Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The end of Haiti?

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 107 posts

Re: The end of Haiti?

#71

Post by gojomo »

sailormoon wrote: post #51
ghshephard wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be wrong, and would appreciate anybody from a third world country educating me, but I don't believe that building code standards are typically on top of the list of properties by which the citizens of those third world companies evaluate their government. Civil Order, Access to Water, Food, Jobs, lack of corruption are probably much, much higher on their minds than "Are proper seismic standards being enforced."…

I also lack this elusive "Third World Perspective" but considering the alarming regularity with which earthquakes shuffle several hundred thousands of their friends, family and neighbours off this mortal coil, perhaps those citizens should, in fact, start encouraging their governments to make building codes and disaster preparation more of a priority.

Your "perhaps they should" reasoning verges a bit into "no bread? let them eat cake" territory.

You can't make buildings safer by decree. It takes resources. Haiti is the poorest country in this hemisphere, by far. (The next poorest countries, Guyana or Nicaragua, are each twice as productive by per capita GDP.)

Even with an accurate idea of the chances (but not certainty) of such a major earthquake, the people and government could quite rationally have decided other more pressing needs deserved all of their meager expenditures.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#72

Post by WalkingDead »

adharmad wrote: post #33
timwiseman wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not apply in this case because it is bringing in resources from outside of the country. The broken window fallacy only applies in a relatively closed system. Of course, even if this DOES improve the economy (and I am not saying it will, just that it does not violate the broken window fallacy if it does) this was a horrible tragedy with an enormous deathtoll.

Agreed..it does not seem to be broken window fallacy....sloppy on my part.

I don't even understand the broken window fallacy. The broken window repair does seem to increase GDP, as long as G means Gross (Gross Domestic Product).

Of course the net gain is zero, but that's not what GDP mean, I think.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#73

Post by marciovm123 »

ghshephard wrote: post #49
sailormoon wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well then that's the problem, isn't it? Look, my point is that something could have been done to prepare, and was not. Mahmud's talking like it's a no-fault act of god that's going to bring everyone together in a solidarity of fellow suffering - I'm saying, if I was Haitian and I'd somehow managed to survive this disaster, I'd compare to how other countries deal with this kind of thing and probably be more angry than…

I may be wrong, and would appreciate anybody from a third world country educating me, but I don't believe that building code standards are typically on top of the list of properties by which the citizens of those third world companies evaluate their government. Civil Order, Access to Water, Food, Jobs, lack of corruption are probably much, much higher on their minds than "Are proper seismic standards being enforced."…

I grew up in Brazil 20 years ago, when the economy was pretty bleak (at one point my allowance was worth half as much after a week or so due to hyperinflation). I'd move Jobs to #2 (money buys water and food) and replace Civil Order by the more general Security.

If anything, non-wealthy people in a place like Brazil (roughly 95% of the population) probably resent any attempt at building code enforcement by their government as merely another pretense to receive bribes. As much as we complain about politics in the US, rest assured that politicians and thus governments in the less human-capital dependent parts of the world are orders of magnitude worst.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#74

Post by simplicissimus »

ars wrote: post #15

Historically disasters (and wars) have the opposite effect. In the short term it's terrible, but long term a disaster usually spurs rebuilding and economic activity that results in a better situation than what was there before.

Somalia is a rather compelling, and modern, example of a sovereign nation damaged beyond recovery by war. Rebuilding might occur on such a scale if the country had recently sustained such economic capacity sometime in the past. Haiti sadly has not, and its gov't even before the earthquake would not have been capable of stewarding any such renaissance.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#75

Post by randallsquared »

sailormoon wrote: post #65
ghshephard wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you should question the strength of your analysis when you appear to be comparing Haiti to not just a First world country, but a G-7 Nation. "Let me tell you what would happen to the mayor of a Japanese town if he let this happen and then just shrugged his shoulders and claimed there was "no-one to blame". "

So which way does the causality flow? Do those Japanese citizens have high expectations because they are from a G7 nation? Or did Japan get to be a G7 nation because of the fact its residents have high expectations? Anyway, Japan just sprang to mind as a country with lots of earthquakes, it was not central to my thesis. Feel free to substitute the name of any well-run country in an earthquake zone.

So which way does the causality flow?

You seem to think that the answer is obvious. Everyone knows that Haiti has severe systemic problems, but it's just not clear what can be done about it in a self-sustaining way.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#76

Post by ErrantX »

gojomo wrote: post #69
seldo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coming from Trinidad and Tobago, where we get both, I assure you it's possible to build in a way to withstand both.

GDP per capita (World Bank, 2008): $24,742 Trinidad and Tobago (28th) $1,177 Haiti (146th) What's possible in a rich country isn't much of an example of what's possible in a dirt poor country -- the poorest in the western hemisphere. (What other expenditures should Haitians have forgone to afford in-advance disaster preparations and rich-country building standards, for an earthquake that might never come?) Poverty is…

Agreed. As an example of the abject poverty there compared to even their closest neighbour.

Last night my parents recounted their trip (about 10 years ago) to the Dominican Republic. A lot of Haitian labour work in the DR in the fields etc (usual "immigrant labour" stuff you get everywhere). The average wage was about $1 a day. To put it in perspective in the DR (admittedly in the tourist resorts) you bought Coke for $1 :)

But $1 didn't buy you a lot more even in the non-tourist regions. And Haitians worked there, apparently, because the wages were good!

Calling it a mess is an understatement I think.

(I also showed my Dad this link and he said [rough quote] "it was pretty much a dying country when we went there")

Re: The end of Haiti?

#77

Post by jacquesm »

sailormoon wrote: post #51
ghshephard wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be wrong, and would appreciate anybody from a third world country educating me, but I don't believe that building code standards are typically on top of the list of properties by which the citizens of those third world companies evaluate their government. Civil Order, Access to Water, Food, Jobs, lack of corruption are probably much, much higher on their minds than "Are proper seismic standards being enforced."…

I also lack this elusive "Third World Perspective" but considering the alarming regularity with which earthquakes shuffle several hundred thousands of their friends, family and neighbours off this mortal coil, perhaps those citizens should, in fact, start encouraging their governments to make building codes and disaster preparation more of a priority.

In a third world country you do not build with what you should build with, you build with what you have, and in any way that it will hold out the elements.

Building codes do not enter in to the equation.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#78

Post by sukuriant »

1gor wrote: post #67

The concluding remark about 'climate refugees' is out of place in this otherwise very important discussion about failed states. Climate change and its perceived influence on the mankind is a very controversial subject, and today most of people's suffering from poverty and misgovernment has nothing to do with it. Advancing your own pet theories using a real-life tragedy as a prop is a bad taste.

Agreed, and I quarreled with that statement briefly. What I think the author is trying to say is that soon, there will be climate refugees, and when that happens, we'll need to know what to do with them, and we can use this event as an example on how the world should handle it.

It wasn't necessary in the argument, and yes, he was pushing his theories, but it may not have been so completely insulting as: "climate changed caused an earthquake!"

Re: The end of Haiti?

#79

Post by yardie »

datums wrote: post #62
patrickgzill wrote: post #50

Does the Dominican Republic want Haiti? I don't think so considering how hard they are on Haitians who try to go to the DR part of the island. Will the USA take on Haiti and make it a second Puerto Rico? I don't think so; for one, it would be expensive; two, all the Haitians would move to the USA as soon as they could; and there are probably other reasons as well. So my analysis shows that Haiti will remain a barely…

Puerto Rico was invaded by the United States. Haiti has great sadness in it's history. A large portion of their population is > 19 yrs old. There's a well known problem of child sex slaves in Haiti.

I think you mean <.

Re: The end of Haiti?

#80

Post by borism »

jacoblyles wrote: post #64
borism wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty ridiculous statement in my opinion. Life goes on, disaster or not. There's supposedly always better situation in the future, it is pretty dubious to claim that wars and cataclysms accelerate long term development.

It's Mancur Olson's "Institutional Sclerosis" growth theory. He claimed to have shown that growth rates increase after a large shock to the existing order. His explanation for this is that institutions tend to be corrupted by special interests over time, feeding on the wealth of society. Shocks give people a chance to start afresh.

Doesn't that mean that winning side of military conflict gets even more corrupt afterwards?
Post reply on HN