FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Politics

If We Had Tomorrow

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

If we had an extra £12 Billion given to the government which had to be injected into NHS, Schools, Housing, Social care, roads etc

.

where would you prefer to see it go

could be split or a full lump injection, what would be your ideal list

I think NHS would be top priority for everyone, anyone care to write a list or say how they would spend £12 Billion

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West

It’s not going to happen. There will not be any kind of Brexit dividend because every Brexit scenario will deliver weaker growth than if we remained in the EU. Weaker growth means less revenue from direct and indirect taxation which will fall anyway because of a fall in immigration. The so called Brexit dividend of £12 billion is more likely to be a £50-£60 billion loss of income so perhaps a better question might be to ask which areas of the UK deserve a bit more austerity? Personally I would say public funding should be cut to all areas that voted Brexit.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Interesting question.

To be honest although most would give the majority of it to the NHS, I would not.

I would put the money into social housing and improving the well-being of the poorest in this country. There is a reason why life expectancy is much higher and crime much lower in affluent areas compared to those of social deprivation, it is called poverty, and the biggest driving factor of poverty is lack of education. I would look to improve education and social care thus reducing poverty and strain on the NHS.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent"

Odd that it equates the exact same sum as the so called Brexit dividend and that there is no possible discussion or debate about how else the U.K. is supposed to get some kind of magical £12 billion windfall.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent

Odd that it equates the exact same sum as the so called Brexit dividend and that there is no possible discussion or debate about how else the U.K. is supposed to get some kind of magical £12 billion windfall."

not sure where you got that figure, but again absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH BREXIT

you can make it £10 Billion / 15 Billion, lets just keep it 12

if you don't want to contribute fine, again just trying to get the views of where it should go

myself personally for the first year, possibly the whole lot straight into NHS even though I have private medical insurance

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Interesting question.

To be honest although most would give the majority of it to the NHS, I would not.

I would put the money into social housing and improving the well-being of the poorest in this country. There is a reason why life expectancy is much higher and crime much lower in affluent areas compared to those of social deprivation, it is called poverty, and the biggest driving factor of poverty is lack of education. I would look to improve education and social care thus reducing poverty and strain on the NHS."

thanks for your input Will, appreciated and see your point

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago

Bristol East

The current Government could find £12bn like that tomorrow, if it wanted to.

Just as the current lot could find an extra £350m a week for the NHS whenever they wanted to (but you never heard any of them arguing for that before it was written on the side of a bus).

£12bn would be spent in whatever way the tories believed would increase their chances at the next election.

Which most likely would be a bribe for voters.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

Half to nhs half just on social care for me

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent

Odd that it equates the exact same sum as the so called Brexit dividend and that there is no possible discussion or debate about how else the U.K. is supposed to get some kind of magical £12 billion windfall."

12 Billion is a nice number to work with...there's 12 months in the year, so it should be easy to work out at a billion a month.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent

Odd that it equates the exact same sum as the so called Brexit dividend and that there is no possible discussion or debate about how else the U.K. is supposed to get some kind of magical £12 billion windfall."

Have you never thought, or been asked, or discussed, what you would do if you won the lottery/pools/horses/bingo?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge

I live in part of the country with one of these new fancy pants mayors. He wants to build an underground rail network in Cambridge! That won't come cheap!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Education, social housing and social care 75%

The rest on the NHS.

The first three will, over time hugely reduce the burden on the state.

Better educated people are healthier and less likely to be involved in low level and violent crime. They are also more likely to find and create work.

Living in good conditions and having places to interact with people, especially when your older, keep you healthier.

We only have a five year election cycle though...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"I live in part of the country with one of these new fancy pants mayors. He wants to build an underground rail network in Cambridge! That won't come cheap!"

How long did it take to get your guided bus route working?

Don't envy anyone building an underground railway through your fenland soil!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

Social care doesn't have the time tho money is needed now

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent

Odd that it equates the exact same sum as the so called Brexit dividend and that there is no possible discussion or debate about how else the U.K. is supposed to get some kind of magical £12 billion windfall.

Have you never thought, or been asked, or discussed, what you would do if you won the lottery/pools/horses/bingo?"

indeed, I have thought about this a lot, I would approach both Dunfermline and Perth hospitals and find out what they were short off, what they needed and how they could improve

I would supply the costs for an MRI scanner for both, simply because they fully fucked up with myself

I would also request that Radiologists & Doctors be fully trained in reading the results so that again they do not fuck up

Its £122 million tonight, so I would indeed spend a large donation on each, as well as a few other things with regards to the health of public

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"I live in part of the country with one of these new fancy pants mayors. He wants to build an underground rail network in Cambridge! That won't come cheap!

How long did it take to get your guided bus route working?

Don't envy anyone building an underground railway through your fenland soil!"

The guided bus that drives autonomously, on certain parts of the route, whilst the driver sits on his arse waiting for his turn to drive. Complete waste of time.

Can you see the likes of Kings College agreeing to a massive great tunnel being dug under their chapel? I can't.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Education, social housing and social care 75%

The rest on the NHS.

The first three will, over time hugely reduce the burden on the state.

Better educated people are healthier and less likely to be involved in low level and violent crime. They are also more likely to find and create work.

Living in good conditions and having places to interact with people, especially when your older, keep you healthier.

We only have a five year election cycle though..."

fair points,

looks like we have many gaps in society or simply cash shortage, obviously time constraints as well

we cant just throw money at housing and homes appear, good planning, and land to build on required too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincessvenusCouple
over a year ago

Hull

you cant keep putting money into the nhs you got to stop and sort the problem out its not all about money

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I think the NHS for me, because it's been forced to get into a much more significantly bad state than other areas and it will benefit so many more people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"you cant keep putting money into the nhs you got to stop and sort the problem out its not all about money"

Do you realise that in reality the NHS has had a 22% cut in funding in the last 8 years?

Fact is if you give 'A' 10% rise but cut a total of 30% from 'B' 'C' and 'D' while requiring 'A' to B,C,and D's shortfall, that unless the 10% rise you gave A is greater than the cuts you imposed on B, C and D what you have actually done is cut A. This is what the Tories have done to the NHS over the last 8 years.

And with all due respect it is all about money, and it always has been about money. Specifically, for the last approximately 40 years since the introduction of Thatcherism and Reaganomics it has been about transferring wealth (money) from the poor to the rich and getting the majority (who are poor) to passively submit and support this. The method used to achieve this has been simple confidence trickery and illusion.

You too can become one of the wealthy elite, all you need to do is pick the right 6, no lets make it 7, no 8 numbers or think up the next facebook...

And the vast majority of us swallow it hook line and sinker!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"you cant keep putting money into the nhs you got to stop and sort the problem out its not all about money

Do you realise that in reality the NHS has had a 22% cut in funding in the last 8 years?

Fact is if you give 'A' 10% rise but cut a total of 30% from 'B' 'C' and 'D' while requiring 'A' to B,C,and D's shortfall, that unless the 10% rise you gave A is greater than the cuts you imposed on B, C and D what you have actually done is cut A. This is what the Tories have done to the NHS over the last 8 years.

And with all due respect it is all about money, and it always has been about money. Specifically, for the last approximately 40 years since the introduction of Thatcherism and Reaganomics it has been about transferring wealth (money) from the poor to the rich and getting the majority (who are poor) to passively submit and support this. The method used to achieve this has been simple confidence trickery and illusion.

You too can become one of the wealthy elite, all you need to do is pick the right 6, no lets make it 7, no 8 numbers or think up the next facebook...

And the vast majority of us swallow it hook line and sinker! "

Since you brought politics into the debate.....the NHS is paying out over £3700 per minute of every hour of every day to the PFI schemes that the last Labour regime signed upto!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"you cant keep putting money into the nhs you got to stop and sort the problem out its not all about money

Do you realise that in reality the NHS has had a 22% cut in funding in the last 8 years?

Fact is if you give 'A' 10% rise but cut a total of 30% from 'B' 'C' and 'D' while requiring 'A' to B,C,and D's shortfall, that unless the 10% rise you gave A is greater than the cuts you imposed on B, C and D what you have actually done is cut A. This is what the Tories have done to the NHS over the last 8 years.

And with all due respect it is all about money, and it always has been about money. Specifically, for the last approximately 40 years since the introduction of Thatcherism and Reaganomics it has been about transferring wealth (money) from the poor to the rich and getting the majority (who are poor) to passively submit and support this. The method used to achieve this has been simple confidence trickery and illusion.

You too can become one of the wealthy elite, all you need to do is pick the right 6, no lets make it 7, no 8 numbers or think up the next facebook...

And the vast majority of us swallow it hook line and sinker! "

Wow, steady will;

you are making out that the majority of us are poor, we are the 5th richest nation in the World, okay there are some poor but I disagree with you saying the vast majority.

.

There are about 6 homeless in Kinross, that doesn't class Kinross as a poor village.

.

Don't you think some families kid on they are poorer than they actually are, so that their kids can get free breakfast at school and free lunches

.

many round about the Kinross area are out of work but they still have mobile phones and sky tv

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"Wow, steady will;

you are making out that the majority of us are poor, we are the 5th richest nation in the World, okay there are some poor but I disagree with you saying the vast majority.

.

There are about 6 homeless in Kinross, that doesn't class Kinross as a poor village.

.

Don't you think some families kid on they are poorer than they actually are, so that their kids can get free breakfast at school and free lunches

.

many round about the Kinross area are out of work but they still have mobile phones and sky tv"

The majority of us ARE poor!

Many of us have relative surface wealth, but that can all be wiped out in an instant. There was a time when being a substantial unmortgaged landowner would have been a reasonable definition of being truly wealthy (and your 3 acres, although no doubt nice does not qualify), but considering that 200 and 300 acre farms are going to the wall all the time that can no longer be claimed to be the case. Fact is now the vast majority of us are poor, it is just a question of how poor? That you look at what you have and consider yourself wealthy when you contrast yourself to a homeless person does not make your perception correct. You need to stop looking at those below you for your comparisons and look to those on the top of the pile...

You know the 42 people who own 50% of the worlds wealth (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/01/22/forty-two-people-hold-wealth-half-world-oxfam-says/ ).

Of course there is a reason you do not look in that direction, you are continually told to look down and count your blessings. Now who on earth would have a vested interest in having you look down rather than up? Maybe you should ponder that for a while as you congratulate yourself for being wealthy because you own 3 acres of land, have a pension, and can look down on those right at the bottom of the pile.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"you cant keep putting money into the nhs you got to stop and sort the problem out its not all about money

Do you realise that in reality the NHS has had a 22% cut in funding in the last 8 years?

Fact is if you give 'A' 10% rise but cut a total of 30% from 'B' 'C' and 'D' while requiring 'A' to B,C,and D's shortfall, that unless the 10% rise you gave A is greater than the cuts you imposed on B, C and D what you have actually done is cut A. This is what the Tories have done to the NHS over the last 8 years.

And with all due respect it is all about money, and it always has been about money. Specifically, for the last approximately 40 years since the introduction of Thatcherism and Reaganomics it has been about transferring wealth (money) from the poor to the rich and getting the majority (who are poor) to passively submit and support this. The method used to achieve this has been simple confidence trickery and illusion.

You too can become one of the wealthy elite, all you need to do is pick the right 6, no lets make it 7, no 8 numbers or think up the next facebook...

And the vast majority of us swallow it hook line and sinker!

Wow, steady will;

you are making out that the majority of us are poor, we are the 5th richest nation in the World, okay there are some poor but I disagree with you saying the vast majority.

.

There are about 6 homeless in Kinross, that doesn't class Kinross as a poor village.

.

Don't you think some families kid on they are poorer than they actually are, so that their kids can get free breakfast at school and free lunches

.

many round about the Kinross area are out of work but they still have mobile phones and sky tv"

Again, this is a strong component of cognitive bias, where you place the importance of your limited experience above the actual data.

You are implying that 0.15% of the population are homeless. The national reality is 0.25-0.5%

That's not really the definition of poor though is it?

I do also find it remarkable when the view that "some people" playing the system somehow negates the situation faced by so many.

This is blaming the poor for their situation. Sometimes it is their own fault. Frequently it most definitely is not. Perhaps I just think better of my fellow countrymen?

The total benefit fraud rate is 1.1% Is that acceptable? No. Is it an overwhelming problem? No.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought."

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought."

You are right.

The best course of action is to not even try to do good.

Especially for people who speak a different language or look different.

Particularly if their definition of poor is far below anything anybody here ever has to encounter in addition to the risk of war, famine, disease and r*pe.

Screw them. They aren't us.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense."

if it means cutting back on payments to major economic powerhouses like China and India, nations with their own space programmes and nuclear weapons, then I am all for it,

I would rather see out UK cash spent on our elderly, our ill and our own brits in poverty, I have no shame in that at all.

perhaps then we could also help more with our overseas territories recovering from Hurricane Irma

no point going into the amount of scandal and corruption with overseas aid as we all know the shocking truth of it

glad you support the corruption & scandal though,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense.

if it means cutting back on payments to major economic powerhouses like China and India, nations with their own space programmes and nuclear weapons, then I am all for it,

I would rather see out UK cash spent on our elderly, our ill and our own brits in poverty, I have no shame in that at all.

perhaps then we could also help more with our overseas territories recovering from Hurricane Irma

no point going into the amount of scandal and corruption with overseas aid as we all know the shocking truth of it

glad you support the corruption & scandal though, "

Do we send aid to China?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

£12 billion thats loose change...Do you want to save some real money.

Try trident!!

Lifetime cost of replacing Trident at least £205bn, latest estimate suggests.The funniest thing is it's obsolete

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense.

if it means cutting back on payments to major economic powerhouses like China and India, nations with their own space programmes and nuclear weapons, then I am all for it,

I would rather see out UK cash spent on our elderly, our ill and our own brits in poverty, I have no shame in that at all.

perhaps then we could also help more with our overseas territories recovering from Hurricane Irma

no point going into the amount of scandal and corruption with overseas aid as we all know the shocking truth of it

glad you support the corruption & scandal though, "

It's quite a step to suggest that I support corruption. You consistently do this. Just being mean and trying to "win" an illusory point. It doesn't help your argument. It just makes you look petty and malicious. Why do you do it?

Interesting that you feel this adds to the discussion.

I do not know what specific projects the UK spends money on.

Do you?

The fact that India or China receives money from the UK doesn't desperately upset me. They may be rich countries but per capita they are not. They are considerably poorer than our poorest. If it does good, if it saves a life or gives someone an opportunity then I won't resent that.

Aid is also not purely for do I.g good for its own sake, although I don't have a problem with that either. It's also a foreign policy tool. Those helped with UK aid will remember that. That is soft power.

Undoubtedly some projects are poorly run and some money is wasted. Is the percentage any higher than the inefficiencies in the UK?

Considering that aid is needed in areas of conflict or chaos it's inevitable that some will be lost. That's not OK. It's also not OK to turn our because every penny isn't well spent.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense.

if it means cutting back on payments to major economic powerhouses like China and India, nations with their own space programmes and nuclear weapons, then I am all for it,

I would rather see out UK cash spent on our elderly, our ill and our own brits in poverty, I have no shame in that at all.

perhaps then we could also help more with our overseas territories recovering from Hurricane Irma

no point going into the amount of scandal and corruption with overseas aid as we all know the shocking truth of it

glad you support the corruption & scandal though,

It's quite a step to suggest that I support corruption. You consistently do this. Just being mean and trying to "win" an illusory point. It doesn't help your argument. It just makes you look petty and malicious. Why do you do it?

Interesting that you feel this adds to the discussion.

I do not know what specific projects the UK spends money on.

Do you?

The fact that India or China receives money from the UK doesn't desperately upset me. They may be rich countries but per capita they are not. They are considerably poorer than our poorest. If it does good, if it saves a life or gives someone an opportunity then I won't resent that.

Aid is also not purely for do I.g good for its own sake, although I don't have a problem with that either. It's also a foreign policy tool. Those helped with UK aid will remember that. That is soft power.

Undoubtedly some projects are poorly run and some money is wasted. Is the percentage any higher than the inefficiencies in the UK?

Considering that aid is needed in areas of conflict or chaos it's inevitable that some will be lost. That's not OK. It's also not OK to turn our because every penny isn't well spent."

no need to justify yourself easy

you put the poor and dyeing of other countires before the poor and dying of the uK

.

thanks all you need to say, we got the message clear

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I would spend it on houses for the homeless, training Centre for nurses and other skilled jobs for people on low incomes, more nurses in the nhs and not more managers, more care home and sheltered living for the elderly and a nice holiday me and a big bonus in my bank

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Oh god, 12 billion if only.. anyway, its not that much, reformation of essential services chews up money by the millions.

I guess I'd actually put a signifigant amount of money, maybe 4 billion into homeless relief shelters, centred around ensuring people are actually not slipping through the net and that they can get on state welfare, gdmet cleaned up, medical and cousilling help - in all try and turn people into getting onto the path where they can become more self sufficient. Hopefully in the long term people can then be an asset to economic growth.

4 billion into social housing. Build affordable social housing in urban areas close to work, and brownfield in the suburbs.

Tats as far as I've got so far.

But i'd also look at infastructure spending, specifically highspeed internet connectivity so more people could get into online services and computer programming and therefore we can compete with china and SEA.

Physically it would also be abput creating tech industry sites in and between every major city north of birmingham - specifically with reduced tax incentives for those buisnesses dealinfmg in computer coding, robotics, A.I programming, hydrid and zero carbon emmision engineering ( get elon musk to invest ), and engineering and manufacturing for sustainable energy infastructure...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *elvet RopeMan
over a year ago

by the big field


"....a better question might be to ask which areas of the UK deserve a bit more austerity? "

Westminster- primarily the gold plated protected pensions, excessive expenses and subsidied bars of the HOP

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"So?

If the majority of people in our country are poor?

the wealthfare system falling to bits

NHS seriously in financial trouble

poor housing & lack of housing

poor education

people unable to feed kids and depend on free school meals

increasing homeless

as well as all other aspects brought up here

.

should we consider stopping, or drastically sucking back overseas aid until we are back on our feet

.

considering the amount of corruption and scandal that is going on with overseas aid cash

.

or should we continue to pay into overseas aid, knowing the corruption and continue to watch our country landslide downwards?

.

just a thought.

Strange...

You sort of acknowledge that there is a problem and rather than look to solve the problem you look to make those even poorer than the poorest of us even more impoverished. The 42 who have managed to go from holding around 10% of the worlds wealth 40 years ago to holding 50% of it now would be proud of your immediate default position of making those less fortunate than you pay for them enriching themselves at everyone's expense.

if it means cutting back on payments to major economic powerhouses like China and India, nations with their own space programmes and nuclear weapons, then I am all for it,

I would rather see out UK cash spent on our elderly, our ill and our own brits in poverty, I have no shame in that at all.

perhaps then we could also help more with our overseas territories recovering from Hurricane Irma

no point going into the amount of scandal and corruption with overseas aid as we all know the shocking truth of it

glad you support the corruption & scandal though,

It's quite a step to suggest that I support corruption. You consistently do this. Just being mean and trying to "win" an illusory point. It doesn't help your argument. It just makes you look petty and malicious. Why do you do it?

Interesting that you feel this adds to the discussion.

I do not know what specific projects the UK spends money on.

Do you?

The fact that India or China receives money from the UK doesn't desperately upset me. They may be rich countries but per capita they are not. They are considerably poorer than our poorest. If it does good, if it saves a life or gives someone an opportunity then I won't resent that.

Aid is also not purely for do I.g good for its own sake, although I don't have a problem with that either. It's also a foreign policy tool. Those helped with UK aid will remember that. That is soft power.

Undoubtedly some projects are poorly run and some money is wasted. Is the percentage any higher than the inefficiencies in the UK?

Considering that aid is needed in areas of conflict or chaos it's inevitable that some will be lost. That's not OK. It's also not OK to turn our because every penny isn't well spent.

no need to justify yourself easy

you put the poor and dyeing of other countires before the poor and dying of the uK

.

thanks all you need to say, we got the message clear "

I am aware very that the world is now interconnected.

Believing that problems "over there" will remain "over there" is very naive, short sighted and foolish.

Always interesting to hear someone try to shut down a complex conversation with an empty attempt to score a point as it makes it very clear that you have no ability to engage with anything but the shallower of selfish thought processes. A fact that you demonstrate widely and loudly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rontier PsychiatristMan
over a year ago

Coventry

They say your health is your wealth

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"_oo hot, you picked it up totally wrong, this isn't a brexit pot

its just a sum of cash £12 billion, nothing to do with brexit

just trying to find out peoples views of where it should be spent"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Money to the NHS,probably around 50%

Police

Security services

Defence

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Money to the NHS,probably around 50%

Police

Security services

Defence"

it appears with everyone's comments, our system in the UK is clearly broke

.

It is about time we spent our overseas aid cash here at home until we the UK are back up and running, back on our feet with a healthy NHS, healthy housing, enough homes for all and our welfare system, emergency services, security & defence all fit for purpose.

.

Once we the UK are back up and running, then we can concentrate of supporting other countries again.

.

You don't see other countries coming to our assistance, infact its the opposite, the EU prevented us from spending our own overseas aid cash on Hurricane Irma-hit British islands

rulings from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that are enshrined in UK law, stop money from being sent to the islands because they are too well off – even though their economies, buildings and infrastructure have been decimated by the furious storm.

Theresa May faces demands to change the “ludicrous” rules and allow British aid to be spent on British islands in need, we need to go one step further and ensure charity begins at home.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"They say your health is your wealth"

Who says that?

Is it by any chance the wealthier and wealthiest on the planet, whose life expectancy is between 30 and 50 years longer than the poorest on the planet?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Money to the NHS,probably around 50%

Police

Security services

Defence

it appears with everyone's comments, our system in the UK is clearly broke

.

It is about time we spent our overseas aid cash here at home until we the UK are back up and running, back on our feet with a healthy NHS, healthy housing, enough homes for all and our welfare system, emergency services, security & defence all fit for purpose.

.

Once we the UK are back up and running, then we can concentrate of supporting other countries again.

.

You don't see other countries coming to our assistance, infact its the opposite, the EU prevented us from spending our own overseas aid cash on Hurricane Irma-hit British islands

rulings from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that are enshrined in UK law, stop money from being sent to the islands because they are too well off – even though their economies, buildings and infrastructure have been decimated by the furious storm.

Theresa May faces demands to change the “ludicrous” rules and allow British aid to be spent on British islands in need, we need to go one step further and ensure charity begins at home.

"

Thank God for humanitarians when there are people like you!

As a rich country we give a tiny amount away in overseas aid. You say look after our own, but what charitable work do you do you? The country became wealthy many years ago by exploiting weaker nations and taking their resources. But times are changing -India who were once the servants are now becoming the masters and exact "retribution ".

Yes we should get best value and there is corruption but there's corruption eveywhere - also known as greed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ercuryMan
over a year ago

Grantham


"They say your health is your wealth

Who says that?

Is it by any chance the wealthier and wealthiest on the planet, whose life expectancy is between 30 and 50 years longer than the poorest on the planet?"

Studies conducted in 2012 gave life expectancy of the poorest nations, as measured by GDP, at 56 and at 82 for the wealthiest nations.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"Money to the NHS,probably around 50%

Police

Security services

Defence

it appears with everyone's comments, our system in the UK is clearly broke

.

It is about time we spent our overseas aid cash here at home until we the UK are back up and running, back on our feet with a healthy NHS, healthy housing, enough homes for all and our welfare system, emergency services, security & defence all fit for purpose.

.

Once we the UK are back up and running, then we can concentrate of supporting other countries again.

.

You don't see other countries coming to our assistance, infact its the opposite, the EU prevented us from spending our own overseas aid cash on Hurricane Irma-hit British islands

rulings from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that are enshrined in UK law, stop money from being sent to the islands because they are too well off – even though their economies, buildings and infrastructure have been decimated by the furious storm.

Theresa May faces demands to change the “ludicrous” rules and allow British aid to be spent on British islands in need, we need to go one step further and ensure charity begins at home.

Thank God for humanitarians when there are people like you!

As a rich country we give a tiny amount away in overseas aid. You say look after our own, but what charitable work do you do you? The country became wealthy many years ago by exploiting weaker nations and taking their resources. But times are changing -India who were once the servants are now becoming the masters and exact "retribution ".

Yes we should get best value and there is corruption but there's corruption eveywhere - also known as greed."

my charity goes to animals

also was a Samaritan for 3 or 4 years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rontier PsychiatristMan
over a year ago

Coventry


"They say your health is your wealth

Who says that?

Is it by any chance the wealthier and wealthiest on the planet, whose life expectancy is between 30 and 50 years longer than the poorest on the planet?

Studies conducted in 2012 gave life expectancy of the poorest nations, as measured by GDP, at 56 and at 82 for the wealthiest nations.

"

The too are interlinked. I think the point is putting your resources towards your health. So on an national level I would say we should be focusing on national health.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London


"Money to the NHS,probably around 50%

Police

Security services

Defence

it appears with everyone's comments, our system in the UK is clearly broke

.

It is about time we spent our overseas aid cash here at home until we the UK are back up and running, back on our feet with a healthy NHS, healthy housing, enough homes for all and our welfare system, emergency services, security & defence all fit for purpose.

.

Once we the UK are back up and running, then we can concentrate of supporting other countries again.

.

You don't see other countries coming to our assistance, infact its the opposite, the EU prevented us from spending our own overseas aid cash on Hurricane Irma-hit British islands

rulings from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) that are enshrined in UK law, stop money from being sent to the islands because they are too well off – even though their economies, buildings and infrastructure have been decimated by the furious storm.

Theresa May faces demands to change the “ludicrous” rules and allow British aid to be spent on British islands in need, we need to go one step further and ensure charity begins at home.

"

We wouldn't be sending money to a foreign country would we? They are part of the UK. It's domestic.

We can spend the money it just isn't overseas aid, unless you want a petty argument on the definition of overseas.

Get a grip.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top