Are you for or against foriegn aid

We send money all over the world but Nigeria shouldn't be one of them.
but the poor nigerian rulers need our money
The most egregious example was President Sani Abacha, a military dictator who ruled in the Nineties and accrued a staggering $4 billion (£2.58 billion) fortune by the time he died of a heart attack while in bed with two Indian prostitutes at his palace in the nation’s capital, Abuja, in 1998. Abacha’s business associates did nicely, too — one of them deposited £122 million in a Jersey offshore account after selling Nigerian army trucks for five times their worth.

It is estimated that since 1960, about $380 billion (£245 billion) of government money has been stolen — almost the total sum Nigeria has received in foreign aid.


in the oil industry, where 136 million barrels of crude oil worth $11 billion (£7.79 billion) were illegally siphoned off in just two years from 2009 to 2011, while hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies were given to fuel merchants to deliver petrol that never materialised.

In essence, 80 per cent of the country’s substantial oil revenues go to the government, which disburses cash to individual governors and hundreds of their cronies, so effectively these huge sums remain in the hands of a mere 1 per cent of the Nigerian population.

if we started spending nigerias foreign aid on cruise missiles to kill the corrupt ******* who ruin the country they would soon learn to stop being corrupt ***** and wouldn't need any foreign aid
 
Last edited:
Where did I preach that the UK should give 100% of everything to the developing world?.
I didn't - I think the UK should give a reasonable amount to aid those less fortunate (just as I do).

Stop making pathetically absurd arguments, you are embarrassing yourself.

I'm sorry, but what part of supporting foreign aid results in the inability to support domestic projects?.

The fact I regularly raise money for numerous domestic & foreign charities complexly destroys whatever pathetic point you are trying to make.

I've spend a couple of hundred hours raising money for Shelter just this year, I buy 20% extra on my food shopping weekly into the food trollies at the local supermarket, I donate 10% of my income through my" give as you earn scheme" at work (British Red Cross & NPCC) & regularly give to various other charities & have offered & given financial assistance to members of this forum multiple times.

On-top of that I support political changes (Which are usually at the determent to me personally financially due to my relative position of privilege) which reduce unnecessary human suffering both domestically & abroad - if you must know.

Then you're lucky enough to be in a sound financial situation which allows you to do so, and kudos to you for actually realising that and doing the right thing.

Unfortunately, the UK is not in a particularly sound financial position at the moment. We're heavily in debt, and making cuts left, right and centre in order to minimise our deficit.

Honestly, would you still be making those charitable donations if you were up to your eyeballs in overdue bills you couldn't pay and maxed out on multiple credit cards/overdrafts?

What the hell have you done?.

Absolutely nothing. I'm just about managing to balance the books at the moment, and it would be stupid and irresponsible of me to stop paying my mortgage, bills and feeding my kids so that I could give money to someone halfway across the world. Call it selfish if you will, but my family is far more important to me than anyone else.

Do you think foreign aid is simply giving food to half starving people?, are you confusing short term famine aid with long term infrastructure projects, water pump creation, arable land purchases to give to locals - many communities have become significantly more independent from aid due to many positive schemes.

Lets have an example then?

Do you not agree that many of the places that "need" this foreign aid are really just deserts, and if people can't survive there, then maybe they shouldn't be living there?

Edit: I'd just like to point out that I've never actually said I'm fully against foreign aid - I just don't think it's the best use of this country's resources when we're not in the best financial position ourselves. Considering some of that money comes from me, I think I'm entitled to an opinion on where it's spent (regardless of the fact that my opinion wont matter to those in power :p)
 
Last edited:
he can't give an example of them because he doesn't realise how corrupt these countries are.

he might want to watch the opening scene of black hawk down to get an idea where the food aid goes
 
Aid needs to be effective...simply giving money to foreign governments is not effective.

I am for increasing Aid to programmes that benefit the people that really need such help, and that such programmes are designed to enable those people to help themselves through incentives to development and redistribution of local wealth and resources.

Aid should also be implemented so it benefits UK interests wherever possible.

In that case, are you against it in its current format?
 
he can't give an example of them because he doesn't realise how corrupt these countries are.

he might want to watch the opening scene of black hawk down to get an idea where the food aid goes
Well, a quick google gives you a list of projects which have a high success rate - but I'll put a list below of strategies which have been proven to be effective (not all do & I agree efficiency can be increased, as with any project).

Aid (foreign, international) is split into two key areas.

Humanitarian aid & developmental aid.

To put it roughly, the humanitarian aid is for disasters, droughts & other natural events (some of which we in the west are part responsible for due to the effective of climate change & the fragility of the local ecosystem) - developmental aid is intended to help them get on their own two feet & look after themselves.

MIT based study

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Abhijit Banerjee and Ruimin He have undertaken a rigorous study of the relatively few independent evaluations of aid program successes and failures.

They suggest the following interventions are usually highly effective forms of aid in normal circumstances:

  • subsidies given directly to families to be spent on children's education and health
  • education vouchers for school uniforms and textbooks
  • teaching selected illiterate adults to read and write
  • deworming drugs and vitamin/nutritional supplements
  • vaccination and HIV/AIDS prevention programs
  • indoor sprays against malaria, anti-mosquito bed netting
  • suitable fertilizers
  • clean water supplies
Aid is split into many different sub-groups.

Types
  • Project aid: Aid is given for a specific purpose e.g. building materials for a new school.
  • Programme aid: Aid is given for a specific sector e.g. funding of the education sector of a country.
  • Budget support: A form of Programme Aid that is directly channelled into the financial system of the recipient country.
  • Sector-wide Approaches (SWAPs): A combination of Project aid and Programme aid/Budget Support e.g. support for the education sector in a country will include both funding of education projects (like school buildings) and provide funds to maintain them (like school books).
  • Technical assistance: Educated personnel, such as doctors are moved into developing countries to assist with a program of development. Can be both programme and project aid.
  • Food aid: Food is given to countries in urgent need of food supplies, especially if they have just experienced a natural disaster. Food aid can be provided by importing food from the donor, buying food locally, or providing cash.
  • International research, such as research that went into the green revolution and many vaccines.
OxpIpIq.jpg


I do agree with one thing, aid is a temporary solution & it would be far better to create an environment in which aid wasn't needed - the only way of actually stopping aid is to change the system at the core to make poverty impossible.

All large political & social systems are corrupt, it's nothing new - a percentage of insurance is fraud, a percentage of our benefits bill is fraud, some corporations are involved in illegal tax avoidance, a number of MP's were scamming expenses, a have normal people working "cash in hand" - I fail to see why charity or international aid should have to live up to an unrealistic standard to get any support.

Yes it needs to be improved, yes we need to do more to deal with the corruption in these nations we are attempting to heal - but on the other side, we need to do more to reduce the negative effectives of climate change, we need to stop selling weapons to undesirables in the region, we need to stop saddling the third world with unsustainable debt, we need to stop working with the select few in these nations who are exploiting the people (via resource theft).

Like it or not, we indirectly benefit from the suffering of these nations & we have a duty to our fellow human beings to do something about it & support changes to the system to do it.
 
Last edited:
You only have to look at parts of Africa to see that billions in aid makes little or no difference, the same problems exist now as they did 30 years ago.
 
Foreign aid makes little sense in terms of charity. I'd rather we had a business development council or some such which at least serves our interests.

Or better, still the money into our defence budget and rebuild the Royal Navy. Ship building would provide much needed heavy industry jobs, helps in science/technology etc.

Or even better, stick some cash into those Sabre engines!
 
Obviously it's a tad more complicated than a lot of people think. Foreign aid is a necessary tool of modern diplomacy. I'd just rather it be termed what it actually is for, eg business development, or "fund to keep our import/export markets happy".

It irks the hell out of me when I see the amount given to India though (currently £200m/year but being phased out thankfully) only to see they're launching a rocket to Mars.
 
Thing with the whole India space program OMG foriegn aid point, is that you are assuming that if we didnt give them the aid that they would scrap the space program and feed their people, if they had fed their people instead of spending it on other things we wouldnt have had to start feeding them in the first place!
 
You only have to look at parts of Africa to see that billions in aid makes little or no difference, the same problems exist now as they did 30 years ago.

I don't think that's true at all, we certainly haven't had the large scale famines that were prevalent in the '80s. Africa's main problems today are to do with corruption and war, it's difficult to see how monetary foreign aid will address these things.
 
Back
Top Bottom