Because money is the answer to EVERYTHING isn't it?
Nick Griffin on Haiti
- Thread starter Darkst4r
- Start date
Because money is the answer to EVERYTHING isn't it?
We do. We have lots more money than we really need when put into perspective against those who need it.
I fail to see how possibly saving hundreds of lives compares to adding just £20 m to our defence budget or to our economy.
We are in debt up to the eyeballs, I do not see how we have money?
The government is practically bankrupt. This is without taking in savings and cuts that haven't been made yet but are needed. If the world faced large scale disaster going by your analysis, at what point would we stop selling the fixture and fittings to throw money into troubled aid operations and corrupt charities?
YOU and I may have money, but that is NOT what I am talking about.
Because that money could be used to make sure our troops are actually getting the equipment they need and not being killed unnecessarily?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,302
- Location
- The Orion Spur
I'm sorry mate but it's these kinds of statements that make me question our evolution as a species, unbelievable seriously, I can't beleive that we as a people are still so segregated and selfish, people say we need 'look after our own' but every living soul on this plant is 'our own'.
Last edited:
The money will be channeled through charities and agencies. Most of which deal with providing immediate relief in terms of water, food and medicine. We've also sent rescue teams and heavy lifting equipment.
It's also worth mentioning that per person the money pledged by the UK means we are giving less than Guayana, Denmark and Luxembourg. At present it works out at 33p per person, are you really that concerned by such a small amount? If you read my earlier post you'll see that the government wastes 500 times as much on far less important matters.
Brilliant. So you think the £20 million is getting handed out to the people? Something tells me that money will be used to buy food and shelter and medicine. Which is obviously a lot more cost effective than sending food and medicine all the way from the UK, which would take god knows how long.
We're in a position to help, so we help. It's a moral standpoint and ethical decision, not a political one. This morality is one of the central ideals to our culture that made us better than others; why we've sent men off to war, why we refuse to lay down.
The money would be lost in the system in this country. It would not have made the slightest bit of difference to anyone unless it went directly into the bank accounts of a certain few, but then what'll happen? People would complain about others getting an easy ride and how it's unfair on them.
The money is better spent and worth much, much more to those in Haiti at the moment. We may 'need' it but not that desperately and £20m, is absolutely tiny. Those in Haiti however, are on a knife's edge and need it, very badly.
Personally, I choose to believe in a country and a society that chooses to help others even if it comes at their expense, because that's the kind of country and society I want to, and would be proud to be a part of. That's the kind of country we claim to be, but it's becoming clear that we're not. Shame on you.
I find it quite sickening actually that there are those of you that would rather have a few pennies extra in your pocket, or just stand idly by and watch as a human-tragedy unfolds within reach. I guess we now know the sum of a man, when he can happily stand by - oh rather, actively complains when help is given - when others are in such need.
Let's hope you're never in need of help from another human-being where they're in a position to ignore you out of spite or selfishness. It's the ugly-side of humanity and something we should really be past by now.
Evidently not.
Why not? Helping the international community, foreign-relations and acting on our moral impulses are just as important to contemporary governance as complaining about the state of the NHS.
We'd give what we can, just like in Haiti. Once again, I remind you that £20m really isn't that huge amount of money. It's like you giving away the loose change in your pocket after buying a happy-meal.
We're not, but we have never been a nation to stand idly by and watch other's misery. Of course, this isn't concrete, but this is here and now, and we're acting on it, even if it does turn out to be an empty gesture.
Last edited:
FFS we aren't handing out £10 notes to people on the streets of Haiti. The money is being used to save peoples lives directly. A large reason that the effects of tsunami weren't many times worse was because the aid was raised quickly and was used effectively straight away.
What are you talking about then? If we didn't have the money, we wouldn't have anything to donate, yet we have. It comes as debt to us, but debt that we can pay off or deal with over time. Who cares when there's people in Haiti with pressing needs right now who need help? They are so much more worse off than us. We have a moral obligation to help them. An obligation as a country who can, and should help them. Your 'global natural disaster' scenario is irrelevant. It doesn't happen like that. If it did, the redistribution, rather than accumulation, of wealth about the worlds countries will help those worse off with very little impact on our lives relatively speaking.
But £20 m buys only a small amount of kit for the troops. It may save a hanful of lives, but not as much as it can save put elsewhere. That's why the government has to make a difficult decision to prioritise.
They were so much worse off than us before. It seems a bit of a knee jerk reaction. Oh quick throw some money that way. If we wanted to help we would divert some troops over there, clear the roads make sure that aid workers can get around safely.
Excuse my ignorance of religion here; I assume that Christians believe in “God”, as in the one most common in the West, i.e. not Allah, or whatever others Gods there are. Anyway, to my point – George Bush and Tony Blair referred to God incessantly during there pre invasion of Iraq speeches, I’m interested to know whether Christians support that invasion/occupation?
Sorry for the topic de-tour, just curious is all.
As for Nick Griffin… politicians are, in my opinion, a total waste of space – I think that the commons and all the bumph that goes with it, is from a bye-gone era and needs to modernised, just imagine how much of our tax money would saved not having to pay hundreds of MP’s wages (assuming they do get paid from the coffers funded by our taxes that is!).
Personally I would welcome a complete change to government, and whilst you’re at it, lose the Royal family too – other than being a nice tourist attraction, I don’t see why they should be so revered
Think I’m going off on a tangent now 
Last edited:
I know my history. I know we're not perfect, and I know we have a very tainted past. But - and this is the point you're missing - culturally, this is what we've chosen to be. It echos back to the abolition of slavery and has engrained in our culture since.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,302
- Location
- The Orion Spur
Exactly, 20 million is a drop in the ocean for the military, but in aid for Haiti it could help save thousands of lives.
I actually share Nix's views here completely. It's a moral decision. If our country is 'dripping red', then why not do something good?
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
The UN see this as the worst need of aid they've ever faced.
I don't see where Nick Griffin even gets a slight nod in this discussion. He is, as always, completely irrelevant.
I don't see where Nick Griffin even gets a slight nod in this discussion. He is, as always, completely irrelevant.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 357
- Location
- UK
In this disaster. Money > Food/Water in the broader spectrum sadly to say. Right now the Aid effort is bottlenecking and all the international aid is being piled up high out of the reach of the starving, angry, frustrated, thirsty people and it's being prepared for the UN world food operation to dish it out. Another thing to note is that most of the food that will be 'donated' to the aid effort will be completely unsuitable for use. Canned goods unable to be opened, mouldy bread? You get the idea.
Money provides the UN, Red Cross and all other aid organisations currently working on the disaster with a means to purchase and send lots more bulk supplies of medical equipment, food, water, clothing, and shelter. One fool may think that thrusting $$$ in the face of a haiti'ian is mockery, but step back and you realise, It's for the greater good. The money also will be used to build new homes after the disaster and can be used hundreds of different ways.
On the topic of money be used for the UK instead. Don't the government have a annual portion of the budget devoted to international aid that's in the tens of millions already?
If you want to argue about how the government allocates their annual budget to different areas then make a new thread, but this thread isn't for that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 3,076
- Location
- a galaxy far far away
unless its in our own country or in afghanistan where our soldiers are dying needlessly
So? Doesn't mean we can't help them.
I think you belittle the governments decision slightly. Does it being a 'knee jerk reaction' make it wrong?
I think this is what the US are doing now. They are better equipped and a mor sensible choice to help in this respect.