Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Realistbear

U K To Increase Foreign Aid Spending A Whopping 40%

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/spending-review/8076707/Spending-review-Development-aid-money-to-Third-World-to-rise-by-40-per-cent.html

Spending review: Development aid money to Third World to rise by 40 per cent

Spending on development aid to the third world is to rise by nearly 40 per cent.

By Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor
Published: 6:51PM BST 20 Oct 2010
The Chancellor said the increase would ensure that the UK will hit the United Nations target of spending 0.7 per cent of national income on aid within three years.
The Department for International Development’s resource budget increased by 37 per ceent in real terms to £9.4 billion by 2014/15 - the largest rise of any department. The department’s capital budget will grow by 20 per cent to £2 billion.
Rail fares 'to rise by up to 40 per cent'
This would mean that total spending on aid – including other departments – would rise to 0.7 per cent of predicted GDP in 2013, up from 0.56 per cent this year.
Mr Osborne said that the increase would make the UK the first major country to meet a target set by the United Nations 40 years ago.
He said: “This Coalition Government will be the first British Government in history, and the first major country in the world, to honour the United Nations commitment on international aid.”

Leaves you speechless doesn't it?*

______________________________

*“Overseas aid is a waste of taxpayers' money that props up dictatorships in sub-Saharan Africa and funds fast-growing countries like India, whose economy has grown by nearly 8.8 per cent in 2010 and which has its own space and nuclear weapons programmes.

“Why the Chancellor thinks that the British taxpayer should fund the Indian space programme is unclear.

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously it makes sense to increase aid to countries like India, who need help with their space program and nuclear development. If Britain goes bankrupt to achieve this, along with climate change targets of course, then at least we know we did the intelligent thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's protection money, bribes, sweetners, a loss leader.

Oh well. "Foreign aid" sounds better even though it's double think . My conscience is clear now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know this, but it would not surpise me if International Development means that this budget gets redirected to pay for the War in Afghanistan and the Foreign Office overseas.

I think there is a lot of smoke and mirrors here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily agree with it, but don't think it really has anything to do with foreign 'aid'.

In my opinion it's about geopolitics, national security and energy/resource interests. This country is now generally a service economy. We depend on the globe to buy our debt, provide our energy needs and support our interests, and this is only going to get worse over time. Going with the 'we scratch your back now and you scratch ours later' philosophy towards the emerging world looks like a growing political strategy.

The only way we can maintain favour with the developing international community is to play the game - give a bit of money here, pick a side there, 'keep peace' here, establish uk interests there (bases, corporations) - with the aim of sharing in future prospects [ripping them off] or at least being higher in the list of friendly-nation status.

As I say it's not necessarily a great way to be spending money, but it's sadly a way the UK maintains a sense of international reconition these days, and perhaps most significantly it's a far cheaper way of maintaining international influence than the armed forces (US) or huge direct and indirect foreign investment (China).

I actually think we may be glad these interests were pursued in the future when energy and resources are scarce, but it's a gamble. Not about charity though.

Indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a cunning bit of lateral thinking here- with the cuts in place they've worked out that large parts of the UK will now qualify as third world regions, allowing us to pay the aid to ourselves while keeping to the letter of our commitments!

Simples :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's protection money, bribes, sweetners, a loss leader.

Oh well. "Foreign aid" sounds better even though it's double think . My conscience is clear now

100% spot on with that definition ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The devil will be in the detail. I wonder how much of the aid we will get back as payment for arms exports.

One of the things Britain still does well, or to be more precise defence (including civil defence) and its not always about things that go bang, a lot of sales involve other equipment/comms/transport etc,

At least there are a few Brit companies that are doing more than flogging overpriced houses to each other! How many people moan about the fact that Britain doesn’t make anything anymore?

Well we do, but just because you can’t buy it on the high street doesn’t mean its not being done – there is more to manufacturing than just Ipods and wide screen TV’s

For sure, it does mean that we can’t always do business with nice people, but that is life and as far as nice people go – check out some of the ‘civilised’ countries like Sweden or Switzerland and look at what weapons they sell (to ANYONE) and don’t even mention the French

If you want to take a Global view and a Realistic view, as far as ‘ethics and arms’ can EVER be put in the same sentence....Britain doesn’t do too badly IMO

Even our American friends are more selective than you think – from memory - M16 sales (and variants) approx 10 million – AK47/74 = 50 million+... go figure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the things Britain still does well, or to be more precise defence (including civil defence) and its not always about things that go bang, a lot of sales involve other equipment/comms/transport etc,

At least there are a few Brit companies that are doing more than flogging overpriced houses to each other! How many people moan about the fact that Britain doesn’t make anything anymore?

Well we do, but just because you can’t buy it on the high street doesn’t mean its not being done – there is more to manufacturing than just Ipods and wide screen TV’s

For sure, it does mean that we can’t always do business with nice people, but that is life and as far as nice people go – check out some of the ‘civilised’ countries like Sweden or Switzerland and look at what weapons they sell (to ANYONE) and don’t even mention the French

If you want to take a Global view and a Realistic view, as far as ‘ethics and arms’ can EVER be put in the same sentence....Britain doesn’t do too badly IMO

Even our American friends are more selective than you think – from memory - M16 sales (and variants) approx 10 million – AK47/74 = 50 million+... go figure?

I made the comment because arms, in all their forms, are our biggest export. We may be more selective, than in the past, but the facts remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made the comment because arms, in all their forms, are our biggest export. We may be more selective, than in the past, but the facts remain.

Sorry if it sounded like my post was aimed at you - it wan't!!!

just used this post to make a point and 'bounced' off your comment :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if it sounded like my post was aimed at you - it wan't!!!

just used this post to make a point and 'bounced' off your comment :unsure:

Your foreign aid tax money comes full circle back to the uk, but it ends up in the hands of the rich, bet it goes backinto the hands of the torys and their donors.

Aid is often wasted on conditions that the recipient must use overpriced goods and services from donor countries<LI>Most aid does not actually go to the poorest who would need it the most<LI>Aid amounts are dwarfed by rich country protectionism that denies market access for poor country products, while rich nations use aid as a lever to open poor country markets to their products<LI>Large projects or massive grand strategies often fail to help the vulnerable; money can often be embezzled away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily agree with it, but don't think it really has anything to do with foreign 'aid'.

In my opinion it's about geopolitics, national security and energy/resource interests. This country is now generally a service economy. We depend on the globe to buy our debt, provide our energy needs and support our interests, and this is only going to get worse over time. Going with the 'we scratch your back now and you scratch ours later' philosophy towards the emerging world looks like a growing political strategy.

The only way we can maintain favour with the developing international community is to play the game - give a bit of money here, pick a side there, 'keep peace' here, establish uk interests there (bases, corporations) - with the aim of sharing in future prospects [ripping them off] or at least being higher in the list of friendly-nation status.

As I say it's not necessarily a great way to be spending money, but it's sadly a way the UK maintains a sense of international reconition these days, and perhaps most significantly it's a far cheaper way of maintaining international influence than the armed forces (US) or huge direct and indirect foreign investment (China).

I actually think we may be glad these interests were pursued in the future when energy and resources are scarce, but it's a gamble. Not about charity though.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your foreign aid tax money comes full circle back to the uk, but it ends up in the hands of the rich, bet it goes backinto the hands of the torys and their donors.

Yep, I'd agree with that one - and thats even if it actually comes back to the UK - thats why Jersey/Caymans/Bahamas/Bermuda etc, exists

This is nothing new and has been getting worse (more blatant) but as long as British House prices were increasing over the last couple of decades - who cares?

'Alright Jack' springs to mind

Britons get what they deserve!

you can blame the polititians, the banks, but when it comes down to it - the collective greed in the UK or as wiser people than me have pointed out - the Brits are being bribed with their own money, it now seems to be payback time

Some people seem to think this is a blip and it will soon be back to 'happy days' i.e. after the credit crunch house prices increased FFS

Second wave coming I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 140 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.