Jump to content

Why is India Still a Recipient of British Aid Money...

Beer in The Evening?

By Beer in The Evening?
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

BrandNewGuy

BrandNewGuy

Posted
Posted

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> India, as pointed out above, has huge problems

> with real poverty. But at the same time it is a

> country that is developing successfully.


Again I think that's debatable. The burgeoning Indian middle class loves to give that impression, but so did the British middle class in the mid-1800s, amidst grinding poverty in both countryside and town...

BrandNewGuy

BrandNewGuy

Posted
Posted

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BrandNewGuy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Enriching the Indian middle class is

> > probably not useful to the poor.

>

> I thought they had tax in India too. Is this not

> the case?


Of course, but I bet they don't spend much of it on the poor - the infrastructure situation in India is so chronic that even the middle class won't get much richer until they spend serious money on it.

Undisputedtruth

Undisputedtruth

Posted
Posted

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BrandNewGuy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Enriching the Indian middle class is

> > probably not useful to the poor.

>

> I thought they had tax in India too. Is this not

> the case?


As this country has shown, the gulf between rich and poor have got wider despite reforms to the taxation system since the days of Thatcher.

Undisputedtruth

Undisputedtruth

Posted
Posted

Beer in The Evening? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Er, so? Opium was a widely-sought commodity in the

> 19th century. Not forgetting that its trade was

> perfectly legal, and any profit made from it.

> Should we seek indemnity from the Wright brothers'

> descendents, seeing as their ancestors' creation

> has lead to so much pollution?


Next you'll be saying that slavery wasn't wrong because it was legal at the time. Sorry I don't accept your point.

BrandNewGuy

BrandNewGuy

Posted
Posted

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Beer in The Evening? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Er, so? Opium was a widely-sought commodity in

> the

> > 19th century. Not forgetting that its trade was

> > perfectly legal, and any profit made from it.

> > Should we seek indemnity from the Wright

> brothers'

> > descendents, seeing as their ancestors'

> creation

> > has lead to so much pollution?

>

> Next you'll be saying that slavery wasn't wrong

> because it was legal at the time. Sorry I don't

> accept your point.


No, the point is that we're no longer reponsible for that wrong

El Pibe

El Pibe

Posted
Posted

Not to mention it wasn't perfectly legal.

The Chinese authorities specifically banned us from selling it, so we killed lots of their folk, blew shit up and forced a one sided humiliating treaty on them allowing us to sell them opium and ravage their society with destructive addiction as long as we stopped killing them and blowing shit up.

I suppose you could call that technically legal, it I think a modern court might deem that coercion.

El Pibe

El Pibe

Posted
Posted

Anyway, the whole historical responsibility thing aside, surely the crux is that we generally alleviate want and poverty specifically where the government does neglect its responsibility.


I'm sure there were many BITE types in the mid 80s farting on about how it wasnt our responsibility to do anything when Ethiopia had among the highest military spend as a proportion of GDP in the world.


Technically they may well have been right but they'd have also been cunts.

Nothings different if you ask me.

BrandNewGuy

BrandNewGuy

Posted
Posted

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyway, the whole historical responsibility thing

> aside, surely the crux is that we generally

> alleviate want and poverty specifically where the

> government does neglect its responsibility.

>

> I'm sure there were many BITE types in the mid 80s

> farting on about how it wasnt our responsibility

> to do anything when Ethiopia had among the highest

> military spend as a proportion of GDP in the

> world.

>

> Technically they may well have been right but

> they'd have also been @#$%&.

> Nothings different if you ask me.


But aid to India today isn't equivalent to emergency relief to Ethiopia in the 80s. Aid is phenomenally complex in its effects - and appeals to people's kindness doesn't make it less complex.

Huguenot

Huguenot

Posted
Posted

I think a more cynical approach to Indian aid would be to describe it as enlightened self interest.


Sometimes we 'give' a little because we get so much more in return.


If you don't think that retaining political influence and trade relations in the second largest nation in the world is in Britain's best interest then you're a little bit dumb.


India is the UK's biggest export market outside of the EU (yes bigger than the US), with around $30 billion dollars a year. The aim is to make this $60 billion dollars a year within 3 years. India is the biggest external investor in the UK even compared with the EU.


UK aid to India is a piss in the ocean compared with this, and to be honest marketing costs at a fraction of 1% of the overall income would be celebrated by every CEO in the world.


The newspapers are simply trying to sell copies, and appealing to simplistic thickos is a pretty good way of doing this.


But small brained right wing pillocks don't get any of this. They just go 'space travellers don't need poverty reduction'. Mainly because they haven't thought it through.


There is a substantial number of Indian MPs who want British aid to India to stop. If it was just free money they wouldn't care. They care because with that cash comes influence and conditions.


If you don't understand that then go back to criticising your neighbours.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • alice
      Digital ID

      By alice · Posted

      Well I say it won’t for those who work ‘ cash in hand’    
    • David Peckham
      Digital ID

      By David Peckham · Posted

      That's why I said 'in some form' - that figure increases to 57% when asked if they were in favour of a 'National ID Card', rather than a digital one on their phone. That suggests a couple of things to me: firstly that the majority of people aren't mad enough to rebel over a perceived Orwellian assault on their civil liberties and, secondly, that 20% of people are worried about someone sussing that they've been looking at 'BigTits.Com' or some-such on their mobile.
    • Angelina
      Digital ID

      By Angelina · Posted

      we need more information - the actual facts on intended use and benefits - now and in the future, otherwise we're just speculating
    • Spartacus
      Digital ID

      By Spartacus · Posted

      I think digital id is potentially a good thing, number of reasons for that. Eventually it will encompass services you already have from the goverment, your driving licence,  you NI number, your gov gateway (all obvious extensions)  Services like photo card driving licences have already proved to have flaws, including Mr Smith, who looks similar to Mr Green,  passing Mr Greens test to get Mr Green a "dodgy" dtiving licence as an example.  Digital id may also ensure only people entitled to NHS care get it and health tourists pay to use our health service.  However, whilst I think.its a good idea, social media will ensure it is still born. Over the weekend I've seen so many anti digital id posts, including Kier as Davros leading the Labour Daleks (did make me chuckle) , comparisons to 1984 and even a song about it. Someone posted "what would happen if we all refused to sign up" and how within 31 days it would topple the government.  Will it actually happen maybe , but I have a feeling, like most things whatever way it goes both sides will again employ project fear and misinformation. 

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...