's extremely cynical of you ..... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:14:05 GMT
Sending money to Pakistan and they have nuclear weapons ,, And India has a space programme ... |
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Oct 2, 2013 21:16:50 GMT
...and some of the money goes straight back to British arms manufacturers, which is why Blair was so keen on increasing overseas "aid". That's extremely cynical of you ..... I know, it's just like me at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:20:31 GMT
Despite the difficult economic climate in the UK we are a very wealthy country , foreign Aid is something we have A moral obligation to continue with . I don't have a problem with properly targeted aid [attachment id="4398" thumbnail="1" " you can't be serious Harry ?" |
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 2, 2013 21:21:32 GMT
Well the best policy for me if they do retain government is that we will stop letting the Hauge tell us who we can and can't exspel from our own country!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:22:30 GMT
That's extremely cynical of you ..... I know, it's just like me at all. Surely you meant " not " ?  |
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Oct 2, 2013 21:25:48 GMT
I know, it's just like me at all. Surely you meant " not " ? Spell checkers are all very fine, but they don't tell you that you've missed a bloody word out! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:27:35 GMT
Surely you meant " not " ? Spell checkers are all very fine, but they don't tell you that you've missed a bloody word out! I knew you had ! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:32:02 GMT
He means he'll get a free chicken tikka masala on saturdays Not worth it unless it's at least a Madras ?.... |
|
|
|
Post by stokester1989 on Oct 2, 2013 21:35:38 GMT
A few years back i seen on Question Time about us sending 60 million a year to Pakistan in aid.. wouldn't be a problem but Pakistan also send out million a year in aid. Id have a good guess at saying the Taliban are supported from Pakistan aswell as imports are passed through the Khyber pass from Afghanistan to Pakistan and vice versa which is a Taliban area.
I also read about the UK sending 300 Million a year to India. 300 big uns seems an awful lot of money to give away. especially when they can splash out 60 million to send a shuttle into space.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2013 21:59:01 GMT
Despite the difficult economic climate in the UK we are a very wealthy country , foreign Aid is something we have A moral obligation to continue with . I don't have a problem with properly targeted aid Me neither. I was just wondering how us pumping money into Pakistan's schools helps Britain???!! |
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 2, 2013 22:09:05 GMT
Despite the difficult economic climate in the UK we are a very wealthy country , foreign Aid is something we have A moral obligation to continue with . I don't have a problem with properly targeted aid Me neither. I was just wondering how us pumping money into Pakistan's schools helps Britain???!! It's simple beef,when they arrive to be with their kindred folk who already reside here we won't have to clog up schools teaching them the basics as our funding would have given them a good start. |
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Oct 3, 2013 3:03:44 GMT
Because if we help the developing world develop into the developed world, we will benefit when they start spending their new found wealth on British products. The fact that most foreign aid ends up in the pockets of tinpot dictators or the coffers of governments wealthier than our own escapes those in charge, which makes me think its as much a political bargaining chip to them as anything else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2013 6:38:58 GMT
In an interview on TV this morning, he was asked, in a roundabout way, whether he thought that Britain should be considering it's own difficulties, as a priority over some Foreign Aid. His answer basically stated that Foreign Aid was key for places like Syria, with the issues over there at the moment; and then went on to say that by, for example, investing in Education in Pakistan, we stand to benefit in the long-term. I'm struggling to see the connection here, what does he mean? If William Hague had been injected with a truth serum 5 minutes before going on air, he would have blurted out something like this: "This is entirely down to the secret and hidden world of international diplomacy. Historically we have always made these payments and withdrawing this funding would be seen as a diplomatic faux pas on a grand scale, possibly even an act of aggression. I understand that it would be a good idea to stop these payments, but we don't fancy creating a shitstorm so we are pretty much locked in". |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 3, 2013 7:36:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by britsabroad on Oct 3, 2013 8:00:18 GMT
Depends what they're doing it for. If they're using it to break new scientific ground then space programs have been responsible for countless innovations in science and medicine. If they're just treading old NASA ground from the 60's to boost their ego then obviously not. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2013 8:55:06 GMT
Why is it always assumed that giving the world's poor some money will make things any better? Whilst I understand that money is vital for famine regions and areas where a natural disaster has occurred, the West really needs to ponder the deeper question of money, happiness and their actual relationship with one another.
For example, my missus is the daughter of a poor Thai rice farmer who has what we'd call nothing, yet this family are also as happy as Larry. Are the inhabitants of the Mumbai slums so desperately unhappy? Well they're OK for food and clean water, in fact these slum dwellings are incredibly clean but let's give them some money, surely a few cans of Coke and an iPhone will cheer them up won't it? Read Shantaram by Gregory David Roberts for an inside view on exactly that point.
Surely the urban slums in Manila contain some starving, poor unhappy wretches that need some money? Well, it's a "no" to that as well i'm afraid. When I was there, I was the probably the only white man who lived in Pasig City, Manila for 12 months. And for sure, they don't have much, but generally even the most miserable Filipino is more cheery than the bloke on the M6 in his silver Merc, you know the one thats hogging your bumper, flashing his lights, whilst snarling and shaking his fist at you. Oh yes, money. It's the answer to everything.
In fact, if you give a poor Filipino twenty quid, they'll either go and get pissed, by some shabu (crystal meth) or blow it on a massive Black Forest Gateaux. I kid you not. Did you think they were going to buy school books? The best way to upset a Filipino is to make them miss one of their five (yes five) square meals a day. Then you'll know what "pissed off" actually means.
The Indian government with it's f*****g Space Programme and it's Nuclear Weapons is the moral equivalent of living in a council flat with no electricity and smashed windows with a Ferrari and a Powerboat parked outside. What a load of shite. Why should we be picking up the tab to pay for their dirty laundry? Unless it's life or death they should have to do it under their own steam i'm afraid. What sort of government buys space rockets and bombs before looking after it's own miserable starving populous? That's if they actually are starving and miserable. Errr....did we check that one?
If India or Pakistan ever decide to let one of those nukes off it's chain, that would probably be the best time to actually send them some money. Because they will definitely need it then.
All these governments are silently laughing at the gullibility of our nature. The average western tourists reaction when visiting a 3rd world country (yes, even those 3rd world countries with Space Programs and Nuclear weapons) is wherever we see what we determine as squalor or decay, the poverty=unhappiness equation pops up. Usually that's closely followed by the chequebook. If you ever have the good fortune to journey on an Indian train and you give up your seat for an elderly Indian fella, he'll happily sit in it and then curse and laugh at you for the rest of the journey for being such a weak willed prick as to give up your seat. That's the truth. Do you think that India would give money to the UK in a role reversal scenario? There's more chance of a snowball in hell.
Most westerners simply don't get the opportunity to see how these places actually tick on a base level. For most people, 9 times out of 10, giving money is all about how it actually makes us feel. All these countries seem to place a much higher emphasis and value on family and friendships than we ever do. And whilst I also love my country deeply, we have our own problems to deal with first. The rest of the world is doing fine, seriously it's OK. There are more abused Indians in Qatar and Dubai than in India FFS!
|
|
|
|
Post by Yorkshirepotter on Oct 3, 2013 9:16:53 GMT
Me neither. I was just wondering how us pumping money into Pakistan's schools helps Britain???!! It's simple beef,when they arrive to be with their kindred folk who already reside here we won't have to clog up schools teaching them the basics as our funding would have given them a good start. Thats racist you cant say that, even though it is true  You only need to look at places like Dewsbury, Batley and huge areas of Bradford to see the massive influx of families from Pakistan, Bangladesh,Iraq etc who come, not from the cities but from the poorer rural villages,bringing no education or skills with then just for a better (easier) life.They speak no English so when the children go to school at the age of 5 the councils are spending millions on interpreters just to get them up to a minimal standard of spoken and written English. They are then behind most of the way through school because they dont get the additional teaching at home (apart from stupid fairy tales about the sky Daddy and his spokesman) that other kids get so more money is forked out on schemes to help them achieve. Then when they do badly in exams its the racist systems fault for failing them. |
|
turbosystems
Academy Starlet
Posts: 142 
Location: A500 S-O-T
|
Post by turbosystems on Oct 3, 2013 9:51:36 GMT
its all bollox........ wiliam hague is bollox,him drinkin 20 pints a night is bollox,people comming over here for our free benefits is bollox and q'ing trying to read indian on a saturday night when your starving is bollox....
|
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 3, 2013 12:44:03 GMT
It's simple beef,when they arrive to be with their kindred folk who already reside here we won't have to clog up schools teaching them the basics as our funding would have given them a good start. Thats racist you cant say that, even though it is true You only need to look at places like Dewsbury, Batley and huge areas of Bradford to see the massive influx of families from Pakistan, Bangladesh,Iraq etc who come, not from the cities but from the poorer rural villages,bringing no education or skills with then just for a better (easier) life.They speak no English so when the children go to school at the age of 5 the councils are spending millions on interpreters just to get them up to a minimal standard of spoken and written English. They are then behind most of the way through school because they dont get the additional teaching at home (apart from stupid fairy tales about the sky Daddy and his spokesman) that other kids get so more money is forked out on schemes to help them achieve. Then when they do badly in exams its the racist systems fault for failing them. It's not racist is a fact and you are right with everything else. |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 3, 2013 13:43:39 GMT
Why is it always assumed that giving the world's poor some money will make things any better? Whilst I understand that money is vital for famine regions and areas where a natural disaster has occurred, the West really needs to ponder the deeper question of money, happiness and their actual relationship with one another. For example, my missus is the daughter of a poor Thai rice farmer who has what we'd call nothing, yet this family are also as happy as Larry. Are the inhabitants of the Mumbai slums so desperately unhappy? Well they're OK for food and clean water, in fact these slum dwellings are incredibly clean but let's give them some money, surely a few cans of Coke and an iPhone will cheer them up won't it? Read Shantaram by Gregory David Roberts for an inside view on exactly that point. Surely the urban slums in Manila contain some starving, poor unhappy wretches that need some money? Well, it's a "no" to that as well i'm afraid. When I was there, I was the probably the only white man who lived in Pasig City, Manila for 12 months. And for sure, they don't have much, but generally even the most miserable Filipino is more cheery than the bloke on the M6 in his silver Merc, you know the one thats hogging your bumper, flashing his lights, whilst snarling and shaking his fist at you. Oh yes, money. It's the answer to everything. In fact, if you give a poor Filipino twenty quid, they'll either go and get pissed, by some shabu (crystal meth) or blow it on a massive Black Forest Gateaux. I kid you not. Did you think they were going to buy school books? The best way to upset a Filipino is to make them miss one of their five (yes five) square meals a day. Then you'll know what "pissed off" actually means. The Indian government with it's f*****g Space Programme and it's Nuclear Weapons is the moral equivalent of living in a council flat with no electricity and smashed windows with a Ferrari and a Powerboat parked outside. What a load of shite. Why should we be picking up the tab to pay for their dirty laundry? Unless it's life or death they should have to do it under their own steam i'm afraid. What sort of government buys space rockets and bombs before looking after it's own miserable starving populous? That's if they actually are starving and miserable. Errr....did we check that one? If India or Pakistan ever decide to let one of those nukes off it's chain, that would probably be the best time to actually send them some money. Because they will definitely need it then. All these governments are silently laughing at the gullibility of our nature. The average western tourists reaction when visiting a 3rd world country (yes, even those 3rd world countries with Space Programs and Nuclear weapons) is wherever we see what we determine as squalor or decay, the poverty=unhappiness equation pops up. Usually that's closely followed by the chequebook. If you ever have the good fortune to journey on an Indian train and you give up your seat for an elderly Indian fella, he'll happily sit in it and then curse and laugh at you for the rest of the journey for being such a weak willed prick as to give up your seat. That's the truth. Do you think that India would give money to the UK in a role reversal scenario? There's more chance of a snowball in hell. Most westerners simply don't get the opportunity to see how these places actually tick on a base level. For most people, 9 times out of 10, giving money is all about how it actually makes us feel. All these countries seem to place a much higher emphasis and value on family and friendships than we ever do. And whilst I also love my country deeply, we have our own problems to deal with first. The rest of the world is doing fine, seriously it's OK. There are more abused Indians in Qatar and Dubai than in India FFS! For someone who seems to think he knows it all you seem to have serious gaps in your knowledge They have clean water you say urbanpoverty.intellecap.com/?p=579 They have nothing but they're happy, sounds like these kids are having the time of their chuffing lives heartsforindia.weebly.com/facts-on-children-in-india.htmlAs for the council house comment what ill informed bile epress.anu.edu.au/narayanan/mobile_devices/ch10s06.html, i'm sure there's more upto date figures but $7bn spent up to 2006 the country has a population over 1.2 billion en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India so yeah $5 or $6 per person would have made a big difference to their lives. Seriously you don't think people in India are starving or poor en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India - it would seem some more intelligent minds disagree with you, if you're capable do the maths and work out exactly how much money it would take to bring 400 million people above the international poverty line of $1.25 per day even if it is only a $0.25 or $0.50 increase. |
|
|
|
Post by jonah77 on Oct 3, 2013 14:10:31 GMT
Perhaps the Indian government should divert a few quid from their space program and nuclear arms race towards bringing their own poor out of squalor.
|
|
|
|
Post by countofmontecristo on Oct 3, 2013 14:14:05 GMT
Why is it always assumed that giving the world's poor some money will make things any better? Whilst I understand that money is vital for famine regions and areas where a natural disaster has occurred, the West really needs to ponder the deeper question of money, happiness and their actual relationship with one another. For example, my missus is the daughter of a poor Thai rice farmer who has what we'd call nothing, yet this family are also as happy as Larry. Are the inhabitants of the Mumbai slums so desperately unhappy? Well they're OK for food and clean water, in fact these slum dwellings are incredibly clean but let's give them some money, surely a few cans of Coke and an iPhone will cheer them up won't it? Read Shantaram by Gregory David Roberts for an inside view on exactly that point. Surely the urban slums in Manila contain some starving, poor unhappy wretches that need some money? Well, it's a "no" to that as well i'm afraid. When I was there, I was the probably the only white man who lived in Pasig City, Manila for 12 months. And for sure, they don't have much, but generally even the most miserable Filipino is more cheery than the bloke on the M6 in his silver Merc, you know the one thats hogging your bumper, flashing his lights, whilst snarling and shaking his fist at you. Oh yes, money. It's the answer to everything. In fact, if you give a poor Filipino twenty quid, they'll either go and get pissed, by some shabu (crystal meth) or blow it on a massive Black Forest Gateaux. I kid you not. Did you think they were going to buy school books? The best way to upset a Filipino is to make them miss one of their five (yes five) square meals a day. Then you'll know what "pissed off" actually means. The Indian government with it's f*****g Space Programme and it's Nuclear Weapons is the moral equivalent of living in a council flat with no electricity and smashed windows with a Ferrari and a Powerboat parked outside. What a load of shite. Why should we be picking up the tab to pay for their dirty laundry? Unless it's life or death they should have to do it under their own steam i'm afraid. What sort of government buys space rockets and bombs before looking after it's own miserable starving populous? That's if they actually are starving and miserable. Errr....did we check that one? If India or Pakistan ever decide to let one of those nukes off it's chain, that would probably be the best time to actually send them some money. Because they will definitely need it then. All these governments are silently laughing at the gullibility of our nature. The average western tourists reaction when visiting a 3rd world country (yes, even those 3rd world countries with Space Programs and Nuclear weapons) is wherever we see what we determine as squalor or decay, the poverty=unhappiness equation pops up. Usually that's closely followed by the chequebook. If you ever have the good fortune to journey on an Indian train and you give up your seat for an elderly Indian fella, he'll happily sit in it and then curse and laugh at you for the rest of the journey for being such a weak willed prick as to give up your seat. That's the truth. Do you think that India would give money to the UK in a role reversal scenario? There's more chance of a snowball in hell. Most westerners simply don't get the opportunity to see how these places actually tick on a base level. For most people, 9 times out of 10, giving money is all about how it actually makes us feel. All these countries seem to place a much higher emphasis and value on family and friendships than we ever do. And whilst I also love my country deeply, we have our own problems to deal with first. The rest of the world is doing fine, seriously it's OK. There are more abused Indians in Qatar and Dubai than in India FFS! For someone who seems to think he knows it all you seem to have serious gaps in your knowledge They have clean water you say urbanpoverty.intellecap.com/?p=579 They have nothing but they're happy, sounds like these kids are having the time of their chuffing lives heartsforindia.weebly.com/facts-on-children-in-india.htmlAs for the council house comment what ill informed bile epress.anu.edu.au/narayanan/mobile_devices/ch10s06.html, i'm sure there's more upto date figures but $7bn spent up to 2006 the country has a population over 1.2 billion en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_India so yeah $5 or $6 per person would have made a big difference to their lives. Seriously you don't think people in India are starving or poor en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India - it would seem some more intelligent minds disagree with you, if you're capable do the maths and work out exactly how much money it would take to bring 400 million people above the international poverty line of $1.25 per day even if it is only a $0.25 or $0.50 increase. Followyoudown ************** has given us his perspective based on his experience mate. Instead of just downloading links and statistics - perhaps you could share your perspective based on your experience of visiting these countries? |
|
|
|
Post by redstriper on Oct 3, 2013 15:24:13 GMT
I may be a tad cynical but...
To me the underlying purpose of foreign aid is to ensure that the politicians who dole it out can visit the recipients countries and be feted like hero's and, when there time in office is up, be welcomed into the said countries for luxury holidays and film star treatment, and be paid massively inflated amounts for the odd after dinner speech.
The vast majority of career politicians are self serving power mad individuals who leech off the rest of us, lining their own pockets to the extent of being multi millionaires, no matter how inept they proved to be from a UK perspective.
|
|
