Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Should These Children Be Funded By The British Taxpayer?
18 Answers
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
"Is it cheaper than keeping them in care in this country?"
Almost certainly. But no as cheap as letting their aunt provide for them wherever they are in Africa. The question that should be asked is this: if their parents are unable to provide for them, who is morally more responsible for doing so, their aunt or the UK taxpayer?
This country, in its quest to become the moral (and financial) guardian of every waif and stray's offspring across the globe, is the laughing stock of the world. It is about time the largesse of politicians with other people's money is radically curtailed.
Almost certainly. But no as cheap as letting their aunt provide for them wherever they are in Africa. The question that should be asked is this: if their parents are unable to provide for them, who is morally more responsible for doing so, their aunt or the UK taxpayer?
This country, in its quest to become the moral (and financial) guardian of every waif and stray's offspring across the globe, is the laughing stock of the world. It is about time the largesse of politicians with other people's money is radically curtailed.
The Mail states it is an unamed African country, so it could be any one of the toilets in Africa, but if it's somewhere like Nigeria, for instance, the average annual salary there is approx £2,500, so between them these children will be getting 6 x the average salary (I'd love to know which African country it is so we could do a proper comparison, but if it is somewhere like Nigeria, they must be living like kings).
No matter how it's spun, this is of weapons grade absurdity.
No matter how it's spun, this is of weapons grade absurdity.
And I forgot to add that the £23,000 a year (£15,600 for the eldest and £7,800 for the younger) is three times the amount of the basic State Pension and some £9,000 more than a worker on the minimum wage would earn for a 35 hour week. Such a sum must amount to a King’s Ransom in almost all African countries and Auntie (if indeed she sees any of the money) must be laughing all the way to the bank.
But what does $2 get you in Africa?
If $2 a day is barely subsistence level then that isn't our problem.
(((IF))) we had a duty to these children then surely just send them $10 a week as our contribution to help with their upkeep. The rest is down to the parents, Auntie and the African state they live in.
We are not nanny. We are not all things to all men. We are not and have not the bottomless pit of money to pay for these children.
If $2 a day is barely subsistence level then that isn't our problem.
(((IF))) we had a duty to these children then surely just send them $10 a week as our contribution to help with their upkeep. The rest is down to the parents, Auntie and the African state they live in.
We are not nanny. We are not all things to all men. We are not and have not the bottomless pit of money to pay for these children.
1 to 18 of 18
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.