India launches spacecraft to Mars ... UK gives India £200m foreign aid

[withdeanwombat]

Many Indian Indians would rather spend their money on space probes than "untouchables" whereas British taxpayers are clearly "touchable" even the British Indian ones.

 

[Creaky]

Once again, as it has been said a million times, someone is clearly taking the p*ss out of UK tax payers once again. If India can spend 55 million launching a spacecraft to Mars, then why are we sending them £200 million pounds in foreign aid. How about they send some aid our way for a change, because last time I checked we had thousands of people having to use food banks in this country because they cannot afford to live.

Can you really compare those using food banks in the UK with the over 50% of young children in India suffering from malnutrition?

The only hope for countries such as India, China and Brazil is that they continue to grow their economy via industrial and scientific innovation. The UK didn't become a relatively rich country by spending all its resources in feeding and taking care of its populace but rather by aiming its resources at industrial growth. The UK wasn't fortunate enough to have richer neighbours during that time who had the compassion to worry about the plight of the ordinary people, thankfully developing nations do.

Remember when you criticise assistance to these countries that you could just as easily have been born to a poor Indian family lucky to earn enough or grow enough for one decent meal a week.

 

[melias shoes]

Yes we should be bailing out banks instead. At least India are doing something useful with our money.

Really? You consider going to Mars more important than looking after their OWN people.?

 

[Creaky]

Really? You consider going to Mars more important than looking after their OWN people.?

Probably the answer to that is yes.

If you know anything of the history of the UK you will realise that the only reason we are a relatively rich country now is that we went through a period of industrialisation where the 'ruling classes' diverted much of the country's resources into industrial inovations rather than using it to feed and care for the general population.

 

[melias shoes]

This is one of those brilliant threads where (next to) no one knows anything but everyone has an opinion regardless.

Thanks for your input.

 

[melias shoes]

Probably the answer to that is yes.

If you know anything of the history of the UK you will realise that the only reason we are a relatively rich country now is that we went through a period of industrialisation where the 'ruling classes' diverted much of the country's resources into industrial inovations rather than using it to feed and care for the general population.

I was talking about the Indian government.

 

[Creaky]

I was talking about the Indian government. Fool.

I realise you were talking about the Indian government and the answer is still - Yes to your question.

Take a village of people living at subsistence level by farming. The elders of the village have saved a small pot of money, enough say to build a road to the next village or to provide enough food for a week to all the people of the village, some of whom are starving.

By your argument that the money should be used to care for their people all that happens is that their hardship is staved off for a week then they are back to exactly where they were. Building the road however would allow the villagers at some time in the future to grow items in demand in other villages which in the long term will mean a better standard of living.

The same argument applies to the overall economy of India - high tech projects such as the Mars space project raises the potential of the whole country.

I may be a fool but I'm not foolish enough to call someone else a fool without knowing anything about them.

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

The questions I ask post the ' banking crisis ' are...
1) Have the banks learnt from their mistakes of the past?
2) Are they still putting their interests and agendas before that of their customers?
3) Are they still ' mis-selling and misrepresenting ' products and services.
4) Are they still making up charges and fees as they go along ( think of a number and double it and lets see if we get away with it )?
5) Are they trying to help SME's or are they continuing to tighten the belt over lending and overdrafts?
6) Are large bonuses still part of the banking culture?
7) Has any trust been restored between the public and the banking sector?
8) At retail level, they are spending millions refurbishing branches, making them look like open-plan offices. Has their service improved, though? Are the public still visiting branches and finding long queues for the few available windows, whilst blinds are pulled down on others, as cashiers do ' other work '
9) Are cashiers still trying to do selling jobs on customers, whilst queues grow in branch?...." Your account qualifies for an upgrade....have you considered this....have you considered that....would you like me to make an appointment for you with our advisor " ( cue...cashier disappearing for 2-3 minutes to try and find said advisor....meanwhile, queues growing to do their banking )
10 ) Repeat no.1

Mo once again you have nailed it

 

[Husty]

Thanks for your input.

You're welcome

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

Seriously, why we would want to give ANYTHING to India? Let them fend for themselves, they do NOT need £200million from us. Whoever makes the decisions to give money to these countries should be held to account, why on EARTH are we giving such ridiculous sums to countries like India?

What a joke. Their stupid waste of money mission to Mars aside, it's a country which does not need our financial support. How about investing that £200million into the infrastructure of the UK? That money could be spent on ANYTHING else and it would be better spent than giving it to India.

Ninja, finally we have something we can agree about

 

[Questions]

you're right, i couldn't think what i'd do with it
regards
DR

Go to Mars ?
Where's the collection bucket ?

 

[Albion Rob]

So, the good news I'm getting from this thread is that 99.3% of UK gross national income is spent on....the UK. Presumably this is how we fund things like benefit scrounges, ministerial Special Advisers and wars in far off places against people who aren't really interested in us.

I have to put my hands up and say that I'm part of the "If I had a pound in my pocket and I could give a ha'penny (well, just over ) to help someone out...." then I would. It's quite right to point out that international aid is not being given at the discretion of the giver (taxpayer) but I think if we're all honest none of us is bothered enough about it to, for example, move to India and swim in the pool of money donated by the UK.

I think there are many things wrong with international aid and how the system works but to be brutally honest my hard earned cash finds it's way into the pockets of plenty of British people I consider far less deserving (even than Indian astronauts!).

 

[The Birdman]

I believe the aid to India may be cut by 2015

 

[Westdene Wonder]

Does anybody think for one moment that India`s spacecraft is going to tell us anything new that the USA & Russia have not already discovered,its just an ego trip to get one up on Packistan.

 

[Taybha]

They could of invested in a better heat shield with that amount of dosh tbh

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Ninja, finally we have something we can agree about

Whenever people agree with me, I always feel I must be wrong.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Can you really compare those using food banks in the UK with the over 50% of young children in India suffering from malnutrition?

The only hope for countries such as India, China and Brazil is that they continue to grow their economy via industrial and scientific innovation. The UK didn't become a relatively rich country by spending all its resources in feeding and taking care of its populace but rather by aiming its resources at industrial growth. The UK wasn't fortunate enough to have richer neighbours during that time who had the compassion to worry about the plight of the ordinary people, thankfully developing nations do.

Remember when you criticise assistance to these countries that you could just as easily have been born to a poor Indian family lucky to earn enough or grow enough for one decent meal a week.

The truth is when you have a population the size of India's your always going to have poverty. The population gets bigger not smaller which means it's a never ending circle of poverty.
The money we send hardy scratches the surface. If people honestly think that one day poverty will be eradicated you can forget it. There is not enough to go around now, let alone enough in say another 50 years time.

 

[Sam-]

The principal reason why give aid to India has not gone away. They should be doing something other than going to space but not up to us to tell there government what to do anymore.
We must just look down on them until they sort it out, who is with me ?

 

[ElectricNaz]

Surely by 'investing in India' we are assuring that if things go **** up in the middle-east then we have access to thousands of Indian soldiers? No?

 

[somerset]

The truth is when you have a population the size of India's your always going to have poverty. The population gets bigger not smaller which means it's a never ending circle of poverty.
The money we send hardy scratches the surface. If people honestly think that one day poverty will be eradicated you can forget it. There is not enough to go around now, let alone enough in say another 50 years time.

I don't thin k the population issue will be resolved until the inevitable war between China and India for economic dominance takes place. Sometime over the next 50 years I would imagine some significant culling taking place across the Himalayan divide.