[Closed] Do people from other countries deserve our help?

Unless you classify foreigners as subhuman then obviously not.

Unless you classify foreigners as subhuman

Sadly a lot of people do, including one aspiring political party.

Yes they do

The issue isn't whether they do or don't IMHO
For me the fact that as a country we are lending billions to governments that we will never see back, adding aid on top of that etc leaving sod all in the pot here.
I have no issues with aid - BUT it needs to be ensured that it is getting to where its needed - not into the foreign governments pot to be handed out via them as is often the case.
Instead of loans - give goods.
The loans that never get repaid can then be used in this country for what we need the money for.
Its not hard - its basic maths.

For me the fact that as a country we are lending billions to governments that we will never see back

You're confusing loans and aid. Aid is given rather than leant.

That 'either/or' us vs them type of questioning/argument is normally loaded from the off. My sympathies. No, I can't think of a good reason why not (a very broad answer to the broadest question!)

Think of it as an investment.
Help folk out, they're going to be more friendly towards you.
Helping them build more infrastructure means they look to import skills to assist them.
Getting other countries to our level of "sophistication" means they are more likely to want the type of goods and services we can supply.

We give £1,000,000,000 a year in AID to less than 5 countries.

Given the marauding history of Britain, they very much deserve our help... a good strategy beyond financial aid would be to curb our own arms trade and encourage others to do the same, so as to reduce the instability and conflict which leads to the need for a lot of the aid in the 1st place.

footflaps - Member
For me the fact that as a country we are lending billions to governments that we will never see back
You're confusing loans and aid. Aid is given rather than leant.

I'm far from "confusing" them Footflaps!

Go have a look at just how many loans have been "written off" because there is no way those countries can ever repay them.
Yet those same countries continue to get aid every year on top.
Quite simple - don't loan any money to them.

For me the fact that as a country we are lending billions to governments that we will never see back, adding aid on top of that etc leaving sod all in the pot here.

I think a lot (most?) foreign aid isn't "no strings attached" and sometimes it will come with quite specific conditions. (although I can't think of any examples at the moment)

Foreign aid isnt just about the Uk government being all altruistic and lettig us feel warm and cuddly. Its also a tool of foreign policy.

It's also the right (in terms of morals) thing to do.

Had a discussion with some students a few months back, or might have been a year ago on whether or not we should find a cure for HIV. If we did find one, should it be given for free. What would happen to countries such as CHina and Africa if we did.

somewhatslightlydazed - Member
I think a lot (most?) foreign aid isn't "no strings attached" and sometimes it will come with quite specific conditions. (although I can't think of any examples at the moment)

Foreign aid isnt just about the Uk government being all altruistic and lettig us feel warm and cuddly. Its also a tool of foreign policy.

Thats very different to loans that there is no hope of ever being repaid though.

footflaps - Member
It's also the right (in terms of morals) thing to do.

"Foriegn aid" - perhaps.
Irresponsible lending - not a chance.

on whether or not we should find a cure for HIV

I'm hoping that was a very short (one word) discussion. If not, I'd be very worried about your students (unless you're in a Catholic school, in which case rampant homophobia is to be expected).

molgrips - yes.

What would happen to countries such as CHina and Africa if we did.

Africa isn't a country. HTH

Quite simple - don't loan any money to them

Then you risk punishing innocent people for the actions of ****less and/or corrupt governments. Not at all fair.

Not at all fair.

That only matters if you consider foreigners to be human rather than sub human.

molgrips - Member
Quite simple - don't loan any money to them
Then you risk punishing innocent people for the actions of ****less and/or corrupt governments. Not at all fair.

So we're to be expected to go without here because of lending to governments that never gets spent where its intended and is never, ever going to be repaid to us?

So what you're [i]actually[/i] saying is lets give them "aid" twice - but we can write one off as a tax loss...

It's one thing helping out - its another being stupid........

There is no problem with giving aid to other countries but maybe we should choose the Chinese approach and make this aid infrastructure, with British companies and people building it?
Its much harder to misuse actual people, materials and equipment than simply giving most of these countries money.

So we're to be expected to go without here because of lending to governments that never gets spent where its intended and is never, ever going to be repaid to us?

No.

The solution to aid being mis-used isn't to stop giving it - of course.

So we're to be expected to go without here because of lending to governments that never gets spent where its intended and is never, ever going to be repaid to us?

That's total nonsense.

We don't go without anything because we give/lend money to foreign countries. There is no hard upper limit on how much the government can spend, we can tax more or borrow more, both of which are easily doable. We can also make choices about how we wish to spend our money. You can always spend more on yourself if you really want to, but is it the right thing to do?

E.g. on a very personal level I could not give to charity every month and buy another bike with the money, but do I want to, no.

If by helping you mean spending then its a daft question innit. we could spend all the money inthis country and all the money in the rest of the world trying to fix the problems here and we'd still make a balls of it. Also I just don't get this britain for people whose parents happened to be british through no effort or design. 'They come over here not claiming our benfits etc'. Do we do it right, probably not, can people point to individual examples of bad aids, probably, does that make a case for not spreading aids to the world. No. We need to be giving aids to people all over the world so that they will be our partners tomorrow.

IMO we should cut the Aid sent to India, for no other reason that India still can not sort it's own internal problems out but uses misaligned funds for a Space programme.

There, I've said it.

We're a rich country, largely off the back of the natural resources of our former empire. We have more than those in other countries so should continue to provide aid and loans.

A space program is a driver for science, engineering research and education, it is an investment in the future of a country. You may expect them to spend money on short term fixes, they may plan for a longer game to boost the education levels and technology in the country for a better outcome later.

A space program is a driver for science, engineering research and education, it is an investment in the future of a country.

True, but India has some very messed up spending priorities, a lot of which is to do with their retarded caste system where a good chunk of their own population is considered sub human, hence they're perfectly happy with the fact that the lower castes starve to death / die of treatable diseases as children.

It is not the loans that are the problem, it is the conditions set on the loans. selling off valuable industry so that rich western companies can monopolise sectors and profit from it. So these countries no longer have the power and infrastructure to pay back the loans! It is therefore a vicious circle and the only people who benefit are the big banks and the big western companies.

And yes, of course they deserve our help.

[i]We're a rich country, largely off the back of the natural resources of our former empire.[/i]

Hmm, an Empire that pretty much ended the best part of 70 years ago - I can't really see that our current 'riches' are anything to do with it.

And while I feel sorry for the poor folk in ALL countries I don't see why I should give them money, when they are plenty of far richer folk in those countries who don't plus lots of government wastage and corruption in those very countries.

FWIW I've worked in many of them, so seen it at first hand.

And lets be clear, we aren't rich in the sense of our money, just rich in the sense of our ability to borrow.

Think of it as reparations for British Colonialism, and the mess left after you pulled out.

Really ? You can't see how the events of 70 years ago impact on today ?? Back to school !!

I don't see why I should give them money, when they are plenty of far richer folk in those countries who don't plus lots of government wastage and corruption in those very countries.

Because giving money to the poorest can make huge change to people's lives. Just because someone else won't give doesn't mean we shouldn't.

Personally, I'm more then happy for my taxes to be given away as overseas aid.

And lets be clear, we aren't rich in the sense of our money, just rich in the sense of our ability to borrow.

We are still a rich country, with a high standard of living, excellent education and health care (as shown by life expectancy figures). Most developed countries borrow money, there's nothing wrong with doing so.

IMO we should cut the Aid sent to India, for no other reason that India still can not sort it's own internal problems out but uses misaligned funds for a Space programme.

There, I've said it.

This.

Am very happy to give to other countries in need (disaster relief etc) but the whole overseas aid thing stinks, and needs reviewing/drastically cutting.

[i]Really ? You can't see how the events of 70 years ago impact on today ?? Back to school !! [/i]

Eh? I think you're Aus/NZ so do you target the British Empire for your countries current troubles/benefits, or its politicians for the last 70 years?

What about the century of American involvement across the world, has probably had a far greater impact than the British Empire ever did.

footflaps - Member
That's total nonsense.

We don't go without anything because we give/lend money to foreign countries. There is no hard upper limit on how much the government can spend, we can tax more or borrow more, both of which are easily doable. We can also make choices about how we wish to spend our money. You can always spend more on yourself if you really want to, but is it the right thing to do?

E.g. on a very personal level I could not give to charity every month and buy another bike with the money, but do I want to, no.

It isn't nonsense footflaps - I've been and helped out in disaster recovery, etc. Ive seen first hand just what wastage and corruption there is.

I have no issue with charity - but tread REALLY carefully there - charity should be just that - not a means for six figure salary chairmans, trips, etc.

As stewartc said - make any aid that of actual assistance, infrastructure, etc.
Direct spending, justifiable, visible.
But STOP loans to governments and countries that cannot and in many cases will not repay them.

The two are VERY different and need to be kept separate.

I wonder if people ask themselves when they see people in trouble in this country 'do they deserve my help?!'.

Are you asking whether or not foreign countries deserve our help/aid or if the people of the UK deserve to be prioritised as they're two different issues?

It isn't nonsense footflaps - I've been and helped out in disaster recovery, etc. Ive seen first hand just what wastage and corruption there is.

There is wastage and corruption in pretty much any organisation (more wastage than corruption), it's not a reason to not try to do things. If it was, we'd stop funding education and health care immediately.

Of course they do. That was an easy question. Even if we increased aid tenfold we'd still be quids in against all the exploitation we've undertaken, think of it as straight forward blood money.

Are you asking whether or not foreign countries deserve our help/aid or if the people of the UK deserve to be prioritised as they're two different issues?

The latter.

There are people in dire need in the UK, but I can't help thinking some people in other countries have it worse.

I'm hoping that was a very short (one word) discussion.

It actually wasn't, and no they weren't catholic.

They are told by their government that there is no AIDS, and the AIDS in the country is from foreigners, and they are deported.

So why should they care about it?

One of them went off and did some research and came back with this snippet of info, although it may not be word perfect or for that matter true.

"The use of quinine in India reduced the deaths from Malaria so significantly, that if it had not been used, the population of India is estimated to be around the same as the UK"

Found he claims in one of those fashionable science books that breaks down common mistakes in science.

They had quite a heated debate on China, as they are made to believe China is bad via the media and their parents. Was it the Chinese prostitutes bringing HIV to the country, that is what they are told.

Africa was more interesting - as the one of the more outspoken students wondered if whether or not looking back historically, the plagues that have effected the world, were just extreme versions of population control.

Could Africa, with it's different countries, in different economic turmoil, with famines and droughts, support a massive population growth if HIV was wiped out.

Ultimately the decision was yes HIV vaccine is a great idea, they would like shares in the company that discovers it, but they were worried about the population explosion of countries that received it, had safesex programmes in place, however ineffective they were.

A great group of kids to work with.

Ultimately the decision was yes HIV vaccine is a great idea, they would like shares in the company that discovers it, but they were worried about the population explosion of countries that received it, had safesex programmes in place, however ineffective they were.
A great group of kids to work with.

They sound delightful!

Do people from other countries deserve our help?

Imagine a Direct Debit coming off your credit card/overdraft every month to various charities.

Thats what the UK Government is doing. The US Government is running a foreign army and Navy 'patrolling' the global seas as their Empire that they never had or will have all run on massive debt.

I dont have to imagine that Hora

TBH I feel blessed to know I had the luck to be born in a rich country and blessed that my kids wont die of hunger or preventable disease and that they will get an education. I believe it is our moral duty to help those financially worse of than ourselves.

Its true we need to help our own but generally our own problems are more first world problems than starving to death.

the issue is not too little money its what we do with it. We could solve our problems and theirs if we GAS still those strivers with their billions eh

Oh I care. I give my time etc and I've put myself in harms way for others (and recent too). I question the chequebook giving and aid in the form of money and selling debt that drive the problem further. Human nature always takes over though and finds ways to profit and feed off others generosity.

footflaps - Member

If not, I'd be very worried about your students (unless you're in a Catholic school, in which case rampant homophobia is to be expected).

Totally uncalled for, footflaps. In spite of the gross caricature, if anyone in a Catholic school encouraged 'rampant homophobia', they would be removed immediately. You may not believe in God (which is fine), but the language of the Church is that [i]all[/i] human beings are children of God, and so absolutely deserving of the same love and respect.

Now, back to the topic at hand...

That will be why it has so few rules about how to please god then.....

Totally uncalled for, footflaps. In spite of the gross caricature, if anyone in a Catholic school encouraged 'rampant homophobia', they would be removed immediately. You may not believe in God (which is fine), but the language of the Church is that all human beings are children of God, and so absolutely deserving of the same love and respect.

Crikey in this instance your best bet is to really not reply.

What about the century of American involvement across the world, has probably had a far greater impact than the British Empire ever did.

You're giving the Americans to much credit, when it comes to general mayhem and long term instability no empire that has ever existed can touch the British empire. The Romans, The Mongols, the Chinese Empire.... even the Third Reich....none of them. The British by and large, are the worst thing that ever happened to the rest of the world. The Spaniards put in a good effort in South America and the Philippines though.

I was in the A&E last night with my wife, there was a young father and his 5/6 year old son, Albanian at a guess. The boy could hardly breath with asthma or some kind of lung infection perhaps.

I would challenge anyone to have denied him treatment.

What about the century of American involvement across the world, has probably had a far greater impact than the British Empire ever did.

Jesus wept- all the Americans did was kill, maim, distabilise governments etc. Thats all they are good for. They only entered WWII because of Japans attack AND certain high profile members of government who envied the British Navy/Empire and wanted it destroyed so they could rule the waves instead.

Lets not forget that 4 out of 5 of every German Soldier was killed on the Russian front.

Yet- still, decades later many countries from around the world still want to be affiliated with Great Britain.

People only want American dollars and pop music.

I would challenge anyone to have denied him treatment.

Jesus wept- all the Americans did was kill, maim, distabilise governments etc. Thats all they are good for. They only entered WWII because of Japans attack AND certain high profile members of government who envied the British Navy/Empire and wanted it destroyed so they could rule the waves instead.

Lets not forget that 4 out of 5 of every German Soldier was killed on the Russian front.

Yet- still, decades later many countries from around the world still want to be affiliated with Great Britain.

No they don't, the only reason why you think this is that you've never been to Palestine, China, India, ****stan etc etc, plenty of people still remember what we did.

Where as the Yanks now bring some of those countries trade that dwarfs any trade we have ever done with them. Money/trade speaks, trying to be matey after you raped and pillaged their country doesn't.

Plenty of people still remember what we did.

I wonder why nobody still remembers what the Romans, the Mongols and the Assyrians did.

I wonder why nobody still remembers what the Romans, the Mongols and the Assyrians did.

I'm guessing the bad sociopolitical effects of the Roman Empire have probably worn off. 😛

I think we are back at the pope 😉

you've never been to Palestine, China, India, ****stan

We left. They reverted back to the way they were and were going.

Palestine was by terrorism.

We're a rich country, largely off the back of the natural resources of our former empire

And what resources were they ? Tea, sugar, coffee, baccy, palm oil ?? all the irreplaceable stuff

We ought to continue foreign aid if only to stop Harrods and the rest of the Knightsbridge shops going bust.

We spend 18% gdp on health, 15% welfare, 12% education, 20% pensions, 12% defence

And less than 1% on aid about 0.7%

People I this country are incredibly well off, healthy, educated....
Yes thing could be improved in places for sure and not everything is perfect. I know my care in the nhs has been fantastic and there are safety nets in place with welfare etc.

Do I in anyway begrudge aid to help people in absolutely dire circumstances? No absolutely not.

If your homeless in the country with a family you will be housed in most circumstances. We all have access to shelter, clean water, money when we fall on hard times.

Much of our aid goes to help people who have nothing! No shelter in harsh environments no clear water food access to any health services, fleeing war.

Yes there is corruption and not all of is goes where it should but a lot does and I'd rather some good came of it and we who have so much can do what we can to help those that have so little.

It's not a perfect world but I'm proud we as a country do what we do to help others even if there is often an Alternative motive of some kind

Yes.
Next complicated question.

We left. They reverted back to the way they were and were going.

Bollocks, that's some of the most arrogant/racist crap I've ever heard on here. The British economically destroyed India in a process of de-industrialization (we actually made India an unequal trading partner so they were a consumer of our goods), we ****ed over China royally during the opium wars and then we spent decades drawing up borders the world over that have directly lead to the much of the political instability seen to this day.

All because, like you, imperialist Britain arrogantly believed it knew what was best for the rest of the world.

Palestine was by terrorism.

We drew up it's borders didn't we and Israels. If we hadn't interfered, decades of Palestinian terrorism would have likely never happened.

Of course they do.

Some common sense applies of course - if that country has rampant poverty, but it's own nuclear weapons and a space programme, then perhaps we should tell them to get their own house in order before we hand them any more money!

Why do you think they need Nuclear weapons? Oh because Britain drew up land borders that led to some of the bloodiest conflicts since the second world war. What a ****ing surprise!

And as others have pointed out, a national space program is actually a pretty good way of reducing poverty as it means there is more investment in education and technology.

I think my only response to the OP is "Yes, they are people just like 'us'"

India needs no help if it can fund a bloody space programme ,or is it using our money to do it ?

Moreover, although the country may have a small super-rich elite and a growing middle class, its capacity for wealth redistribution remains limited according to a 2009 World Bank report. [b]It found that even a 100% marginal tax rate on Indian earnings would only plug 20% of its aggregate poverty gap.[/b]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12607537

Why do you think they need Nuclear weapons? Oh because Britain drew up land borders that led to some of the bloodiest conflicts since the second world war. What a **** surprise!

[i]Each boundary commission consisted of 5 people - a chairman (Radcliffe), 2 members nominated by the Indian National Congress and 2 members nominated by the Muslim League.[/i]

Colonial guilt fail 😉

And as others have pointed out, a national space program is actually a pretty good way of reducing poverty as it means there is more investment in education and technology.

A national toilet programme might be better

Each boundary commission consisted of 5 people - a chairman (Radcliffe), 2 members nominated by the Indian National Congress and 2 members nominated by the Muslim League.

Colonial guilt fail

Great bit of selective quotation there, read the rest of the article ninfan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radcliffe_Line

and also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

India needs no help if it can fund a bloody space programme ,or is it using our money to do it ?

It's not as simple as that though. There will be income from foreign sources specifically due to the space program (and other) that will filter out into the society. It also leads to education, status etc etc all of which are important and different wealth to 'money'. India is very wealthy in terms of intelligence but it's finances and resources are strained and that is what we see. If they ploughed everything into fixing toilets etc then they would just be a poor nation with working toilets and no way to sustain themselves.

Jaguar Land Rover is one of Britains most high profile car manufacturers but it is owned by Tata Group which goes to show it's not simple.

It's not as simple as that though. There will be income from foreign sources specifically due to the space program (and other) that will filter out into the society. It also leads to education, status etc etc all of which are important and different wealth to 'money'. India is very wealthy in terms of intelligence but it's finances and resources are strained and that is what we see. If they ploughed everything into fixing toilets etc then they would just be a poor nation with working toilets and no way to sustain themselves.

Jaguar Land Rover is one of Britains most high profile car manufacturers but it is owned by Tata Group which goes to show it's not simple.

+1

Great response.