(February 5, 2016 at 3:30 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I don't know about sitting on the money, I was thinking the money would be better spent towards the national health service which in 2015 had a deficit of around 2 billion pounds.

Hmn, possibly straighter teeth and paid debts for natives or humanitarian aide for a crisis...tough call? I don't think you have to make that choice though.....do you? Will the NHS close their doors on account of this?

Of course we want them to rebuild. We'll be going to war with them again in a decade or so, we at least want them to put up something like a fight.

Before



And after



Looks like paradise, doesn't it? In case anyone still wonders why so many Syrians are leaving.

I guess, the 9 billion the UN collected won't even buy one new street.

(February 5, 2016 at 4:36 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

(February 5, 2016 at 3:30 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I don't know about sitting on the money, I was thinking the money would be better spent towards the national health service which in 2015 had a deficit of around 2 billion pounds.

Hmn, possibly straighter teeth and paid debts for natives or humanitarian aide for a crisis...tough call? I don't think you have to make that choice though.....do you? Will the NHS close their doors on account of this?

I don't want to make a choice of straighter teeth and debts paid for natives vs humanitarian aid for a crisis because that decision bares no relevance to the actual decision being made in reality.

The NHS is where most tax payers have to go for their health care, things like cancer treatment, radio therapy, broken bones, heart problems, pregnancy. Life of death things. So all this straighter teeth talk is nonsense.

David Cameron, his friends, they won't have to use these services, they will be well paid enough to afford private care easily, it's not a decision that will affect him.

So it's really a choice between good health care provided for the people of Britain vs aid for another country. And the money isn't coming out of thin air, it's being taxed from the workers of Britain, it isn't just landing from outer space and we're deciding which country the alien money should go to, it was taken as tax which is supposed to be used for things like the NHS, education, schools and the police

(February 5, 2016 at 5:29 pm)abaris Wrote: Before



And after



Looks like paradise, doesn't it? In case anyone still wonders why so many Syrians are leaving.

I guess, the 9 billion the UN collected won't even buy one new street.

Yes those streets look damaged

(February 5, 2016 at 5:39 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I don't want to make a choice of straighter teeth and debts paid for natives vs humanitarian aid for a crisis because that decision bares no relevance to the actual decision being made in reality.

Agreed.

Quote:The NHS is where most tax payers have to go for their health care, things like cancer treatment, radio therapy, broken bones, heart problems, pregnancy.  Life of death things.  So all this straighter teeth talk is nonsense.

I think they'll cut back on straighter teeth before they cut back on cancer treatment..if they cut back at all.  Look, if the money well runs dry and you reach a point where the cash you're offering would be more helpful to yourselves than it is to them...then can get behind that, completely.  Something tells me you have a long way to fall before that's the case...judging by just that picture above.

Quote:David Cameron, his friends, they won't have to use these services, they will be well paid enough to afford private care easily, it's not a decision that will affect him.

So it's really a choice between good health care provided for the people of Britain vs aid for another country.  And the money isn't coming out of thin air, it's being taxed from the workers of Britain, it isn't just landing from outer space and we're deciding which country the alien money should go to, it was taken as tax which is supposed to be used for things like the NHS, education, schools and the police

I do understand this, I really do.  My country also spends an exorbitant sum of money on foreign aide and it -doesn't- have an NHS.  While I can see that our government -could- spend that money on it's own citizens........ and it's undeniable that this -would- lead to a quality of life increase or decrease for those people.........

...we have those pictures above to consider.

At the -very worst-, we (as in your country and my country) can borrow the money to float our bills while we help out a neighbor.  That's an option they don't have.

(February 5, 2016 at 6:15 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

(February 5, 2016 at 5:39 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I don't want to make a choice of straighter teeth and debts paid for natives vs humanitarian aid for a crisis because that decision bares no relevance to the actual decision being made in reality.

Agreed.

Quote:The NHS is where most tax payers have to go for their health care, things like cancer treatment, radio therapy, broken bones, heart problems, pregnancy.  Life of death things.  So all this straighter teeth talk is nonsense.

I think they'll cut back on straighter teeth before they cut back on cancer treatment..if they cut back at all.  Look, if the money well runs dry and you reach a point where the cash you're offering would be more helpful to yourselves than it is to them...then can get behind that, completely.  Something tells me you have a long way to fall before that's the case...judging by just that picture above.

I'm not offering the cash, the tax payers aren't offering the cash.  The money is being demanded by the government via the system of taxation which as I said before is normally where money is paid into a government to benefit those people who paid into it out of their earnings.
You still don't really get the situation I don't think because you're still talking about straighter teeth even though you seemingly agreed that it has no relevance to the real situation.  People in the UK aren't complaining about not being able to get their teeth straightened
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/...s-revealed
They complain about less beds, longer waiting times, preventable deaths and basically less good care for patients.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...lance.html
http://nhsfightback.org/tag/nhs-cuts/
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/...ng-to-cope
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/nhs-...ve-9912894
http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/01/22/cu...r-britain/


I'm not saying read all of these links, you don't really need to read any if you don't want, they just echo what I'm saying but just in a more informed manner.  They go into further detail about treatment being denied and inadequate services.

-and all of those things should be and can be addressed without reference to this other thing.  You can do both.

(February 5, 2016 at 7:05 pm)Rhythm Wrote: -and all of those things should be and can be addressed without reference to this other thing.  You can do both.

Ok I'm just pointing out how ridiculous your statement was that they will cut back on the teeth straightening before they cut back on the cancer treatment, was it a joke?  I don't know.  If your opinion on this topic is that you think they can do both that's fair enough.

Not at all.  If the pennies are so pinched that this aide comes at a cost of medical services currently being paid for...I can only assume that they would skimp on the least life threatening things they currently spend money on....and while that would be shitty..you'd still have it better than the refugees you'd be helping. A dollar goes farther in a warzone, and for people who have lost -everything-.

I do think they can do both. I don't think that everybody can. I think that people pitting health services against foreign aide are xenophobic fear mongering isolationists with a vested interest in that money -not- going to help refugees.
(unless, ofc, that's where -they- turn -their- profits...or tricks, in the case of politicians)

I find it appalling that a nation that, in living memory, has been completely propped up by another nation with problems all it's own, can even accommodate such a narrative.