# Winter Fuel Payment



## cazz (Jun 29, 2010)

Hi all finding it a bit tricky to get round this site hope everyone is ok and would like to say thanks to all who have given me advice over the past weeks. Well it is gonna happen my husband and I will be moving to Camposol in August and we are both very excited.I wonder if anyone can throw any light on the winter fuel payment we receive at present in the UK can we still claim this when we move to Spain. Many thanks again Cazz x


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

cazz said:


> Hi all finding it a bit tricky to get round this site hope everyone is ok and would like to say thanks to all who have given me advice over the past weeks. Well it is gonna happen my husband and I will be moving to Camposol in August and we are both very excited.I wonder if anyone can throw any light on the winter fuel payment we receive at present in the UK can we still claim this when we move to Spain. Many thanks again Cazz x


it appears that if you already receive it you can continue to

Winter fuel payment


----------



## Mame (Aug 8, 2008)

cazz said:


> Hi all finding it a bit tricky to get round this site hope everyone is ok and would like to say thanks to all who have given me advice over the past weeks. Well it is gonna happen my husband and I will be moving to Camposol in August and we are both very excited.I wonder if anyone can throw any light on the winter fuel payment we receive at present in the UK can we still claim this when we move to Spain. Many thanks again Cazz x


Yes we have ours here in Spain for the last 5 years. As long as you are in receipt of it before you leave the UK it is not a problem.


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

I think if Dave and Nick have their way no-one will be eligible for it in Spain. Quite right too in my opinion. The whole scheme needs revamping.


----------



## Mame (Aug 8, 2008)

country boy said:


> I think if Dave and Nick have their way no-one will be eligible for it in Spain. Quite right too in my opinion. The whole scheme needs revamping.


We have as much right to it as any one else. I worked 45 years and contributed in the Uk. Also where we live our temperatures can go down to - 20


----------



## Jaxx (Apr 21, 2010)

*Totally agree!!!!!!!!*



Mame said:


> We have as much right to it as any one else. I worked 45 years and contributed in the Uk. Also where we live our temperatures can go down to - 20


:clap2:

I agree with you , yes people who retire to Spain have paid their dues so are fully entitled to receive it like those in the UK.!!!


----------



## 90199 (Mar 21, 2010)

Jaxx said:


> :clap2:
> 
> I agree with you , yes people who retire to Spain have paid their dues so are fully entitled to receive it like those in the UK.!!!



Me too I agree, but I must admit feeling a bit guilty, living in the Canaries, but having said that the U.K. are still taxing my income,

Hepa


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

The system is flawed. We paid our dues for 43 years, never took a day in dole money, never went on the social in all that time. We came down here when we were 57 to retire early after knackering ourselves working.
We are not entitled to Fuel Allowance because we never got it in the UK. Doh! what difference dose that make? We are still OAP's getting a UK pension.
Having said that, I always felt that the idea of winter fuel allowance was to help the needy old folk get through a particularly cold winter, not an automatic right for everyone regardless.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

I read somewhere that its on "the list" to be subject to means testing in the foreseeable future - along with child allowance

Jo xxx


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

Ah...JoJo....I hear the rustling of discontent in the streets....Means Testing...two dirty words to the fat and lazy!!


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

country boy said:


> Ah...JoJo....I hear the rustling of discontent in the streets....Means Testing...two dirty words to the fat and lazy!!


LOL!!! I dunno, but it has always seemed daft to me that even the queen was entitled to child allowance - and a heating allowance!!??? Quite frankly, I never saw why anyone should give me or anyone else money for having kids. That was my choice which was based on my ability to provide for them - but thats just me! 

Jo xxxx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

country boy said:


> Ah...JoJo....I hear the rustling of discontent in the streets....Means Testing...two dirty words to the fat and lazy!!


You are obviously unaware that means testing has been in force for many years, in one form or another, for many benefits, as should be the case. I am no fan of univeralism.
Pensions however are not a 'benefit' - they are deferred pay which you have handed to the government through your tax and insurance contributions.
What about the thin and lazy? Or the 'normal sized 'and lazy?
Why exclude them from your opprobrium?
We have all -or most of us - paid taxes in one way or another, either personally on salaries or through our businesses.
Why some people parade it as a virtue is beyond me as honest people would not consider it to be one.


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

I consider it to be a virtue because the millions who *do *are virtuous. It's the millions who don't, or haven't, and have their hands out all the time that I find repugnant. I also find a system that encourages this situation repugnant. As far as FAT is concerned, I find that repugnant too. ( I do know however that it is not PC to say so).


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

And something else to ponder over your cornflakes: Nick and Dave want to cut public spending yet their very own Budget Book forecasts an extra 100000 people will be made jobless as a result of public spending cuts. This in addition to those already unemployed.
Their presumption is that the private sector will step in with expansion plans and job opportunities for these unemployed people. Yet spokespeople for the CBI and other employers organisations have expressed fears that the private sector is not yet in a position to create the required number of new jobs. Independent economists and financial analysts are warning of the very real likelihood of a double-dip recession.
It seems quite possible that we shall see a repeat of the Thatcher scenario: she came to office promising to cut public spending and enable people to be less dependent on the state yet left office with increased public spending largely due to the huge rise in the welfare budget caused by unemployment benefits to the millions left unemployed as a result of her policies.
Of course the welfare budget must be cut and the whole flawed system reformed. It takes up far too large a proportion of our spending and removes the incentive to work - if any is available. But it must be done intelligently and without prejudice and the tendency shown by some to tar all those claiming benefit as workshy is misleading and frankly silly.
If there are no jobs then what is the alternative to welfare benefits: starvation? crime?
In the area of the UK where I lived years ago there were many unemployed and very few jobs.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

I think its all going to have to change over the next few years. I suspect by the time I become a pensioner, things as they are now will be gone. And I dont think there is any point complaining. I'm prepared to look after my own needs, I dont expect to claim a pension and those who do may sadly be dissappointed - I'm not saying its right or wrong - I've paid into the system for most of my life too, I'm simply pointing out that those of you now who can and are claiming are probably the last and should be grateful. 

I've started to think of national insurance like any other insurance, once you've stopped paying your policy, it no longer covers you! 

Jo xxx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

country boy said:


> I consider it to be a virtue because the millions who *do *are virtuous. It's the millions who don't, or haven't, and have their hands out all the time that I find repugnant. I also find a system that encourages this situation repugnant. As far as FAT is concerned, I find that repugnant too. ( I do know however that it is not PC to say so).


You find fat people repugnant???? Send us your photo so we can all decide if you pass the physical beauty test.. Could you define 'PC'? I was taught it wasn't polite to criticise people on the grounds of their physical appearance. So-called political correctness didn't come into it, just old-fashioned good manners.
Millions of people take handouts that they don't deserve?
Where do you get your figures from? Do you know how many people actually are in receipt of benefits? and of which kind? 
There is a need for SERIOUS debate on this issue and serious debate requires facts not wild assertions and gut prejudices.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

looking at peoples fat bodies may not be to your taste, but fat people can be lovely!!! I used to be 18 stone and yes, I dont disagree I wasnt a pretty sight, but I was a nice person (most of the time!!!) I then lost loads of weight, so now I'm not a fat person, but I'm the same person!!!!

Viva the Atkins diet!!!!!

Jo xxxx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

jojo said:


> I think its all going to have to change over the next few years. I suspect by the time I become a pensioner, things as they are now will be gone. And I dont think there is any point complaining. I'm prepared to look after my own needs, I dont expect to claim a pension and those who do may sadly be dissappointed - I'm not saying its right or wrong - I've paid into the system for most of my life too, I'm simply pointing out that those of you now who can and are claiming are probably the last and should be grateful.
> 
> I've started to think of national insurance like any other insurance, once you've stopped paying your policy, it no longer covers you!
> 
> Jo xxx


But that's not quite correct, Jo. NI and some elements of taxation are a form of state insurance for when you are no longer able to support yourself by working. You pay in and you take out.
You are right when you say that the system won't continue as it is...demographics alone make it impossible. But unless people have some means of support in their old age how can they live? Latest life expectancy figures show a UK average of around 89.
Support can come from various sources: private 'portable' pensions, final salary schemes (now rapidly becoming a thing of the past), savings, equity from property sales, investments and so on. But for the low-paid -and in terms of provision for old age I would regard anyone earning under £40 -£50k p.a. as low-paid -most of these will not be options. Current return on pension pots in the region of £500k will not return a 'living' income in retirement with interest rates as they are. We trawled the net to find a good yield and the best we could find was 4.5% in an offshore bank - so after tax deduction you'd get around £3k per annum return on £100k.
The state will still be the pension provider for the majority but personal contributions will have to increase considerably.
This is not and should not be a party-political issue - it needs wide consultation and any proposals must have general acceptance. I believe I read somewhere that an all-Party Commission is to be set up to examine the issue.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

jojo said:


> looking at peoples fat bodies may not be to your taste, but fat people can be lovely!!! I used to be 18 stone and yes, I dont disagree I wasnt a pretty sight, but I was a nice person (most of the time!!!) I then lost loads of weight, so now I'm not a fat person, but I'm the same person!!!!
> 
> Viva the Atkins diet!!!!!
> 
> Jo xxxx


Yes, it's a rather sad, superficial view of humanity. I used to be a gym bunny/fitness freak, slim, toned, etc.etc........but that was then..I'm not fat in the sense of obese but I could do with losing a few kilos.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

mrypg9 said:


> But that's not quite correct, Jo. NI and some elements of taxation are a form of state insurance for when you are no longer able to support yourself by working. You pay in and you take out.
> You are right when you say that the system won't continue as it is...demographics alone make it impossible. But unless people have some means of support in their old age how can they live? Latest life expectancy figures show a UK average of around 89.
> Support can come from various sources: private 'portable' pensions, final salary schemes (now rapidly becoming a thing of the past), savings, equity from property sales, investments and so on. But for the low-paid -and in terms of provision for old age I would regard anyone earning under £40 -£50k p.a. as low-paid -most of these will not be options. Current return on pension pots in the region of £500k will not return a 'living' income in retirement with interest rates as they are. We trawled the net to find a good yield and the best we could find was 4.5% in an offshore bank - so after tax deduction you'd get around £34k per annum return on £100k.
> The state will still be the pension provider for the majority but personal contributions will have to increase considerably.
> This is not and should not be a party-political issue - it needs wide consultation and any proposals must have general acceptance. I believe I read somewhere that an all-Party Commission is to be set up to examine the issue.


Hey, I know my views arent accurate, but my point is that I'm preparing to make sure that when necessary I wont need to rely on the state or be destitute??!!??!I have a couple of little "pots/nest eggs" that I will be able to turn to when the time comes! 

I think that my generation - "the baby boomers" should be looking to be more self reliant in our old age! Its just the way I think it has to be. Put it this way, I dont think we'll be stressing about whether we will get winter fuel allowance wherever we live!

Jo xxx


----------



## xabiaxica (Jun 23, 2009)

jojo said:


> Hey, I know my views arent accurate, but my point is that I'm preparing to make sure that when necessary I wont need to rely on the state or be destitute??!!??!I have a couple of little "pots/nest eggs" that I will be able to turn to when the time comes!
> 
> I think that my generation - "the baby boomers" should be looking to be more self reliant in our old age! Its just the way I think it has to be. Put it this way, I dont think we'll be stressing about whether we will get winter fuel allowance wherever we live!
> 
> Jo xxx


I think you're right jojo - & your views are just that - your views, so 'accuracy' doesn't come into it



& yes, maybe there does need to be serious debate on it marypg9 - but is a forum about living in Spain really the place for it?


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

xabiachica said:


> I think you're right jojo - & your views are just that - your views, so 'accuracy' doesn't come into it
> 
> 
> 
> & yes, maybe there does need to be serious debate on it marypg9 - but is a forum about living in Spain really the place for it?


Is a forum on living in Spain the right place for comments about the repugnancy of fat people or alleging millions of people in the UK are workshy?

But you are right since a serious debate requires much evidence and serious thought and I doubt if we are equipped for that on this forum.

Of course Jo is entitled to her views - as are we all -and I have never suggested she isn't. I do like to have some basis in fact for my views as I'm sure Jo and everyone else does.

As for self- sufficiency in old-age...consider that one person would require an income of approaching £25k p.a. to meet all needs. That would require savings/nest egg whatever well beyond the means of the average earner.

And there is some relevance to living in Spain here as many people who came to live in Spain relying on the State Retirement Pension alone or supplemented by a private income are being obliged to return to the UK where many will be forced to rely on the Welfare State.


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

:focus:The winter fuel allowance...hurrah!
Now then, how can it be right that if you drew one fuel payment while living in the UK then you are entitled to receive it now, in Ex-pat mode, for the rest of your natural (or until it is rescinded by he incumbent Government ).
If you didn't bother to draw it in UK because you were not in "need" then you can't draw it now in retrospect for the reason that one is Ex-pat? 
I'm not jealous, I am just pointing out how flawed the system is, that is not "Fair"to many legitimate claimers.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

country boy said:


> :focus:The winter fuel allowance...hurrah!
> Now then, how can it be right that if you drew one fuel payment while living in the UK then you are entitled to receive it now, in Ex-pat mode, for the rest of your natural (or until it is rescinded by he incumbent Government ).
> If you didn't bother to draw it in UK because you were not in "need" then you can't draw it now in retrospect for the reason that one is Ex-pat?
> I'm not jealous, I am just pointing out how flawed the system is, that is not "Fair"to many legitimate claimers.



I know what you're saying countryboy, but there is soooooo much that is flawed, isnt right or fair about the British welfare system. The whole thing needs a major reform, but its not something that can be done easily. Hopefully the new government can make inroads, but it wont be done overnight, nor without some major disruptions

Jo xxxx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

country boy said:


> :focus:The winter fuel allowance...hurrah!
> Now then, how can it be right that if you drew one fuel payment while living in the UK then you are entitled to receive it now, in Ex-pat mode, for the rest of your natural (or until it is rescinded by he incumbent Government ).
> If you didn't bother to draw it in UK because you were not in "need" then you can't draw it now in retrospect for the reason that one is Ex-pat?
> I'm not jealous, I am just pointing out how flawed the system is, that is not "Fair"to many legitimate claimers.


And I actually agree with you. It's an unfair anomaly, as is Child Benefit. And I also agree that those pensioners who, when pensions of all kinds plus investments etc. are added together, are probably receiving more than the average working person in the UK, should not get these universal benefits.
It's absurd that a retired person on, say, more than £50k, should get a free bus pass and winter fuel allowance when some OAPs exist on the basic pension plus minimum SERPS and if appropriate Housing Benefit. This morning I had a conversation with a retired businessman neighbour who lives in a large house and owns bars in Puerto Banus. Does he need the WFA? More should be given to the needy.
As far as I'm aware WFA is an automatic pension credit which you do not need to draw and cannot refuse.
Anyone feeling they have something they either do not want or feel they are not entitled to could of course donate the money to Age Concern.
Where I disagree with your previous posts is solely with your use of emotive language.
My grandmother who died decades ago never worked - my grandfather was the old-fashioned type who believed a man should 'keep' his wife. Very sexist
After he died, she had only the basic state pension to live on and as her needs were modest, she just about managed. When I suggested she could apply for supplementary benefit (as I think it was then termed) she was unwilling as she thought she would be classed as a 'scrounger'. That's what wild talk about benefit cheats can lead to.
Yes, there are very many benefit cheats and tax dodgers and a lot of them are in Spain. But as things stand at the moment, those immigrants to Spain and elsewhere who were in receipt of WFA when resident in the UK will continue to receive it abroad.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

And another interesting point: should wealthy pensioners receive free medical care?
I think we don't consider just how much it costs to keep us in our old age. Most of us will live for at least twenty years after we retire. 
If we don't think the state should provide our pension in our old age, should it provide free medical care?
After all, we contribute to both via taxes and NI payments.


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

Food for thought.

A person on a large salary pays more towards the system than one on a lower income or on benefit. Wealthy people generally employ others and generate economic stimulus - so long as the tax man stays clear of the 95% (my dad and the Beatles taught me about that rate ), or they take their dosh elsewhere.

Child benefit is there to support the future generation that will work and pay for the retirement of people in the future - including those who've had no children and complained about how unfair child benefit was.
In the smoking room a co-worker asked me "Why should I pay towards your kids schooling" - I said, "so they can pay for your pension".

There are single mums who are not. It's obvious they're not, and yet, with all those "inspectors" out there, they carry on receiving benefit. Why is that?
Same goes for dissability, and same goes for just about any benefit. BUT, what's the percentage overall? 
In the end, it all comes down to commercial reality. You can't spend more catching the cheats than what you'd recover doing it.... and we can all imagine what government agency hourly rates are for an army of kojacks sleeping outside potential wrong'uns for months on end whilst they "build a case".

Last but not least. If health care was not provided, at all, a lot of people would die very painfully and very early on in life. We've all heard the stories of people going to the US for private specialist treatment or plastic surgery or whatever, the op going wrong, them having a heart attack on the table and having to stay in Hospital a tad longer than expected, and getting a bill for Hundreds of Thousands of dollars for the heart op, hospital stay etc. Ruined for life. That scenario would be a serious mistake as those that have wouldn't for long. Rich would be poor and poor would be dead. Unemployment impact would be huge, the country would go to the dogs 
Clearly I am referring to no cover. If as a result your tax bill was far less and thus you could pay an insurance (that the government wouldn't allow to screw you with after X age or X ops or whatever), or if you were un employed the government would sub the basic cover, then fine.... that's how it works in a lot of countries.

Xose


----------



## VFR (Dec 23, 2009)

Winter fuel payment.
An irrelevance in the scale of things IMO, as the tax payer is now burdened with a whole generation Chav - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia that have evolved from the liberal state that neutered them & who are educated via facebook.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

Xose said:


> Food for thought.
> 
> A person on a large salary pays more towards the system than one on a lower income or on benefit. Wealthy people generally employ others and generate economic stimulus - so long as the tax man stays clear of the 95% (my dad and the Beatles taught me about that rate ), or they take their dosh elsewhere.
> 
> ...


I agree with you!!! And thats the master plan isnt it!! But, its been abused, misused and mishandled to the point of destruction!

Jo xx


----------



## Stravinsky (Aug 12, 2007)

Excellently put. Many people complain about these things but don't see the bigger picture.

Many years ago when I was much younger and had no kids I remember me saying the same thing "why should I pay for your kids education". Of course now with more experience and understanding I dont have a problem with contributing as its all part of the engine that drives the society




Xose said:


> Food for thought.
> 
> A person on a large salary pays more towards the system than one on a lower income or on benefit. Wealthy people generally employ others and generate economic stimulus - so long as the tax man stays clear of the 95% (my dad and the Beatles taught me about that rate ), or they take their dosh elsewhere.
> 
> ...


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

playamonte said:


> Winter fuel payment.
> An irrelevance in the scale of things IMO, as the tax payer is now burdened with a whole generation Chav - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia that have evolved from the liberal state that neutered them & who are educated via facebook.



I agree with you.
But by the 'liberal state' I presume you are referring to the Thatcher/Major Governments.
Figures from Hansard to illustrate the growth of the underclass during this period:

*the % of non-pensioner households wholly workless increased from 6.5% in 1975 to 16.4 % in 1985 and to 19.1% in 1994. Between 1992 and 1997 there was a 15% increase in the number of unemployed lone parents. *

It was ironic that Thatcher, in spite of her rhetoric, made more people dependent on the state and actually increased public sector spending.

This situation may have worsened since 1997 as welfare dependency is an addiction that is passed down the generations.
I honestly don't know what can be done (I have private, unprintable thoughts).
Everything in the UK seems dumbed down as can be seen from the moronic tripe on tv...including the BBC and the low-tone of rags like the Sun, Mirror, unspeakable Daily Mail. 
The problem is that 100000 more people are to be made jobless over the next five years according to the Government's own budget plans. And if there are no jobs????
Thanks to Mrs. Thatcher signing the Single European Act (which enables us to live and work here) anyone from the EU apart from Bulgaria and Romania who are on quotas can work in the UK. So when I was in London last week almost every waiter, chambermaid, hotel receptionist, bus and tube staff etc. were non-British.
The growth of the chav underclass was for me one of the main reasons for leaving the UK. Alas ...many of them are here in Spain too although thankfully miles away from our little neck of the woods. That and the general dumbing down of our social and cultural life.
So if by liberal you mean neo-con economic policies I agree with you. Something needed to be done by the late '70s but taking away state support for unproductive industries without having a plan for replacing them with hi -tech ones lead to a wasting of North Sea oil revenue on welfare payments to feed a growing underclass.


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

jojo said:


> I agree with you!!! And thats the master plan isnt it!! But, its been abused, misused and mishandled to the point of destruction!
> 
> Jo xx


Agree, but the master plan is still there - changing, left and right, up and down, benefit cheats and Trident Missiles, car allowance for those that aren't really dissabled and road tax that doesn't get spent on roads, heating allowance and fuel taxed to the hilt. Forces of Man compensate by the nature of the beast. 

There will always be Thatcher or Gordon Gekko types to bring times like today around. Not enough until" we make some more, in the mean time "sod you" mentality rules, "greed is good" etc. Then, times improve, "Please give three pounds a month to keep thiese animals from suffering" adverts, cheap credit, silly money for a one bedroom bedsit..... and more money for nothing types.

We'll never stop this in the idealistic world that is the UK's very old and trusted system of keeping the masses happy by "the 5%". 

We certainly won't ever balance with views like Child benefit scrapped, married allowance already scrapped AND the completely conflicting view that there are too many immigrints. One or the other, or death of a nation in the future.

One things for sure, the system is here to stay, changing up and down, giving and taking, Tory and Labour with rare glimpses of stability for Lib Dems, and long may it be so. All systems are flawed, but the UK's, for me, is up there with the best of them. I just hope the current mob got there in time and have the minerals to maintain it - because it's going to hurt!

Xose


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Xose said:


> One things for sure, the system is here to stay, changing up and down, giving and taking, Tory and Labour with rare glimpses of stability for Lib Dems, and long may it be so. All systems are flawed, but the UK's, for me, is up there with the best of them. I just hope the current mob got there in time and have the minerals to maintain it - because it's going to hurt!
> 
> Xose


Boom and bust cycles are endemic to capitalism and have been for centuries. Silly of Brown to boast he'd stopped this cycle - he merely prolonged the boom which with the cheap credit helped intensify the bust.
But yes, capitalism with all its faults is the best vehicle yet for raising the standard of living of the mass of people.
Africa needs entrepreneurs, not handouts.


----------



## Xose (Dec 10, 2008)

mrypg9 said:


> Boom and bust cycles are endemic to capitalism and have been for centuries. Silly of Brown to boast he'd stopped this cycle - he merely prolonged the boom which with the cheap credit helped intensify the bust.
> But yes, capitalism with all its faults is the best vehicle yet for raising the standard of living of the mass of people.
> Africa needs entrepreneurs, not handouts.


Indeed, teach a man to fish and all that. Trouble is, once you do that, he will need the finances to store the fish, logistics to distribute it and a stable banking system and currency to invest in. Otherwise, you might as well do all that for him once you've taught him. (being the devils advocate here


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

Xose said:


> Indeed, teach a man to fish and all that. Trouble is, once you do that, he will need the finances to store the fish, logistics to distribute it and a stable banking system and currency to invest in. Otherwise, you might as well do all that for him once you've taught him. (being the devils advocate here


I read somewhere that actually alot of these countries who receive aid, dont want to be "taught to fish" and resist it, they just want to be given the "fish"

Jo xx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

jojo said:


> I read somewhere that actually alot of these countries who receive aid, dont want to be "taught to fish" and resist it, they just want to be given the "fish"
> 
> Jo xx


In the past, corrupt elites took the aid and diverted much of it into their own bank accounts, that's true. But I'm not sure it's the case now. 
There was an interesting article in The Economist which said that business is beginning to realise that there are millions and millions of potential customers in Africa. Once that realisation is acted upon the continent could start to take off as necessary infrastructure will be put in place, jobs created etc.
And of course not all Africans live in poverty and not all African economies are basket cases.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Xose said:


> Indeed, teach a man to fish and all that. Trouble is, once you do that, he will need the finances to store the fish, logistics to distribute it and a stable banking system and currency to invest in. Otherwise, you might as well do all that for him once you've taught him. (being the devils advocate here


And knowing the nature of the beast aka globalisation, that could well be what will happen.
But if millions are lifted out opf poverty, does it matter how?
Once living standards are raised, other questions can be asked by the people themselves.
As Berthold Brecht said: 'Eats first, morals afterwards'.


----------

