Foreign aid SHOULD NEVER be given by way of CASH.

The other point I would make, similar to Bellys first post, when our people are suffering, charity starts at home.

For too long now, our former government, and their supporters have been in denial about just where we sit.

There is trouble brewing and we need every spare cent we can get.

Finally, as for most poor countries, my best advice would be some serious birth control, otherwise we are simply contributing to a problem that will simply not go away.

rehctub,

".....when our people are suffering, charity starts at home.

For too long now, our former government, and their supporters have been in denial about just where we sit."

Did you happen to miss this earlier link?

http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/aussies-the-worlds-richest-people-credit-suisse-20131009-2v7qy.html

That's: "Aussies the world's richest people: Credit Suisse"

rehctub. I am talking about our Pacific neighbors and Australian aid, I'm not familiar with Australian aid outside of the Pacific region. There is about 16 "countries" in the Pacific to which about 20% of our aid goes. from Fiji and Vanuatu, 2 countries I have visited in the past year, who receive $50m or $60m each the Solomon Islands about $190m the biggest in Australian aid down to Niue and the Cook Islands, I hope to visit there next year, it gets most of its help from New Zealand, who receive around $6m each.
You said;
Foreign aid SHOULD NEVER be given by way of CASH. Its not, our aid to these countries is program based and not in the form of cash handouts, besides the people surprisingly have little need for cash, what would they spend it on? wide screen TV's. What is needed is spending on basic health, education, and such like services, far more important than cash. As for population Fiji has about 900,000 hardly overpopulated with many living in rural villages. A little country like Niue the population is falling.
"There is trouble brewing and we need every spare cent we can get." I don't agree that Australia is that "poor" we need to cut aid in this way.

Oh so funny Paul, my post was infinitely more sophisticated than your reply. You need an injection of lighten the f^ck up man.

Hey Poirot I agree we are living in the best country in the world and we have the most amazing lifestyle, and I've been to around 50 different countries and the only thing we're missing is culcha and any sense we're actually part of a wider world.

I met a French guy the other day and he actually likes that about this place, go figure.

Anyway I think people, y'all, are talkin' at cross purposes. There is two ishoooos. The pick a finger out of your ass figure we 'should' be spending, in cash, and the best mechanism for actually helping these unlucky people.

Actually there's many. There's the give a man a fish or teach him to fish yadda yadda, there's government vs NGOs, effectiveness and control, democracy and the use of tax dollars, there's a whole swathe of unethical business practices, there's tourism, there's protectionism, but no, Paul is obsessed with his .5% cash, decided on by who knows who, perhaps an expert in the human rights industry or some such parasite, trekking around the world and nodding earnestly in conferences in exotic locations.

It's the way of the world, sure, but all I'm rambling about is it's a much more complex issue than .5% man.

To me, it's like people complaining about the price of groceries, and at the same time paying 70 basis points too much on their $500k mortgage.

So, you have to take these 'cuts' in context of the wider policy. I'm not for or against this comparison with an arbitrary figure of .5%, I just find it curious and amusing. Besides as someone said, the game is really about the threat of what aid you can withdraw for political purposes. Aid has always really been a means to an end, like the godfather paying a few gambling debts, he's gonna want something of your soul, and the bleeding hearts god bless them think it's about helping poor people

' we need to maintain that material lifestyle, which for many is a burden. Lots of Australians with their busy materialistic lifestyles have lost sight of so many of the real values in life, family, friends, the value of interacting with other human beings, the satisfaction of helping to add to the quality of both their lives and the lives of others.'

They have 'lost sight' in your opinion, based on your projection of what their values should be. Other people have 'lost sight' of The Lord, some have 'lost sight' of the environment, I reckon lots of people have 'lost sight' of the true nature and essence of sport.

So.... government should take their money away and give it to some people in other countries. It will enrich them! Be good for them! Says Paul.

Look, Paul, glad you're happy with your lifestyle, and glad you're discovered a new god to replace your old materialist god, I get it that you're a reformed smoker, but some people still enjoy a toke. No doubt you have an economic situation that allows you to sacrifice whatever it is you do. A certain buffer not every citizen would have.

What is too much, is you deciding for all people what you believe they should be sacrificing for others, by way of where their tax dollars are used. Just like a greenie living in the inner city bemoaning the bogan who lives in Penrith why he uses his car so much.

Just accept people have different means, and different values. Maybe they mow their neighbors lawn while you're off helping Fijians. Maybe they feel passionate about that.

Poirot if you had even a trace of analytical ability you would have understood the true message of the article you linked.

The message any one with half a brain should get from it is not the spin it is pushing, but what it means.

That is that our housing is greatly overpriced.

That tens of thousands of Ozzies are struggling because of that.

They are not made rich by the price of housing, but made very poor as they struggle with the effort to buy a home, or pay the rent required to service the high price of whatever they are renting.

Slip out into the Pacific & you will find people we are supposed to fund with foreign aid, who can feed themselves with less than a couple of hours effort a day, & clothes themselves for a few minutes effort a week.

The same people can house themselves for a couple of weeks effort a year. If anyone should be receiving aid it should be us from them. I used to wonder how we ever convinced any of them to work in our style.

Forty years of this work earns us the right to retire to sit on a beach, & think about catching a fish or two. Hell this is what they do all their lives for gods sake.

Continued.