If the country is in that bad a state, then why dont we send less aid to other countrys?

[nomorebooze]

Am i not getting it? I dont think we should'nt help but FFS why cause all this money stress for our own when the goverment throws OUR money at other countries. Including wars etc which i dont feel is always for our countries safety or benefit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Because we can afford it.

Yes, I know that there are a lot of people who do really struggle financially in this country, and who do find it hard to budget for food and clothing for their children, and I do think that a lot more could be done to redress this imbalance within the UK.

But even the poorest people in the UK have a vastly higher standard of living than many people in the countries to which we send aid. And while the majority of people in the UK can afford holidays, new to buy new clothes before the old ones disintegrate, and to run a car, then I do not think that we can (as a country) say that we do not have enough money to help people who struggle to obtain the most basic necessities in life.

I know that this is not a view that everyone holds, but I see absolutely no difference in our obligation to provide a welfare state to people in the UK, and our obligation to support people from other countries. We are all human beings; it is just by a turn of fate that some happen to be born in the UK and some do not.

Presumably the government will be making cuts in all areas, including charity to other countries.

The amount of aid sent to other countries is tiny compared with the amount spent on the UK. Cutting it really wouldn't save us that much.

its getting to the point where i'm struggling to pay for the 'necessities' of life though!!

water bill.....gas and electric.....and food.

clothing might be cheaper,but its poor quality and doesnt last. how far does our standard of living need to fall?

Oh, and also what Thistledew said.

because if we send aid, they flog us cheaper food or shoot more people trying to flee their countries, stuff like that.

We send aid, it gets to the despot dictators who furnish their palaces and buy guns.

Needs a rethink tbh.

To me its all contradictoray [excuse spellings if wrong] i still think its very wrong. it may be a small amount of money to what we spend but when you hear of the figures of cash sent you wonder why some cant be held back to benefit our own ecomony?

TBB - I would say that there is no moral justification for anyone having a higher standard of living than shelter, food, clean water, heating, education, and healthcare to prevent suffering. I cannot morally justify anything better if it means someone else falling below that standard.

How you would actually realise that is a different matter, and definitely not something I could even begin to formulate an answer to!

There is a growing body of thought that international aid often doesn't work so you might not BU. I don't know enough about it to talk intelligently on the subject, but I don't think YABU to question it.

Because in our country people don't starve to death
Because in our country we don't die from lack of safe drinking water
Because in our country children aren't sent to work in factories earning a few pennies to make cheap clothing for the West instead of getting an education
Because in our country we tend not to have our lives torn apart by genocide, civil war and huge natural disasters
Because in our country most people don't die from lack of access to the most basic medicines

Enough?

nomorebooze - genuine question - at what standard of living would you say that we have a moral duty to help others less fortunate? And if you think we do not, why not?

grunge...are you sure about all that??

we send aid because
a) we are buying influence in areas which might have resources we need

b) trying to stop areas that unstable imploding and then needing our troops to go in

c) it's a kind thing to do as let's face it, we're not flush as a country, but don't have millions dying of starvation

d) our leaders get to look all stateman-like and important on the world stage

I do think there's a lot to be said for cutting aid to some countries, I dont get why we send aid to places like India - this is a democracy with a large middle class and could raise the taxes to solve a lot of their own problems...

Quite sure ThreeBlondeboys

Three - which bit don't you agree with?! Am genuinely baffled.

I am not saying not to help other countries as that would be very wrong, however i still feel that we should also look after our own and if needed cut back on certain things like the amount of cash given out to other countries in general!!!!!!!!, there are people in poverty in This country who could do with more help and support, these people seem to be forgotten about.

I would also think if we don't help, the people from those countries are more likely to seek asylum here... Its much more cost efficient to support them in their own countries i would think.

YABVU, obviously.

Crazy- there has been an improvement in recent years as to the types of aid that are given. It is still important to provide food to avert a genuine famine situation, but apart from that, it is now recognised that food aid can actually be damaging to a country's ability to feed its population.

There have been programs in Ethiopia, for example, that have improved the ability of the country to stockpile, and to predict where droughts etc are likely to strike, so that changes can be made to food production and distribution before a problem occurs.

Most programs now focus on developing the country's ability to provide for itself, whether it is food, medicine, or water technology etc, to avert problems before they arise.

There will always be a need for disaster management- eg providing food, shelter and medicine to the victims of the Haiti earthquake.

Totally agree with fakeplastictrees

"Because in our country people don't starve to death"
yes, they do

i agree with all your other points though.

fakeplastictrees, i like your reply thats the type of thing im talking about, but couldnt put into words

What fakeplastic, thistle and pootles said.

Some aid is an essential moral responsibility- yes some gets to despot dictatorrs etc but equally some goes to search and rescue post earthqualke, rebuilding areas that have been devastated....

So, well palced, well thought out aid has to be an aim but also it's very naive to think much of it isn't an investment: we don't want our troops elaned on further (can't afford!) or to end up with swathes of genuine asylum seekers and even more illegal immigrants in the country over and aboce the rate we alrerady have- a country not listed as posing a risk and qwualifying the new arrial as an asylum seeker may still be an even more horrid palce to be if aid is withdrawn.

And turninga way genuine asylum seekers would be a horrid thing to have to do.

yes nickelbabe....thats what i thought....and food HERE is not getting cheaper either.