Starmer Increases Defense Spending: Cuts Overseas Aid to Pay For It

[3NUMBAS]

Still sending foreign aid to despots like North Korea 

 

and money to India despite them spending on space vehicles

[JonnyF]

40 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

Still sending foreign aid to despots like North Korea 

 

and money to India despite them spending on space vehicles

 

Indeed.

 

White guilt is one hell of an affliction. 

[candide]

43 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

Still sending foreign aid to despots like North Korea 

 

and money to India despite them spending on space vehicles

UK sending foreign help to NK? 

[RayC]

On 2/26/2025 at 5:16 PM, James105 said:

 

You do realize that if the UK disappeared overnight and consumed not a jot of energy ever again this would make net zero difference to climate change?  Thinking that just UK citizens paying extra for energy, putting up a few bird killing wind farms, spaffing £23 billion on unproven carbon capture is going to make any difference other than destroying the UK economy is just delusional.  

 

Let's suspend reality for a moment and assume that the UK has some influence on the world stage and has entered into a negotiation about emissions with China and India. Adopting your position, the conversation might go something like this.

 

UK: We'd like you to formulate a plan for achieving 'net zero',

C+I: Difficult but we'll give it a go. Can we have your plan. We'll use it as a template for our own. 

UK: Err .. We don't have one.

C+I: What? How do you hope to achieve 'net zero' without a plan?

UK: Actually we don't have any intention of trying to achieve 'net zero'.

C+I: So let's get this straight. You're asking us to take measures that you are unwilling to take yourself?

UK: Err ... Yes. That's the nub of it.

C+I: Wonder if we can make it to Heathrow in time to catch the next planes home?

 

On 2/26/2025 at 5:16 PM, James105 said:

DOGE UK would have achieved significantly more.  

 

Perhaps. But any savings wouldn't be immediate.

 

On 2/26/2025 at 5:16 PM, James105 said:

 

"We are doing this for your safety" said every authoritarian tyrant who ever lived. 

 

Starmer is no more an authoritarian tyrant than he is someone deliberately trying to make the UK poorer. It is ridiculous hyperbole.

 

On 2/26/2025 at 5:16 PM, James105 said:

The fact that this is where passwords, passkeys are stored and should a hacker get access to the unencrypted data would be a treasure trove for them.   

 

It would.

[nauseus]

On 2/26/2025 at 11:06 AM, Bkk Brian said:

Since 2014......................

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyrkkv4gd7o

 

US apart, it seems that the further away from the Ukraine the others are, the smaller the recent increases are. Funny that. 

[James105]

15 hours ago, RayC said:

Let's suspend reality for a moment and assume that the UK has some influence on the world stage

 

You already suspended reality with your hyperbole about net zero saving humanity so why not go a step further.   Should the UK achieve net zero then it will be a poorer country that produces nothing so it would be laughable to demand China did the same - why would they want to make themselves poorer just because the UK were stupid enough to do so?  Besides, UK politicians know its a scam anyway and "setting an example for the world to follow" is just something that they say to justify keeping the scam going and the "green taxes" rolling in.   

[RayC]

6 hours ago, James105 said:

 

You already suspended reality with your hyperbole about net zero saving humanity so why not go a step further.   Should the UK achieve net zero then it will be a poorer country that produces nothing so it would be laughable to demand China did the same - why would they want to make themselves poorer just because the UK were stupid enough to do so?  Besides, UK politicians know its a scam anyway and "setting an example for the world to follow" is just something that they say to justify keeping the scam going and the "green taxes" rolling in.   

 

You should read posts more carefully.

 

This is what I posted: "Alternative viewpoints (not all of which I agree with):

 

* Net zero: Necessary if the life on earth is to continue"

 

Notwithstanding the above, I explained the economic concept of an externality in a long reply to you some months ago. I will not repeat it here but suffice to say, environmental pollution is a prime example of an externality. It has an economic (and social) cost to society which is not borne by the producer or the consumer. Ignoring the obvious social costs - e.g. reduced utility resulting from a poorer quality of life, etc - from a purely economic perspective, the market is distorted.

 

The Clean Air legislation introduced in the UK in the '50s are examples of how the costs of these externalities can be addressed. Many producers, notably the electricity providers, were against this legislation and warned of the dire economic consequences of its' introduction. No doubt, you would have been fully behind these objectors. Fortunately, the governments of the day had the sense to ignore these protests. If they hadn't it is almost unimaginable what the effect would have been like on the capital's economy and, more importantly, on the general welfare of Londoners.