Instead of funding NGOs replicating the work of other NGOs, should the overseas development aid budget be used to subsidise the economy. Particulary those who have been hardest hit. We could build an awful lot of houses in south africa and flood hit regions for 850m. The idea is utterly crass, but borrowing such sums during a recession is plain daft - but if we are going to spend it anyway should we not use it in the most advantagous way?
It is difficult to understand your point. What exactly are you proposing?
quite simple: we are committed to spending nearly a billion a year which we can barely afford. We currently give the money to NGOs to spend. I am suggesting we use to the money in other ways. eg. paying builders to build in indonesia, sending surplus to requirement civil servants on leave of absences to third world countries to assist setting up civil government or sustainable energy research in third countries. There are probably better ideas out there but the principal is my point: should we have a more selfish attitude in how we spend our ODA budget?
Last edited by Question R24U; 17th November 2008 at 12:20 AM.
The whole point of ODA is that it's not selfish. It goes into communities directly anyway!Originally Posted by Question R24U
Woop Woop
Off course we should. A billion a year in a recession is madness. Especially when we couldn't find €10 million to save the lives of young women.
Every one sees what you appear to be, few really know what you are, and those few dare not oppose themselves to the opinion of the many, who have the majesty of the state to defend them.
- [SIZE=2]Niccolò Machiavelli[/SIZE]
Reading Fg as e.g.
Your plan is extravagant rather than selfish. Far from saving money, it wold cost us (off the top of my head, I don't have the back of an envelope handy) about three times as much as we are currently paying.
How would it cost 3 billion? There would obviously be brought in, only when existing plans are phased out.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote