President Donald Trump said he is starting a program to offer residency and a path to citizenship to investors who pay $5 million, offering a new avenue for legal immigration even as he carries out a sweeping crackdown on undocumented migrants.
Who has $5m but couldn't already swing an O1 with the right advice?
The O1 is a non-immigrant visa, with no path to citizenship / green card.
I'm on an O1. But I don't have any plans to become American, so it's the right visa choice for me.
My cousin got a green card from an O visa though that was about 10 years ago. Not sure if the rules have changed since then.
You can apply for an EB‑1A from an O1, which does have a Green Card pathway, but there's no direct route from an O1 to a green card.
On topic. Two Canadian polls out today both showing a LPC lead! The first since March 2023. (There was a tie in September). One is ekos which has been consistently the most Lib friendly pollster. But the other is Leger which hasn't. Trump truly shitting the bed with this. Libs can't believe their luck.
President Donald Trump said he is starting a program to offer residency and a path to citizenship to investors who pay $5 million, offering a new avenue for legal immigration even as he carries out a sweeping crackdown on undocumented migrants.
Who has $5m but couldn't already swing an O1 with the right advice?
The O1 is a non-immigrant visa, with no path to citizenship / green card.
I'm on an O1. But I don't have any plans to become American, so it's the right visa choice for me.
Important to note. The LPC don't need a lead to govern. They can win most seats from second place in votes. (A function of massive Conservative majorities across the Prairie States, and the absence of very many Lib votes west of Ontario.
In early January the Libs were 26 points behind the Conservatives.
There’s still a wide range of results from different pollsters but still the movement seen from Ipsos is noteworthy .
Parties need not worry about making sizable policy changes after being increasingly tired in office, just pick a fight with the demented guy next door*. The Canadian version of the General Election survey will be an interesting one to pick up on, with some fun graphs on polling.
*(Admittedly they got Trudeau out at just the right moment to boot, which is not an insigificant factor I imagine)
On topic. Two Canadian polls out today both showing a LPC lead! The first since March 2023. (There was a tie in September). One is ekos which has been consistently the most Lib friendly pollster. But the other is Leger which hasn't. Trump truly shitting the bed with this. Libs can't believe their luck.
With it becoming a bit of a trend, at the least with the result to be much closer and the Liberals better able to make coalition deals, I wonder what the Conservatives there can do now.
Disavowing Trump's designs on Canada (or just his shabby treatment toward them), presumably won't work as the movement suggests people either don't buy it or think the Liberals are just as or better placed to deal with it.
I guess maybe now the Conservatives are the ones who would rather the election not be sooner rather than later, in the hope that a honeymoon for the new Liberal leader will dissipate and the old leads return.
On topic. Two Canadian polls out today both showing a LPC lead! The first since March 2023. (There was a tie in September). One is ekos which has been consistently the most Lib friendly pollster. But the other is Leger which hasn't. Trump truly shitting the bed with this. Libs can't believe their luck.
I haven't seen the details but let me guess: EKOS.
In early January the Libs were 26 points behind the Conservatives.
Trump is influencing elections even outside the US.
Nothing would make him happier, he loves having an impact. I'm not sure he even cares how that impact manifests, just that he has caused things to happen.
Important to note. The LPC don't need a lead to govern. They are far more coalitionable.
Mark Carney is probably seen as a safe pair of hands after his stint as BOC Governor after the 2008 crash . If he wins the leadership it might be worth taking a risk to go for a quick election .
Important to note. The LPC don't need a lead to govern. They are far more coalitionable.
Mark Carney is probably seen as a safe pair of hands after his stint as BOC Governor after the 2008 crash . If he wins the leadership it might be worth taking a risk to go for a quick election .
Given where they had been before if I were them I'd be terrified of the recovery evaporating given time, so go for it now.
The counter risk would be the calling of a GE would snap people back to thinking why they were going to hammer the Liberals in the first place (it cannot all have been down to the leadership), and then he'd have the humiliation of a very short premiership to boot. But the election has to be this year anyway, so how much would that really matter?
On topic. Two Canadian polls out today both showing a LPC lead! The first since March 2023. (There was a tie in September). One is ekos which has been consistently the most Lib friendly pollster. But the other is Leger which hasn't. Trump truly shitting the bed with this. Libs can't believe their luck.
I haven't seen the details but let me guess: EKOS.
Yes. And they have been consistently Lib friendly. The other was Ipsos (MEA culpa, not Leger. They had a small Tory lead yesterday in a poll I missed, sorry). We await Abacus, who were still showing 20 and 19 point Tory leads as recently as the 11 and 12 th of the month.
Starmer’s announcement today seems to have been received with near universal plaudits on here, which is unusual (though I don’t believe @bigjohnowls has commented yet, and I can see @Foxy isn’t happy).
I think the scale of the aid cut announced will come back to haunt them, but I accept it’s pretty decent short term politics. It feels a bit like the government equivalent of cutting BBC funding - saves some money now but at the expense of cultural and service exports later.
How will public opinion react though? This place is not exactly representative of the general public.
Starmer has another test on Thursday. How will he deal with Trump? That will possibly be the decisive one. Difficult balancing act.
Have you looked at the guff we spend the aid budget on recently? It's not feeding people. Half of it is probably actively malign. As for 'Xi stepping in' - I hope he bloody does step in, to replace the aid we currently provide to China, which should be first to go.
We don't give aid to China. This is where our aid currently goes:
It's this failure to understand where our aid goes and what it does that makes it such a target. There are many myths and falsehoods about it.
Yes we do. The last year I can find figures for, 2023, we sent £8.2mn. A very small figure within the context of the wider budget, but a large quantity of tax payers' earnings nonetheless.
Perhaps next time you're tackling the "myths and falsehoods" you might bother to check your facts.
2.2 UK bilateral aid to China has declined rapidly. ICAI found that total UK aid engaging China fell from about £80 million in 2019 to about £48 million in 2021-22 and to about £8 million in 2023-24 plus ODA‑eligible administration costs. FCDO expects aid to China to remain at, or around, this level while China remains ODA-eligible.
Starmer’s announcement today seems to have been received with near universal plaudits on here, which is unusual (though I don’t believe @bigjohnowls has commented yet, and I can see @Foxy isn’t happy).
I think the scale of the aid cut announced will come back to haunt them, but I accept it’s pretty decent short term politics. It feels a bit like the government equivalent of cutting BBC funding - saves some money now but at the expense of cultural and service exports later.
How will public opinion react though? This place is not exactly representative of the general public.
Starmer has another test on Thursday. How will he deal with Trump? That will possibly be the decisive one. Difficult balancing act.
Have you looked at the guff we spend the aid budget on recently? It's not feeding people. Half of it is probably actively malign. As for 'Xi stepping in' - I hope he bloody does step in, to replace the aid we currently provide to China, which should be first to go.
We don't give aid to China. This is where our aid currently goes:
It's this failure to understand where our aid goes and what it does that makes it such a target. There are many myths and falsehoods about it.
It's not a failure to understand - it's a failure to call out liars such as LG as the bullshit merchants they really are..
Err, sorry what?
Several posters here have now CONFIRMED that we still send aid to China, and the FCDO expects China to remain eligible for Overseas Development Assistance for the next 6 to 7 years.
How does that contradict a single thing I said? Point me to the lies please.
Starmer’s announcement today seems to have been received with near universal plaudits on here, which is unusual (though I don’t believe @bigjohnowls has commented yet, and I can see @Foxy isn’t happy).
I think the scale of the aid cut announced will come back to haunt them, but I accept it’s pretty decent short term politics. It feels a bit like the government equivalent of cutting BBC funding - saves some money now but at the expense of cultural and service exports later.
How will public opinion react though? This place is not exactly representative of the general public.
Starmer has another test on Thursday. How will he deal with Trump? That will possibly be the decisive one. Difficult balancing act.
Have you looked at the guff we spend the aid budget on recently? It's not feeding people. Half of it is probably actively malign. As for 'Xi stepping in' - I hope he bloody does step in, to replace the aid we currently provide to China, which should be first to go.
We don't give aid to China. This is where our aid currently goes:
It's this failure to understand where our aid goes and what it does that makes it such a target. There are many myths and falsehoods about it.
It's not a failure to understand - it's a failure to call out liars such as LG as the bullshit merchants they really are..
Err, sorry what?
Several posters here have now CONFIRMED that we still send aid to China, and the FCDO expects China to remain eligible for Overseas Development Assistance for the next 6 to 7 years.
How does that contradict a single thing I said? Point me to the lies please.
Looking at what you linked to and don’t seem to have read The vast majority if the money is British Council (I.e. cultural exports) and human rights
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
There was a poll which showed 15% of Canadians would be OK with being part of the USA. They almost all will vote CPC. Unfortunately, the other 15% of their core vote are the old Tories. Loyalists fleeing the American revolution, Scots-Irish Rangers fans and hardcore Monarchists. There couldn't be an issue more designed to expose the libertarian/traditionalist faultlines in the CPC coalition.
I've only looked casually before, but the argument seems to be a pretty basic point that in practice rent controls just don't work and have never worked, and your piece doesn't seem to answer the main question of why politicians nonetheless think it does. Sure politicians are wrong about a lot, but eventually they would figure things out you'd assume, so why not on this?
I've only looked casually before, but the argument seems to be a pretty basic point that in practice rent controls just don't work and have never worked, and your piece doesn't seem to answer the main question of why politicians nonetheless think it does. Sure politicians are wrong about a lot, but eventually they would figure things out you'd assume, so why not on this?
Because we make your biggest outgoing (rent) more affordable looks great to a lot of voters
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the aid to China is actually advertising UK universities to Chinese students.
That was interesting, I haven't given much thought to the subject before. I know that you used to be able rent a flat in a downmarket area of London for hardly anything in the 1960s/70s and assumed it was a good thing in some way. Clive James wrote about renting a one bedroom flat in Earls Court when he first moved there in about 1962 and it was inexpensive. But in those days the population of London was going down.
On way back to war ravaged, dingy and depressed Blighty (apparently) from the paradise that is Singapore (apparently).
Plenty to muse on and bore you with in true centrist style with perhaps a couple of threads to come once we’re home, clear of jet lag and acclimatised to Britain so probably mid May.
In true Flint Knapper style, I’ve tried some of Singapore’s culinary delights. The hawker markets aren’t what they were but the Penang Prawn Noodle soup was the standout. A honourable mention for the barbecued pig’s trotters….
On way back to war ravaged, dingy and depressed Blighty (apparently) from the paradise that is Singapore (apparently).
Plenty to muse on and bore you with in true centrist style with perhaps a couple of threads to come once we’re home, clear of jet lag and acclimatised to Britain so probably mid May.
In true Flint Knapper style, I’ve tried some of Singapore’s culinary delights. The hawker markets aren’t what they were but the Penang Prawn Noodle soup was the standout. A honourable mention for the barbecued pig’s trotters….
Morning. I've spent the grand total of 4 days in Singapore, in September 2009. Visited Raffles for about 45 mins, which was nice.
On way back to war ravaged, dingy and depressed Blighty (apparently) from the paradise that is Singapore (apparently).
Plenty to muse on and bore you with in true centrist style with perhaps a couple of threads to come once we’re home, clear of jet lag and acclimatised to Britain so probably mid May.
In true Flint Knapper style, I’ve tried some of Singapore’s culinary delights. The hawker markets aren’t what they were but the Penang Prawn Noodle soup was the standout. A honourable mention for the barbecued pig’s trotters….
Morning. I've spent the grand total of 4 days in Singapore, in September 2009. Visited Raffles for about 45 mins, which was nice.
This has been our first visit since 2006 and a lot has happened. Our hotel and the airport terminal weren’t here then. I’m not wholly convinced the improvements are universally beneficial - Clarke Quay is now eatery after eatery and the old character of the place has been compromised.
Singapore is 60 and they’re happy to tell the world. In 2006 they still referenced the Japanese Occupation, now hardly mentioned. It’s always interesting to see how nations deal with their history - for some the past defines them, others less so.
Starmer’s announcement today seems to have been received with near universal plaudits on here, which is unusual (though I don’t believe @bigjohnowls has commented yet, and I can see @Foxy isn’t happy).
I think the scale of the aid cut announced will come back to haunt them, but I accept it’s pretty decent short term politics. It feels a bit like the government equivalent of cutting BBC funding - saves some money now but at the expense of cultural and service exports later.
How will public opinion react though? This place is not exactly representative of the general public.
Starmer has another test on Thursday. How will he deal with Trump? That will possibly be the decisive one. Difficult balancing act.
Have you looked at the guff we spend the aid budget on recently? It's not feeding people. Half of it is probably actively malign. As for 'Xi stepping in' - I hope he bloody does step in, to replace the aid we currently provide to China, which should be first to go.
We don't give aid to China. This is where our aid currently goes:
It's this failure to understand where our aid goes and what it does that makes it such a target. There are many myths and falsehoods about it.
Yes we do. The last year I can find figures for, 2023, we sent £8.2mn. A very small figure within the context of the wider budget, but a large quantity of tax payers' earnings nonetheless.
Perhaps next time you're tackling the "myths and falsehoods" you might bother to check your facts.
2.2 UK bilateral aid to China has declined rapidly. ICAI found that total UK aid engaging China fell from about £80 million in 2019 to about £48 million in 2021-22 and to about £8 million in 2023-24 plus ODA‑eligible administration costs. FCDO expects aid to China to remain at, or around, this level while China remains ODA-eligible.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
During my senate campaign in 2022, I met a Ukrainian-American man in NE Ohio. He was very angry about my views on the conflict, and my desire to bring it to a rapid close.
"You are trying to abandon my country, and I don't like it."
"Sir, I replied, "your country is the United States of America, and so is mine."
I always found it offensive that a new immigrant to our country would be willing to use the power and influence of their new nation to settle the ethnic rivalries of the old.
One of the most important parts of assimilation is seeing *your* country as the USA. It's part of the bargain: if you're welcomed into our national family, you ought to look out for the interests of the United States. I know many immigrants who have the right perspective, and I'm grateful to them. For example, I met many Ukrainian Americans during that campaign (and since) who agreed with my views, or at the very least, asked the right question: what is in the best interests of the United States?
The passive aggressive "sir" is a nice touch. "The right perspective" what a jerk.
Owen Jones @owenjonesjourno · 3h We are getting to the point where we are increasingly normalising the idea that direct war with Russia is inevitable.
This will significantly increase the chance of nuclear apocalypse, in which the lucky ones will die in the initial blast.
It is OK to resist this.
He is making a valid point. All this talk of rearmament does run the risk of being dragged into direct war.
We either prepare for a direct war or we end up unprepared fighting a direct war. The world has changed take your pick as to the options but remember Russia isn't going to play fair...
You seem to see war between UK and Russia as inevitable. It doesn't have to be so.
I wish our politicians were thinking of how to avoid a direct war.
Arms races are not a reliable way of avoiding war. Not in Edwardian times and not now.
So come up with a plan then - so I can shoot it down for the fundamental flaws you will have missed.
Hint with Putin willing to send 300,000 men to their deaths to gain a few miles of almost worthless land in Ukraine - we aren't exactly in the cold war era...
Facism, militarism and the drift to war. There are alternatives.
I have 2 sons of military age. I do not want them to die in the Donbas.
So you haven't got a plan - just an ulterior motive.
How many of your own family do you want to send to the Donbas? Or is it just other people's kids who should go?
The Ukranians are quite prepared to fight on our behalf. Which is the point.
- you can try and stop Putin in Ukraine - you can try and stop Putin in Riga. - you can try and stop Putin at the Polish border. - Etc
Pick one.
His war aims in Ukraine were elimination of the Ukrainian identity, and its total absorption into the Russian state.
That’s not the kind of thinking that has limits.
Putin's Russia is an expansionist, fascistic, and imperialist state. Given that, I'm surprised and dismayed how many people are keen to forget what happened the last time an expansionist, fascistic, and imperialist state started a major war in Europe, and the grand powers attempted appeasement.
MoD faces mounting pressure to probe Russia link to drone sightings at RAF bases ... On Friday, The i Paper revealed that three people with links to Russian military and intelligence sites travelled to stay near top-secret UK air bases where suspicious drones were sighted.
One of the three individuals was just metres from the perimeter of RAF Mildenhall on a day when drones were flown over. At least two people are believed to have worked as seasonal fruit pickers in close proximity to the airbases – visiting fields close to the airbases at night. https://inews.co.uk/news/mod-pressure-probe-russia-link-drone-sightings-raf-bases-3553532
Totally off topic... on the train home today, a kid got on, sat diagonally opposite, put his feet on the seat next to me, then when I got up to get off at my stop barely moved out of the way to let me past. How delightful, I thought, noting the crest of one of the local private schools on his tracksuit. Whatever his parents are paying them to teach him, it certainly isn't good manners.
Which one? Do tell
Alleyns.
An email to the school office, concerned about their reputation and being offended, will work wonders.
Slightly more seriously, when I were a lad a couple of ours mooned through the bus window at a car on the motorway on the way back from a Duke of Edinburgh Award trip. Someone wrote down the bus company phone number, time and location. They were suspended.
During my senate campaign in 2022, I met a Ukrainian-American man in NE Ohio. He was very angry about my views on the conflict, and my desire to bring it to a rapid close.
"You are trying to abandon my country, and I don't like it."
"Sir, I replied, "your country is the United States of America, and so is mine."
I always found it offensive that a new immigrant to our country would be willing to use the power and influence of their new nation to settle the ethnic rivalries of the old.
One of the most important parts of assimilation is seeing *your* country as the USA. It's part of the bargain: if you're welcomed into our national family, you ought to look out for the interests of the United States. I know many immigrants who have the right perspective, and I'm grateful to them. For example, I met many Ukrainian Americans during that campaign (and since) who agreed with my views, or at the very least, asked the right question: what is in the best interests of the United States?
A bit simplistic from Vance. You can care about more than one country at the same time.
It’s also essentially an ad hom response to an argument, which is obviously uncomfortable for him to address on its own terms.
It's also again an argument that should be very worrying for other countries especially Israel
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
well you could link to your 'sources' if you want us to believe you. save you having to apologise.
but the fact that you believe 'reports' that British aid funds the Indian space program means you are even further down the rabbit hole than I thought.
It looks like I was wrong about Merz, yesterday he ruled out reforming the debt brake, so maybe he is sincere about wanting to keep it as is (or he was told it's not going to fly to reform the constitution after the election in this way). Which means that he is even stupider than I thought (and I already thought he was pretty stupid).
Now the talk is of recalling parliament to create or topup a special defence fund, which would also need a 2 thirds majority. Let's see if people are willing to go along with this in the couple of weeks theoretically available.
The seven bills due to go up in April 1. Water bills 2. Energy bills 3. Council tax 4. Car tax 5. Broadband, phone and TV licence 6. Stamp duty 7. Hidden tax rises (fiscal drag) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg18pvz7kko
President Donald Trump said he is starting a program to offer residency and a path to citizenship to investors who pay $5 million, offering a new avenue for legal immigration even as he carries out a sweeping crackdown on undocumented migrants.
The plaque on Ellis Island now reads '....give us your rich, yearning to pay the fee'
The seven bills due to go up in April 1. Water bills 2. Energy bills 3. Council tax 4. Car tax 5. Broadband, phone and TV licence 6. Stamp duty 7. Hidden tax rises (fiscal drag) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg18pvz7kko
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the aid to China is actually advertising UK universities to Chinese students.
Which, if true, is more waste.
The universities are private enterprises, and can pay to advertise themselves.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the aid to China is actually advertising UK universities to Chinese students.
Which, if true, is more waste.
The universities are private enterprises, and can pay to advertise themselves.
It was the Tory government who wanted and drove the increase in overseas students to improve our balance of payments deficit.
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the aid to China is actually advertising UK universities to Chinese students.
Which, if true, is more waste.
The universities are private enterprises, and can pay to advertise themselves.
Universities are usually regarded as part of the public sector, although they are financially independent. They usually have charitable status, although in law they have a unique status, being a university, which is distinct from being a company, a social enterprise or a charity.
It's a bit light in that it highlights the lack of enforcement of legislation aka bad behaviour. But lack of enforcement is almost de rigueur for recent governments. And coming back to the issue of 'council' housing. Most of this was passed onto Social Landlords as providers of Affordable Housing. They are increasing Social Housing every year though they may not build it themselves.
It's the issue of strategic thinking that's missing. To build more to overcome shortages, you need skills and materials (and planning). These are the current restrictions though tax receipts for Housing Benefit are not. So paying increasing amounts of HB only adds to the inflation on rent inflation.
You can coordinate Rent control with strategic housebuilding plans to prevent excess profits in the rental (and mortgage) sector. The same arguments used for controls on energy.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the aid to China is actually advertising UK universities to Chinese students.
Which, if true, is more waste.
The universities are private enterprises, and can pay to advertise themselves.
It was the Tory government who wanted and drove the increase in overseas students to improve our balance of payments deficit.
I don't decide what I think, or don't think, on an issue depending on which party was in power at the time.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
King James Bible, 1 Corinthians 13:13.
Then, people can give charity from their own purse.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
During my senate campaign in 2022, I met a Ukrainian-American man in NE Ohio. He was very angry about my views on the conflict, and my desire to bring it to a rapid close.
"You are trying to abandon my country, and I don't like it."
"Sir, I replied, "your country is the United States of America, and so is mine."
I always found it offensive that a new immigrant to our country would be willing to use the power and influence of their new nation to settle the ethnic rivalries of the old.
One of the most important parts of assimilation is seeing *your* country as the USA. It's part of the bargain: if you're welcomed into our national family, you ought to look out for the interests of the United States. I know many immigrants who have the right perspective, and I'm grateful to them. For example, I met many Ukrainian Americans during that campaign (and since) who agreed with my views, or at the very least, asked the right question: what is in the best interests of the United States?
A bit simplistic from Vance. You can care about more than one country at the same time.
It’s also essentially an ad hom response to an argument, which is obviously uncomfortable for him to address on its own terms.
It's also again an argument that should be very worrying for other countries especially Israel
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
well you could link to your 'sources' if you want us to believe you. save you having to apologise.
but the fact that you believe 'reports' that British aid funds the Indian space program means you are even further down the rabbit hole than I thought.
IIRC the original story was that India had a space programme *at the same time* as it was receiving aid from the UK.
The misremembering of “funding the space programme” is understandable mutation of the original truth
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
When well targeted aid is incredibly impactful and the best way to reduce international terrorism. Ask Andrew Mitchell about some of the programmes he funded on female education in east Africa
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
"Personal attacks?" LOL. Remove the plank from your eye.
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
When well targeted aid is incredibly impactful and the best way to reduce international terrorism. Ask Andrew Mitchell about some of the programmes he funded on female education in east Africa
I'm afraid I don't find Andrew Mitchell convincing. He had a good experience out in sub-Saharan Africa when the Conservatives were still in opposition, and has been moralising about that for over 15 years.
I don't see the evidence it's reducing international terrorism, which isn't driven by poverty.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
"Personal attacks?" LOL. Remove the plank from your eye.
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
I'd turn that around: I see it as immoral for a government to impose a record tax burden on UK taxpayers to compulsorily draw money for "aid" that is often anything but, and pet-policy driven.
I think your arguments on vaccinations are a straw-man, and about you feeling low on self-esteem this morning and wanting to attack someone else so you feel better about yourself.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
"Personal attacks?" LOL. Remove the plank from your eye.
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
(Snip)
I think your arguments on vaccinations are a straw-man, and about you feeling low on self-esteem this morning and wanting to attack someone else so you feel better about yourself.
We've all seen it before.
You complain about a mild comment I made being a 'personal attack', and then write that?
LOL.
My self-esteem is fine, thank you very much. I'm happy; I am keeping to my training plan, and am listening to my son playing with a friend downstairs before school. Life is good. It's just that I'd quite like it to be good for other people as well. And not just people I know. That does not mean I want to give everything away, but neither do I want to be Scrooge McDuck.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
"Personal attacks?" LOL. Remove the plank from your eye.
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
(Snip)
I think your arguments on vaccinations are a straw-man, and about you feeling low on self-esteem this morning and wanting to attack someone else so you feel better about yourself.
We've all seen it before.
You complain about a mild comment I made being a 'personal attack', and then write that?
LOL.
My self-esteem is fine, thank you very much. I'm happy; I am keeping to my training plan, and am listening to my son playing with a friend downstairs before school. Life is good. It's just that I'd quite like it to be good for other people as well. And not just people I know. That does not mean I want to give everything away, but neither do I want to be Scrooge McDuck.
Yep, self-esteem not great. A personal man who specialises in personal attacks.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Then I utterly disagree with you, and believe your position is immoral.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
My examples cover famine relief (an emergency) or vaccination programmes against a global disease where we have an interest.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
"Personal attacks?" LOL. Remove the plank from your eye.
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
(Snip)
I think your arguments on vaccinations are a straw-man, and about you feeling low on self-esteem this morning and wanting to attack someone else so you feel better about yourself.
We've all seen it before.
You complain about a mild comment I made being a 'personal attack', and then write that?
LOL.
My self-esteem is fine, thank you very much. I'm happy; I am keeping to my training plan, and am listening to my son playing with a friend downstairs before school. Life is good. It's just that I'd quite like it to be good for other people as well. And not just people I know. That does not mean I want to give everything away, but neither do I want to be Scrooge McDuck.
Yep, self-esteem not great. A personal man who specialises in personal attacks.
It's very sad. Maybe go for another walk.
... and you follow up with another personal attack.
As I said, I think my self-esteem is fine. I'm happy and content. I'd recommend it.
During my senate campaign in 2022, I met a Ukrainian-American man in NE Ohio. He was very angry about my views on the conflict, and my desire to bring it to a rapid close.
"You are trying to abandon my country, and I don't like it."
"Sir, I replied, "your country is the United States of America, and so is mine."
I always found it offensive that a new immigrant to our country would be willing to use the power and influence of their new nation to settle the ethnic rivalries of the old.
One of the most important parts of assimilation is seeing *your* country as the USA. It's part of the bargain: if you're welcomed into our national family, you ought to look out for the interests of the United States. I know many immigrants who have the right perspective, and I'm grateful to them. For example, I met many Ukrainian Americans during that campaign (and since) who agreed with my views, or at the very least, asked the right question: what is in the best interests of the United States?
A bit simplistic from Vance. You can care about more than one country at the same time.
It’s also essentially an ad hom response to an argument, which is obviously uncomfortable for him to address on its own terms.
It's also again an argument that should be very worrying for other countries especially Israel
Hopefully funding the Indian space programme and Chinese government projects will be the first things to be cut from the aid budget, assuming reports about those things are true. Apologies if they're not true.
well you could link to your 'sources' if you want us to believe you. save you having to apologise.
but the fact that you believe 'reports' that British aid funds the Indian space program means you are even further down the rabbit hole than I thought.
IIRC the original story was that India had a space programme *at the same time* as it was receiving aid from the UK.
The misremembering of “funding the space programme” is understandable mutation of the original truth
Hmm the poster is building up a history of posting unlikely stories with a certain agenda and no source given. "if true" is usually a giveaway that a poster knows something isn't true (it's not hard to check the facts in this case), but they want to post it anyway.
Comments
The latest Ipsos poll compared to early February.
Libs 38 ( +10)
Cons 36 ( -5)
NDP 12 ( -4)
Bloc Q 6 (-3)
Green 4 (+1)
PP 3 (-)
In early January the Libs were 26 points behind the Conservatives.
There’s still a wide range of results from different pollsters but still the movement seen from Ipsos is noteworthy .
Two Canadian polls out today both showing a LPC lead!
The first since March 2023. (There was a tie in September).
One is ekos which has been consistently the most Lib friendly pollster. But the other is Leger which hasn't.
Trump truly shitting the bed with this. Libs can't believe their luck.
The LPC don't need a lead to govern. They can win most seats from second place in votes. (A function of massive Conservative majorities across the Prairie States, and the absence of very many Lib votes west of Ontario.
*(Admittedly they got Trudeau out at just the right moment to boot, which is not an insigificant factor I imagine)
Disavowing Trump's designs on Canada (or just his shabby treatment toward them), presumably won't work as the movement suggests people either don't buy it or think the Liberals are just as or better placed to deal with it.
I guess maybe now the Conservatives are the ones who would rather the election not be sooner rather than later, in the hope that a honeymoon for the new Liberal leader will dissipate and the old leads return.
The counter risk would be the calling of a GE would snap people back to thinking why they were going to hammer the Liberals in the first place (it cannot all have been down to the leadership), and then he'd have the humiliation of a very short premiership to boot. But the election has to be this year anyway, so how much would that really matter?
The other was Ipsos (MEA culpa, not Leger. They had a small Tory lead yesterday in a poll I missed, sorry).
We await Abacus, who were still showing 20 and 19 point Tory leads as recently as the 11 and 12 th of the month.
Perhaps next time you're tackling the "myths and falsehoods" you might bother to check your facts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O_visa
(And congratulations for your modesty, for not mentioning them, even indirectly, until now. Traditional British restraint, perhaps?)
Several posters here have now CONFIRMED that we still send aid to China, and the FCDO expects China to remain eligible for Overseas Development Assistance for the next 6 to 7 years.
How does that contradict a single thing I said? Point me to the lies please.
They almost all will vote CPC.
Unfortunately, the other 15% of their core vote are the old Tories. Loyalists fleeing the American revolution, Scots-Irish Rangers fans and hardcore Monarchists.
There couldn't be an issue more designed to expose the libertarian/traditionalist faultlines in the CPC coalition.
On way back to war ravaged, dingy and depressed Blighty (apparently) from the paradise that is Singapore (apparently).
Plenty to muse on and bore you with in true centrist style with perhaps a couple of threads to come once we’re home, clear of jet lag and acclimatised to Britain so probably mid May.
In true Flint Knapper style, I’ve tried some of Singapore’s culinary delights. The hawker markets aren’t what they were but the Penang Prawn Noodle soup was the standout. A honourable mention for the barbecued pig’s trotters….
Singapore is 60 and they’re happy to tell the world. In 2006 they still referenced the Japanese Occupation, now hardly mentioned. It’s always interesting to see how nations deal with their history - for some the past defines them, others less so.
TRUMP: Yeah, possibly. Hey. I know some Russian oligarchs that are very nice people.
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lizvyikzok2x
If you read the link I put earlier in the subthread it does not feature in the 24-25 budget.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
"The right perspective" what a jerk.
Munira Mirza has been brought into Downing Street to consult on Labour’s approach to multiculturalism
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/starmer-aides-consult-johnson-policy-chief-on-fighting-reform-2ncld308c (£££)
What next? David Cameron?
Rogue state could fund military with crypto cash plundered in Bybit hack
State-backed North Korean hackers have stolen $1.5bn (£1.2bn) of cryptocurrency in the largest heist in history.
Agents from Pyongyang were able to breach the systems of Dubai-based exchange Bybit to steal the digital coin Ether, according to security analysts.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/25/north-korea-plunders-worlds-crypto-markets-biggest-heist/ (£££)
Note to Rachel Reeves...
...
On Friday, The i Paper revealed that three people with links to Russian military and intelligence sites travelled to stay near top-secret UK air bases where suspicious drones were sighted.
One of the three individuals was just metres from the perimeter of RAF Mildenhall on a day when drones were flown over. At least two people are believed to have worked as seasonal fruit pickers in close proximity to the airbases – visiting fields close to the airbases at night.
https://inews.co.uk/news/mod-pressure-probe-russia-link-drone-sightings-raf-bases-3553532
NHS staff fear power grab by health department as health secretary looks to shrink body due to ‘duplication’ of roles
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/25/wes-streeting-to-axe-thousands-of-jobs-at-nhs-england-after-ousting-of-chief-executive
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14436125/Lord-Ashcrofts-Imperial-War-Museum-close-landmark-exhibition.html
Worst headline ever?
Anyway, you've got until June to see the collection of VCs and GCs in the IWM's Ashcroft gallery. Worth a visit imo.
F1 testing starts today.
The outbreak, first discovered in three children who ate a bat, has caused 431 cases and 53 deaths
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/25/unknown-illness-kills-in-north-west-drc
Slightly more seriously, when I were a lad a couple of ours mooned through the bus window at a car on the motorway on the way back from a Duke of Edinburgh Award trip. Someone wrote down the bus company phone number, time and location. They were suspended.
Aside from slashed aid budgets and Trump, RFK and Elon competing to see who can most damage America's CDC.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5164108-house-republicans-budget-resolution-trump-agenda/
Should be popular, once it sinks in ...
but the fact that you believe 'reports' that British aid funds the Indian space program means you are even further down the rabbit hole than I thought.
Now the talk is of recalling parliament to create or topup a special defence fund, which would also need a 2 thirds majority. Let's see if people are willing to go along with this in the couple of weeks theoretically available.
https://www.sons-of-battery.de/collections/tesla-kollektion
1. Water bills
2. Energy bills
3. Council tax
4. Car tax
5. Broadband, phone and TV licence
6. Stamp duty
7. Hidden tax rises (fiscal drag)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg18pvz7kko
Anyone betting on a spring poll revival?
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
The universities are private enterprises, and can pay to advertise themselves.
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
e.g. this:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5e62181fe90e077e3c38a330/Gavi-Replenishment-campaign.pdf
It's a bit light in that it highlights the lack of enforcement of legislation aka bad behaviour. But lack of enforcement is almost de rigueur for recent governments. And coming back to the issue of 'council' housing. Most of this was passed onto Social Landlords as providers of Affordable Housing. They are increasing Social Housing every year though they may not build it themselves.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/social-landlords-continue-to-build-new-homes-according-to-rsh-statistics
It's the issue of strategic thinking that's missing. To build more to overcome shortages, you need skills and materials (and planning). These are the current restrictions though tax receipts for Housing Benefit are not. So paying increasing amounts of HB only adds to the inflation on rent inflation.
You can coordinate Rent control with strategic housebuilding plans to prevent excess profits in the rental (and mortgage) sector. The same arguments used for controls on energy.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Do you?
NEW THREAD
Excellent. He's judged it right.
Vaccination is a good for everyone. As is famine relief, as an example.
You can disagree with me, but we can all do without your personal attacks, thank you.
(Probably a hantavirus of some sort)
The misremembering of “funding the space programme” is understandable mutation of the original truth
And yes, I do think your position is immoral. I think it may also be inconsistent. If famine relief for a country where we have no direct interest - say, Ethiopia - is allowed, then why is a vaccination program in that same country not? Both save many lives - it's just that the lives saved by vaccination are invisible on the TV news. You can ignore them.
I thoroughly believe people should try to help themselves first. But if we live in a rich country - and we do - then I think there is a certain moral - if you like call it a Christian - requirement to help others, even if there is no obvious self-interest in that help, and the scale is limited.
Yesterday I said that I was in favour of the international aid cut, as these are not ordinary times. But cutting all aid might have first and second-order consequences for us down the road.
I don't see the evidence it's reducing international terrorism, which isn't driven by poverty.
I think your arguments on vaccinations are a straw-man, and about you feeling low on self-esteem this morning and wanting to attack someone else so you feel better about yourself.
We've all seen it before.
LOL.
My self-esteem is fine, thank you very much. I'm happy; I am keeping to my training plan, and am listening to my son playing with a friend downstairs before school. Life is good. It's just that I'd quite like it to be good for other people as well. And not just people I know. That does not mean I want to give everything away, but neither do I want to be Scrooge McDuck.
It's very sad. Maybe go for another walk.
As I said, I think my self-esteem is fine. I'm happy and content. I'd recommend it.