Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[soalbundy]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I think the Remoaners have more faith in this gov than the Brexiteers.

correct, it will lead to a nobrexit or a very watered down one.

[HAKAPALITA]

15 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

Money well spent if it encourages them to stay at home.

 

Do you want to quote any figures for the foreign aid budget, and how much gets spent with British companies?

 

i’d rather spend money with Oxfam to make Syria a better place to live, than with BAe to make it worse

Oxfam , im not sure, but isnt that a Charity whers directors take millions in salery.

[simple1]

15 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Oxfam , im not sure, but isnt that a Charity whers directors take millions in salery.

No

[HAKAPALITA]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

No

Did they sue the Papers who said they did.?, Not Brit, buy i remember something who ha about Oxfam. Also think Brexit a good idea for hardworking England, but not for lazy people in europe

[tebee]

2 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

281 pages  and Brexit is still going to happen , come on remainers get it up to 500 and i will look in again for a laugh .by the way see the pounds up a bit .

I still shouldn't be too sure, the cost are becoming more obvious .

Even if it does happen it's going to be mostly a damp squib of a brexit that no one wanted - staying in the EU in all but name  

[owl sees all]

1 hour ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Oxfam , im not sure, but isnt that a Charity whers directors take millions in salery.

Oxfam, save the children, stop the suffering etc. UK's Chanel 4 did a docu some years ago and concluded that only 7 to 9% of 'money in' ever arrived at the desired destination.

Edited April 18, 2018 by owl sees all

[Kieran00001]

7 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Oxfam, save the children, stop the suffering etc. UK's Chanel 4 did a docu some years ago and found that only 7% of 'money in' ever got it's stated destination.

 

Oxfam sees 80% of their funds spent on general humanitarian causes and 100% when emergency relief.  Of the 20% lost, 11% is spent on advertising, 9% on admin.   We don't need papers to investigate, charities have to declare everything to government and the amounts they decide to spend on admin etc are fixed, any change requires an act of parliament.  Of course you will hear people saying all sorts of things about charities, but really they are just attempting to justify their lack of charity.

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Oxfam , im not sure, but isnt that a Charity whers directors take millions in salery.

 

Nope, chief exec is paid 119,000 pounds, in total the board make more than 1 million.

[HAKAPALITA]

15 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Nope, chief exec is paid 119,000 pounds, in total the board make more than 1 million.

Thats vaguely how i remember it.It Stinks then after all.!!

[owl sees all]

34 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

Oxfam sees 80% of their funds spent on general humanitarian causes and 100% when emergency relief.  Of the 20% lost, 11% is spent on advertising, 9% on admin.   We don't need papers to investigate, charities have to declare everything to government and the amounts they decide to spend on admin etc are fixed, any change requires an act of parliament.  Of course you will hear people saying all sorts of things about charities, but really they are just attempting to justify their lack of charity.

I like your post K00001.  Thought provoking.

 

I'm not convinced about this charitable work for the world's underprivileged. Too many stories of the greedy selling off the goods and the needy going without. That's of course after it gets to the desired destination; if it actually does!

 

The very nice salaries that some of these executives are paid also puts doubts of the worthwhileness of some of these charities IMO.

 

I'd like to see more funds and effort put into technologies at local levels. Clean water, electricity, agriculture etc....

 

"Give a man a fish and his family will eat well for one meal; teach a man to fish and his family will eat well every meal."

Edited April 18, 2018 by owl sees all

[HAKAPALITA]

3 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

I like your post K00001.  Thought provoking.

 

I'm not convinced about this charitable work for the world's underprivileged. Too many stories of the greedy selling off the goods and the needy going without. That's of course after it gets to the desired destination; if it actually does!

 

The very nice salaries that some of these executives are paid also puts doubts of the worthwhileness of some of these charities IMO.

 

I'd like to see more funds and effort put into technologies at local levels. Clean water, electricity, agriculture etc....

 

"Give a man a fish and his family will eat well for one meal; teach a man to fish and his family will eat well every meal."

Only the Brits are that Dumb they give Millions to India, then the Indians use it to but Brit Companies.My stupid Country wil do the same once our recources run out.

[owl sees all]

8 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Only the Brits are that Dumb they give Millions to India, then the Indians use it to but Brit Companies.My stupid Country wil do the same once our recources run out.

Technology has hardly had a positive effect for half the world. Better to help people help themselves. There are small concerns (electricity for the village; the ram jet project) that are doing just that but they have to compete with the 'big boys' for funding. 

 

I personally designed an agriculture filter that is reliable, cheap (10% of a manufactured one) and where the filter can be replaced in 2 minutes. Used all over now. And how much did I earn; zilch! Wouldn't want it any other way. You either want to help people or you want to help yourself. Easy decision!!

[simple1]

1 hour ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Thats vaguely how i remember it.It Stinks then after all.!!

Trolls are boring - get a life

Edited April 18, 2018 by simple1

[aright]

4 hours ago, soalbundy said:

BAe produces workplaces and pays taxes which can then be given out as foreign aid to repair the damage done, God works in mysterious ways.

While I truly respect StreetCowboy's laudable moral stand on this issue your argument draws only half the circle. The problem is if BAe stops selling arms to whomever the void would be filled by the likes of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Safran, Almaz-Antei....there's plenty of them. As a result the Government would suffer an immense tax loss and the country would suffer a large loss of jobs and the world would not have changed one bit. Only a global ban on arms sales would satisfy the moral argument and that won't happen in my lifetime.  

[soalbundy]

3 minutes ago, aright said:

While I truly respect StreetCowboy's laudable moral stand on this issue your argument draws only half the circle. The problem is if BAe stops selling arms to whomever the void would be filled by the likes of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Safran, Almaz-Antei....there's plenty of them. As a result the Government would suffer an immense tax loss and the country would suffer a large loss of jobs and the world would not have changed one bit. Only a global ban on arms sales would satisfy the moral argument and that won't happen in my lifetime.  

I thoroughly agree, but we have the world that we have, we have the mindsets that we have, we are still Neanderthals but in pin striped suits and our clubs now are missiles.

[vogie]

18 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Doesn't it ever get boring for you and your clique being trolls? Suppose not being small minded people...

And don't you ever get bored calling people that don't agree with you 'trolls and your clique' truly pathetic.

[aright]

3 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

I thoroughly agree, but we have the world that we have, we have the mindsets that we have, we are still Neanderthals but in pin striped suits and our clubs now are missiles.

I hope this isn't a preamble to you telling us about your pocket rocket.

[soalbundy]

Just now, aright said:

I hope this isn't a preamble to you telling us about your pocket rocket.

It's harmless, made of rubber these days

[Odysseus123]

8 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

I thoroughly agree, but we have the world that we have, we have the mindsets that we have, we are still Neanderthals but in pin striped suits and our clubs now are missiles.

What have you actually got against Neanderthals?

 

As far as I know they were generally decent working class lads just doing their bit when the Cro-Magnons (none of whom had a valid visa) hove into view..

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, Odysseus123 said:

What have you actually got against Neanderthals?

 

As far as I know they were generally decent working class lads just doing their bit when the Cro-Magnons (none of whom had a valid visa) hove into view..

That's true enough, they just moved in without so much as a 'by your leave' in fact both cro-magnon and Neanderthal were probably quite humane if they weren't hungry (cannibalism was evident in both cultures, probably in times of hunger stress). Humans first became really nasty when they 'owned land' and settled down to farming. 

[aright]

30 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

That's true enough, they just moved in without so much as a 'by your leave' in fact both cro-magnon and Neanderthal were probably quite humane if they weren't hungry (cannibalism was evident in both cultures, probably in times of hunger stress). Humans first became really nasty when they 'owned land' and settled down to farming. 

I thought they first became nasty when Adam and Eve discovered apples.

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

I like your post K00001.  Thought provoking.

 

I'm not convinced about this charitable work for the world's underprivileged. Too many stories of the greedy selling off the goods and the needy going without. That's of course after it gets to the desired destination; if it actually does!

 

The very nice salaries that some of these executives are paid also puts doubts of the worthwhileness of some of these charities IMO.

 

I'd like to see more funds and effort put into technologies at local levels. Clean water, electricity, agriculture etc....

 

"Give a man a fish and his family will eat well for one meal; teach a man to fish and his family will eat well every meal."

 

In my opinion, charity not always getting through is not a reason to never give to charity.

 

The executive salaries tend to be somewhere below the average for the level, and they need to pay somewhere near the average or they just get substandard staff.

 

Different charities have different priorities, Oxford has always prioritized immediate famine relief but also does do just as you suggest, in fact they had a campaign headed by the quote you posted.

[Odysseus123]

10 minutes ago, aright said:

I thought they first became nasty when Adam and Eve discovered apples.

Ah...sex,sin and the devil.

 

Yup-they certainly turned nasty after that.

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Only the Brits are that Dumb they give Millions to India, then the Indians use it to but Brit Companies.My stupid Country wil do the same once our recources run out.

 

You would have to very dumb indeed if you think the money we give to India is the same money that other Indians use to buy British companies.  To make things simple for you, we give aid to the underclass while it is the upper class who are buying our companies.  And if you think not helping the very people that their own country fails to help themselves will in some way help anyone then you are deluded.

[soalbundy]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

I thought they first became nasty when Adam and Eve discovered apples.

That was an allegory to the birth of ego, nothing to do with Granny Smiths, the snake was the mind, with the birth of 'me' came selfishness and unhappiness. Buddha said the same thing, same same but different :- Duka, or misery, is caused by desire. I don't know if he also said this but it is my believe, that wanting change from the situation you are in now, refusing to accept what is, is the cause of dissatisfaction and sadness. Don't blame the fruit.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Thats vaguely how i remember it.It Stinks then after all.!!

 

Does it?  How much do you think their chief exec should be paid and why do you think any chief exec would go for the job when the other vacancies for chief execs are paying over 100K? 

[soalbundy]

2 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

You would have to very dumb indeed if you think the money we give to India is the same money that other Indians use to buy British companies.  To make things simple for you, we give aid to the underclass while it is the upper class who are buying our companies.  And if you think not helping the very people that their own country fails to help themselves will in some way help anyone then you are deluded.

Besides which we nicked so much off them during the 200 year Raj (or rather the East India company did,with blessing from whitehall) that we should regard it as retribution.

[HAKAPALITA]

9 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

You would have to very dumb indeed if you think the money we give to India is the same money that other Indians use to buy British companies.  To make things simple for you, we give aid to the underclass while it is the upper class who are buying our companies.  And if you think not helping the very people that their own country fails to help themselves will in some way help anyone then you are deluded.

Dumb.?.The world over the poor make the rich rich.We western working folk pay tax just for a bleeding heart give it to Indian Poor ,the Rich get it sooner of later. Let the Rich Indian feed their own Poor.

[Odysseus123]

7 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

Besides which we nicked so much off them during the 200 year Raj (or rather the East India company did,with blessing from whitehall) that we should regard it as retribution.

 Yep-they even forced the Indian people to pay for the Imperial crown worn at the Delhi Durbar-all 60,000 quids worth.

 

The Brits have still got it.

[Kieran00001]

5 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Dumb.?.The world over the poor make the rich rich.We western working folk pay tax just for a bleeding heart give it to Indian Poor ,the Rich get it sooner of later. Let the Rich Indian feed their own Poor.

 

Yup.

The poor in India do not get help from the rich, so letting them feed their own poor makes no sense at all, what you are actually suggesting is leaving them without any help.  You criticize peoples "bleeding hearts" but all you demonstrate is that you dont have one. 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Kieran00001