I swore I wasn't getting into this but I suggest you type "luxury homes" followed by any one of the countries you're talking about and then tell me why there are people starving. I mean genuinely dropping dead with starvation, not like here where one seems to be "poor" if one can't afford ones £10 a pkt cigarettes.
The recent exchange of views just goes to show how easy it is to misunderstand what has been written, sad but true. I agree with Dove about lazy politicians and others who appear to want to stay in but don't like the lick spittle comment whoever it was aimed at.
I think those who want to leave shouldn't be allowed to vote but I suppose that's unreasonable(wanted to put a tongue in cheek smiley but they're not working for me today)
Because governments and people can be corrupt or indifferent to the needs of others. This isn't confined to the area we call the Third World. God knows, there's a lot of it right here, but next to some places, we are just amateurs. Fortunately, our government, military and police are relatively incorrupt and we have a system that overrides individual greed and selfishness and obliges us to behave better. And long may it continue.
The fact that India has a space programme doesn't mean our aid money ever went to finance it. We didn't just send the Indian government a cheque for its money box...
Incidentally, I agree with your distaste for Steve's turn of phrase. However passionately we feel (and I do too!), there's no excuse for slagging off those with a different point of view, even when we are absolutely convinced they are wrong...
Our money may not have gone directly to the Indian space programme, but obviously any money we gave them the humanitarian aid freed up that amount for them to spend on other projects. Surely nobody really believes that aid money is simply added to the amount the recipient country was planning to use for their own aid projects.
Even if it is, the recipient country should get their own priorities sorted before we fund anything. If they can afford to spend billions on a space programme they haven't needed our financial support for many years.
KT53, if we wait for recipient countries to get their own priorities sorted before we fund anything, a very large number of innocent people will die. I'm not prepared to have that on my conscience.
Doghouse Riley, if you're looking in - I'm sorry, but it's there in black & white. At 10.12 you posted a quote from my post, followed by a few paragraphs of your own, of which the last began "I really don't think the aid given to some countries helps us at all."
I rest my case.
Since 2019 I've lived in east Clare, in the west of Ireland.
We had a home in India for 7 years and it always amazed me that they had a space programme, and an atomic bomb programme , but none to supply clean drinking water to everyone, give them all an education or inoculate new born babies against preventable diseases.
I came to the conclusion that posturing with China and Pakistan seemed more important to them.
Sorry, we're obviously completely at odds here. I tried to give some genuine facts about the aid programme yesterday evening (though I was a bit out of date, as Steve pointed out), including the government's assertion that there just might be a spin-off from aid, working in Britain's favour. You are perfectly entitled to disbelieve the experts. I apologise if I misunderstood you... now I understand you, but still fundamentally disagree with your point of view.
The End. (I hope.)
Since 2019 I've lived in east Clare, in the west of Ireland.
Posts
I swore I wasn't getting into this but I suggest you type "luxury homes" followed by any one of the countries you're talking about and then tell me why there are people starving. I mean genuinely dropping dead with starvation, not like here where one seems to be "poor" if one can't afford ones £10 a pkt cigarettes.
Last edited: 19 June 2016 11:44:04
The recent exchange of views just goes to show how easy it is to misunderstand what has been written, sad but true. I agree with Dove about lazy politicians and others who appear to want to stay in but don't like the lick spittle comment whoever it was aimed at.
I think those who want to leave shouldn't be allowed to vote but I suppose that's unreasonable (wanted to put a tongue in cheek smiley but they're not working for me today)
Because governments and people can be corrupt or indifferent to the needs of others. This isn't confined to the area we call the Third World. God knows, there's a lot of it right here, but next to some places, we are just amateurs. Fortunately, our government, military and police are relatively incorrupt and we have a system that overrides individual greed and selfishness and obliges us to behave better. And long may it continue.
Our money may not have gone directly to the Indian space programme, but obviously any money we gave them the humanitarian aid freed up that amount for them to spend on other projects. Surely nobody really believes that aid money is simply added to the amount the recipient country was planning to use for their own aid projects.
Even if it is, the recipient country should get their own priorities sorted before we fund anything. If they can afford to spend billions on a space programme they haven't needed our financial support for many years.
KT53, if we wait for recipient countries to get their own priorities sorted before we fund anything, a very large number of innocent people will die. I'm not prepared to have that on my conscience.
Doghouse Riley, if you're looking in - I'm sorry, but it's there in black & white. At 10.12 you posted a quote from my post, followed by a few paragraphs of your own, of which the last began "I really don't think the aid given to some countries helps us at all."
I rest my case.
Posy, I'm with you 100%.
The aid programme still has nothing to do with the referendum though, which is what this thread claims to be about...
You're right. I got carried away!
We had a home in India for 7 years and it always amazed me that they had a space programme, and an atomic bomb programme , but none to supply clean drinking water to everyone, give them all an education or inoculate new born babies against preventable diseases.
I came to the conclusion that posturing with China and Pakistan seemed more important to them.
Aargh...
Sorry, we're obviously completely at odds here. I tried to give some genuine facts about the aid programme yesterday evening (though I was a bit out of date, as Steve pointed out), including the government's assertion that there just might be a spin-off from aid, working in Britain's favour. You are perfectly entitled to disbelieve the experts. I apologise if I misunderstood you... now I understand you, but still fundamentally disagree with your point of view.
The End. (I hope.)