Haiti

At what point does the government of Haiti, or other world governments, decide it’s time to have a mass migration of people out of Haiti to a safer location. They are so in the path of hurricanes that at some point someone with some authority has to wake up. Reminds me of some shtick Sam Kinison used to do. He was talking about all the starvation in Ethiopia, or some such African country. And his response was, Of course you’re starving, you live in a goddamn desert. Why don’t you move where there’s a McDonalds. It sounds cruel, but it also makes some sense.

Where are they going to go and who is going to pay for it?

I remember someone telling me that Sam Kinison joke. I was a the chairman of Students Against World Hunger at Indiana University. When they sent me mail they abbreviated it to “Stud Against World”.
I asked a similar question. It’s a common application of Western culture point of view to Southern Hemisphere reality. When we had the dust bowl, people loaded up the trucks and moved to California. That went well. That was people with money, healthy, job skills, same color, similar ancestry.

Where are they going to go and who is going to pay for it?
They can go just about anywhere. And it can be paid by the same sources that pay year after year after year for "Aid to Haiti after Hurricane X".

Although CuthbertJ’s idea is somewhat half baked, it’s something we might have to get used to. I’m thinking more about islands that are disappearing, as well as coastlines, but why not places that just don’t make sense for civilization? I would love to see us abandon private ownership of all potential flood zones, waterways, important habitats, etc. The biggest obstacle though it is the most expensive real estate in the world. And real estate is the basis of much of the world economy. Other than that…

Half baked? I don’t think he’s turned on the oven yet.
But you raise a good point. We will need to relocate millions of people in the near future, including many in our own country. The longer we delay planning the more expensive the relocation efforts and the more people will suffer and die before we face reality.

Other countries will build walls.
The idea is not half baked, the oven is not just off, the recipe is poisonous. See e.g. Willkommenskultur]. Unless people really open their hearts, and are prepared to really share their privileges, i.e. partially give them up, it will only activate people’s racist and fascist glands.

What made Kinison’s joke a joke is that he took the individual act of moving, something hard enough for a starving child, and applied it to a nation. The closest thing to that is moving a city, say to higher ground after constant flooding. But most people don’t realize our concept of nation-state was created by treaty in 1648, they think it is something that has always existed as it is, I mean, it’s in the Bible right? Wrong. And just like in 1648, when the Pope was declared just another nation, not someone who could authorize the king to go kill the heathens, we will need to change he idea that because you are born somewhere, you get certain privileges on the natural resources that are in and around there. Once you start thinking about how you get that because someone killed someone else 250 years ago, then enslaved some others, your argument for having those privileges starts to unravel.

Half baked? I don't think he's turned on the oven yet. But you raise a good point. We will need to relocate millions of people in the near future, including many in our own country. The longer we delay planning the more expensive the relocation efforts and the more people will suffer and die before we face reality.
Hold on Trump (defined as someone who contradicts himself in the same stream of thought). You say my idea is totally goofy, then in your next sentence you say "We will need to relocate millions...in the near future...". You just restated my point. Year after year billions of dollars flow into Haiti to assist in hurricane relief. At what point does someone say, enough is enough, let's figure out how to...in your own words, relocate people "out of the sand and next to a McDonalds" speaking figuratively.
At what point does someone say, enough is enough, let's figure out how to...in your own words, relocate people "out of the sand and next to a McDonalds" speaking figuratively.
Fortunately very few "someones" say, "let them die". When I'm asking for donations from people, I don't use that language, but on forums, I do. If we do nothing, we let them die. If we say, "why don't they move", we are the caricatured Marie Antoinette. You also ignore that in the Bush/Clinton years, we forced them to drop their tariffs on rice we sell to them. This destroyed local farming there. So, you are "half baked" in that you see a problem, but haven't considered the consequences of the solution you proposed. When we who use proportionately more resources speak in abstracts terms about "sustainability", what we are really saying is, we want to keep living like we do, but we know the whole world can't live this way. We are Guatama Buddha who was let out of his father's gated castle, except we see the poverty and don't go on a spiritual journey to rethink our ethics. We go back to the castle and say it's them who aren't thinking right.
Half baked? I don't think he's turned on the oven yet. But you raise a good point. We will need to relocate millions of people in the near future, including many in our own country. The longer we delay planning the more expensive the relocation efforts and the more people will suffer and die before we face reality.
Hold on Trump (defined as someone who contradicts himself in the same stream of thought). You say my idea is totally goofy, then in your next sentence you say "We will need to relocate millions...in the near future...". You just restated my point. Year after year billions of dollars flow into Haiti to assist in hurricane relief. At what point does someone say, enough is enough, let's figure out how to...in your own words, relocate people "out of the sand and next to a McDonalds" speaking figuratively. No, I didn't say your idea was totally goofy, I said it wasn't even half baked. That was after I asked a perfectly reasonable question about logistics and financing and you came back with an empty response. Saying "they can go just about anywhere" is not helpful at all, as GdB pointed out. Look at the resistance to taking in refugees in our own country. Do you really believe rednecks will suddenly turn compassionate when the UN our perhaps our own government starts moving large numbers of poor black people into their states? Sending aid money is a far different task and responsibility than moving people out of their homeland into foreign countries.

Looking at the news after Matthew passed Haiti and the Dominican Republic I think Cuthbert has the wrong idea. Latest reports confirm 842 dead in Haiti and four dead in the Dominican Republic. This is interesting because they are the same island separated by an artificial border, but the big difference is economic. The Dominican Republic is much more affluent than Haiti and the buildings are made to more stringent codes, if any codes even exist in Haiti. Instead of relocating Haitians the world should pool its resources and help the people build more disaster-proof homes, schools and businesses. This won’t happen, of course, because of tribalism.
Edit: fixed two typos

Other countries will build walls. The idea is not half baked, the oven is not just off, the recipe is poisonous. See e.g. Willkommenskultur]. Unless people really open their hearts, and are prepared to really share their privileges, i.e. partially give them up, it will only activate people's racist and fascist glands.
Given the rise of Nationalism and Xenophobia and absolutism doesn't look like that strategy has much of a future.
Other countries will build walls. The idea is not half baked, the oven is not just off, the recipe is poisonous. See e.g. Willkommenskultur]. Unless people really open their hearts, and are prepared to really share their privileges, i.e. partially give them up, it will only activate people's racist and fascist glands.
Given the rise of Nationalism and Xenophobia and absolutism doesn't look like that strategy has much of a future. You forgot racism.
Looking at the news after Matthew passed Haiti and the Dominican Republic I think Cuthbert has the wrong idea. Latest reports confirm 842 dead in Haiti and four dead in the Dominican Republic. This is interesting because they are the same island separated by an artificial border, but the big difference is economic. The Dominican Republic is much more affluent than Haiti and the building are made to more stringent codes, if any codes even exist in Haitians. Instead of relocating Haitians the world should pool its resources and help the people build more disaster-proof homes, schools and businesses. This won't happen, of course, because of tribalism.
+1

Agreed gdb. Darrin is right. To understand Haiti, it helps to look at their neighbor.