Irelands 2012 budget: How much for Overseas AID?

Cork boy 55

Ireland Overseas Development Aid 2012
I think Ireland is spending too much money here.

Given the state of our economy relative to those ahead of us in OECD, Ireland is the most generous country in the world for this currently, IMO.

I think spending should be reduced to 150 million region(1996 levels), thus giving a saving of at least 450 millon next year.

(1)
We gave 636 million to Irish AID for ODA this year(2011)
That's about 2% of all taxes we took in.


(2)
Ireland ODA 1996-2011 trend
1996 142 million
1999 230 million
2003 455 million
2007 734 million
2010 671 million
2011 636 million
2012 Don't know
2013 Don't know
2014 500million (projected FF four year plan 2010)

Also
2012 1500 million (*projected in 2007 plan*) :rolleyes:


(3)
We are the eight most generous donor of ODA per captia in the OECD
Greece give 0.29% ODA/GNI (2009)
Germany gives 0.35% ODA/GNI (2009)
Ireland gives 0.54% ODA/GNI (2009)




links
http://www.irishaid.gov.ie/whitepaper/assets/White%20Paper%20English.pdf
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/17/9/44981892.pdf
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/About-DFID/Finance-and-performance/Aid-Statistics/Statistic-on-International-Development-2010/SID-2010-Section-3-How-much-is-UK-expenditure-on-International-Development/

Discuss?
How much do you think we should give in 2012?

Pride Fighter

Cork boy 55 wrote: »

Discuss?
How much do you think we should give in 2012?

0.7%. Despite being in an economic quagmire, we are still one of the worlds wealthiest nations. The 0.7% would do a lot to alleviate world hunger and improve education. Education is the key, if we can increase literacy levels that would in turn create greater levels of self-sufficiency as education is the great liberator and always will be.

harrythehat

They need it more than we do, no matter how bad we think we have it. Simple as. I guess I wouldn't be opposed to a marginal reduction but nothing more. You're talking about people's lives.

Manach

Whilst I'd be supportive of some level of oversea's aid (pre-Boom era 1996)- this is money that the State can ill-afford to spend as they are relying on IMF/EU aid to keep afloat, the money can be better spent on Irish citizens, and given the raft of new taxes/levys/charges that are incoming in the budget, can the ordinary taxpayer afford yet another hit to the wallet though this enforced charity.

Dirk Gently

maybe we should set aside a single months worth of unsecured bond repayments and use that as our overseas aid budget instead. save ourselves that 2% you're so worried about and increase our aid contribution significantly too.

Gudgeoon

I'm amazed the IMf didn't insist on an end to overseas aid as part of their programme.

Imagine you had a friend who was completely broke and close to bankruptcy. You help him out and then find he is giving money to charity.

Is there any proof of the effectivness of overseas aid? You would expect that the money is used by dictators to buy arms. In the case where the money does reach the poor, you would expect their governments to cut public spending by the same amount and use the savings to buy more weapons.

InigoMontoya

We should maintain our current commitment.

Godge

An interesting question OP.


Assume we donate €40m to Kenya in 2012. If we had to borrow this on the open market it would cost around 9% in interest. Kenya could borrow it at a lower rate.

So if we borrow money at a high rate and give it to Kenya who could borrow it at a lower rate who benefits? Obviously the Kenyan people benefit as they don't have to borrow the money, but there is a second beneficiary. The international bondholder who can lend the same €40m to Ireland instead of Kenya.

There is an argument therefore that we should suspend Aid programmes and funding until such time as we either (a) have a balanced budget and therefore money to spare or (b) can return to the market at interest rates below those paid by Kenya and other aid recipients.

Otherwise we are feeding the bondholders, not burning them.

caseyann

Shouldnt be sending anything anywhere.Borrowing to give it away then pay it back to give it away.Makes sense :rolleyes:
Get the countries sorted out instead of throwing money at them.
Quick to dish that money out but take it off the low paid tax payer in heart beat and hunt them down when they loose their jobs but still enough to throw away to another country that should be well on its way to been able to live without aid.
Just how much money and many more decades before that happens.
Wipe it clean no more aid get on your own feet.

FreudianSlippers

caseyann wrote: »

Shouldnt be sending anything anywhere.Borrowing to give it away then pay it back to give it away.Makes sense :rolleyes:
Get the countries sorted out instead of throwing money at them.
Quick to dish that money out but take it off the low paid tax payer in heart beat and hunt them down when they loose their jobs but still enough to throw away to another country that should be well on its way to been able to live without aid.
Just how much money and many more decades before that happens.
Wipe it clean no more aid get on your own feet.

I actually agree with you here, I think we should halt all aid for the time being, at least until we re-enter the bond markets and then we should probably give somewhere in the neighbourhood of 0.30% ODA/GNI.

caseyann

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I actually agree with you here, I think we should halt all aid for the time being, at least until we re-enter the bond markets and then we should probably give somewhere in the neighbourhood of 0.30% ODA/GNI.

But even then there shouldnt be even that much called for.By now should be well on its way to fixing itself and contributing back.
Like an individual human,if they keep getting pay out and charity and dont feel like they need to work to obtain what they get.They get reliant and rather than stand on own feet and fix it they stay as they are.
All money should go into everyones own countries its unsustainable this kind of stuff.
We have hospitals closing down and the our ladys one virtually on its last legs.:( This is where the money needs to go.Updated medical care for here etc..
Give them the tools and that is all.

LaBaguette

Godge wrote: »

Kenya could borrow it at a lower rate.

I'm no expert in this matter, but do you have a link or could you explain the logic here ?

My understanding is that, at the most basic level, rates follow the risk taken by the lender. And even if Ireland is in a ****ty situation, I'd still have more faith in its ability to repay than Kenya's.

As pointed above, Ireland is still a rich country, fully integrated in the wealthy Western economy, and the EU provides another layer of support compared to Kenya. And on the political side, Ireland hasnt faced major constitutional crises and isnt in a politically unstable region.

Considering this, I'd see Ireland as a safer bet than Kenya. But maybe investors see something that I don't ?

Broads.ie

A few people here are under the illusion that our aid money actually gets used for it's intended purpose.

The 0.7% would do a lot to alleviate world hunger and improve education.

They need it more than we do, no matter how bad we think we have it.

Wasn't that said by every western country every year for the last 50 years? Look at the state of Africa now. It's WORSE than it was at independence.

The subject of foreign aid and how it can be decreased should be on the radios every day. I see people constantly giving out about dole leechers here on boards, why don't they give out this other waste of money? I'm not saying that all aid should be cut tomorrow, but it should be slashed considerably, with a set goal of having foreign aid donations (to corrupt nations at least) non-existent in the near future.

African leaders are taking the west for a ride, they see no end to this aid and they are feckin' loving it! The World Bank are arriving in Kenya soon to try and figure out how 3.5million dollars went missing from an Arid Lands project. That's pocket change though. 35 million dollars have recently gone missing from the Kenyan Education Ministry (part funded by western tax money). By the way, the Minister of Education is still in office! He didn't even get a slap on the wrist and he is now laughing all the way to the bank.

There is so much wrong with foreign aid right now, but the average joe doesn't really seem to care.

caseyann

LaBaguette wrote: »

I'm no expert in this matter, but do you have a link or could you explain the logic here ?

My understanding is that, at the most basic level, rates follow the risk taken by the lender. And even if Ireland is in a ****ty situation, I'd still have more faith in its ability to repay than Kenya's.

As pointed above, Ireland is still a rich country, fully integrated in the wealthy Western economy, and the EU provides another layer of support compared to Kenya. And on the political side, Ireland hasnt faced major constitutional crises and isnt in a politically unstable region.

Considering this, I'd see Ireland as a safer bet than Kenya. But maybe investors see something that I don't ?

Ireland is not rich it is begging and borrowing and burning the future generations and the politicians leaving a waste land for them while they enjoy getting fatter.
Ireland need to take care of itself and make others take care of themselves.

Broads.ie

I emailed Irish Aid and asked them to comment on how Uganda recently spent €512m on military jets, and why the hell we are funding this homophobic anti-west dictator? (Remember the homosexuality death penalty bill recently?)

Here is an excerpt of the reply:

Through our Embassy in Kampala, Ireland has been made aware of the contracts undertaken by the Ugandan Government in 2010 for the purchase of military equipment and the implications of this action. We are concerned about the purchase of this military equipment, and we have expressed our concern to the Government of Uganda. In April 2010, Ireland along with other donors, communicated with the then Minister of Finance expressing concern at reports that Uganda had signed a contract for the purchase of these planes. Since then, along with other donors, we have continued to raise this and other issues with Uganda through our Embassy in Kampala.

So issues were raised. Concerns were expressed. That's great. Now send Uganda another few million euros ... the crayturs.

Isn't it the biggest waste of our aid money? We are spending millions of euros feeding and educating Museveni's poverty stricken people, but it turns out that he actually had about €500 million to spare! Wha, he must have found it down the back of his couch.

Icepick

0.5% seems totally fine

Einhard

Pride Fighter wrote: »

0.7%. Despite being in an economic quagmire, we are still one of the worlds wealthiest nations. The 0.7% would do a lot to alleviate world hunger and improve education. Education is the key, if we can increase literacy levels that would in turn create greater levels of self-sufficiency as education is the great liberator and always will be.

I'd agree with much of this, but I think there needs to be a total overhaul of how we distribute our aid, and who it goes to. I know that much of it goes to NGOs, but this should increase, and accountability should be a key factor in deciding where the aid is delivered.

Manach wrote: »

Whilst I'd be supportive of some level of oversea's aid (pre-Boom era 1996)- this is money that the State can ill-afford to spend as they are relying on IMF/EU aid to keep afloat, the money can be better spent on Irish citizens, and given the raft of new taxes/levys/charges that are incoming in the budget, can the ordinary taxpayer afford yet another hit to the wallet though this enforced charity.

What do you mean the aid can be much better spent on Irish taxpayers? How so? I understand the desire to see Irish people benefit from Irish tax receipts, but I don't think it's true that Irish people would benefit more from the money than, say, a Somali woman living in a refugee camp. €200 is one week's dole for an Irish resident; it's 6 months wages in Somalia- and that's the average. So, in terms of efficacy, I'd say that the money would be much better spent in Somalia than in Ireland.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I actually agree with you here, I think we should halt all aid for the time being, at least until we re-enter the bond markets and then we should probably give somewhere in the neighbourhood of 0.30% ODA/GNI.

If the objection to aid is that we're borrowing it, how does waiting until we enter bond markets change anything?

Broads.ie wrote: »

A few people here are under the illusion that our aid money actually gets used for it's intended purpose.

Much of it does get used for its intended purposes. I assume that you'll google some abuse of aid cases and use this to prove your point, but one can promote any POV through cherrypicking evidence.

That is not to say that the aid systam is perfect. Of course it;s not, and there are abuses. But IMO, the correct response to this is to reform the system, rather than abolish it altogether. The Social Welfare system in Ireland is subject to widespread abuse. Should we just abolish it? Or seek to reduce fraud as the current government is doing?

Wasn't that said by every western country every year for the last 50 years? Look at the state of Africa now. It's WORSE than it was at independence.

Africa isn't some monolithic entity. There are many nations in Africa which are better off now than they were 50 years ago. others have slipped back somewhat, but one can't make gorss generalisations about such a diverse continent.

The subject of foreign aid and how it can be decreased should be on the radios every day. I see people constantly giving out about dole leechers here on boards, why don't they give out this other waste of money? I'm not saying that all aid should be cut tomorrow, but it should be slashed considerably, with a set goal of having foreign aid donations (to corrupt nations at least) non-existent in the near future.

How do you define "corrupt nations". Every country is corrupt in some way. Even if we agree to cut aid to "most corrupt" countries, that will have no impact on the rulers of these states. They'll continue to live in luxury as their citizens die on the streets. Far better, IMO, to reform the system so that the aid flows through well-audited NGOs, rather than into state coffers.

African leaders are taking the west for a ride, they see no end to this aid and they are feckin' loving it! The World Bank are arriving in Kenya soon to try and figure out how 3.5million dollars went missing from an Arid Lands project.

That's pocket change though. 35 million dollars have recently gone missing from the Kenyan Education Ministry (part funded by western tax money). By the way, the Minister of Education is still in office! He didn't even get a slap on the wrist and he is now laughing all the way to the bank.

Such misuse of funds is not restricted to Afrian nations. Only last year, it was discovered that €500k of union funding provided by the state had gone missing. The officials involved received reprimands but none lost their positions. We all know the activities of the ikes of Michael Lowry and Ray Burke in the 90s and earlier. I don't really think we're in a position to cherrypick incidents of malfeasance in other countries, and use them to condemn entire nations. Does Kenya have problems? Of course. However it is doing better in many sense than it was at the start of the century, and to pull all funding would set the place back immensely- which would be a waste of any money we have spent there.

There is so much wrong with foreign aid right now, but the average joe doesn't really seem to care.

I'd consider myself an average Joe and I do care. Just because someone doesn't share your opinion on something, doesn't mean they don't have any opinion. I agree that there is much wrong with the foreign aid system, but I also know that to abolish it, or cut it dramatically, would lead to untold misery, suffering, and death- on a scale incomparable with the crrent situation in Ireland. I want to see aid reformed rather than abolished. I think we are moving in that direction, have much more to do, but an imperfect system is better IMO than no system at all.

Einhard

Broads.ie wrote: »

So issues were raised. Concerns were expressed. That's great. Now send Uganda another few million euros ... the crayturs.

Isn't it the biggest waste of our aid money? We are spending millions of euros feeding and educating Museveni's poverty stricken people, but it turns out that he actually had about €500 million to spare! Wha, he must have found it down the back of his couch.

This is an absolutely valid complain to make. My response though would be to cance all aid to the administration in Kampala and instead funnel it rhough responsible NGOs. Thus corrupt regimes aren't funded by the Irish taxpayer, and the people who depend on our supprt still receive it.

It seems though that some people (not talking about you) have an ideological opposition to aid programmes, and the fact that people will die without them doesn't seem to impinge on their thinking.

AlekSmart

Broads.ie wrote: »

I recently emailed Irish Aid and asked them to comment on how Uganda recently spent €512m military jets, and why the hell are we funding this homophobic anti-west dictator? (Remember the homosexuality death penalty bill recently?)

Here is an excerpt of the reply:.......

................So issues were raised. Concerns were expressed. That's great. Now send Uganda another few million euros ... the crayturs.

Isn't it the biggest waste of our aid money? We are spending millions of euros feeding and educating Museveni's poverty stricken people, but it turns out that he actually had about €500 million to spare! Wha, he must have found it down the back of his couch.

There are quite a few reasons why Broads.ie gets the "Overly Inquisitive Punter" response from Irish Aid but the primary one is self-preservation.....The various Governmental and Non-Governmental agencies involved in collecting,counting and distributing "Aid" to Africa are all serious employers in their own right.

Their senior people get to travel hither,tither and yon,attending conferences,symposia and the likes in the never ending search for an answer to African poverty...all,of course,funded by whatever few cent they can appropriate from our Universal Service Charge and whatever other taxes we can be made pay.

It's kinda Pythonesque in a way,but we in the West have just deposed a supposedly mad,evil Dictator in Libya's Colonel Gadaffi....a leader who made one of the most significant contributions towards ending his peoples poverty by bringing them fresh WATER in amazing quantities.....

http://www.water-technology.net/projects/gmr/

Yet our Irish money goes to prop up the likes of Musaveni....we badly need a face-palm smiley here....:(

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

, but I also know that to abolish it, or cut it dramatically, would lead to untold misery, suffering, and death- on a scale incomparable with the crrent situation in Ireland. I want to see aid reformed rather than abolished. I think we are moving in that direction, have much more to do, but an imperfect system is better IMO than no system at all.

It would make them get off their keisters and force their own governments to take care of their own country and stop relying on foreign aid to save them forever.

Give them the tools and let them build their own country.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

It would make them get off their keisters and force their own governments to take care of their own country and stop relying on foreign aid to save them forever.

Yeah because the tens of millions of people suffering from malnutrition in the world are doing so out of their own free will, simply because they won't "get off their keisters". Such insight...

Also, it takes a very naive worldview to believe that a tyrannical dictator will suddenly see the light and decide to do right by his people once the West abolishes aid. The removal of foreign aid will generally not matter a jot to the people in power. They'll just steal more from their people to fund their lifestyles.

Give them the tools and let them build their own country.

One moment you're advocating removing aid; the next you're proposing we "give them the tools". What is that except a form of aid?

Einhard

AlekSmart wrote: »

It's kinda Pythonesque in a way,but we in the West have just deposed a supposedly mad,evil Dictator in Libya's Colonel Gadaffi....a leader who made one of the most significant contributions towards ending his peoples poverty by bringing them fresh WATER in amazing quantities.....

http://www.water-technology.net/projects/gmr/

Yet our Irish money goes to prop up the likes of Musaveni....we badly need a face-palm smiley here....:(

Ah yes, because grandiose infrastructure projects and dictatorships have always been mutually exclusive. You're correct about the need for a face-palm smiley...

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

Yeah because the tens of millions of people suffering from malnutrition in the world are doing so out of their own free will, simply because they won't "get off their keisters". Such insight...

Also, it takes a very naive worldview to believe that a tyrannical dictator will suddenly see the light and decide to do right by his people once the West abolishes aid. The removal of foreign aid will generally not matter a jot to the people in power. They'll just steal more from their people to fund their lifestyles.



One moment you're advocating removing aid; the next you're proposing we "give them the tools". What is that except a form of aid?

I hate when people dissect the posts when all same post.

Then the people will stand up and be counted.Taking their own lives in their own hands and government will be over thrown.
They control their own futures and people are dying anyway so aid is not working is it.

Give them the tools yes that could have been paid for thousands of times already.

You just continue to promote the circle that will never stop.

Manach

Einhard wrote: »

What do you mean the aid can be much better spent on Irish taxpayers? How so? I understand the desire to see Irish people benefit from Irish tax receipts, but I don't think it's true that Irish people would benefit more from the money than, say, a Somali woman living in a refugee camp. €200 is one week's dole for an Irish resident; it's 6 months wages in Somalia- and that's the average. So, in terms of efficacy, I'd say that the money would be much better spent in Somalia than in Ireland.

If I must be part of a Government wealth redistributive scheme, the money spent in Ireland will improve our own infrastructure/people who are able to then be more productive and will benefit the whole of Irish taxpayers and increase our GDP.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

I hate when people dissect the posts when all same post.

In other words, you hate when people reply to the points you make.

Then the people will stand up and be counted.Taking their own lives in their own hands and government will be over thrown.

Oh. My. God. You really think it's that easy? That murderous dictatorships can be just overthrown with a snap of the fingers? By a starving populace? They can barely swat the flies from their faces, but by God, up they'll get and thrown down the oppressive dictator who's just spend millions on artillery and warplanes.

Are you serious?

They control their own futures and people are dying anyway so aid is not working is it.

No, they don't control their own futures. And people are dying alright, but far more would be dying were aid abolished. Your statement is akin to saying that some Irish children go hungry, so social welfare couldn't be working.

Give them the tools yes that could have been paid for thousands of times already.

So you agree with aid? What else could providing tools be unless aid?

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

In other words, you hate when people reply to the points you make.



Oh. My. God. You really think it's that easy? That murderous dictatorships can be just overthrown with a snap of the fingers? By a starving populace? They can barely swat the flies from their faces, but by God, up they'll get and thrown down the oppressive dictator who's just spend millions on artillery and warplanes.

Are you serious?



No, they don't control their own futures. And people are dying alright, but far more would be dying were aid abolished. Your statement is akin to saying that some Irish children go hungry, so social welfare couldn't be working.



So you agree with aid? What else could providing tools be unless aid?

no it means what it said.I dont need to debate with you anymore i said my point and i stand by it.
I dont care if you agree with me or not.

Einhard

Manach wrote: »

If I must be part of a Government wealth redistributive scheme, the money spent in Ireland will improve our own infrastructure/people who are able to then be more productive and will benefit the whole of Irish taxpayers and increase our GDP.

The first part is fair enough, and I understand your POV. But I don't think it stands to scrutiny that an amount of money spent on alleviating hunger in a Somali refugee camp would be better spent in Ireland providing someone with the dole. My issue isn't so much with spending the money in Ireland, but with the notion that it would be better spent in Ireland.

caseyann wrote: »

no it means what it said.I dont need to debate with you anymore i said my point and i stand by it.
I dont care if you agree with me or not.

Of course you don't need to debate- nobody's forcing you. And of course you don't care whether I agree with you- it would be a boring place of everyone did. But your point is contradictory. You want to abolish aid, and yet provide people with the tools to determine their own future. Which is a form of aid.

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

Of course you don't need to debate- nobody's forcing you. And of course you don't care whether I agree with you- it would be a boring place of everyone did. But your point is contradictory. You want to abolish aid, and yet provide people with the tools to determine their own future. Which is a form of aid.

A form of tools to help themselves is like building wells and farming incentive's,Such as green houses etc.. and i have no objection to that.But get this stuff built in our countries and fly them there no more cash.And then they do what they got to do work for themselves.
Endless money thrown down meaningless aid in the way it is is pointless and only viscous circle.
It was meant to be a solution not a lifetime thing.

andyjo

Pride Fighter wrote: »

we are still one of the worlds wealthiest nations.

so how come the IMF is having to lend us the money to keep the lights on and public servants and social welfare paid? We are the economic basket case of the world despite 30 years of EC handouts.

We are the beggar on the street. When someone lends us a few bob , we give it to a dictator in Africa.

Until we can borrow cheaper than Kenya can,;) no more foreign aid.

passarellaie

The reality that Ireland is sending hundreds of millions of euro to unaccountable ngos and foreign dictatorships is ludicrous in the extreme given the situation that pertains in this country today when tens of thousands of our best young people are fleeing the country in an attempt to get work.
Yet another example of quango madness

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

A form of tools to help themselves is like building wells and farming incentive's,Such as green houses etc.. and i have no objection to that.But get this stuff built in our countries and fly them there no more cash.And then they do what they got to do work for themselves.
Endless money thrown down meaningless aid in the way it is is pointless and only viscous circle.
It was meant to be a solution not a lifetime thing.

You think we should build wells in Ireland and fly them out to the nations that need them?

passarellaie wrote: »

The reality that Ireland is sending hundreds of millions of euro to unaccountable ngos and foreign dictatorships is ludicrous in the extreme given the situation that pertains in this country today when tens of thousands of our best young people are fleeing the country in an attempt to get work.
Yet another example of quango madness

Do you have evidence to prove that the NGos to which Ireland provide funding are generally unaccountable?

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

You think we should build wells in Ireland and fly them out to the nations that need them?

Now you are just being petty and a pain.And if i get in trouble for this.I am sorry mods but it is the truth.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

Now you are just being petty and a pain.And if i get in trouble for this.I am sorry mods but it is the truth.

like building wells and farming incentive's,Such as green houses etc.. and i have no objection to that.But get this stuff built in our countries and fly them there

caseyann, I'm not a mind reader. I can only respond to what you write. You make a suggestion, I respond to that exact suggestion, and somehow I'm being petty? You suggest that we should build things here in Ireland- you specifically mention wells and greenhouses- and fly them out to fordign countries. I responded to your words. If you don't mean what you say then it's best not to type it.

LaBaguette

andyjo wrote: »

so how come the IMF is having to lend us the money to keep the lights on and public servants and social welfare paid? We are the economic basket case of the world despite 30 years of EC handouts.

We are the beggar on the street. When someone lends us a few bob , we give it to a dictator in Africa.

Until we can borrow cheaper than Kenya can,;) no more foreign aid.

There's running water, electricity and internet in every house of Ireland. The vast majority of people are not starving and have access to health care. The economic structure is still here, even though a bit fright compared to most EU countries.

Ireland has put itself in a massive debt and has a "cashflow crisis", but it's not a poor country, by any standards. The fact that money has to be borrowed in vast quantities does not negate the fact that many countries are in a much dire position.

Also, can you provide a source for the claim that Kenya can borrow cheaper than Ireland ?

@caseyann : "Being petty" does not equate with "pointing out the contradictions in your posts". And suggesting that wells and greenhouses should be built in Ireland then sent to whatever country needs them is quite debatable, don't you think ?

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

caseyann, I'm not a mind reader. I can only respond to what you write. You make a suggestion, I respond to that exact suggestion, and somehow I'm being petty? You suggest that we should build things here in Ireland- you specifically mention wells and greenhouses- and fly them out to fordign countries. I responded to your words. If you don't mean what you say then it's best not to type it.

Common sense would be tools to build wells and the green houses built here.But you knew that.Dont play coy with me.

caseyann

LaBaguette wrote: »

There's running water, electricity and internet in every house of Ireland. The vast majority of people are not starving and have access to health care. The economic structure is still here, even though a bit fright compared to most EU countries.

Ireland has put itself in a massive debt and has a "cashflow crisis", but it's not a poor country, by any standards. The fact that money has to be borrowed in vast quantities does not negate the fact that many countries are in a much dire position.

Also, can you provide a source for the claim that Kenya can borrow cheaper than Ireland ?

@caseyann : "Being petty" does not equate with "pointing out the contradictions in your posts". And suggesting that wells and greenhouses should be built in Ireland then sent to whatever country needs them is quite debatable, don't you think ?

http://www.gothicarchgreenhouses.com/

Not in slightest at least know what the money is going on and supervising them being built.
There you grow your food easy.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

Common sense would be tools to build wells and the green houses built here.But you knew that.Dont play coy with me.

But that's still aid. If we give people tools, at the very least, we have to spend money on those tools. So that's aid. That's the contrdiction I'm getting at.

caseyann

Einhard wrote: »

But that's still aid. If we give people tools, at the very least, we have to spend money on those tools. So that's aid. That's the contrdiction I'm getting at.

No contradiction,as it means it real aid and tools to no longer receive aid also wouldn't cost half as much.Then ends the aid rather than paying it every year and even planning for the next year.
Thats not aid its stale mate.

Broads.ie

Einhard I'm not going to answer all your posts, there are too many. And while I can't speak for all African countries, I will refer specifically to Kenya. Also, I want to ask have you ever been to Kenya? I lived there for a year and followed the corruption scandals in the media day in day out. I've also studied and dissected some Nairobi wikileaks for the Kenyan version of politics.ie ... So I like to think I have a valid opinion on this.

But IMO, the correct response to this is to reform the system, rather than abolish it altogether.

This stood out as a pretty ridiculous one though. So you think aid should never end? No targets set for the final phase out? No D-Day when Kenyan politicians have to really start earning their obscene paychecks?

Kenya's prime minister has a higher salary than Obama. And have a look at this interesting graph.



Notice at 2nd place is Singapore's prime minister gets paid around 40 times the GDP. Then Kenya at first place jumps to 240 times the GDP!!! All civil servants are paid obscene amounts, but what is there to show for it? Famine and starvation was this years big show in Kenya actually.

If NGOs are building wells and supplying water to villages in Kenya, what is the water ministry doing? (a ministry involved in another recent scandal - which includes a regional office being burnt down to destroy evidence) I'll tell you what they're not doing - their job. Ah , I could go on all night. Can somebody do something about this. Call Joe or something.


I'm surprised Nodin hasn't come here to ask for sources yet.

Einhard

Broads.ie wrote: »

This stood out as a pretty ridiculous one though. So you think aid should never end? No targets set for the final phase out? No D-Day when Kenyan politicians have to really start earning their obscene paychecks?

I never stated that. I don't think it should be abolished over night. I think it should be reformed, which could include a date for the cessation of aid. I think that's a rather balanced proposal, and one that doesn't involve the deaths of millions because of a simple abolition of foreign aid. I'd thinl that would qualify as something slightly stronger than ridiculous.

Broads.ie

Einhard wrote: »

How do you define "corrupt nations". Every country is corrupt in some way.

Oh jaysus... It's like comparing the Northern Bank Robbery to 5 year old Jimmy stealing a Twix from the shop. I think that question is silly anyway. You know the exact definition of corruption we are talking about. Blatant, in your face, African style (yes African style) theft of public funds, and all the suffering that goes with it.

Have you ever lived in any of these corrupt African nations we're talking about?

Broads.ie

Einhard wrote: »

I never stated that. I don't think it should be abolished over night. I think it should be reformed, which could include a date for the cessation of aid. I think that's a rather balanced proposal, and one that doesn't involve the deaths of millions because of a simple abolition of foreign aid. I'd thinl that would qualify as something slightly stronger than ridiculous.

Ok yeah, I don't think it should be stopped suddenly either. I would like to see that happen though, and watch the African politicians fly to Europe in their private jets to literally beg and grovel. They need a shock. A "kick in the hole" as they say.

Einhard

Broads.ie wrote: »

Ok yeah, I don't think it should be stopped suddenly either. I would like to see that happen though, and watch the African politicians fly to Europe in their private jets to literally beg and grovel. They need a shock. A "kick in the hole" as they say.

Well it appears we're in agreement on the wider issue. I'd like to see direct funding of governments stopped ASAP, and the money channelled through NGOs. And all funds to linked to local and national performance criteria.

djpbarry

Einhard wrote: »

I'd like to see direct funding of governments stopped ASAP...

How much direct government funding does Irish Aid provide?

walshb

Pride Fighter wrote: »

Education is the key, if we can increase literacy levels that would in turn create greater levels of self-sufficiency as education is the great liberator and always will be.

Increase literacy levels? Yes, here, we definitely should.

Then we can swan all over the world and educate the poor people.

Einhard

walshb wrote: »

Increase literacy levels? Yes, here, we definitely should.

Then we can swan all over the world and educate the poor people.

The problems with literacy levels in Ireland isn't caused by lack of funding, but by an overburdened cirriculum, and particularly by parental malaise. There are kids leaving African slum schools after 6 years of primary schools with higher literacy levels than their Irish equivalents. If we halved the aid budget tomorrow and pumped it all into literacy, the impact would likely be neglibible. So much of what's wrong in Ireland isn't a factor of lack of money but rather inefficient use of it. We should realise by now that throwing money at a problem rarely resolves it.

walshb

Einhard wrote: »

The problems with literacy levels in Ireland isn't caused by lack of funding, .

And you think Africa suffers from a lack of funding? All I hear every day is begging and begging. Millions and millions and millions shipped to the continent every year from here. And that is just us. Add in the aid from other countries too, and when will it sink in with the West, that aid and incessant aid doesn't seem to be working?

djpbarry

walshb wrote: »

...when will it sink in with the West, that aid and incessant aid doesn't seem to be working?

So foreign aid has not benefited anyone in the developing world in any way?

walshb

djpbarry wrote: »

So foreign aid has not benefited anyone in the developing world in any way?

Didn't say that.

Anyway, like incessant aid, threads like these are incessant and usually get us nowhere.

the groutch

Zero, we need to unf**k our own country first before giving to other random countries.
If individuals want to donate to international charities, that fine, I don't want our government making the decision for us.

Nodin

Broads.ie wrote: »

.......


I'm surprised Nodin hasn't come here to ask for sources yet.

You provided one, as the bottom of the graph lists where it comes from.....