As more than 1 million people remain homeless after the January earthquake that destroyed parts of Haiti, the mayor of one town builds a luxurious palace among the rubble…
http://www.justnews.com/video/24230298/index.html
Advertisement
July 14, 2010 by thegreatgl
As more than 1 million people remain homeless after the January earthquake that destroyed parts of Haiti, the mayor of one town builds a luxurious palace among the rubble…
http://www.justnews.com/video/24230298/index.html
From a reader….my two cents… and I’m curious to know what you think. Is it really that terrible? If they rebuild the government in it’s proper stature and then move to the people… then the city as a whole has been rebuilt to reflect excellence. As opposed to rushing to get everyone in homes and it’s a short term fix b/c no one see the long term goal. For example, if I have money to build a home and had to decide to take a few year to build my dream home or a few months to get me into a structure but it might not be the dream… is it wrong if I aim for the dream that can last forever versus something quick that I will change later down the line anyway. I think so long as the government is working to fix themselves and then the people… than fine. But if it’s only all about itself with no intent to help its people… than that’s terrible. The media should try to avoid judging so quickly b/c Haiti had NOTHING before the earthquake and it became NONEXISTENT after. They are in a lose lose situation.
from me…. I don’t mind them building a nice building for the town, but I think this is the wrong way to go about it. Although, if it can be a source of revenue for the city to hold conferences there, then that is a different story. The materials used could have been toned down alot, but still allowed for it to be nice. You are right though, it is not completely terrible. Also, the fact that the funds used, if true, were donations then that is a huge problem as well. If they use this building to create revenue for the city that is a different story.
from reader (comment 1) I just wanted to see if I was the only one thinking this is might not completely be all that terrible. The money is going to build Haiti, and part of that is to help the infrastructure which didn’t exist. I think what’s completely terrible is the fact that only 2% of donated money has been released. WTF!! 99% of the money goes to aid groups, and only 2% of that was released. Again it’s a lose-lose situation. The only shining light is if the government is doing this City Hall to help the town with revenue, but the fact that 99% of the money is going to aid groups to help the people… you can’t fault the government for helping itself first with what it’s got. We have another situation of where everyone is helping the people of haiti and letting the government sit out of its responsibilities. The aid groups getting this 99% should work with the government to help… but the aid groups doing the government’s functions (i.e. healthcare, education, religion, security, etc) is a BOOMING BUSINESS… and I can see why they will never let the government run itself b/c then these aid groups are out of business. Haiti is their best client b/c it will always have to depend on them.