[discardorama]

> You seem to have a problem with this simple wish but perhaps you can explain what it is?

My problem is with the assumption that this miniscule amount of "aid" is somehow significant.

Do realize that when countries give "aid", it is often more for domestic reasons. This "aid" comes with all sorts of strings attached, and benefits the donor country more than the recipient.

Case in point: US military aid to Israel comes right back to the US in the form of weapons purchases from Lockheed, Grumman, Boeing, etc. In other countries, donor countries stipulate that the aid be used to purchase things from the donor country only; or expensive "consultants" are hired to manage the aid, depriving any benefit to the recipient.

[bolder88]

As stated elsewhere, foreign aid from the UK to india is £280m. But I'm glad that's such a miniscule amount to you.

[discardorama]

India's budget for this year is ~ $270B. So this "aid" from Britain (most of which would be absorbed by British charities buying British goods and hiring British consultants anyways) amounts to about 0.1% of the budget. Sounds pretty miniscule to me; and in terms of impact, would have roughly the same effect as a flea jumping on an elephant.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Union_budget_of_India