Should we have to spend 0.7% of GNI on foreign aid?

There are several.
British aid does wonders. It provides vaccinations and medicines to stop diseases spreading. It provides clean drinking water and irrigation systems to countries can grow food.

It contributes to infrastructure, builds roads, schools, hospitals and transport facilities.

It's vital and if anything should be increased.

Name them (5th time) Name some infrastructure, schools or hospitals that foreign aid has directly provided.

Or are you still searching Google for it?

Reply 81

bob072

OP

12

Original post by HighOnGoofballs

I mean, India's wealth was 27% of the ENTIRE WORLD INCOME in the 1700s. Then the British came, and it was reduced to nothing more than 3% in 1950. 3%!! But hey, they got a few railroads, so pat yourself on the back boys.

I question the accuracy of knowing India was exactly 27% of the world 300 years ago, but also the rest of the world like the USA grew massively so it's not a fair comparison.

And the British started the trans-Atlantic slave trade! You started something, reaped the rewards, and then ended it once you're conscious finally caught up with you. How is that something to be proud of? It's like me enslaving someone, making them work without pay for a couple decades, and then saying 'sorry, I was wrong, whoops'.

We had ships patrolling the African coast to prevent the slave trade, yes I think that's important.

I don't look back on the British Empire as some great benevolent endeavor (and would prefer it hadn't happened) but we shouldn't be sucked into post-truth analysis that it was atrocius to everyone involved and the world hates us for it.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 82

username3672344

14

Original post by jdddd

Name them (5th time) Name some infrastructure, schools or hospitals that foreign aid has directly provided.

Or are you still searching Google for it?

https://www.aidforafrica.org/member-charities/rise-international/
Here you go.

Foreign aid goes to charities who carry out such work.

I'm still laughing at your suggestion that locals in a poverty stricken community have the money to pay for all of this.

Why are you opposed to providing vaccinations and medical resources to such countries?

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 83

jdddd

19

Original post by DeBruyne18

chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44676.pdf

Here you go.

Foreign aid goes to charities who carry out such work.

I'm still laughing at your suggestion that locals in a poverty stricken community have the money to pay for all of this.

Why are you opposed to providing vaccinations and medical resources to such countries?

Can't open that link. - Now works - Aid for Africa, which is a US based non profit charity? Nothing to do with foreign aid hahaha you could of just linked me to Oxfam? hahaha

The same charities whose bosses are on 400k plus a year.

Im laughing cause I never said that. I said that a lot locals have accommodation, that can house volunteers, as I have seen volunteering programs to do so.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 84

username3672344

14

Original post by jdddd

Can't open that link. - Now works - Aid for Africa, which is a US based non profit charity? Nothing to do with foreign aid hahaha you could of just linked me to Oxfam? hahaha

The same charities whose bosses are on 400k plus a year.

Im laughing cause I never said that. I said that a lot locals have accommodation, that can house volunteers, as I have seen volunteering programs to do so.

Again, reading is definitely not your strong point. Read my past messages.

You really aren't the best person to debate with, very weak arguments, no knowledge of volunteering or any programs, no knowledge of how charities and medicine work and reading skills definitely need some improving.

The charity receives foreign aid, as do several others who carry out work in the region.

Answer me this:
Should Britain be spending foreign aid on creating clean water and irrigation systems and providing vaccinations for diseases like malaria?

yes or no?

Reply 85

Davij038

13

Original post by Eva.Gregoria

Every other country is in debt, we’re not special.

Germany, Switzerland and others are not in debt.,

Also again you’re making the assumption that less spending on foreign aid will force the government into spending more on domestic issues.

No, I’m saying that they could. And even if they didn’t it do anything that would be paying off our national debt which would be just as beneficial.

Theresa May has repeatedly said there’s no magic money tree for the country, except when it was convenient for her to use I.e. for the DUP, renovating the queens palaces and other useless endeavours.

Your point is that spending less on foreign aid would ease our national debt, my point is that it wouldn’t make a difference to the lives of ordinary British people.

The DUP deal was a farce.

Foreign aid doesn’t make a difference to the lives of ordinary British people. The deficit however does.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 86

Davij038

13

Original post by DeBruyne18

Rule of law in a country where the majority of the population has no access to clean water and food is entirely meaningless. Before you can have systems that work you need to make sure people have access to the most basic of supplies. Telling people who have no access to food not to steal is pointless.*
You need both.

*Actually no. See the Middle Ages. Or China. Or India. Or Hong Kong.

. As long as an elite are able to have supplies (which they almost always will) and can exert terror onto the local populace there can be a degree of stability which is the only possibility for growth.

Liberals seem to think you can turn somewhere like Sudan into Sweden in the space of a few years if enough money and resources are thrown at it. This is dangerous utopian nonsense.

Reply 87

bob072

OP

12

Original post by DeBruyne18

Spend more.

Ok, if you believe we should be spending more, do you believe our spending should be in accordance with the amount we decide is nessecary and can afford, instead of an arbritary target which no one else follows and comes with rules that exclude things like hurricane hit British Virgin Islands?

Reply 88

010100111001

1

[placeholder_Text]

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 89

Zystra

14

Original post by jdddd

Name them (5th time) Name some infrastructure, schools or hospitals that foreign aid has directly provided.

Or are you still searching Google for it?

Ever heard of the Marshall Plan? Without it Europe would've been in ruins for decades longer. South Korea was also a huge recipient of our aid - it would not be where it is now without foreign aid and they are a HUGE trading partner of us. North Korea were richer than them at one point!

Foreign aid helps fix inequality in the world. If other countries are richer due to our foreign aid they will spend more money here which will create jobs domestically, AND abroad. 0.7% is not a lot of money and most likely we benefit more by spending it abroad.

Foreign aid in poorer countries will create a LOT more wealth in poorer countries than it does here (Because we save so much money, it means that foreign aid to us wouldn't be that effective whilst because African countries for example spend most of their money instead of saving it, it will create a lot of jobs.

Obviously there are a lot of problems with foreign aid such as corruption and inefficient use of it but foreign aid is generally a good thing and improves living standards world wide.

Reply 90

HighOnGoofballs

16

@Davij038 Germany and Switzerland ARE in debt. Germany doesn't like to display or update it's figures as much as other countries do, that may be why you're mistaken, but they, along with Switzerland, are certainly in debt.

Currently, there's only 5 countries which are debt free and they're all small islands/towns.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-nation-that-is-debt-free

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 91

tomm0

6

Original post by Ezisola

We should not send anything abroad while there are still people legitimately homeless and hungry in this country.

A big part of foreign aid goes towards stopping spread of various diseases. Food for thought.

Reply 92

jdddd

19

Original post by DeBruyne18

The charity receives foreign aid, as do several others who carry out work in the region.

Answer me this:
Should Britain be spending foreign aid on creating clean water and irrigation systems and providing vaccinations for diseases like malaria?

yes or no?

If we had been inputting the billions each year we do literally the world population would have water by now. You could answer mine why should I answer yours? Idiot.

Reply 93

The PoliticalGuy

16

Giving money to Pakistan who use it to fund the executions of homosexual and apostates.
I'm sorry but I'm not against helping poorer countries become more developed but I am also strictly against giving money to corrupt nations and human rights abusers.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 94

The PoliticalGuy

16

Original post by DeBruyne18

Should Britain be spending foreign aid on creating clean water and irrigation systems and providing vaccinations for diseases like malaria?

yes or no?

Short answer yes. Long answer- The UK only spends 25% of the foreign aid budget on multilateral organisations and disease prevention this includes the £230m the UK gave to stop the spread of Ebola in West Africa. So in essence around 60% of the foreign aid budget is used in undeveloped countries with £700m going to Pakistan and Nigeria some of the most corrupt countries in the world some reports suggest up to 50% of all the money given to them goes into their own pockets.

How can you defend the current funding formula?

Reply 95

username1207499

18

Original post by ckfeister

we had a british empire,
we made them poor and in trouble,
we are one of the richest nations in the world,
if homeless people in UK want to get out of homeless go to a charity,
people in developing countries don't have this choice as they can't afford it,
hence why RICH countries give aid to POOR countries

They were poorer before the empire

We are in so much debt we will probably never be able to pay it off.

If homeless people in the uk must go to charities, why can't other countries do the same?

Reply 96

Davij038

13

Original post by HighOnGoofballs

@Davij038 Germany and Switzerland ARE in debt. Germany doesn't like to display or update it's figures as much as other countries do, that may be why you're mistaken, but they, along with Switzerland, are certainly in debt.

Currently, there's only 5 countries which are debt free and they're all small islands/towns.

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-nation-that-is-debt-free

Hmm my mistake then, thanks.

Reply 97

username1207499

18

Original post by jdddd

If we had been inputting the billions each year we do literally the world population would have water by now. You could answer mine why should I answer yours? Idiot.