Why give aid to a country sending rockets to Mars?

Discussion in 'International Politics' started by AVERAGE INDIAN, Nov 7, 2013.

  1. AVERAGE INDIAN

    AVERAGE INDIAN EXORCIST Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    2,718
    Location:
    Detroit MI
    Last year India received £280million in aid from British taxpayers. On Tuesday it launched its first rocket to Mars at a cost of more than £45million.

    Asked why we were handing over money to a country that can afford to send rockets into space, a spokesman for the Department for International Development said: "Not a penny of British taxpayers' aid money has gone on India's space programme."

    And with that, the unidentified spokesman should take a bow. He or she is the runaway winner of the contest.

    Mind you, fatuous doesn't even come close to describing the deliberate, calculating missing-of-the-point mindset revealed by that statement.

    The issue is what are we doing handing over British taxpayers' money to a country wealthy enough to allocate around £750million of its own money for a space programme?

    Aid is trumpeted by its advocates as a form of moral duty on the wealthy West - that we have an obligation to do our bit to help those less well off than ourselves. As David Cameron put it: "Even when things are difficult at home we should fulfil our moral obligations to the poorest of the world."

    The majority of people would agree with the broad sentiment that the wealthy do indeed have a charitable duty to the poor. But fine as that sentiment is in intention, when applied internationally it can be distorted beyond all sense. For one thing, there's the corruption intrinsically linked to aid.

    Study after study reveals the corruption that is endemic in the aid industry - and that's what it is, a multi-billion-pound global industry.

    Then there's the fact that much aid ends up making things worse - by subsidising inefficiency and bankrolling societies that are incapable of standing on their own two feet, it can act to prevent poor areas ever adopting the reforms or developing the tools needed to grow and prosper.

    As for our "moral obligation to the poorest of the world", if you want to understand how distorted that gets, just look closely at what the Department for International Development spokesman had to say about the Indian space programme.

    Yes, India still has grinding poverty of a kind no British welfare recipient ever experiences. But if India chooses to spend its vast resources and growing wealth on rockets, why is it our duty to make up the difference with aid? As if to ram home the madness, India even has its own £328million-a-year overseas aid budget, not to mention a huge defence budget.

    Where is the moral duty on us to send taxpayers' money to a nation that has enough of its own wealth for that?

    Yet under the last Labour government India was the largest net recipient of British aid, receiving £421million in 2010.

    And then when the coalition took over in 2010, far from tightening the purse-strings, David Cameron's obsession with aid meant that the then international development secretary Andrew Mitchell agreed to hand over another £1.1billion in the years up to 2014. It's true that his successor Justine Greening announced last year that we would stop giving India any more taxpayers' money from 2015.

    That did not go down well in India. Its then finance minister Pranab Mukherjee reacted by saying that British aid was "a peanut in our total development expenditure".

    In which case he won't miss it. But none of that explains, let alone justifies, why we have thrown away - and are still doing so this year - so much money on a country that simply doesn't need it.

    This year alone, remember, even though we have already decided that India doesn't need our money, we are handing over £280million. It beggars belief.

    The real explanation is that logic and need don't enter the equation. Yesterday it was revealed that we are stopping any further aid to the Ugandan government after corrupt government officials were shown to have stolen £1.3million. That's sensible - even if, astonishingly, it is the first time that all aid payments have been stopped to a country's government as a reaction to corruption being exposed.

    But there'll be no reduction in the total amount actually sent to Uganda. It will still receive another £37.5million. It's just that instead of it going to the government it will be given to aid agencies to distribute. And so overall the aid budget continues to soar.


    Ministers have repeated their commitment to increase the amount we give away to £11.3billion this year. That will mean that we hit the target they have repeatedly said is their aim - spending 0.7 per cent of national income on aid. The sums are breathtaking. Next year it will be £12.6billion.

    And although we are stopping aid to one country with a space programme, we have already given Nigeria £300million this year. That's the same Nigeria that has its own space programme.

    What a bizarre racket. The hardworking poor in the West hand over their taxes to governments which would rather squander their taxes on space programmes than dealing with their own problems.

    Confused? Not half as confused as our own government.

    Why give aid to a country sending rockets to Mars? | Express Comment | Comment | Daily Express

    :flame::flame::flame:
     
  2.  
  3. ladder

    ladder Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Messages:
    4,751
    Likes Received:
    2,666
    Location:
    India
    We here at DFI are better at not discussing the whining of retarded Brits.

    These voices would grow louder inversely proportional to square of dwindling stature of Britain in international standing.

    The Brits now give solely for the purpose that the recipient nation would sent two top ranking official and minister to receive them at airport and present them with red carpet welcome, when they visit for the review purpose.

    The event then shall be shown during prime time in BBC, with the sole intention of proving to their citizenry that the old lord of the oceans still enjoy some standing among diverse nations.

    The mars mission is cheaper than a single Euro-fighter Typhoon which the Brits were so eager to sell to us, not one but 126 of them.
    Why did not they take a moral stand and drop out of competition, classifying it as wasteful expenditure.

    Why not not bid for 20 addl. Hawk 132 for IAF, which even are not for training but for Acrobatic team.

    Moral high standard is a contagious disease for the so called " The hardworking poor in the West".They better be vaccinated for it.

    While the vaccine can be administered to all orally, the Brits need higher dose in the form of jab in their fat butts.
     
    happy, Dovah, kseeker and 4 others like this.
  4. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Please ask the British who is the sinlge largest investor in their country displacing the Chinese.

    The net Indian Investment in UK is many multiples of the pathetic aid that flows from there.
     
    TrueSpirit1 and ladder like this.
  5. dhananjay1

    dhananjay1 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    972
    Likes Received:
    912
    Location:
    india
    They are talking as if they don't receive anything in return for their 'aid'. The money is given to specific organizations for specific causes to buy influence among different Indian institutions. If they don't provide 'aid' then they lose that influence. The general British public, like Indian public, doesn't know the intricacies of government spendings.
     
  6. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Didn't ask for the aid in the first place.

    Instead the last FM, now President asked them to stop it as it was peanuts.

    This so called aid basically goes to the British NGOs operating in India and they have an agenda, not always favourable to India.

    It will be interesting to note that the Manipur crusader Irom Sharmila is living in with a British journalist! Love at first sight like Hope Cooke's love for the Chogyal, who she deserted as soon as he lost his throne?!

    Wheels within wheels!
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2013
  7. Manas7

    Manas7 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    244
    This randi rona (thats it is ) in every British media outlet on our Mars mission is hilarious to say the least. Send them a packet of Burnol pls.

    White man's burden is becoming white man's Burnol.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2013
    rock127 and AVERAGE INDIAN like this.
  8. AVERAGE INDIAN

    AVERAGE INDIAN EXORCIST Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    2,718
    Location:
    Detroit MI
  9. Blackwater

    Blackwater Veteran Member Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    20,983
    Likes Received:
    11,811
    Location:
    Akhand Bharat
    well British waste more money else where rather than randi rona on Indian aid of 280 million pounds .


    its obvious master will not tolerate if his servant goes ahead of him, servant become their masters now.



    British still thinks they own India


    what about gold and precious metal ,diamond looted from India before 1947 ,still lying in bank of inggglanddd.. is that more in value of that??


    Most of British AID goes to British NGO working in India..


    british waste more money in Afghanistan on WOT, ""begani shaadi me abdulla dewana""
     
  10. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,248
    Likes Received:
    1,862
    that is good news ......... i had thought we were a distance away from the chinese
    good to know we are either pretty close to , caught up or overtaken ?
    either way , any way , it's pretty ok with me .

    england and scotland ( if they remain ) will soon have to get used to the idea
    that money and accordingly power is moving away from them
    and it's happening fast

    Scotland may wanna jettison that sinking ship
    and figure out a strategy for themselves ?

    added later;:-
    according to this article - india 4th , china 6th
    http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-23/news/40749477_1_uk-trade-ukti-the-uk
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2013
  11. EXPERT

    EXPERT Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2012
    Messages:
    470
    Likes Received:
    288
    Location:
    From Heart to Brain
    Atleast we only send rockets into Space , why are you giving money to Pakistan, who is sending your countrymen direct into space by firing RPG's and bullets on you ????
     
    TrueSpirit1, Blackwater and chase like this.
  12. rock127

    rock127 Maulana Rockullah Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    8,936
    Likes Received:
    10,289
    Location:
    India
    British loves Pakis so they wont say anything at all.

    Did you forget Paki middle aged men grooming British white teen girls and making them sex slaves? :rolleyes:

    They can at most say "Asian men" since they have submitted to Pakis. :lol:

    Exactly... British are now turned into a randi by their past slaves.So expect their randi rona dhona. :lol:
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2013
    TrueSpirit1 and nirranj like this.
  13. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Stephen Pollard should be horse-whipped.
     
    AVERAGE INDIAN and chase like this.
  14. chase

    chase Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2012
    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    536
    n 1970, a Zambia-based nun named Sister Mary Jucunda wrote to Dr. Ernst Stuhlinger, then-associate director of science at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, in response to his ongoing research into a piloted mission toMars. Specifically, she asked how he could suggest spending billions of dollars on such a project at a time when so many children were starving on Earth.

    Stuhlinger soon sent the following letter of explanation to Sister Jucunda, along with a copy of "Earthrise," the iconic photograph of Earth taken in 1968 by astronaut William Anders, from the Moon (also embedded in the transcript). His thoughtful reply was later published by NASA, and titled, "Why Explore Space?"

    (Source: Roger Launius, via Gavin Williams; Photo above: The surface of Mars, taken by Curiosity today, August 6th, 2012. Via NASA.)

    May 6, 1970
     
    K Factor, happy, Dovah and 4 others like this.
  15. nirranj

    nirranj Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2013
    Messages:
    910
    Likes Received:
    776
    Location:
    Bangalore
    Govt should first monitor where the fund goes and what it buys in India. If that fund is found out to be arming extremists or aiding dissidents, then We should suspend all relations with the Brits.
     

Share This Page