Is It Any Wonder That Britain Is Short Of Cash?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303696/We-spend-aid-Germany-population-20million-theirs.html

Why is it that we continue to increase our overseas aid while most other countries are reducing theirs?

/// Douglas Carswell, Tory MP for Clacton, said: ‘We keep being told that we need austerity and yet we can find money to pay for overseas aid. It makes no sense. ///

/// ‘I despair when I think of the way politicians hand over billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to subsidise foreign governments, but cut back on local services. ///

/// ‘This country has not had a budget surplus in 30 of the last 36 years. What makes us think we can afford this?’ ///

[douglas9401]

Do you think the cash is for starving locals? It's paid in case anything interesting is found underground or as compensation for Empire.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303815/MPs-anger-180m-British-aid-boost-Pakistan-70-politicians-pay-NO-tax.html

While at the same time:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303792/Unions-ask-3million-workers-walk-protest-austerity-measures-general-strike-1926.html

Pity they haven't considered calling for a general strike against the high foreign aid spending, but then the left agree with this type of spending.

[emmie]

douglas, compensation for Empire, surely Britain has paid over and over for that, we shouldn't be giving aid to Pakistan, not at any point.

[bazwillrun]

not forgetting the billions we throw into the eussr trough every year.
thats no different to foreign aid.

[AB Editor]

Isn't one of the main reasons we're short of cash because we've got a bank bailout on the books? Once that is sold off we'll be back to "normal" levels of borrowed cash - I think this is a drop in the water compared to that.

[emmie]

perhaps, but whilst i am teetering on the edge of catastrophe, as are others, why should any money be given in aid, particularly to the rogue nations.

[anotheoldgit]

AB Editor

/// Isn't one of the main reasons we're short of cash because we've got a bank bailout on the books? Once that is sold off we'll be back to "normal" levels of borrowed cash - I think this is a drop in the water compared to
that. ///

That may well be, but wouldn't one first make cuts abroad, before finding it necessary to deprive one's fellow country men & women of amenities and cash?

One could say the 'Bedroom Tax' is just a 'drop in the water', but they found it necessary to introduce that.

[mickrog]

aog.......totally agree

[anotheoldgit]

I think what is far more important than class, is the way in which one conducts one's life.

One can have the lowest paid worker, or even non-worker, who is more benefit to society by the way they conduct their lives, than the highest aristocrat who leads a life of depravity.

[anotheoldgit]

Sorry that last post should have finished up in the Class thread.

[emmie]

i wish i had the money to live a life of depravity, chance would be a fine thing.

[anotheoldgit]

em10

/// i wish i had the money to live a life of depravity, chance would be a fine
thing. ///

One doesn't need money to lead a life of depravity em, look at Mick Phillpot.

But eh wait a minute he's a bad example, he had plenty of 'OUR' money didn't he?

[pdq1]

You fell that our politicians are treating it like a league table....you increase yours and I'll better it. Coming 2nd to the US sounds magnificent and shows what a caring compassionate country we are.

However on the other side of the argument countries with small populations like Sweden and Denark are contributing more than us based on aid/population so we should be thankful we are not trying to match them.

[AB Editor]

"That may well be, but wouldn't one first make cuts abroad, before finding it necessary to deprive one's fellow country men & women of amenities and cash?"

Depends if you want to continue to have good relations with those other countries? We were one of the first "global" superpowers at one point - we still hold significant power/influence at an international level, we can't shirk from it now.

The philosophies of the British are a force for good in the world, and if you want to stop being a force for good in the world because it costs a few quid then you need to reconsider the influence we still hold; hey, why not hand over the reigns to Brussels and Strasborg instead? If you want us to be small, that is what happens.

"One could say the 'Bedroom Tax' is just a 'drop in the water', but they found it necessary to introduce that."

I agree it is also a "drop in the water" - but it wasn't a "necessity" which brought it on, it is clearly ideologically driven. Whether you agree with it or not it can be seen as a comfortable position between the Tory's desire to use a stick rather than a carrot on those in receipt of benefits and the Lib Dem's dislike of large houses :)

[Gromit]

Shame on the Germans. The fact that we have overtaken them should be a source of pride not grumbling?

[emmie]

Ed, that ideology you speak of is costing me dear, as it will a lot of others, who can ill afford it. Whilst there do we have to buy goodwill around the world, if so it's hasn't done us much good so far.

[emmie]

The Germans are quite happy taking money off the Greeks and once they were done with that the Cypriots, who i am pretty sure aren't necessarily grateful, so thanks a lot.

[sir.prize]

Maybe I am old fashioned but charity begins at home. Why send millions of pounds annually to Pakistan - which we now know allowed Bin Laden to remain hidden in their country.

[AB Editor]

"Ed, that ideology you speak of is costing me dear"

And others, I do sympathise and don't particularly like the way things have shaken out.

[sp1814]

AOG

Do you know why we actually provide aid?

Surely you don't think it's out of sheer altruism?

There can be varied reasons for giving foreign aid, such as economic, political, strategic as well as cultural; the most important reason being, augmenting economic development of the recipient country.

Less developed countries (LDCs) are characterized by low income and unemployment, which results in low savings and investment. Therefore, capital stock is small in these countries, while the population growth is comparatively high.

In order to sustain such large populations, they need rapid economic development, which is simply not possible due to low levels of saving and investment. As a result they turn to richer countries for external help in the form of financial and technical assistance.

Financial assistance given by the developed countries (DCs) not only aims at economic development of the recipient country, but also for the balanced growth of the world economy.

That's closer to the reason we give aid...it gives us a foothold in DCs. The reason we need this foothold, is that Western economies are stagnant, and we need British influence ins emerging states.

We need to be careful about what we think of as 'aid'. This isn't just the donation of money, but also covers lower interest loans, provision of services and technology.

I think it's wrong to think of aid simply as charity. It's not quite the same.

If both the donor and recipient countries take appropriate measures to prevent misutilization of funds, then aid can play a significant role in fostering rapid growth and development of the less developed economies.

However, foreign aid should not be considered as a permanent solution to the economic problems of the LDCs and hence should be supplemented by adequate efforts to raise the level of domestic savings and investment.