-:Undertaker:-
15-02-2011, 02:04 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1357056/Britains-1bn-aid-India-nation-3-times-billionaires-have.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/8324257/India-a-friend-in-need.html
Why are we giving £1bn aid to India? A nation with three times as many billionaires as we have (and its own space programme)
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/02/15/article-1357056-0D319013000005DC-865_474x196.jpg
Britain is to give more than £1billion in aid to India over the next four years, even though it has almost three times as many billionaires as we do. Ministers defended handing around £280million a year in taxpayers’ cash to one of the world’s biggest economies. They insist it will re-energise the relationship with the former colony and claim it still needs international aid. However, critics pointed out that India is a nuclear power, has its own space programme and is rich enough to donate money to poor African nations each year.
Andrew Mitchell, the International Development Secretary, says Britain will channel its aid to the three poorest states in India. Speaking on Radio 4, he said it was ‘the right place for us to be’. He added: ‘They do have a space programme, but on the other hand there are more poor people in India than in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa and the average income of an Indian citizen is only one third of that of a Chinese person.’ The Coalition has already axed aid to economic powerhouse economies such as Russia and China. But Department for International Development sources claim India is ‘different’.
A spokesman said: ‘Our development programme is in transition, but now is not the time to end it completely. ‘We will not be in India forever. But as part of the revitalised British relationship with India, following the Prime Minister’s successful visit last year, our development partnership has an important role to play.’Meet the new boss, same as the old boss - it continues, our elite seems to have some obsession with the rest of the world forgetting that they were elected to serve the interests of the British taxpayer, not the interests of the European Union, India or Egypt/Zimbabwe. The idea that this helps trade is ridiculous, its like ASDA giving you £50 to spend before you enter the store and you end up spending £15 - ASDA haven't made any money, infact they've lost. And as one of the comments said on the Mail comments; half of these countries wouldn't spit on us if we were on fire.
Look at where western aid (of which none of us can afford) actually ends up, it feeds the habits of rich dictators across Africa and the world (would you believe we fund Robert Mugabe!?) and actually keeps the people of those countries down because it allows the leaders to continue spending all the countries wealth on armed forces of which helps them retain power. If you want to donate to causes in India/around the world, it should be done on a personal basis so that those who do not agree with the cause etc do not have to chip in because afterall this money is the money of the taxpayer.
Lets be friends with the world and trade with them, but enough of being the free-for-all - we cannot afford it. So the logic of this is this; we are borrowing money (and having to pay interest on it).. in order to give that money away; lunacy. Although this video concerns the United States, its in the same boat as us with its £14tn+ debt;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLywvxki39U
Thoughts?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/8324257/India-a-friend-in-need.html
Why are we giving £1bn aid to India? A nation with three times as many billionaires as we have (and its own space programme)
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/02/15/article-1357056-0D319013000005DC-865_474x196.jpg
Britain is to give more than £1billion in aid to India over the next four years, even though it has almost three times as many billionaires as we do. Ministers defended handing around £280million a year in taxpayers’ cash to one of the world’s biggest economies. They insist it will re-energise the relationship with the former colony and claim it still needs international aid. However, critics pointed out that India is a nuclear power, has its own space programme and is rich enough to donate money to poor African nations each year.
Andrew Mitchell, the International Development Secretary, says Britain will channel its aid to the three poorest states in India. Speaking on Radio 4, he said it was ‘the right place for us to be’. He added: ‘They do have a space programme, but on the other hand there are more poor people in India than in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa and the average income of an Indian citizen is only one third of that of a Chinese person.’ The Coalition has already axed aid to economic powerhouse economies such as Russia and China. But Department for International Development sources claim India is ‘different’.
A spokesman said: ‘Our development programme is in transition, but now is not the time to end it completely. ‘We will not be in India forever. But as part of the revitalised British relationship with India, following the Prime Minister’s successful visit last year, our development partnership has an important role to play.’Meet the new boss, same as the old boss - it continues, our elite seems to have some obsession with the rest of the world forgetting that they were elected to serve the interests of the British taxpayer, not the interests of the European Union, India or Egypt/Zimbabwe. The idea that this helps trade is ridiculous, its like ASDA giving you £50 to spend before you enter the store and you end up spending £15 - ASDA haven't made any money, infact they've lost. And as one of the comments said on the Mail comments; half of these countries wouldn't spit on us if we were on fire.
Look at where western aid (of which none of us can afford) actually ends up, it feeds the habits of rich dictators across Africa and the world (would you believe we fund Robert Mugabe!?) and actually keeps the people of those countries down because it allows the leaders to continue spending all the countries wealth on armed forces of which helps them retain power. If you want to donate to causes in India/around the world, it should be done on a personal basis so that those who do not agree with the cause etc do not have to chip in because afterall this money is the money of the taxpayer.
Lets be friends with the world and trade with them, but enough of being the free-for-all - we cannot afford it. So the logic of this is this; we are borrowing money (and having to pay interest on it).. in order to give that money away; lunacy. Although this video concerns the United States, its in the same boat as us with its £14tn+ debt;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLywvxki39U
Thoughts?