Difference is, that country is filling the arms of its population with vaccines.
Similarity is, the government decides what it wants to spend the nation's money on.
Difference is, that country is filling the arms of its population with vaccines.
Yep. And India chose nuclear weapons and space exploration above a starving, unvaccinated population.Similarity is, the government decides what it wants to spend the nation's money on.
But if the wealthy countries helped third world countries build local infrastructure, using aid as the means, it would reduce the dependence on buying more expensive drugs on the open market.
The old "give a man a fish" v "teach a man to fish"
Imho foreign aid should not be dependant on conditions that say, mean the recipient is forced to buy goods from the donor. It should aimed at improving local facilities to allow modernisation of local conditions.
Too much foreign aid is aimed towards ensuring (British) exports.
AKA a bribeToo much foreign aid is aimed towards ensuring (British) exports.
Even with the temporary reduction in vaccines the UK will still be doing more than any European country,and at the moment we are way ahead of schedule,the total today is rumoured to be a record amount of around 700,000.
I really dont know -I dont understand what foreign aid is all about TBH.AKA cooperating for a mutual benefit. Helping each other.
We made many mistakes,but this is one thing that we got right, so hopefully it will enable some sort of normality.European governments have done a terrible job of public messaging for the vaccine and their organization of the vaccines centres has also been poor
I dont if its because we have a national health service that has helped our vaccination organization but it has been brillian -I went on Monday to Crawley hospital for the jab and it was very well set up -with a huge throughput of people