Irish Aid and the recession

Húrin · 18-01-2009 02:57AM

j1smithy wrote: »

I was looking at the budget that Irish Aid had in 2007, apparently the Irish government gave away €813m euro to developing countries. While this has to be commended, does anyone else think that charity should begin at home? The public sector is looking at a pay cut of €2billion, so the inevitable question must be asked, should we stop, or severely cut back on what is noble but we clearly cannot afford?

Do you really think that people here have problems along the scale of the problems people have in Africa? Irish Aid is among the last things that should be cut, not the first. If I was running the show I would increase it.

tallaght01 · 18-01-2009 02:57AM

professore wrote: »

Yes I agree with your last sentence - but surely we should solve issues of life and death in our own country first ? If every government sorted out the problems in its own country first there would be far less problems.

On the first two please quote sources - not that I don't think there is a huge crisis in Africa but you need sources to back these stats up, otherwise they are in the "everybody knows" category.

I just noticed I wrote 45 million, when i meant to type 35 million (it was a genuine typo :P ).

If I get sources, will you agree with me? Coz I'm not rooting them out for nothing :P

Agamemnon · 18-01-2009 03:01AM

When I saw the thread title, I thought this was going to be about a Live Aid-style concert called "Irish Aid" for all those affected by the recession. Thank fug it isn't. You can just picture the cheesy single that would be released to support it, with Bono, Knob Geldof and Ronan Wankshaft Keating looking all serious and concerned in the video, alongside scenes of dole queues and closed factories. We have dodged a bullet here, people. \o/

j1smithy · 18-01-2009 03:04AM

tallaght01 wrote: »

African girls have more chance of being raped than of learning to read.

I don't see how us giving money to these countries is going to prevent these girls from getting raped tbh. We might improve their literacy levels but we won't change the culture.

Anyway, I just cannot seem to be able to justify how our government can borrow money to give it away. I don't think many people would borrow money from the bank and give it to charity. In school we were taught in economics, that it was trade not aid that was required. Charity is good, however I cannot help but think how much good €600m euro would do if it was spent on Irish social services.

tallaght01 · 18-01-2009 03:18AM

j1smithy wrote: »

I don't see how us giving money to these countries is going to prevent these girls from getting raped tbh. We might improve their literacy levels but we won't change the culture.

.

I guess the argument is that gender inequality and sexual abuse is more common in poorer, less educated populations. And more literate, educated, empowered girls will do something about it.

K-9 · 18-01-2009 03:20AM

tallaght01 wrote: »

I guess the argument is that gender inequality and sexual abuse is more common in poorer, less educated populations. And more literate, educated, empowered girls will do something about it.

What a mad notion. Be Irish and Proud.

Holsten · 18-01-2009 03:30AM

Give nothing.

We need everything we have.

K-9 · 18-01-2009 03:34AM

Holsten wrote: »

Give nothing.

We need everything we have.

Indeed. Stop the Black Babies fund.

randylonghorn · 18-01-2009 04:05AM

Dob74 wrote: »

I have heard nothing but bad stories about NGO's doing work in africa.

Sources? I have heard a hell of a lot of good stories, and mostly from local African community workers and teachers ... but your comment doesn't prove that everything's terrible, and mine doesn't prove that everything's perfect!

professore wrote: »

Hello ? 80 women a year here are going to die because of the decision not to go ahead with the cervical cancer vaccination. And cuts in the health service will cost lives here too.

So sell the Government jet. Make FitzPatrick pay his loans back. Take from the rich and reckless who got us into this mess, not the poorest of the poor.

j1smithy wrote: »

In school we were taught in economics, that it was trade not aid that was required.

Economics: the discipline noted for having a heart!! :pac:

Seriously, though, I wouldn't totally disagree: fair trade, though, and, while things may have got slightly better, there still isn't much of that around.

EamonnKeane · 18-01-2009 03:25PM

€50,000: build a school in Sierra Leone, or keep Jacinta and her seven children in a fancy house and booze and fags and Nike tracksuits.

Degsy · 18-01-2009 04:31PM

Cut the aid completely.
People will never feel motivated to help themselves if thry become dependent on handouts from others..look at the culture of long-term dole recipients.
In the case of aid to africa,almost none of it ever gets to where its supposed to,its usually apropriated by corrupt regimes,beurocrats and bandits.

Húrin · 18-01-2009 05:01PM

Degsy wrote: »

Cut the aid completely.
People will never feel motivated to help themselves if thry become dependent on handouts from others..look at the culture of long-term dole recipients.
In the case of aid to africa,almost none of it ever gets to where its supposed to,its usually apropriated by corrupt regimes,beurocrats and bandits.

If you're going to make blanket claims about Irish Aid that are false, as many have done in this thread, please provide sources.

There really is a world of difference between the career dole recipients here and the places in Africa which lack the infrastructure for people to help themselves.

Dob74 · 18-01-2009 07:55PM

Húrin wrote: »

If you're going to make blanket claims about Irish Aid that are false, as many have done in this thread, please provide sources.

There really is a world of difference between the career dole recipients here and the places in Africa which lack the infrastructure for people to help themselves.

The afrians can build it themselves. Alls they need is honest governments not hand outs.

Piste · 18-01-2009 08:02PM

The money of the Irish People should go and help the Irish People first and foremost. That means that money should go towards our healthcare and education, not another country's. I'm not saying they don't need it more, but we deserve it more. The only aid that should be given is surplus money which we can afford to give, seeing as this country is in so much debt we need to save as much money as we can.

brianthebard · 18-01-2009 08:09PM

Dob74 wrote: »

The afrians can build it themselves. Alls they need is honest governments not hand outs.

It takes a lot of effort to take something as complex as Africa and make it seem that simplistic. Well done.

Tricity Bendix · 18-01-2009 09:33PM

Hey, these folks know what they're talking about. Some of them even did economics in school

Seriously, though, when we were rolling in dosh we couldn't fix the problems in our public services, I don't think 600 million is going to turn it all around now.

18-01-2009 09:34PM

Piste wrote: »

The money of the Irish People should go and help the Irish People first and foremost. That means that money should go towards our healthcare and education, not another country's. I'm not saying they don't need it more, but we deserve it more. The only aid that should be given is surplus money which we can afford to give, seeing as this country is in so much debt we need to save as much money as we can.

I can remember a similar line of argument in the 1840's when some primitives managed to make a mess of their crops and came whining to London to give them food for nothing. Bally rascals!

Steve.Pseudonym · 18-01-2009 10:04PM

Piste wrote: »

The money of the Irish People should go and help the Irish People first and foremost. That means that money should go towards our healthcare and education, not another country's. I'm not saying they don't need it more, but we deserve it more. The only aid that should be given is surplus money which we can afford to give, seeing as this country is in so much debt we need to save as much money as we can.

This is exactly it.

The Irish state exists to be of benefit to it's citizens, not to donate money to other states or NGOs. In times of plenty if we wish to be generous and donate to them, that's all well and good. Now we can't afford to. That said, simply cutting aid in order to keep funding a bloated civil service would be abhorrent, so if aid were to be cut it could only be done in tandem with severe cuts.

Many posters here point out that our money would save lives elsewhere. Well yes, it would, and I could empty my own bank account to save more. But I'm not going to for the same reason that I endorse cutting aid: if it's a decision between them and me, I'll pick me every time.

Think of that what you will.

Piste · 18-01-2009 10:28PM

994 wrote: »

I can remember a similar line of argument in the 1840's when some primitives managed to make a mess of their crops and came whining to London to give them food for nothing. Bally rascals!

Yes, the Irish people went to the government that ruled them- remember we weren't a separate country in the 19th century.

eagleye7 · 19-01-2009 01:03AM

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

But I'm not going to for the same reason that I endorse cutting aid: if it's a decision between them and me, I'll pick me every time.

Think of that what you will.

But think about it. the small .4% was it? that is sent to the charities can do a lot more good than it will here. that number is a drop in the ridiculously large ocean of debt were in.

i propose this too.

image for a minute if humanity suddenly took your stance. how long would we last now or how long would any country last if we cut off ties with each other.

In 500 years time we might be the ones looking for aid, with no economy or infrastructure. and imho if we act as you say the rest of the world will turn and lololololol at us all day long

randylonghorn · 19-01-2009 02:19AM

Piste wrote: »

I'm not saying they don't need it more, but we deserve it more. The only aid that should be given is surplus money which we can afford to give, seeing as this country is in so much debt we need to save as much money as we can.

There will always be something which needs doing at home though.

Human nature being what it is, if we followed this line, we would never give anything.

Steve.Pseudonym · 19-01-2009 02:39AM

eagleye7 wrote: »

But think about it. the small .4% was it? that is sent to the charities can do a lot more good than it will here. that number is a drop in the ridiculously large ocean of debt were in.

i propose this too.

image for a minute if humanity suddenly took your stance. how long would we last now or how long would any country last if we cut off ties with each other.

In 500 years time we might be the ones looking for aid, with no economy or infrastructure. and imho if we act as you say the rest of the world will turn and lololololol at us all day long

What are you talking about? International relations are based on trade, not charity. Withholding aid is in no way the same as cutting off relations.

840m may be a small amount out of the overall budget, but the alternative is taking that money from services which we need. Take your pick, health, education, gardai, prisons, social welfare. It has to come from somewhere.

randylonghorn wrote: »

There will always be something which needs doing at home though.

Human nature being what it is, if we followed this line, we would never give anything.

Oh come on, are you telling me you can't see the difference between the current economic climate and business as usual? Right now we're in a whole lot of trouble ourselves, we need to look after ourselves first.

randylonghorn · 19-01-2009 02:42AM

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

Take your pick, health, education, gardai, prisons, social welfare. It has to come from somewhere.

I pick golden handshakes to reckless bankers ...

Steve.Pseudonym · 19-01-2009 02:49AM

randylonghorn wrote: »

I pick golden handshakes to reckless bankers ...

Oh, great, and when the banks collapse around us I'll just ask for you eh?

The banks need to be shored up. It's terrible, I know, but not interfering would lead to catastrophe.

dolliemix · 19-01-2009 03:00AM

Piste wrote: »

The money of the Irish People should go and help the Irish People first and foremost. That means that money should go towards our healthcare and education, not another country's. I'm not saying they don't need it more, but we deserve it more. The only aid that should be given is surplus money which we can afford to give, seeing as this country is in so much debt we need to save as much money as we can.

Why do we 'deserve' it more? Because by sheer luck we were born into a first world country? We may have to make sacrifices in the near future but using 4% of our expenditure to generate development in a third world country is surely worth that. Anyway we're committed to those projects - we cant just get up and go home. Isn't that what the Americans did after the first invasion of Iraq?

g5fd6ow0hseima · 19-01-2009 03:05AM

To me foreign Aid is a pathetic fallacy anyways.

Nobody is benefitting from the Aid we give as it enters a repetitive cycle.
therefore, I hope the Irish government could perhaps stand up and disregard the giving of development aid, although this would require something Irish to think for itself, and go against the grain - clearly something not in the make up of modern day Ireland.

DonJose · 19-01-2009 03:05AM

fryup wrote: »

you know back in the time of live aid, when this country was on its knees financially ireland donated the highest amont per capita in the world on the day

What goes around comes around. Now the Nigerians are giving the Irish their spare change

g5fd6ow0hseima · 19-01-2009 03:09AM

DonJose wrote: »

What goes around comes around. Now the Nigerians are giving the Irish their spare change

Live Aid wasnt exactly aimed at West Africa was it?

ScissorPaperRock · 19-01-2009 03:10AM

Aid should be cut off and used domestically to curb the effects of the current enonomic bla bla bla until we are better positioned to resume offering aid again.

randylonghorn · 19-01-2009 03:14AM

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

Oh come on, are you telling me you can't see the difference between the current economic climate and business as usual? Right now we're in a whole lot of trouble ourselves, we need to look after ourselves first.

Of course I can see the difference; I'm old enough to remember the last recession, and while we're nowhere near that yet, I can read the signs as well as anyone.

And it seems to me that whether we're in a period of boom or bang, a lot of people will always argue for "ourselves first".

In fact, many of the same people who vent their spleen on the bankers and builders for putting themselves first over the last ten years (and I'll admit I'm sympathetic to their anger) are very good at arguing the opposite when they're standing at the top of the stairs rather than the bottom.

It's human nature, I guess, but it's neither logical or especially admirable.

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

Oh, great, and when the banks collapse around us I'll just ask for you eh?

The banks need to be shored up. It's terrible, I know, but not interfering would lead to catastrophe.

I wasn't talking about supporting the banking system per se; please re-read my post.

And I was using it simply as one example of fat that needs to be trimmed. The FÁS debacle is another.

My point is that the list you gave was biased towards the emotive, and ignored that fat.

The reality is that if the govt. continues to stick to the 0.4% yardstick, the level of aid will fall in real terms over the next couple of years anyway.

Irish Aid and the recession

Comments