India to surrender aid if UK decides to cut it: Pranab

[sunny001]

Such a mentality only makes us more and more associated with colonial era and keeps us stuck in a time warp.They looted us only because we let them by being so naive.Its true poverty in South Asia is British colonial legacy,but the responsibility and blame is ours as we didn't improve the situation much.If Britain hands over artifacts and items of historical significance and which are part of our heritage as compensation then its ok.

I am not expecting them to return us anything nor am I demanding them to give us back everything they took from us. I have given the above statement as a justification for or moral responsibility of British to providing us with aid even if we don't need one.

 

[CardSharp]

Sorry, I just used one of the numbers given to me. 80 billion did seem a little high. But my point stands. It is well for rich Indians to say we are too proud to receive aid when that money doesn't feed their children.

suppose they are giving us a aid of 100..now they reduce it to 80. in that case we will surrender the wholw 80

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not expecting them to return us anything nor am I demanding them to give us back everything they took from us. I have given the above statement as a justification or moral responsibility of British to providing us with aid even if we don't need one.

This repayment will happen at same time when they pay compensation for the Africans they captured as slaves, when they return the profit they reaped from Sugar and Tobacco plantations in the Caribbeans, when they rebuild the summer palace that they burnt and looted, when they etc etc.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[sunny001]

Sorry, I just used one of the numbers given to me. 80 billion did seem a little high. But my point stands. It is well for rich Indians to say we are too proud to receive aid when that money doesn't feed their children.

No India doesn't want its aid to cut off. You should read the article carefully. It says if the British council do decide to cut the aid to India, if they let India know about their decision, they would voluntarily ask to cut it, so to avoid uncomfortability on both sides.

So, its not India's decision but British's. Also, 1 billion for a trillion dollar economy is too little to face ridicule whenever we launch a space satellite.

 

[sunny001]

Sorry, I just used one of the numbers given to me. 80 billion did seem a little high. But my point stands. It is well for rich Indians to say we are too proud to receive aid when that money doesn't feed their children.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This repayment will happen at same time when they pay compensation for the Africans they captured as slaves, when they return the profit they reaped from Sugar and Tobacco plantations in the Caribbeans, when they rebuild the summer palace that they burnt and looted, when they etc etc.

Don't hold your breath.

Again, I am not expecting anything. The statement was meant to provide justification for British to provide us aid. But I know they wouldn't.

 

[CardSharp]

No India doesn't want its aid to cut off. You should read the article carefully. It says if the British council do decide to cut the aid to India, if they let India know about their decision, they would voluntarily ask to cut it, so to avoid uncomfortability on both sides.

So, its not India's decision but British's. Also, 1 billion for a trillion dollar economy is too little to face ridicule whenever we launch a space satellite.

This is a different explanation for what the others provided. They say that if UK cuts 20% of aid to India, India will refuse 100% of the aid.

So, its not India's decision but British's. Also, 1 billion for a trillion dollar economy is too little to face ridicule whenever we launch a space satellite.

I am of a mind to accept every penny freely given if it can help alleviate poverty.

 

[linkinpark]

I'm proud that our President or Prime minister doesn't have to do world tours and go begging and spread the alms in front of every Tom, D!ck and Harry. May be there will be a time we have to give AID to UK. You never know.

 

[sunny001]

This is a different explanation for what the others provided. They say that if UK cuts 20% of aid to India, India will refuse 100% of the aid.

This doesn't make sense at all, at least to me. Why would India cut the rest of it, when they are willing to giving it? When GOI is not the one that is getting it but several NGOs that are working in different states. Makes no sense.

I am of a mind to accept every penny freely given if it can help alleviate poverty.

As per me, they are planning on cutting the aid entirely. Good for you. When I think about it, may be I would too.

 

[CardSharp]

I'm proud that our President or Prime minister doesn't have to do world tours and go begging and spread the alms in front of every Tom, D!ck and Harry. May be there will be a time we have to give AID to UK. You never know.

How about you spend your money on your own people rather than than extravagant displays of "we're better than you". Doing that would be as stupid and flamboyant as Hugo Chavez's donation of heating oil to America.

 

[CardSharp]

This doesn't make sense at all, at least to me. Why would India cut the rest of it, when they are willing to giving it? When GOI is not the one that is getting it but several NGOs that are working in different states. Makes no sense.

That is how the other members here explained it to me. Does anyone know how this will work?

suppose they are giving us a aid of 100..now they reduce it to 80. in that case we will surrender the wholw 80

Ok see ...wat it means is ....say as an example

India today was recieveing 4 Billion USD as Aid and UK said now we will give 2 Billion USD only .WE will say thanks but no thanks .we will not need ur 2 BIllion ...

Thats all

 

[linkinpark]

How about you spend your money on your own people rather than than extravagant displays of "we're better than you". Doing that would be as stupid and flamboyant as Hugo Chavez's donation of heating oil to America.

We spend much less than many advanced nations on our toys especially in a neighborhood where they spend close to 4-5% of GDP on military toys. We spend majority of our GDP on social welfare. So stop patronizing.

 

[CardSharp]

We spend much less than many advanced nations on our toys especially in a neighborhood where they spend close to 4-5% of GDP on military toys. We spend majority of our GDP on social welfare. So stop patronizing.

Do you know or are you guessing that you spend "majority of our GDP on social welfare". 50%+ of GDP seems a ridiculous amount to spend on social welfare.

 

[sunny001]

Do you know or are you guessing that you spend "majority of our GDP on social welfare". 50%+ of GDP seems a ridiculous amount to spend on social welfare.

Ah come on, you know that his intension was not that. You are just twisting his words to make your point. I think what he meant was major allocation of budget goes to social welfare.

Are you always like this, provoking people to reply to you in disgust?

 

[somebozo]

Voluntarily surrender if they decide to cut it?? Ha ha..last minute face saving exercise?? Its like an employes who decides to resign after his termination has been made evident.

 

[CardSharp]

Ah come on, you know that his intension was not that. You are just twisting his words to make your point. I think what he meant was major allocation of budget goes to social welfare.

Are you always like this, provoking people to reply to you in disgust?

It's how I get my kicks and it's how I figure who is worth listening to (ie those who don't lose their cool, or don't hold a grudge.)

 

[sunny001]

It's how I get my kicks and it's how I figure who is worth listening to (ie those who don't lose their cool, or don't hold a grudge.)

Good for you.