Its far more complex an issue and all the black & white perspectives seem just a little bit too extreme to me
Foreign aid on its own has never been a long term solution
Even expecting developing economies to be able to thrive & survive in a global world is a bit simple.The recent destruction of African Manufacturing industries in various countries due to the chinese juggernaut proved that
Some interesting articles om this site by a self titled elitist/satanist
about countries and where they sit on many issues.A bit biased but it gives a good picture from country to country and who's doing what.Who attaches strings to their foreign aid etc
nice ideals, I think you might be waiting a long time, in the meantime 100 mil is going to mean nothing to realising those ideals but will mean tens of thousands of others won't die needlessly
not really the same as being a bit hungry until the next dole cheque comes through
we are Leeds.... , and we can still beat the mighty Chester
Philanthropy is something best practiced by the fabulously rich ? the Gates?, Gettys, and Rockefellers of this world. Those who have far more money than they could possibly spend on themselves in a lifetime. Great Britain PLC does not come under that banner ? not while cancer drugs are rationed, not while our old folk are denied social care, not while our troops are sent into battle without the requisite kit - all on grounds of cost. I wonder if the families of the dead Hercules servicemen will toast Gordon Broon?s largess, nonchalantly giving away 100 million quid to people in far off lands when a few hundred thousand could have saved our own chaps lives?
But of course the Armed Services and ordinary British old folk are not sexy and fashionable in trendy Islington, amongst wealthy NuLabour luvvies. Spending YOUR hard earned dough on exotic people in far of lands is a handy way of assuaging their fashionable middleclass guilt over ?The Empire?, without any financial cost to themselves. They just stealthily jack your taxes up ? the taxes of what Broon patronising refers to as ?Hard working families? and spend the resultant take on their favourite luvvie projects, while at the same time enhancing their street cred and ingratiating themselves with the likes of Bono and Saint Bob. Never mind that lonely pensioners are freezing to death, never mind that our soldiers don?t have enough ammo or choppers, never mind that British roads our gradually becoming akin to the pot-holed jungle tracks of Zimbabwe.
There have been the predictably hysterical cries of racism raised throughout this debate ? but hold on. Weren?t the same people who are decrying the administrate powers of the Africans the same people who are lambasting the singularly Caucasian chavs of the Shannon Matthews estate? I call that equal opportunity. Yes, I?m pleased to say there is prejudice on the forum ? prejudice against the incompetent, stupid, and feckless, whatever their outward hue. I believe there's cause for celebration. If there are still people left who adhere to old-fashioned standards of competence and behaviour and know ?a wrong un? when they see him, then there's still hope that humanity can be saved from decadence, chaos, and the ultimate implosion of human civilisation.
The problems of Africa have been touched on once again. Well, I?m pleased to say I can offer blessed relief to all you privileged middleclass handwringers. I have the solution! It?s quite simple ? just put sub-Saharan Africa back under competent colonial administration. Job sorted. After all, it?s corruption, incompetence, and mal administration that are Africa?s main woes. It's nothing to do with debt. Japan and Germany were bombed into rubble by the end of WW2, but they were given huge finical assistance to rebuild their economies and set up businesses ? just like post colonial Africa. The differences in outcomes are stark to say the least. And if all African debt were to be forgiven and they were given billions more on top of that, does anyone seriously believe the outcome (say, 20 years down the line?) would be any different to the one we have now? Without a radical change of management is there any reason why more aid money would not be spent on AK47?s, gilded palaces or stuffed in Swiss bank accounts?
The world cannot afford to let the African debacle go on much longer ? as in time it will come to taint the lives of everyone in the first world. We are already seeing food and commodity prices rising around the globe. Factor in global warming and an ever-increasing world population and one can deduce that there may be trouble ahead. First world populations will become increasingly restless if the unstemmed stream of African immigrants becomes a flood - and thereby threatens the quality of life we all now take for granted.
sorry Dibble but this isn't about ordinary british folk vs african folk and who gets the money.
your point was about giving 100 mil of nets to help prevent malaria, not about the rights or wrongs of the state of africa
you talk about would the servicemen care about having better protection on planes, what about 50,000 deaths saved by these nets
are some lives worth saving more because they are british, maybe we could prevent a few dozen lives lost with that 100 mil, or we could save 50k, does it come down to numbers?
I don't know what's right or wrong but giving 100mil to save 10s of thousands seems a good thing to me, if you want to make this country better in terms of money spent on things then look to yourself and let the governemnt raise taxes to 40%+ basic as it is in most european countries, hmmm maybe that wouldn't go down so well
we are Leeds.... , and we can still beat the mighty Chester
?but this isn't about ordinary British folk vs african folk and who gets the money.?
It is to the ordinary British folk whose taxes make up that money.
?you talk about would the servicemen care about having better protection on planes, what about 50,000 deaths saved by these nets?
What about them? The immediate concern of the bereaved families, and of Britain?s in general, are our families, our men. The grieving families probably won?t care if it was 50 million third world deaths if they could have their sons or their dads back. This is simply human nature, a fact of life. There?s nothing wrong with it, there?s nothing broke. It?s exactly what Mother Nature intended.
?are some lives worth saving more because they are british?
Yes, if you are British, no doubt they will be. First and foremost we care about the ones closest to us, most like us. Once again there?s nothing wrong with that, it?s all in Mother Nature?s game plan.
?if you want to make this country better in terms of money spent on things then look to yourself and let the governemnt raise taxes to 40%+ basic as it is in most european countries,?
Better for whom? Hasn?t Peter ?Swiss Tony? Hain got enough Armani suits and sun beds? Haven?t the Jowell?s, Mandelsons and Balls? got big enough property portfolios? Haven?t they all attended enough luvvie laden champagne soirees?? Maybe you haven?t been paying attention these past months while we?ve been talking about Labour luvvie ?snouts in the trough??
If the Heath service, where huge injections of funds seem to have evaporated with little discernable benefit, is an example of tax and spend, then I quite understand the British people?s reluctance to dig any deeper in their pockets.
You seem to have missed many of my points ? for instance, if a large number of Africans were saved, what would they then eat? Although many of them live in a resources rich ?bread basket? they don?t seem to be able to feed themselves and world food surpluses are being soaked up by the ?go for it? Chinese and Indians.
The fact is that there are to many of us humans already. We?re spreading across the globe like a rampant virus. Pestilence and famine are simply Gia?s way of regulating her fever.
