Most people agree with aid to poorer countries, They hold the belief that their tax money is going to help poor people in those poorer countries. However in most cases this is not the case, invariably the aid comes with strings attached. There are usually conditions that a large proportion of the aid is spent on buying goods and/or services from the donor country. In other words your tax money goes through a loop and into the pockets of the corporate world. One example is the “aid” package recently sign by Obama which gives Israel $3 billion in “aid” this year 2010, and a further $30 billion over the next ten years. That’s a lot of tax payers money, perhaps the Israeli government will spend it improving the lot of the poorer Arab Israelis or perhaps trying to improve relations with the Palestinian people. There are of course a few strings attached, the “aid” package is conditional on them spending 75% of the amount on military hardware from the United States. Then again there is America’s strategic protection of Saudi Arabia, that is linked to recent $60 billion sale of aircraft, benefiting, not the people of Saudi Arabia, but USA defence manufacturers in some 44 states with approximately 77,000 jobs involved.
Hence Hilary Clinton’s anxiety about the UK defence cuts and especially the replacement of the Trident nuclear “deterrent”, as the warheads would be purchased in American and the servicing would also be done there. So a large slice of the £80 billion of tax payers money that would be required for this project would eventually end up in the coffers of the American arms industry. Now we can’t jeopardise that flow of tax payers money slurping its way into the the rich parasites pockets, can we? We subsidise the corporate world at every turn, we bail out the gambling bank casinos and we give tax payers money to the arms industry, yep, war is big business.