[Torplexed]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12607537

In a widely-signalled move, it is anticipated that International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell will announce the amount of aid given to India will be maintained at 2009/10 levels.

But the decision has attracted criticism from newspapers and politicians who say the UK taxpayer does not need to donate to a state that is itself a foreign aid donor, which is classified by the World Bank as a middle income country (MIC) and whose economy is growing at nearly 10% a year.

The Indian military has conducted nuclear tests, the country operates its own space programme and, according to Forbes magazine, it has more billionaires than the UK.

Moreover, India is itself a foreign aid donor, providing more than £300m ($500m) to poorer countries in 2008.

Conservative MP Philip Davies argues the decision to continue funding the country is indefensible at a time when the British taxpayers are experiencing a spending squeeze of their own.

Wow. As long as you generous Britons are signing checks to former colonies, could we in the US have some?