quote:

Originally posted by HardTranceProd yeah thanks for that correction. That's what I was thinking of. But still, doesn't that kinda disprove the myth perpetuated by the thread starter?

A government taxing its citizens and then using that money to give foreign aid is completely different from a person deciding to give money above and beyond taxes to be used in a charity/aid setting. One is forced, the other completely voluntary.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Of course governments can cut health spending, but my point was, at the beginning of the year, the government will say "we will spend x on health" in the budget and that is guaranteed. Charities cannot make the same pledge...

Well since you put it that way, then yea

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Of course governments can cut health spending, but my point was, at the beginning of the year, the government will say "we will spend x on health" in the budget and that is guaranteed. Charities cannot make the same pledge...

But couldn't you also say that once a government has spent "x on health" you're SOL until the new fiscal year begins, whereas a charity can simply hold a fund raiser?

I know that's an over-simplification, but whereas a state sets a yearly budget that is only usually replenished or modified once a year, a charity can be continually adding additional funds to meet its needs.