3 ms·

Fun little thing to mention about Phosphate mining. A tiny island country called Nauru (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru

Fun little thing to mention about Phosphate mining. A tiny island country called Nauru (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru) got super rich off of Phosphate mining which kept going into the 1990s. This led their government to invest in many projects abroad, including what may in fact be the worst large-scale well funded musical ever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_the_Musical:_A_Portrait_of_Love https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_the_Musical:_A_Portra...

EdwardDiego 3y ago
To be fair, most of the phosphate was mined by colonial powers before independence. I think at its peak the trust had $1 billion in investments. But, yeah the majority of that wealth was extracted by Australia before independence. Not that any of that excuses the grossly wasteful spending. But the money's gone, the phosphate's gone, and most of Nauru looks like that crazy bit of Madagascar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsingy_de_Bemaraha_National_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsingy_de_Bemaraha_National_Pa...
- a_bonobo 3y ago
  Now Nauru is getting that money back via Australia's off-shore detention program! A bipartisan program by previous governments that spends hundreds of millions on private security companies to run private prisons for asylum seekers who tried to get to Australia by boat. (likely illegal under international law?) https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/07/cost-of-australia-holding-each-refugee-on-nauru-balloons-to-43m-a-year https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/07/cost-... >By August 2021, the number of asylum seekers and refugees held on the island had fallen nearly tenfold, but the costs of running the offshore program remained broadly static. In that month, there were 107 refugees and asylum seekers on Nauru at a cost to taxpayers of $464,486 a month for each person, or more than $15,000 a day. Imagine getting paid $15,000 per day... I guess Nauru is getting its P money back.
  - heywhatupboys 3y ago
    > companies to run private prisons for asylum seekers who tried to get to Australia by boat. (likely illegal under international law?) It isn't a prison if you are free to leave........

EdwardDiego 3y ago

To be fair, most of the phosphate was mined by colonial powers before independence. I think at its peak the trust had $1 billion in investments. But, yeah the majority of that wealth was extracted by Australia before independence. Not that any of that excuses the grossly wasteful spending. But the money's gone, the phosphate's gone, and most of Nauru looks like that crazy bit of Madagascar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsingy_de_Bemaraha_National_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsingy_de_Bemaraha_National_Pa...

a_bonobo 3y ago
Now Nauru is getting that money back via Australia's off-shore detention program! A bipartisan program by previous governments that spends hundreds of millions on private security companies to run private prisons for asylum seekers who tried to get to Australia by boat. (likely illegal under international law?) https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/07/cost-of-australia-holding-each-refugee-on-nauru-balloons-to-43m-a-year https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/nov/07/cost-... >By August 2021, the number of asylum seekers and refugees held on the island had fallen nearly tenfold, but the costs of running the offshore program remained broadly static. In that month, there were 107 refugees and asylum seekers on Nauru at a cost to taxpayers of $464,486 a month for each person, or more than $15,000 a day. Imagine getting paid $15,000 per day... I guess Nauru is getting its P money back.
- heywhatupboys 3y ago
  > companies to run private prisons for asylum seekers who tried to get to Australia by boat. (likely illegal under international law?) It isn't a prison if you are free to leave........