medical card uproar, a smoke screen over foreign aid?

strandsman

Since the budget last week I've been hearing nothing but all the uproar about the medical card issue, it's all over the news,internet,Facebook,radio, workplace etc but I've yet to hear anything about the 700 million euro we give to foreign aid every year, Why do people ignore this huge amount of money that is borrowed by Ireland and sent abroad, We the tax payer then have to pay this money back. Wouldn't 700 million euro pay allot of medical cards in this country? why do people not question this foreign aid "give away"? Is the medical card a smoke screen to cover over this huge amount of money exported on our behalf, I think I've heard foreign aid mentioned once last month on radio in a discussion on pre budget submissions. Why is it not spoken about in the media? If every other area of this country must face and absorb cutbacks why not foreign aid?

Sierra Oscar

The amount of aid we give has been cut in successive budgets, and was cut again in Budget 2014.

Things may be bad here, but try going over to a warn torn country and living there for a few years. You will quickly realize that there are a lot of people out there who are more needy than us despite our current difficulties, which pale in comparison to the difficulties of people being bombed out of their homes in places such as Damascus at the moment. I for one don't take issue with a tiny amount of our overall budget going towards helping these people.

Of course you are also forgetting that the aid we give, and our reputation as helping other states in need, gives us significant diplomatic soft power that makes it a worthwhile pursuit aside from it being a moral matter.

spank_inferno

This tired old chestnut?

No matter how bad people think it is here we are wealthier than almost all of the people on this small blue planet.

Plain & simple.

Personally I'd be happy for further domestic spending cuts to maintain our already much reduced foreign aid budget.

strandsman

If I walk down the main street on a Saturday afternoon I am usually confronted by several charities collecting money, I make my own decision to give or not, If I give a substantial amount of money to A or all charities then I will have nothing left for myself to pay my bills, Much like the current situation the country is in. Would you Spank or Sierra borrow money to give to a charity and spend the next 10 years paying off the debt? I doubt you would so why should the country. I would say that if a poll were taken on stopping foreign aid I would think that the majority would favour stopping it. Lets say the government decided to stop sending 600-700 million euro to foreign aid and what if the government then said to the Irish people "600- 700 million euro will be put back into your pockets through tax reductions so Please contribute this saving to the foreign aid charities you see on the main street" do you think people will? I doubt 50 million will be contributed to foreign aid. But at least people can make their own decision to contribute or not.

riffmongous

strandsman wrote: »

If I walk down the main street on a Saturday afternoon I am usually confronted by several charities collecting money, I make my own decision to give or not, If I give a substantial amount of money to A or all charities then I will have nothing left for myself to pay my bills, Much like the current situation the country is in. Would you Spank or Sierra borrow money to give to a charity and spend the next 10 years paying off the debt? I doubt you would so why should the country. I would say that if a poll were taken on stopping foreign aid I would think that the majority would favour stopping it. Lets say the government decided to stop sending 600-700 million euro to foreign aid and what if the government then said to the Irish people "600- 700 million euro will be put back into your pockets through tax reductions so Please contribute this saving to the foreign aid charities you see on the main street" do you think people will? I doubt 50 million will be contributed to foreign aid. But at least people can make their own decision to contribute or not.

I honestly don't think most Irish people would agree with you (maybe a poll could even be added to the thread?), I've always thought Irish people had a good sense of the importance of charity, both national and international and I would certainly hope that with our history that never changes.

sparkling sea

Come on people, donor countries generally give aid because it is in their own interest to do so. Undoubtedly some aid is given with humanitarian motives in mind; however, most foreign aid is given for variety of political, strategic and economic reasons that become a substantial benefit the donor countries in the longer term.

A huge problem for people who are losing the medical card is the loss of ancillary services that come from having medical card; lack of access to a public health nurse etc. Its so much more that Doctors fees or prescription charges.

rodento

Question is, is the aid going to wealthier nations

Victor

rodento wrote: »

Question is, is the aid going to wealthier nations

Irish Aid's programme countries are Ethiopia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia. www.ria.ie/getmedia/21e4baee-bad7-4e86-a37a-e88f97bb26bb/13.ISIA_22_O-Neill_187.pdf.aspx

Valetta

Most of the people losing medical cards can afford to pay for our heavily subsidized health care.

I have no problem with the government giving aid to people who are way wY worse off than ourselves.

riffmongous

Part of the problem I see is that while the aid goes to poor countries, too much of it is siphoned off by rich people within those countries. Fixing that makes far more sense imo than cutting off all aid.

Also if the medical card problem is so bad that people are losing access to doctors then why introduce a non means tested free access scheme for kids? Not to mention all the other non-means tested schemes we (or technically 'you') have

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

rodento

Victor wrote: »

Irish Aid's programme countries are Ethiopia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia. www.ria.ie/getmedia/21e4baee-bad7-4e86-a37a-e88f97bb26bb/13.ISIA_22_O-Neill_187.pdf.aspx

That doesn't answer the question, are these countries financially better off than us after our financial collapse

hfallada

You have to question the effectiveness of irish aid through. We give money to places to Uganda which will never have a functioning economy with its massive families. Iran and China put placed a huge importance on smaller families and their economies grow rapidly. Take the US during Bush administration put a huge importance on "abstinence only" family planning. This cost hundreds of million dollars, but caused HIV rates to increase as condom use decreased. Most Asian countries believe smaller families = better economy. The same cant be said for africa

You can throw borrowed billions at aid, but the chances are it wont improve lives. Especially Uganda with its serious issues regarding gay rights. Why should we give money to a country that believes gay people should be killed? Isnt the point of aid to improve lives. Stopping aid might actually improve lives in these circumstances.

spank_inferno

Domestically African countries are lumbered with higher taxes than countries they are competing with.

Foreign investment is difficult & domestic consumers are priced out of consuming much.

I agree that the best gift the west could give Africa is the gift of good governance, however we should not be blind to immediate needs of some of the worlds poorest.

Also.... Our tax euros are given to NGOs who do the work on the ground.
They are less agenda driven than much of the "aid" approved by the US congress.

So anyway.... I support the foreign aid budget.
If the country needs more money they could ask say the the millionairs in the horse racing industry (currently tax excempt).... Or Google (who pay 0.2% tax on their earnings).

Plenty of money there for aid.

riffmongous

rodento wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question, are these countries financially better off than us after our financial collapse

Well a quick Google shows how low the life expectancy is in most of those countries

Victor

riffmongous wrote: »

Part of the problem I see is that while the aid goes to poor countries, too much of it is siphoned off by rich people within those countries. Fixing that makes far more sense imo than cutting off all aid.

Are we certain of this? Money isn't just handed over, projects need to be completed for the money to be handed over.

sparkling sea wrote: »

Come on people, donor countries generally give aid because it is in their own interest to do so. Undoubtedly some aid is given with humanitarian motives in mind; however, most foreign aid is given for variety of political, strategic and economic reasons that become a substantial benefit the donor countries in the longer term.

So, what are Ireland's motivations?

rodento wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question, are these countries financially better off than us after our financial collapse

If you put an average person from Ireland and one from each of the programme countries in a room, the Irish person would have twice the income of all the others put together.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2004rank.html?countryname=Ireland&countrycode=ei&regionCode=eur&rank=24#eiRank country GDP - per capita (PPP) Date of Information
24 Ireland 42600 2012 est.
119 Timor-Leste 10000 2012 est.
170 Vietnam 3600 2012 est.
191 Lesotho 2200 2012 est.
200 Zambia 1700 2012 est.
201 Tanzania 1600 2012 est.
206 Uganda 1400 2012 est.
210 Mozambique 1200 2012 est.
211 Ethiopia 1200 2012 est.
220 Malawi 900 2012 est.

Moses101

Didn't that jackass gilmore borrow millions last year on our behalve to give to uganda,for some assh*le in de gov. There to run off with it.

riffmongous

Victor wrote: »

Are we certain of this? Money isn't just handed over, projects need to be completed for the money to be handed over.

Well evidence-wise I was going by this article I read earlier http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/foreign-aid-squandered-by-the-pool-29023234.html

And ignoring the horrible way the article is written (how a witness protection program and promoting a young scientist competition made it in beside 500€ sofa covers is a mystery to me) I don't like the idea of so much money going on making sure the ambassador is living the high life. I guess it's important to make sure your ambassadors project the right image but I don't like the idea of this money coming from our foreign aid

Victor

Moses101 wrote: »

Didn't that jackass gilmore borrow millions last year on our behalve to give to uganda,for some assh*le in de gov. There to run off with it.

As I understand it, the money was returned, but nobody has been reprimanded for taking it.

riffmongous wrote: »

Well evidence-wise I was going by this article I read earlier http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/foreign-aid-squandered-by-the-pool-29023234.html

And ignoring the horrible way the article is written (how a witness protection program and promoting a young scientist competition made it in beside 500€ sofa covers is a mystery to me) I don't like the idea of so much money going on making sure the ambassador is living the high life. I guess it's important to make sure your ambassadors project the right image but I don't like the idea of this money coming from our foreign aid

I strongly suspect they are confusing the Departmental spending with Irish Aid spending.

J.P.M

And this crap will continue, unless we do something about it

rodento

riffmongous wrote: »

Well a quick Google shows how low the life expectancy is in most of those countries

What's that got to do with it

We have a huge national dept and are giving away money we can't afford to countries that are in better financial position than us, Zambia for example has a better credit rating than ours

strandsman

Victor wrote: »

Irish Aid's programme countries are Ethiopia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia. www.ria.ie/getmedia/21e4baee-bad7-4e86-a37a-e88f97bb26bb/13.ISIA_22_O-Neill_187.pdf.aspx

you could throw billions at these countries tomorrow and they will still come back for more, they need to learn to stand on their own two feet, If the government of their country is corrupt,they and only they should deal with that. Don't forget, our taxes increase when more money is borrowed for foreign aid thus reducing our disposable income which reduces money given to local and foreign charities, Our ability to purchase produce from foreign aid countries is reduced if we have less disposable income which in turn has a bigger impact on that countries economy and people.

micosoft

rodento wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question, are these countries financially better off than us after our financial collapse

Seriously? You actually asked this "question"?

One thing absent in this country is a complete and utter lack of perspective. We are not a poor country. At the worst we went back to 2004 in GDP terms which as I recall wasn't such a bad year.

An interesting article here on the international response to the Irish Great Famine. India and Turkey being significant contributors. Interestingly some of the commentators on here suggesting it's Africans fault due to their large families etc would find great solace in Punch magazine in 1847.

Actually that makes two things - perspective and a sense of history

micosoft

strandsman wrote: »

you could throw billions at these countries tomorrow and they will still come back for more, they need to learn to stand on their own two feet, If the government of their country is corrupt,they and only they should deal with that. Don't forget, our taxes increase when more money is borrowed for foreign aid thus reducing our disposable income which reduces money given to local and foreign charities, Our ability to purchase produce from foreign aid countries is reduced if we have less disposable income which in turn has a bigger impact on that countries economy and people.

Yes. I'm sure a lot of Germans are saying exactly this about the corrupt and stupid Irish. If we kept our money instead of bailing out the Irish we would have money to buy their Kerrygold.*

*Don't come out with the chestnut that the Germans were bailing themselves out by bailing us out. They owe us nothing. Same silly argument can be made for Africa. Bankrupt Irish are bailing out themselves by exporting the only goods they actually own the means of production to (agrilculture) to Africa. As a side note we export a hell of a lot more then we import from Africa.

riffmongous

rodento wrote: »

What's that got to do with it

We have a huge national dept and are giving away money we can't afford to countries that are in better financial position than us, Zambia for example has a better credit rating than ours

What has that got to do with it?

RobbingBandit

The aid money is going to more than a few questionable governments that do not use it to aid their citizens, totally off topic here with this but imagine if a bunch of chuggers were standing on Henry Street in Dublin today asking you to donate to the nuclear armament program for a random government,rather than feed the children etc.

We are giving money to the wrong places and or people,yes many of those being cut can afford it but why not target the right areas first such as pensions for TDs, money being thrown away on tribunals that lead to nothing and even foreign aid in cases where it is going to corrupt regimes

rodento

riffmongous wrote: »

What has that got to do with it?

We have to cut 1 billion from our Heath budget because we can't afford it and we are borrowing over 700 mill a year to pay for an aid program ???

It doesn't make sense

Victor

RobbingBandit wrote: »

The aid money is going to more than a few questionable governments that do not use it to aid their citizens, totally off topic here with this but imagine if a bunch of chuggers were standing on Henry Street in Dublin today asking you to donate to the nuclear armament program for a random government,rather than feed the children etc.

So which of these countries has a "nuclear armament program" - Ethiopia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia?

Answer: None

RobbingBandit

Victor wrote: »

So which of these countries has a "nuclear armament program" - Ethiopia, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia?

Answer: None

No they don't but it's damn sure the money is going on weapons rather than food aid, bad analogy on my part really.

spank_inferno

RobbingBandit wrote: »

No they don't but it's damn sure the money is going on weapons rather than food aid, bad analogy on my part really.

So when the funding is given to Concern who build wells & classrooms & medical training.... This in your "mind" is money spent on weapons?

Christ on a bike .... This baseless rational is frankly moronic.

K-9

strandsman wrote: »

you could throw billions at these countries tomorrow and they will still come back for more, they need to learn to stand on their own two feet, If the government of their country is corrupt,they and only they should deal with that. Don't forget, our taxes increase when more money is borrowed for foreign aid thus reducing our disposable income which reduces money given to local and foreign charities, Our ability to purchase produce from foreign aid countries is reduced if we have less disposable income which in turn has a bigger impact on that countries economy and people.

RobbingBandit wrote: »

No they don't but it's damn sure the money is going on weapons rather than food aid, bad analogy on my part really.

All you can do is target it more at food aid and education and put more safeguards in place so that it doesn't end up on weapons.

As for your point about Governments, we can't interfere, and they should stand on their own two feet, what if the people from India and Turkey who gave relief here during the Famine had the same attitude? Sure we were part of the Empire next door to England.

I just don't think you can give up on so many countries like that, it sends out a message that they are on their own and nobody cares.

RobbingBandit

spank_inferno wrote: »

So when the funding is given to Concern who build wells & classrooms & medical training.... This in your "mind" is money spent on weapons?

Christ on a bike .... This baseless rational is frankly moronic.

IMAGINE that you didn't read my post closely enough to see the word Imagine, now that is frankly moronic.

Sorry really thought this thread was in after hours for some reason, sincer apologies for any offence caused.

RobbingBandit

K-9 wrote: »

All you can do is target it more at food aid and education and put more safeguards in place so that it doesn't end up on weapons.

As for your point about Governments, we can't interfere, and they should stand on their own two feet, what if the people from India and Turkey who gave relief here during the Famine had the same attitude? Sure we were part of the Empire next door to England.

I just don't think you can give up on so many countries like that, it sends out a message that they are on their own and nobody cares.

I understand your points fully but I just think it is money being squandered that should be spent on our own, for example I am 31 year old adult with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder, there is absolutely no support available for me from the HSE who again have had their funding cut, yes it's sad people are screwed over in other countries but I think we should look after our own concerns first, all I am going to say on this as it is getting way off topic.

rodento

I've always wondered how much money given to irish charities is spent on overheads like wages and salaries

They express amazement that, for example, Justin Kilcullen, the head of Trocaire, was on €146,000 in 2010 and €133,000 in 2011, while former Concern CEO Tom Arnold, who retired earlier this year was on about €130,000, especially when they are dealing with "the poorest of the poor".


http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/eamon-delaney-a-charity-boss-paid-over-100k-lets-get-real-29491252.html

goose2005

It's odd that people are horrified that "the rich" or "the 1%" or "the elites" don't care about us, but if we don't care about those with less money, power or opportunities than us, why should those with more money, power or opportunities than us care about us? Do we deserve consideration when we're happy to see anyone below us go to the wall?

micosoft

RobbingBandit wrote: »

I understand your points fully but I just think it is money being squandered that should be spent on our own, for example I am 31 year old adult with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder, there is absolutely no support available for me from the HSE who again have had their funding cut, yes it's sad people are screwed over in other countries but I think we should look after our own concerns first, all I am going to say on this as it is getting way off topic.

And where do you draw the "our own" line? Why should I pay for your treatment? I or my family are not affected by autistic spectrum disorder. But it's likely going by my family history I'm more interested in stroke care..... see how "local" things can get.

Ultimately its about empathy and realising that Ireland has gotten huge support in the past from other countries. Even if that were not the case we can always think of it as paying it forward.

micosoft

rodento wrote: »

I've always wondered how much money given to irish charities is spent on overheads like wages and salaries

They express amazement that, for example, Justin Kilcullen, the head of Trocaire, was on €146,000 in 2010 and €133,000 in 2011, while former Concern CEO Tom Arnold, who retired earlier this year was on about €130,000, especially when they are dealing with "the poorest of the poor".


http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/eamon-delaney-a-charity-boss-paid-over-100k-lets-get-real-29491252.html

Yes - lets get real - Concern have over 3200 employees and a turnover of over €120m and are in over 20 countries. And if they screw up (food aid) people could die. It's a reasonable income for someone with so much responsibility and it's not ethical or fair to demand that someone in the position is paid less then that.

K-9

RobbingBandit wrote: »

I understand your points fully but I just think it is money being squandered that should be spent on our own, for example I am 31 year old adult with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder, there is absolutely no support available for me from the HSE who again have had their funding cut, yes it's sad people are screwed over in other countries but I think we should look after our own concerns first,

That's terrible, my concern would be why when money was thrown at the HSE, why wasn't some given for resources for ASD?

I can only point to what others did and say the aid budget has been cut too. AFAIK we've always had an aid budget, even in the 80's when things were arguably worse.

all I am going to say on this as it is getting way off topic.

In fairness it isn't, the title is a bit misleading but the OP is very much about foreign aid.

strandsman

rodento wrote: »

I've always wondered how much money given to irish charities is spent on overheads like wages and salaries

They express amazement that, for example, Justin Kilcullen, the head of Trocaire, was on €146,000 in 2010 and €133,000 in 2011, while former Concern CEO Tom Arnold, who retired earlier this year was on about €130,000, especially when they are dealing with "the poorest of the poor".


http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/eamon-delaney-a-charity-boss-paid-over-100k-lets-get-real-29491252.html

Dont forget about GOAL! was it this year or last year there were curious going's on in that organisation, corporate governance comes to mind. Didn't O'shea step down or was he removed.Is his daughter still working there?
For every euro given to charity isn't it true that most of it is absorbed into administration? Foreign aid more of an industry than a charity

Victor

strandsman wrote: »

For every euro given to charity isn't it true that most of it is absorbed into administration?

No it isn't. It would seem you are either re-hashing wrong information or making things up.

strandsman

Victor wrote: »

No it isn't. It would seem you are either re-hashing wrong information or making things up.

so have you got a breakdown of a euro donated?, How much goes to admin?

Victor

strandsman wrote: »

so have you got a breakdown of a euro donated?, How much goes to admin?

I suggest you pick a charity and check their accounts.

strandsman

Read this below, Not all foreign aid organisations but still it's a disgrace the money these people are on. Why give to charity? To keep these people in luxury they are used to I suppose!! The local school and community hall is all I'm going to contribute to from now on.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/bosses-of-14-charities-get-salaries-over-100k-29707277.html,

oscarBravo

I'm confused as to why people are so upset that the chief executives of large organisations are being paid salaries commensurate with being the chief executive of a large organisation.

strandsman

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm confused as to why people are so upset that the chief executives of large organisations are being paid salaries commensurate with being the chief executive of a large organisation.

Don't forget that is only the payment of chief executives,They probably get a company car, health cover, travel expenses, pension etc etc, keep in mind the managers working in those organisations also, More company cars etc etc. So when I see media adverts from charities requesting help for people in foreign countries, I think to myself those people will have to wait in the queue for help as the "organisation" will help itself to the funds first!

djpbarry

strandsman wrote: »

...I've yet to hear anything about the 700 million euro we give to foreign aid every year...

A quick search on this forum will fix that:

Borrowing Money to Provide Foreign Aid
The Politics of Foreign Aid
Cut back on Foreign Aid?
Slash foreign aid contribution
Irish AID 2011 budget
Irelands 2012 budget: How much for Overseas AID?

RandomName2

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The amount of aid we give has been cut in successive budgets, and was cut again in Budget 2014.

In absolute terms we have allocated around additional 100 million this year, compared to last. That's a "cut".

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Things may be bad here, but try going over to a warn torn country and living there for a few years. You will quickly realize that there are a lot of people out there who are more needy than us despite our current difficulties, which pale in comparison to the difficulties of people being bombed out of their homes in places such as Damascus at the moment. I for one don't take issue with a tiny amount of our overall budget going towards helping these people.

Notwithstanding the fact that simply flushing money to fix matters such as these has had demonstrably poor results, or has been used to prop up kleptocracies, why should this be taken out of peoples' taxes? There are a wealth of charities available in Ireland for people to give money to - and they are free from the normal expenses that ordinary businesses are subject to.

Involuntary charity - ins't that an oxymoron?

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Of course you are also forgetting that the aid we give, and our reputation as helping other states in need, gives us significant diplomatic soft power that makes it a worthwhile pursuit aside from it being a moral matter.

Personally, I'm not forgetting the billions that we have given to date - which, quite frankly hasn't made us look particularly good. I believe the international political scene thought us spendthrift when they had to bail us out.

Although I imagine the Ugandan military is still thankful for the jets.

alastair

RandomName2 wrote: »

In absolute terms we have allocated around additional 100 million this year, compared to last.

Not sure how you figure that?

Department of Foreign Affairs funding for overseas development assistance will be cut by €14.1 million this year, the sixth successive year that funding has been cut.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/overseas-development-aid-to-be-cut-by-14-1-million-1.1561873

oscarBravo

strandsman wrote: »

Don't forget that is only the payment of chief executives,They probably get a company car, health cover, travel expenses, pension etc etc, keep in mind the managers working in those organisations also, More company cars etc etc.

Just so we're clear: your problem with charities is that they have managers? You'd be happy for charities to receive money as long as they don't have any employees whose job it is to actually run the charity?

strandsman

oscarBravo wrote: »

Just so we're clear: your problem with charities is that they have managers? You'd be happy for charities to receive money as long as they don't have any employees whose job it is to actually run the charity?

maybe you should look at it like this, A person running a charity is on 100k or 200k plus a year, managers on 50-100K, So If I or the taxpayer donates 1000 euro to a charity who gets the money first? Does the salary get paid first or the person/area in need? Think about it. It's an industry the same as any other and they product they are selling is the image of starving child or a war torn country. Do the employees of these foreign aid organisation forego a weekly wage to ensure much needed funds arrive at a particular destination? I doubt it.

RandomName2

alastair wrote: »

Not sure how you figure that?



http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/overseas-development-aid-to-be-cut-by-14-1-million-1.1561873

Yeah I know - it was €500 last year...