2 Billion pounds for Syrian aid given by David Cameron.

[paulpablo]

I'm, not saying it's the specifically the money being sent to Syria that is putting the UK in a bind, just simply that the money being sent to Syria could be used on the NHS which is what taxes are traditionally spent on, the government takes tax and promises to govern that money to improve the country for the tax payers.

"Im not saying its the money to syria, just that it's the money to syria. "  Yes, that's what you're saying.  Own it.   

And I don't think it's a question of what the haves should do, it's a question of, should the government force the tax payers, which are comprised of haves and the not haves very much and are struggling, to give 2 billion pounds to Syria.

The worst of you is better off than they are.  Your situations aren't even comparable and you consistently ignore them (and that) in your comments.   Your struggle, in context, is a first world problem (and you already have it better than :cough: "some of us" just relative to the first world).  That your government spends an incredible chunk of it's budget on your first world problem and has pledged a fraction of a percent in aid to syria -should- address your concerns...obviously your government is far and away more interested and more invested in your NHS.  To imagine that there is -any- situation in which they would favor syrian aid over nhs funding in any direct relationship, or even in a sufficiently coercive indirect relationship, is a flight of incredible fantasy. You have interpreted this situation as them making a choice they have not made, which they need not make, it is a non-representative summary of the situation at multiple levels.

This isn't anything against voluntary charitable donations of people with lots of money sending billions to charity, although when the Muslim communities in England did do that there were allegations that the money was going to terrorist organizations anyway.

Additionally I fully take on board what you're saying about the NHS funding already being in the hundreds of billions and 2 billion is quite a small percentage of that, and as I said before I take on board what you're saying about money being wasted on stupid shit by the NHS.

It;s not just a small percentage of that, it;s a small percentage that won;t be -taken- from that.  Complain about the stupid shit before you impeach or malign the foreign aid?  If you have some general problem with the idea of taxes idk what to tell you.  There's probably some guy out there who complains about his taxes going to the nhs........what do you tell him?

When you say the worst of you has it better than they do, I'd disagree, worst off people in the uk are on the verge of death or are missing limbs or blind, things like that, being from a good county doesn't make you immune to health problems. You're saying they, meaning Syrians, I don't know how you'd judge how a whole nation of Syrian refugees are but I imagine the majority have their limbs, eyesight and more than just a few minutes to live.

And no I'm really not saying that the money being sent to Syria is causing the problems in the nhs, I'm saying the tax payers money would be better spent on improving the facilities tax payers use. If the money hadn't been spent on Syria I don't know it would definitely be spent on something important. I know the problems the nhs has has been blamed on underfunding and under funding is solved by funding, as a simple quick solution. That along with more shrewd spending.

And also I'm not saying they favour Syrian aid over funding the nhs. I'm saying what I've repeatedly said in this reply and in previous replies, that I think the tax payers money should be spent on services directly benefiting the tax payers most important needs, and charity should be voluntery.

For people who don't support taxes at all and don't want to pay for the NHS that would be a too much of a simple statement to be able to judge what they actually mean by that. I'd have to know their motivation and if they still think other people should still pay taxes or not and basically listen to their arguments beyond that simple statement.

I'm not saying that they did necessarily think about it as a choice between the NHS and Syrian aid either. I'm saying that when you govern people's taxes you make a choice of what to spend it on and I think I'd be in favour of them spending that money on the NHS rather than Syrian aid.