5 ms·

What I haven't seen explained is what exactly needs to be rebuilt? If someone has nothing, and there is an earthquake, exactly how does billions of dollars res

by sharms 17y ago

What I haven't seen explained is what exactly needs to be rebuilt? If someone has nothing, and there is an earthquake, exactly how does billions of dollars restore nothing? Or because of this earthquake the world should build their infrastructure for free?

tptacek 17y ago
Hospitals, prisons, drinking water distribution, sewage, housing, electricity, police stations, firefighting capability. Is this a trick question? Haiti didn't have nothing; it had a very crappy version of most things. Charge Haiti whatever you'd like to build a basic survivable level of civilization. They'll never pay, but that doesn't matter. The alternative is Somalia in the Carribean.
- pbhjpbhj 17y ago
  I think it is a reasonable question. There are plenty of places without drinking water and sewage infrastructure of any real note. Why then does this earthquake mean that we should fix Haiti's water/sewage. Why not fix Somalia's instead? Given the comments about Haiti's resources it seems it should be quite rich monetarily, certainly enough to pay for the rapid construction of Hospitals and the like. Yes, we'd want to help with skilled workers if sufficient don't exist locally for the timescales sought. I don't think (hope) that the parent is saying we shouldn't help Haiti, just asking why only help them or help them in preference to others that are suffering as much.
  - pyre 17y ago
    Well, the point is that we can't have the attitude that we help everyone or we help no one. In the case of Somalia, there is political turmoil there that could (hopefully) be avoided in Haiti if we help sooner than later.
  - philwelch 17y ago
    The quick answer to "why not fix Somalia" is "we tried, and they ended up shooting at us, so we left". Oddly enough, we tried fixing Haiti a few times, too. It's not very successful, but they don't seem to shoot at us quite so much.
    - tptacek 17y ago
      Haiti is not yet Somalia. By the '90s, purely humanitarian intervention in Somalia was untenable.
    - pbhjpbhj 17y ago
      FWIW I was defending the asking of the question, questions are good, not for lack of an answer which would have been a mix of those answers here for sure.
alex_c 17y ago
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/earthquake_in_haiti.html http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/earthquake_in_haiti... http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/haiti_48_hours_later.html http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/haiti_48_hours_late... Most pictures show the human suffering, but there are a few that show the destruction to infrastructure. I wouldn't say "nothing" is the right word for what Haiti had, but it's a good description of what's left.

by sharms 17y ago

tptacek 17y ago

Hospitals, prisons, drinking water distribution, sewage, housing, electricity, police stations, firefighting capability. Is this a trick question? Haiti didn't have nothing; it had a very crappy version of most things. Charge Haiti whatever you'd like to build a basic survivable level of civilization. They'll never pay, but that doesn't matter. The alternative is Somalia in the Carribean.

pbhjpbhj 17y ago
I think it is a reasonable question. There are plenty of places without drinking water and sewage infrastructure of any real note. Why then does this earthquake mean that we should fix Haiti's water/sewage. Why not fix Somalia's instead? Given the comments about Haiti's resources it seems it should be quite rich monetarily, certainly enough to pay for the rapid construction of Hospitals and the like. Yes, we'd want to help with skilled workers if sufficient don't exist locally for the timescales sought. I don't think (hope) that the parent is saying we shouldn't help Haiti, just asking why only help them or help them in preference to others that are suffering as much.
- pyre 17y ago
  Well, the point is that we can't have the attitude that we help everyone or we help no one. In the case of Somalia, there is political turmoil there that could (hopefully) be avoided in Haiti if we help sooner than later.
- philwelch 17y ago
  The quick answer to "why not fix Somalia" is "we tried, and they ended up shooting at us, so we left". Oddly enough, we tried fixing Haiti a few times, too. It's not very successful, but they don't seem to shoot at us quite so much.
  - tptacek 17y ago
    Haiti is not yet Somalia. By the '90s, purely humanitarian intervention in Somalia was untenable.
  - pbhjpbhj 17y ago
    FWIW I was defending the asking of the question, questions are good, not for lack of an answer which would have been a mix of those answers here for sure.

alex_c 17y ago

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/earthquake_in_haiti.html http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/earthquake_in_haiti... http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/haiti_48_hours_later.html http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/01/haiti_48_hours_late... Most pictures show the human suffering, but there are a few that show the destruction to infrastructure. I wouldn't say "nothing" is the right word for what Haiti had, but it's a good description of what's left.