Donate SIGN UP

Answers

41 to 60 of 64rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Chilldoubt

I'm on the right flank of Labour, looking at through the Conservative's patio doors.

My hope is that the right wing of the Tory party split off and head off to UKIP. That might be the tipping point for me.

That and Theresa May replacing David Cameron.

Or perhaps I just find the Conservatives more appealing now compared to UKIP?

You're welome Svejk.

Always happy to shine a light...
I suppose it all comes down to what you would like the nation's wealth spent on. Personally, so long as the government feels the need to take around 45% of the nation's income to fund its programmes I would prefer those programmes to concentrate exclusively on benefits to the UK. What is certainly absurd is for the government to borrow money (when the loans are serviced by the UK taxpayer) only to give that money to people overseas.

It's certainly true that floods in Bangladesh (which occur near enough annually and which leads me to conclude that the area is not fit for humans to live in) cause far more problems than those on the Somerset levels. But people living in Somerset pay UK taxes whilst those in Bangladesh do not. So whilst a conflict exists for the funds to address the problem it is my view that Somerset should get first shout and there should not be the sort of prevarication among politicians arguing if it should be provided and from where the money should come.

If the government really feels the need to legislate to determine how much of other people's money should be given to foreigners I'd far rather they define the amount given as a percentage of tax surplus rather than GDP. At least then they would not have to borrow cash to show their munificence abroad and when we have no surplus there would be no overseas aid.
So either way sp, you'll be supposrting a party that wants to stay in the EU. I don't.
Furthermore, I've never voted in my life in any general election but will do so next May. Why would that be?
Why have a bunch of 'swivel eyed loons' gone from whipping boys to serious contenders in the space of 18 months? What is it about them that is so appealing?

http://www.ukip.org/policies_for_people

So many like me who were apathetic about politics until recently have suddenly found a party that is addressing serious and pressing concerns, those of the ordinary guy in the street. I know it's getting repetitive but next May will in all probability be the most historic in British political history. Too many have had enough of the status quo and will be making their feelings known.
Question Author
sp1814

These are the top ten oil producers in the World, can I ask how much Foreign Aid we give to each of them?

1 Russia
2 Saudi Arabia
3 United States
4 Iran
5 China
6 Canada
7 Iraq
8 United Arab Emirates
9 Venezuela
10 Mexico
Here's a clue, aog. ;)
Top 10 recipients of UK aid in 2009/10
1. India £295m
2. Ethiopia £214m
3. Bangladesh £149m
4. Sudan £146m
5. Tanzania £144m
6. Pakistan £140m
7. Afghanistan £133m
8. Nigeria £114m
9. Congo (Dem Rep) £109m
10. Ghana (£90m
Source: DIFD
Chilldoubt

I'm happy for you...obviously I don't want UKIP to win the next General Election (or any after that), but if you do, and you trust UKIP be in charge of writing and implementing the next budget - fill yer boots!!!
Sorry AOG - I don't get your point.
The point is, sp, that your insightful guide to the murky world of international finance doesn't really stand up to any scrutiny, does it?
Svejk

Yes it does.
-- answer removed --
God, you're annoying, even by the standards of the lib/lab master debaters on this site. You're the one who linked British Aid with British financial interest, with particular reference to oil. Clearly you were mistaken.
What has America's 'war on terror' got to do with British overseas aid?
Svejk

Yes - it's an extremely complex issue.

Totally agree with you on that.
Question Author
Svejk

Thanks for your list Svejk, most interesting, I could have a guess at the reason, but it would not be quite PC.

Like you I can't understand why sp could not get my point, since it was him who used the old chestnut "it's all about oil" but then he is not alone in this many other ABers think that this is the reason for most things.
To be quite honest, aog, I used to believe and spout similar things myself,,,,,,,,,,,,,when I was 12.
Svejk's List

Mostly ex-British Colonial territories

Many are of strategic importance

And a few are potentially huge markets for trade

Perhaps those are the most relevant connections to our present Aid allocations?
/when I was 12./

What's your IQ now then svejk?
Ha ha...thank you for your post at 12:54.

Sometimes it's nice to hand over the educational reigns and have a rest!
Question Author
When one can not win an argument, why not just revert to insults.

41 to 60 of 64rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Why Should We Spend £600M On Third World Flood Defences, When We Have A Flood Problem Of Our Own?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.