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

[Wellesley]

You and Bold Seagull are suggesting that i might need to know something about economics, politics and business to understand this ?

Sod that, i don't have time to learn about it - I'm too busy being outraged

Leave her alone. She's just a woman trying to make sense ,in her pretty little head, of things that we men understand naturally. Bless her heart.

 

[somerset]

Albumen says

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

Difference being, all the bank bailout money 1) saved the economy and financial infrastructure of the country, and 2) is being paid back in huge chunks, with interest......see the difference?

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

I suppose, in an attempt to have a more educated argument here, it would be useful to know what the value of the UK's overall trade is with India, which is, after all, the second largest country in the world in terms of population and an increasingly powerful presence in terms of international business.

It does seem strange to be giving aid to a country that has nuclear weapons and a space programme, but I wouldn't mind betting that the value of our trade with them is far in excess of £200 million. Perhaps it's one of those little things that Governments do to help smooth that relationship. A small (relatively speaking) sweetener in terms of what we get in return.

I have no idea, by the way, it was just a thought.

Not only is that how I see it as well but you've just managed to put it across in a far more eloquent manner than I've ever done. Nice!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Albumen says

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

Difference being, all the bank bailout money 1) saved the economy and financial infrastructure of the country, and 2) is being paid back in huge chunks, with interest......see the difference?

point 2).....really!?

When you say 'huge', do you mean in relation to the £800bn and interest thereafter?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

point 2).....really!?

When you say 'huge', do you mean in relation to the £800bn and interest thereafter?

Wasn't the £800bn in guarantees rather than cold hard cash ?

 

[Guinness Boy]

A quick Google came up with the below explanation. Interestingly the "it's madness" brigade are normally the ones admitting to voting Tory. So here's Tory MP Andrew Mitchell explaining why foreign aid in general is an investment and admitting that the Tories decided to end aid in China and Russia but to only "walk the last mile" with India. In the Torygraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...reign-aid-is-an-investment-in-our-future.html

 

[Nibble]

I suppose, in an attempt to have a more educated argument here, it would be useful to know what the value of the UK's overall trade is with India, which is, after all, the second largest country in the world in terms of population and an increasingly powerful presence in terms of international business.

It does seem strange to be giving aid to a country that has nuclear weapons and a space programme, but I wouldn't mind betting that the value of our trade with them is far in excess of £200 million. Perhaps it's one of those little things that Governments do to help smooth that relationship. A small (relatively speaking) sweetener in terms of what we get in return.

I have no idea, by the way, it was just a thought.[/QUOT

I would imagine this is the truth.

 

[Albumen]

Albumen says

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

Difference being, all the bank bailout money 1) saved the economy and financial infrastructure of the country, and 2) is being paid back in huge chunks, with interest......see the difference?

1) Did it?
2) Hahahaha yeah ok.

 

[BigGully]

I suppose, in an attempt to have a more educated argument here, it would be useful to know what the value of the UK's overall trade is with India, which is, after all, the second largest country in the world in terms of population and an increasingly powerful presence in terms of international business.

It does seem strange to be giving aid to a country that has nuclear weapons and a space programme, but I wouldn't mind betting that the value of our trade with them is far in excess of £200 million. Perhaps it's one of those little things that Governments do to help smooth that relationship. A small (relatively speaking) sweetener in terms of what we get in return.

I have no idea, by the way, it was just a thought.

I hope too, that this might be the case, but I have my doubts.

I suspect that politicians just keep spunking our money to India because ...... ermmm that's what we have always done.

Ending the payments would likely to be seen by some as callous and nasty politics something that all parties do not want to be associated with.

If as I hope it was genuinely for trade kick back, they could for sure find a more trade friendly term when giving away our money with exactly the same effect and a transparency to the electorate.

 

[gazingdown]

The bailouts were "short term" (and arguably political) fixes and the wrong thing to do.

Let a bank fall and then other banks will "behave" as they know they won't be bailed out.
As it is, the "evil bankers" can get away with anything as they're "too big" to fail. We reap what we sow.

If you gamble and get bailed out when you lose, you carry on gambling.

 

[Nibble]

It's a borderline racist thought and I've no doubt, far from the reality but I can't help thinking of a sort of "It Ain't Half Hot Mum" set on Mars.

 

[Creaky]

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.

The people the aid is aimed at are not the ones involved in the Indian space programme nor are they in a position to decide whether or not their government are investing in that technology.

What many people forget is that it is purely by accident of birth that they were born into a relatively rich country such as the UK not by their own endeavours. In some ways those who have travelled to our shores have a better claim to criticise aid payments than those born here.

Such payments often bring forth the normal cliches - "charity begins at home" - 'could be better spent on [name your own project] - etc.

Then there are the extremes from the other perspective - if you had a choice between buying food to stop a child starving or spending it on [name your own project], what would you do?

Neither are valid in my opinion and are both based on isolationist principles - we are all part of the human race and one of the attributes of humanity is awareness of those worse off than ourselves and the empathy to want to do something to help - that is why on an individual basis so many contribute so much in time and money to charitable causes.

International aid should be just those charitable leanings expressed in a group form - unfortunately much of it is used in a way to impose 'our will' on other nations by way of trade agreements etc. rather than in a purely charitable form - hardly any wonder then that there is so much reported corruption surrounding these payments, both from the giver and the receiver.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I hope too, that this might be the case, but I have my doubts.

I suspect that politicians just keep spunking our money to India because ...... ermmm that's what we have always done.

Ending the payments would likely to be seen by some as callous and nasty politics something that all parties do not want to be associated with.

If as I hope it was genuinely for trade kick back, they could for sure find a more trade friendly term when giving away our money with exactly the same effect and a transparency to the electorate.

Depends on how far you want to go back. There is little debate we pretty much bled India dry through our colonisation and funding of our own industrial revolution and world wars for that matter. What we've given back is probably insignificant to what we actually took out.

 

[Footsoldier]

Don't know whjy I'm bothering but...

Pre existing agreement - India won't be receiving a penny post 2016 (from memory).Loads of people in India need aid £200m is really not alot of money.

It should be stopped right now.

Cameron couldn't give a flying monkey about her but more interested in giving our tax money away while our own people suffer. £12 billion and will keep rising.

[yt]FJntu9ZIWDs[/yt]

 

[BigGully]

Depends on how far you want to go back. There is little debate we pretty much bleed India dry through our colonisation and funding of our own industrial revolution and world wars for that matter. What we've given back is probably insignificant to what we actually took out.

Personally I find this historical context where you wish to invalidate any debate on current affairs as tiresome.

I have no doubt that if you wish to quantify our history in terms of some moral profit and loss account we will be indebted to some whilst owed much by many.

 

[somerset]

Wasn't the £800bn in guarantees rather than cold hard cash ?

955bn total exposure, now back to a touch over 500bn......only 125bn in cash.....now especially Lloyd's, those investments are now worth more than the original purchase price...its all going in the right direction.

 

[Janbha]

I shall wait with anticipation for the Mars a day helps you work rest and play the citar advert at the top of my screen .

 

[Meade's Ball]

Can't wait for the Bollywood movie on this.

I'd like to have seen Sandra Bullock burst into song as she struggles for her last breath in Gravity 3D. It would have added an extra dimension to the film and tale that only song and dance can offer.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

955bn total exposure, now back to a touch over 500bn......only 125bn in cash.....now especially Lloyd's, those investments are now worth more than the original purchase price...its all going in the right direction.

OK, so my figure was slightly out but it does annoy me the people that imply the government actually SPENT that amount of money propping up the banks when they clearly didn't !

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

It should be stopped right now.

Cameron couldn't give a flying monkey about her but more interested in giving our tax money away while our own people suffer. £12 billion and will keep rising.

[yt]FJntu9ZIWDs[/yt]

It would be interesting to know how many of the 1st World nations have "broken their promise" on maintaining their own respective International Aid budget since the 2008 financial crisis and reduced their contributions accordingly.