ChatterBank1 min ago
Uk Aid Spending Tops £14Billion
looking at the chart beggars belief, specially pakistan...why, they can afford or waste money on a nuclear bomb and its maintenance, oh its wonderful blasphemy law, and nigeria an oil rich country full of scam artists, so the money is a bribe for contracts mmm payola, meanwhile
back in blighty cuts across all public services, homeless foodbanks etc etc, rising crime.
https:/
back in blighty cuts across all public services, homeless foodbanks etc etc, rising crime.
https:/
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fender62. 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.
On another thread tonight Theland has referred to a 'compassionate society'. It's interesting to note that his compassion appears to stop at the English Channel. Perhaps he ought to be proud that the UK is one of the few countries that actually honours its internationally-agreed payment of 0.7% of GDP as overseas aid?
Where the money goes:
http://
Where the money goes:
http://
"Keep my taxes here to help our people, you send yours as you like."
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, Theland. Every person in the UK - every man, woman and child - loses the use of about two hundred quid to finance this preposterous exercise. Much of it disappears into Swiss Bank accounts and benefits nobody other than the despots who misappropriate it. This has been known for donkey's years. Still it persists despite assurances that rigorous control is just around the corner. The UK doesn't have this cash to spare. It has to be borrowed and taxpayers have to service the loans.
There is no justification to provide aid on a regular basis to these supplicant nations. The notion that vital services in this country should be deprived of funds whilst money is being syphoned out of UK taxpayers' pockets by a government desperate to demonstrate its humanitarian credentials is a scandal of the first order.
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, Theland. Every person in the UK - every man, woman and child - loses the use of about two hundred quid to finance this preposterous exercise. Much of it disappears into Swiss Bank accounts and benefits nobody other than the despots who misappropriate it. This has been known for donkey's years. Still it persists despite assurances that rigorous control is just around the corner. The UK doesn't have this cash to spare. It has to be borrowed and taxpayers have to service the loans.
There is no justification to provide aid on a regular basis to these supplicant nations. The notion that vital services in this country should be deprived of funds whilst money is being syphoned out of UK taxpayers' pockets by a government desperate to demonstrate its humanitarian credentials is a scandal of the first order.
//Perhaps he ought to be proud that the UK is one of the few countries that actually honours its internationally-agreed payment of 0.7% of GDP as overseas aid? //
Why be proud that one's leaders are utter fools who know they are being taken for a ride but nevertheless continue to climb aboard? Nothing there to be proud of. If anything it's weep-worthy.
Why be proud that one's leaders are utter fools who know they are being taken for a ride but nevertheless continue to climb aboard? Nothing there to be proud of. If anything it's weep-worthy.
However much most of us would like to see foreign aid reduced it's very unlikely to happen. First of all we'd really need to change the law (Cameron's) that we will give 0.7% of GDP and I cannot see that happening. None of the parties has a policy of supporting reductions in foreign aid, and some want to spend more. I don't think we could realistically come close to eliminating it anyway as a significant part of it is not aid in the sense that people think of (cash handouts/food for the starving or anyone else, buying Rolls Royces for ruling classes) but is really trade sweeteners/deals, political/military influence, investment in infrastructure that will help us- and when we leave the EU we will want more trade with some of these countries.
But we know money is wasted and some does go in brown envelopes or to support LGBT bands in Africa so the best I can hope for is that a party with a chance of being elected decides to reduce the figure incrementally to say 0.5% over 5 years and then to say 0.3% after 10 years. We probably could not go much lower.
But we know money is wasted and some does go in brown envelopes or to support LGBT bands in Africa so the best I can hope for is that a party with a chance of being elected decides to reduce the figure incrementally to say 0.5% over 5 years and then to say 0.3% after 10 years. We probably could not go much lower.
1 to 14 of 14
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.