´óÏó´«Ã½

Bill Gates Confronted on Eugenics by We Are Change



Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman, philanthropist, and 2010 Bilderberg attendee.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Why was Peter Mandelson at the Bilderberg meeting?

Ask bill gates about his sterilty programme for the third world.

The programme was billed as 'Choosing to Die' but ‘Choosing Not to Live’ would give scope for broader debate on a more urgent issue, eg:





These links illustrate that at least two members of the Royal Family are not afraid to speak up on issues of vital importance. Controversial comment from both Church and Crown is a form of diversity that we should all welcome. I’m neither a royalist nor an equality freak, just glad that we have some checks and balances against the absolute power of presidents and religious leaders who are exerting totalitarian rule over their ‘subjects’ in many parts of the world.

We should pay more attention to the views of those who have not the dangerous levels of real power to abuse and corrupt but are free from the fetters of political correctness and party politics and should influence opinion. Prince Philip’s 90th birthday comment on population control justifies a full scale debate on the greatest cause of the Earth’s depletion and destruction, yet (deliberately) avoided by those in power.

AGENDA-FREE AARONOVITCH?

Not that I have noticed. What is his motivation here?

Not chosen just for EDGINESS surely?

CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME - CULLING IN A PALACE?

Greater love hath no royal than he lay down someone else's life for his own ends.

Like Dave Allen said of healers: "They don't do teeth": royals don't do humility.

JASPER CARROT SAW IT COMING

Please read the following to the melody of 'How much is that Doggie in the Window'.

Carrot had a routine about the rum-te-tum music played behind Teletext and Cefax, in the olden days. In his act he would verbalise a supposed TV 'item' of death and mayhem, then 'back it' with some banal music.

NOW: every time I am linked to a YouTube regarding Armageddon and its Dark Riders, I GET DUMB MUSIC! Has the Dark Lord hacked into everything? Will nothing EVER be reported again WITH GRAVITAS?

GATES' ANSWER TO BOGEY CO2 IS TO BURN U 238 LIKE A ROMAN CANDLE (#1 link)

He listed renewables but somehow left out the energy of the oceans.

Probably just an oversight. . .

He does a lot of good work for Charidy.

Brilliant and wonderful work by Mr. Gates & his foundation on the vaccination. Can you please ask him when he is going to reveal his next scheme on how he plans to increase world food production to feed the kids who are saved by the vaccination? I mean, it would be pretty dumb to for children to survive pneumonia only to die from starvation, right? After all, he's one of the smartest & richest people on the planet. So, he must have a plan. I do apologise if he's already revealed it and I missed it.

#4 Did you watch this very sad programme Indi?



To quote an Indian man on the programme who's wife was carrying one of these babies, "women are thick, the only thing they can do is have babies".

With a general attitude like that, doesn't bode well for women!

#6(re#4)

Thanks, I’ll add ‘humility’ to my English characteristics that have allowed our country to be EU’s most crowded. Together with Complacency, Humility, Apathy and Tolerance, it seems all we can do is CHAT about it.
Meanwhile, try these for size barrie:

Is it true J. Paxman considered putting in a bid to buy ´óÏó´«Ã½ TV Centre? And he only dropped the idea because he found that his ego wouldn't fit into it?

MAD MAD MALE WORLD (#10)

Hi Lizzy. Only one thing worse than a woman who believes she is thick, because a man told her she is - that's a woman who thinks she wants to be like a man BECAUSE A WOE-MAN TOLD HER!

Remember the 'Mum' roll-on ad?

If there was ever evidence to prove that the whole object of ConDem welfare reform is basically providing a welfare state for the stock market parasites, perhaps today's announcement by Lord Freud that the 26k cap on benefits will be suspended in certain circumstances. It does not take that much imagination to perceive that exceptional circumstances probably means cases where stock market parasites are renting out even not that big houses on 100% housing benefit in London for perhaps over 20k a year. Of course if their benefit claimant tenants were forced to move out they would loose their income, and in addition house prices would fall in the local market. This is a double whammy for Freud's stock market parasite mates, as if they have to sell their house into a falling market they will also have to sell the shares they have borrowed against it ?

FOOL OR KNAVE - DAVE OR DAVE? (#14)

The Age of Perversity is getting surreal.

We all know that with Westminster, what you see is not what you get. But it is also apparent that blaggers are not very bright - and Westminster loves blaggers (especially as Prime Ministers). But some of the others are deeply Machiavellian - aka knaves.

It's not optimum management of a state is it!

SPOIL PARTY GAMES - DISMANTLE WESTMINSTER

Gates=Great. At least the money for all those copies of Windows & Office I bought is finally going somewhere worthwhile...

NHS - we have a pattern emerging here of how Mr Cameron runs the Government:

1. Listen to fuitcakes @ Daily Mail, IEA, ASI, Reason/Heritage Foundation etc and swallow ideas aimed at smashing the state ASAP and cutting off benefits to the poor.

2. Float policies based on 1. above and pay out the rope to Cabinet Ministers to get on with it.

3. Act al surprised and "listening" when the outrage from professionals, carers, police, social services, charities, military, civl service etc etc etc reaches howling point.

4. Row back HARD on the whiole idea, superceed relevant Cabinet Mnister with "new No.10 Initiative" and slip into damage limitation mode.

5. Ask the people involved to tell you what REALLY needs doing - then trumpet it as your own idea - and hang Cabinet Minister out to dry!

6. Sit back and smile - you're shafted any potential rivals, you're seen as "listening" and you've proved just how far you can push it before the brown stuff hits the extractor.

7. If things get REALLY sticky with the Tory banckbenchers, reach for Clegg and blame him for the U turns.

8, Brown & New LAbour can still be blamed for just about anything (other than the better than predicted economic performance during your 1st six months) - indeed he was probably responsible for personally lending $$$ to the sub-prime mortgage market in the USA which started the credit crisis, which led to the UK bank bailout and the deficit!

The only downside with this is that you get through Cabinet Ministers pretty quickly..

Here's the current "Dead Duck" Index - 0=OK, 5=A la Orange

Kenneth Clarke - 50% prison discounts - 5
Teresa May - police cuts - 3
Caroline Spellman - selling off the nation's forests -4
Andrew Landsley - NHS Reforms - 5
Dr Fox - Defence Cuts - 3/4
IDS - Welfare Reforms - 2
William Hague - SAS style mission to Libya - 2
David Willetts - Student Loans - 4
Eric Pickles - local govet cuts/finance - 2
George Osborne - growth stalled & debt rising - 3

I have this vision of a Steve Bell cartoon where Cameron is running a chinese restaurant on the quiet out of the side of No 10, offering Sweet & Sour (but mainly sour) duck suppers...

#9 I don’t suppose you and I were the only people concerned about ‘charitable’ outcomes, but most people seem reluctant to see or discuss the bigger issue.

Similar to Prince Philip’s comment about ‘bunny-huggers’ who see only the individual animal and ignore the long-term conservation and survival of all species. Mankind is fighting against natural laws and appears to be winning each individual battle, but ultimately will surely lose the war. I suppose we could feed another few billion human mouths by sacrificing conservation in the interests of homosap.
Eg We could kill the 150,000 grey seal (each consume 5 kilos of fish per day) then the whales, Gannets and other sea-birds could be disposed of together with any other species that compete in the food chain. That would probably allow another 10 billion homosaps to survive in a rather crowded and barren landscape, until the level of Calhoun’s behavioural sink is reached, aggression sets in and all-out war manages the problem.

#10. No I didn’t see the programme liz; reading your link was enough. I try to keep my blood pressure in check by limiting my intake of horror stories to one copy of Daily Mail and one Panorama per week.

Factory farming, genetic engineering and outsourcing have been applied to most other things, so I suppose the development of mail-order babies was inevitable, but by an alien catalytic surrogate? Wow, that’s really progress !

#17 No, we're not. For others, it's an absolute no-no to discuss the bigger issues. What perplexes me is that on the one hand, we're told to cut down on CO2 emissions for the sake of our descendants. But on the other hand, population growth, which directly contributes to rising CO2 emissions is never discussed. Is it really so difficult to see that the 2 are directly related?

I saw the Prince Philip interview and I was really depressed that a 46-yr old man (me) was agreeing with a 90-yr old man & we're both in the minority. Like I said, the great and the good have a plan which I hope they will share with us mortals...soon.

What about the flash mob lootings occuring across the USA Newsnight, are you going to report this phenomena?

MSM in the US are now beginning to do so...

Chicago Police Brace for 'Flash Mob' Attacks

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

what a stitch up! Who choose the people on the sofas - it might as well be sponsored by Dignitas!! Are the bbc going to give/allow the same level of coverage to the people who are anti euthanasia?

EUTHANASIA

As a Belgian citizen who has lived in England for the past 2 years this is one of the many points I have found this country to be very behind on. The first problem I have with tonight’s Newsnight special is the fact that religion is brought into the discussion of euthanasia. Why? It is a personal choice! Whilst someone’s believes may play a role in their opinion on the matter of euthanasia it is still personal. Religion should have no place in this argument and the Rt Revd Michael Langrish Bishop of Exeter should not have had a place around your table.

Another point of bother was that many times the topic seemed to trail onto subjects such as suicide and ending life support which are things that should always be kept separate as are not the same as euthanasia. Connecting these subjects can be highly dangerous and misleading. This seemed to have already affected Liz Carr who expressed a fear of a legislation legalising euthanasia. If it is not something you have personally chosen for there is nothing to fear, nobody will be forced to undergo this and she did not seem to fully understand this fact.

Another argument made by Carr against legalising euthanasia was that it was only a minority of people that the legislation would apply to and therefore should not happen. This is probably the worst argument raised in the whole debate. A brief thought and one can come up with hundreds of laws already in place for minorities (think of abortion, out of all pregnancies very few end with abortions yet the option is there when needed). The point is hardly worth mentioning as it is such as easy one to dismiss.

Very moving programme by Terry Pratchett on the right to die tonight - and an excellent debate afterwards by Jeremy, Purdy et al. Why should someone have to travel to Switzerland to be able to die with dignity, and not be allowed to do so in the UK? I fully agree with the right to euthanasia. Besides anything, we do not allow animals to suffer if they are in great pain, and we can have them out down. Why should a human being (of his/her own accord) not be able to have the same choice? Excellent selection of guests too :o)

Excellent regular Newsnight particular Jeremy's debate with Gates et al. Just a note for the people who want to cut aid money to various parts of the globe - aid money is loaned and paid back with interest. It isn't just a free for all at all:p

BILL GATES IS ODD AND RICH - (THIS IS A TELLING COMMENT ON OUR AGE)

But he is clearly more zealous than wise. The world needs no more zealots (one Blair is enough).

THE WORLD NEEDS WISDOM.

Nuff sed

Beware the well meaning philanthropist bearing gifts of $billions..chances are he'll be a liberal.

We'll start with this first..aid is a racket..got it? good..next:
Bill Gates means well - so it appears. He was never asked about his donations to Planned Parenthood..the charge of him being a eugenicists does stick with the man.

Glaxosmithkline are are drug cartel with massive mark-up on their products. There business ethics makes Don Corleone look like an honest ice cream sales man.

And the man from Africa represents the countrymen of his continent...the begging bowl pushed out yet again because they don't have the resource, the ability or wherewithal to govern themselves... or roll out vaccine programmes for their own peoples.


Why is the UK the largest giver of aid. Well in the UK we have cats and dogs and donkey sactuaries..in the poor countries these animals are transport systems or dinner...do I need to spell it out for you..!
Liberalism is a mental disorder and laws need enacted so that anybody wishing to become an MP should have a medical examination to ensure they are free from this unpleasent illness, an illiness which can financially burden others who are free form this unpleasant condition. At present our Govt are full of liberalism...something needs to be done about that, and soon.

were we supposed to take that discussion that was had in the newsnight studio serious by the way?

THANKS DEBBY (#22)

I won't re-post all my usual points. ´óÏó´«Ã½ reporting is first EDGY, second artistic, and (a poor) third, edifying. Religion presents 'life' as separate from matter, on a par with 'spirit', 'evil', and the Holy Ghost. It suits them, just as imaginary money suits bankers. Wisdom it isn't. (#24)

THIS IS THE AGE OF PERVERSITY.

LIVING WITHIN THE LIE EXTENDS TO MAN'S INHUMANITY TO MAN (#21)

Being born is an imposition and killing the unborn is a legal option; against this fact, refusal to let the competent living terminate their own continuance IS PERVERSE.

The only reason humans have evolved, is because the universe is programmed for a balance of complexity v decay (entropy) in which complexity CAN win for a while, whereupon consciousness emerges.

The sum total of misery, current among the billions on the planet, simply from BEING, is vastly exacerbated by man's inhumanity to man; nowhere less than in the 'developed world'. Even if wholesale pressurised death broke out (an idea which is easily demolished) IT WOULD NOT REGISTER ON THE SCALE OF ATROCITY ENDURED BY SOME OF THE LIVING, AT THE HANDS OF OTHERS.

BILL GATES IS (REDACTED) AND RICH - (THIS IS A TELLING COMMENT ON OUR AGE) #24

But he is clearly more (redacted) than (redacted). The world needs no more zealots. (redacted)

THE WORLD NEEDS WISDOM.

Nuff sed

Right to die:

I've watched hundreds of people die as a paramedic in the 1970s.

I've drawn only one conclusion from this: die a good death - one where you're as happy as you can be to leave, where those around you are reconciled to your passing and the vain hope of a last minute miracle has been firmly dispensed with and the biology of death is managed to make it as painless and peaceful as possible.

Pointless invasive medical procedures should not happen -a gentle process of reconciling impending death should allow the person dying to slip away peacefully whilst those left behind should reflect on their relationship with the dying individual, make their peace and bring to end end their concious living relationship in love and affection.

There is no role for the state, the church or society in this process - only the medical profession in providing a good death through the use of paliative drugs, counselling and physical care. If there is no realistic prospect of prolonging life and avoiding suffering, then its the job of the medical profession to ramp up palative drug administratiion until it overcomes the biology of pain and suffering and aids passing on.

If as a society we don't accept this model, then we support the opposite - a pointless and futile attempt to drag out existence for ideological reasons in defiance of the biological realities - in other words, cruelty. I've nothing against people who are prepared to suffer and make their families suffer too, but they should not have the right to inflict their supernatural obsessions on everyone else.

If someone is terminally ill, then they should have the right to decide when to bring their suffering to an end and we need to put in place a legal process that ensures this is done without undue pressure and whilst of a sound mind.

Terry Pratchett's condition is terminal - he knows it - and he wants to be allowed to decide at what point he wants to die before his personality and what it is to be that person ceases to be, even if his body remains functional. I see no reason to prevent him from making that choice and I utterly reject and refute the right of organised religion to an opinion about this in terms of what the law should be on this - the more that religion agitates about these issues, the more I feel the need to ostracise it completely from the state and its decisionmaking processes.

Death is the last great taboo - it comes to us all, but we fear it partly because it is frightening and partly because we in the west have so little experience of

By favouring the noble, hard-working farmer on his/her little plot of land, aid agencies' romanticism harms as many as big agri-business.

By the way, the recipients of 25% of our foreign aid are determined by our 'elected' officials in Brussels, not Whitehall.

PERVERSITY NEVER MORE APPARENT (#31)

Well said Richard.

Discussion of death should always be preceded by definition of life. Failure to agree on the latter should preclude embarking on the former.

I (and many more) have no fear of being dead, but in the Age of Perversity, I have seen the peculiar mix of 'care' and brutality, that a certain mind-set delivers to old, malfunctioning, messy units of ‘life’.

THAT SCARES ME TO DEATH!

MORE PERVERSITY (#33)

I just attempted to watch (and failed) 'Choosing to Die' on iPlayer. I skipped a lot, to avoid the idiotic music and fartistic camera. But then, as the mother of the young man was speaking so movingly of her loving fight with the duality of pragmatism, and a mother's true nature, the wretched camera imposed a tight view through Terry Pratchet's glasses lens.

Nuff sed

WHERE WAS THE PHILOSOPHICAL VIEW? WE ALL START OFF 'CONTENTEDLY DEAD'.

If few can register the wide relevance of that, let alone think there way forward to a sensible conclusion about death, clearly education is teaching the wrong skills.

#31 Thank you for your post Richard, you have said some very true things there. A pity we don't have more rational discussions like yours. As a family we are going through this process at the moment, you are correct in saying the patients wishes are paramount. Wisely some consultants decided not to impose more operations on our patient, or other treatments, which would have hurt and upset the patient far more than leaving well alone. The GP is giving pain relief, and the patient is in their family home where they want to be, and is content with that. I'm not sure if the patient would like a speedier death, they haven't mentioned that. But I'm realistic about it, although sad.

You make a very salient point here, "If someone is terminally ill, then they should have the right to decide when to bring their suffering to an end and we need to put in place a legal process that ensures this is done without undue pressure and whilst of a sound mind."

I think there would unfortunately have to be a very secure legal process, so that people were not pressured into making a choice to die. Some relatives and friends might do that, or doctors subtley, to rid themselves of the "problem".

Thanks again for your well written post.

#33 Agreed Barrie, you make good points as well.

PUZZLED AGAIN

Within these shores, untold numbers of minds are inflicting LIVING HELL on untold numbers of others - exacerbated by state poisons: alcohol, tobacco and TV (list incomplete).

Not content with that, 'Civilisation' has devised a legality (national and international) that allows us to BOMB TO HELL whole communities and nations in the unending war on an abstract noun. We leave dead, dying, maddened, traumatised, sick and miserable BUT THAT IS OK.

Can anyone spot the error?

The wonder is we don't ALL want to die, right now, as a better option than the corruption and perversity we currently endure.

SPOILPARTYGAMES - DISMANTLE WESTMINSTER - SEEK OUT WISDOM

#31 Richard Bunning

Excellent Post. Good enough to bring me out of hibernation.

I watched the Terry Pratchett documentary and the following NN Special silently.

To those who complain it was a 'Pro 'assisted dying/suicide' I say - you got what it said on the tin. It didn't purport to be a see all sides documentary - just a look into the details of the pro camp with some else minded additions to offer food for thought.

And this debate needs opening up - I fear it will be closed down again all too soon because we inhabit a strange world; a dichotomy of life being awfully cheap in some views through the lens - in others a lack of ability to accept that we are all born terminally well with a sell by date that is all too often being artificially extended through the oft injudicious use of synthetic preservatives.

Let those who choose to measure the quality of life in different ways be allowed to do so for themselves- with safeguards.

The fatuous debate of what if's..... (a cure was found, changes mind, palliative care improve.....) are just that. We all make decisions every day based upon what we know and believe at the time. Yes, this is a terminal decision but if taken and carried out in the manner shown, then I feel all that is required is some sensible and manageable legislation to protect the vulnerable and the manipulators .

My greatest concern is that if the options for putting such a choice into practice are broadened, with them comes a greater possibility of unscrupulous practitioners becoming involved.

I suspect we are all pretty uncomfortable when it is a young person making such a choice, or one whose life is not knowingly being shortened or terminated naturally if intervention is resisted.

I have tried to get my head around the 'merciful God' and 'all life is sacred' arguments for a long time- I really have but have so far failed miserably.

I am not quite sure how far the ´óÏó´«Ã½ can and is prepared to go on the 'that which should not be mentioned' topics but I thought this was handled pretty well. It has opened the debate again and without the hand wringing and counter allegation that might have accompanied it.

Well said Richard. I await Part the second.

THOSE WHO (GODLIKE) JOIN TOGETHER, MUST BE PREPARED TO SUNDER (#38)

Gas mark 9 there BYT.

I still want the business of MAKING life (willy-nilly) addressed, as the product of a union is not consulted. THEN we can argue over the right of said product to RETURN TO THE STATUS QUO ANTE on demand.

Indeed, I would suggest that any product of the wilfulness (OR NEGLIGENCE) of others, has a de facto right to assistance in dying FROM THE SELF-SAME presumptuous pair.

In the debate on Terry Pratchet's film, Debbie Purdy made a very important observation that applies to all such debates that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ creates. She commented how the same sort of people were making the same sort of arguments about the right to die as was made about equality for homosexual people, and that they were equally wrong, and would again never admit it.

The reason for that is of course that this is yet another of the many areas of life (and death) over which they believe, with no reason, they have a right, even a duty, to interfere with the way others live their lives, or cease to do so.

A belief based on supposed holy writings (in fact very much the work of men), and revelations from an imaginary being in the sky, but which they are fully entitled to live their own lives by, if they wish.

But to impose that on the most intimate aspects of the lives of others is crossing way over legitimate boundaries, which is the very essence of abuse. It is not debatable. In fact to subject those whose lives (and deaths) are being interfered with by such people to further unending demands - as in the debate last night - that the they be given more publicity, or baseless accusations that there is a threat to the disabled, or that religion is being threatened, is to perpetrate further abuse. Even to refresh the trauma caused by previous suffering.

That cannot be justified in the name of entertainment. And such contrived and pointless debates are no more than cruel entertainment, because nothing that includes those implacably invested in exercising religious power over others will ever advance society.

If the ´óÏó´«Ã½ wants to debate that serious, and very important issue in the way it deserves, the implacable religious opponents must be set aside with an acknowledging nod, and the debate be held between those who so need reform and those who have genuine, legal, political, or practical problems with it. Which none of last nights opponents had; only smear, volume, bluster, and overweening entitlement.

We all deserve no less. All of us, because who knows which of us, or our beloved ones, might need a better death.

But perhaps there are no such arguments? Just as there were no real arguments against equal access to human rights for sexual minorities.

Rich Man Poor Man

in what way are countries deep in debt rich? how is the uk rich? the uk borrows money at interest to give to someone else even though it cannot afford it? Which is irrational if not extremist.

Gates of Money

To listen to some people they would rather nothing was done than something was done? Gates should spend it how he wants.

British Aid Vanity

The world must see the uk as useful idiots? The trustafarians ie the children of the inner empire, need to feel they are 'doing something' and need to put the uk into more debt to do it?

..India’s multi-millionaire super-rich will treble in number in the next five years, according to a report by one of the country’s leading banks. The number of those with more than three million pounds in assets, known as ‘ultra-high net worth individuals’, will increase from 62,000 this year to just under 220,000 by 2015.




Losing the Public?

More like JP lost the plot. Who does he think watches NN? usual anti knowledge ludditism from JP. remember his outbursts against the NN website? Maybe he needs more time to go fishing?

31 continued - thanks for your kind words!

Death is the last great taboo - it comes to us all, but we fear it partly because it is frightening and partly because we in the west have so little experience of it in our coseted western lives.

This leaves the moral control over death with those directly associated with the reality of the process - and in our ignorance we allow the world of medicine to elect where on the spectrum ranging from neglect through unecessary and distressing pointless treatment, to well-managed, low pain, low stress death that we find our own death, or that of our leved one(s).

Our ignorance and fear also allows the religious overtones to continue to dominate the debate when we normally take a rational scientific, evidence-based approach to the other aspects of our humanity like childbirth, immunisation or routine medical care. I find it deeply objectionable that those who believe in the supernatural still feel it accepotable to interfere in the lives - and deaths - of those of us who don't.

A few more words about a good death - both the person passing away and their loved ones should take time to reflect on their lives together, identify all those unsaid, deep thoughts about eacjh other and great times together, what really matters to each of you about your relationship, what you have given them and what they have given you - sit and talk together about the good times you had and relive them. If you accept that death is inevitable and stop hoping beyond hope for miracles or non-existent cures, then you can free your minds, reconsile yourselves to what is inevitable and open up a window through which love and passion and flow between you.

Giving someone your real affection for them from deep down inside is a gift beyond price that will carry them away contented and ease your own sorrow.

I said I've seen hundreds of deaths but only a very few were good deaths, so many were traumatic and hurtful either because of medical cruelty, religious bigotry or being swept away by uncontrollable fear.

When you die first you go to sleep, then your body stops breathing and your heart stills - that's all it is - then you've gone - but the memories of your loved ones remain - please make sure those memories are happy, loving and to be treasured.

HOW I WISH I COULD EMULATE SUCH DEVASTATING CALM IN THE FACE OF ´óÏó´«Ã½ 'EDGY' (#40)

Well met by blog-light Jenny63 (that's a sort of dull sepia). But you failed to tell us to what notional musack we should read your incisive words, and your graphics were - well - non existent.

(:o)

AID IS SOLELY AN AID TO WINNING AT GLOBOPOLY (#41)

I have 'explained' it all before. Dave and his lieutenants swan the world playing Globopoly. If you come to the board with nukes, GDP, wars and AID in your little plastic dangler, you play at the highest level.

At the Globopoly table Britain counts ONLY as a counter! The poor buggers who live there COUNT FOR NOTHING.

I don’t think aid money necessarily gives the donor country more power on the international stage, nuclear nukes and GDP growth does. While it is commendable that David Cameron is increasing budget on foreign aid to save lives in the poorest part of the world, I don’t agree with their priorities. Why can’t they stop the aid programs for a few years just until the economy gets back on its feet?