Do they know its Christmas? Hasnt been redone yet....


EEUU para Chile anyone? LOL

I don't think anybody even knew Haiti existed before that earthquake

One of the main reasons governments, agencies, etc... have been slower to respond to Chile as compared to Haiti is because Chile is possibly one of the more prosperous of the South American countries and was prepared to withstand some type of catastrophe than Haiti. Even the buildings are built better and that's why the damage wasn't as numerous. Nevertheless, the Chilean government has asked for assistance and it kind of caught the world governments/agencies off guard.

This is according to a few Latin American news agencies I've been watching.

Here's a good comparison by TIME magazine

http://www.time.com/time/world/arti...1968576,00.html

Japan!

Re: So wheres the outpouring of grief for Chile?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Wheres the matching government donations? The We are the Worlds? The 24 hour CNN "disaster porn"? Where is Michelle Jean? Wycleff Jean?

1. Wycleff is from Haiti
2. Everybody's sympathy has been wasted on Haiti. The Chile quake happened much too soon.

OK Jay...

I'm usually on your side on issues but in this case, you're comparing apples to oranges...

Chile is more than capable of handling this situation with minimal assistance from other countries...

The damage and death toll are un-comparable between these two events...

quote:

Originally posted by VDub OK Jay... I'm usually on your side on issues but in this case, you're comparing apples to oranges... Chile is more than capable of handling this situation with minimal assistance from other countries... The damage and death toll are un-comparable between these two events...

Correct me if I'm wrong but during/after Katrina, did other countries not assist in the fixing up the damage done?

quote:

Originally posted by LKD so just because fewer people died, the world should just shrug it off saying "meh...it's ok...it's not 300,000 ? is it?" More survivors without homes/food = more mouths that need feeding.

Agreed.

It's almost like Haiti was a fad and the powers that be are saying "been there, done that" I know Hollywood definitely is. They all got years of PR from Haiti.

u could say its apples and oranges.. but *only* 3000 people died on sep 11 and the damage was contained to a few blocks in the richest country in the world.

But that didnt stop the outpouring of aide and sympathy.

It just played way better in the media (for obvious reasons).


A tragedy isnt nec based on # of deaths or wealth of a country is my point.

A lot of people died and are now homeless in Chile. And the same people that played the violins for their own interests in Haiti are now silent for Chile. And the hypocrisy is glaring. As glaring as it was during the Haiti situation when i asked why everyone was suddenly going overboard for it when they had remained silent about so many other disasters.

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 I don't think anybody even knew Haiti existed before that earthquake

Everybody knew it as "the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere".

I think Haiti received more help because of a collective feeling of guilt. It is such a close neighbour, but most people over looked it when considering donations to a poor country (outside of disaster time). People always thought of Africa, South (East) Asia...etc, not Haiti. That's not to say that people didn't donate, obviously they did, but not to the same extent. Plus, how many 'help Haiti' commercials did you see before the earth quake?

Chile higher GDP (76st source) is a lot closer to ours than Haiti's. Hell some people in Canada don't make the same as people in Chile. Also, take into account population loss. Haiti lost ~3% of it's people, where as Chile will lose far fewer. So the battle for the surviving to deal with the dead is less exhaustive.

The news coverage has baffled me a bit. When Haiti was hit, CBC News was basically the all Haiti channel, you couldn't get coverage for anything else. But, for Chile, it is business as usual.

We must not forget our ties to Haiti. Our Governor General is from there. Plus, the US has a large Haitian population, which helped spur media focus, here and south of us. I think this played a huge part.

you're insulting our intelligence with your posts, Jayx.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko Everybody knew it as "the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere". I think Haiti received more help because of a collective feeling of guilt. It is such a close neighbour, but most people over looked it when considering donations to a poor country (outside of disaster time). People always thought of Africa, South (East) Asia...etc, not Haiti. That's not to say that people didn't donate, obviously they did, but not to the same extent. Plus, how many 'help Haiti' commercials did you see before the earth quake? Argintina's higher GDP (81st source) is a lot closer to ours than Haiti's. Hell some people in Canada don't make the same as people in Argentina. Also, take into account population loss. Haiti lost ~3% of it's people, where as Argentina will lose far fewer. So the battle for the surviving to deal with the dead is less exhaustive. The news coverage has baffled me a bit. When Haiti was hit, CBC News was basically the all Haiti channel, you couldn't get coverage for anything else. But, for Argentina, it is business as usual. We must not forget our ties to Haiti. Our Governor General is from there. Plus, the US has a large Haitian population, which helped spur media focus, here and south of us. I think this played a huge part.

and the numbers. It's a combination of factors, the sheer numbers, the helplessness and existing poverty you've mentioned in your post, the timing (which is unfortunate for Chile), etc.

To use an act of terrorism as a comparison to Chile is however.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko Everybody knew it as "the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere". I think Haiti received more help because of a collective feeling of guilt. It is such a close neighbour, but most people over looked it when considering donations to a poor country (outside of disaster time). People always thought of Africa, South (East) Asia...etc, not Haiti. That's not to say that people didn't donate, obviously they did, but not to the same extent. Plus, how many 'help Haiti' commercials did you see before the earth quake? Argintina's higher GDP (81st source) is a lot closer to ours than Haiti's. Hell some people in Canada don't make the same as people in Argentina. Also, take into account population loss. Haiti lost ~3% of it's people, where as Argentina will lose far fewer. So the battle for the surviving to deal with the dead is less exhaustive. The news coverage has baffled me a bit. When Haiti was hit, CBC News was basically the all Haiti channel, you couldn't get coverage for anything else. But, for Argentina, it is business as usual. We must not forget our ties to Haiti. Our Governor General is from there. Plus, the US has a large Haitian population, which helped spur media focus, here and south of us. I think this played a huge part.

you mean Chile?

Haha, I totally wrote the wrong country!

Post updated...same points!

I'm almost certain Jayx was watching the hockey game and not the news on Chile

quote:

I think Haiti received more help because of a collective feeling of guilt.

i doubt it. did you know that haiti had to pay reparations to france from 1825 to 1947 ???

quote:

Originally posted by Otaku2K Japan!

They want to clean up before excepting help...

I wasn't tying to belittle the tragedy of ppl dying in Chile. These are my ppl afterall.

I'm just saying that Chile doesn't need as much help as Haiti did to recover from this event.

And putting these natural disasters up with the terrorism that was 9/11 is REALLY comparing apples to oranges...

Also, someone mentioned Katrina. The US didn't need any help for that disaster. The problem was that the gov didn't give a rats ass...

quote:

Originally posted by VDub Also, someone mentioned Katrina. The US didn't need any help for that disaster. The problem was that the gov didn't give a rats ass...

^^^^

quote:

Originally posted by VDub I wasn't tying to belittle the tragedy of ppl dying in Chile. These are my ppl afterall. I'm just saying that Chile doesn't need as much help as Haiti did to recover from this event. And putting these natural disasters up with the terrorism that was 9/11 is REALLY comparing apples to oranges... Also, someone mentioned Katrina. The US didn't need any help for that disaster. The problem was that the gov didn't give a rats ass...

I wasn't talking about just help but the spectacle of sympathy/grief that prevailed after both those events.

Just because they're terrorist based events or lack of action from the government, in the end there's loss of life and property on a large scale PERIOD.

you can't say "oh well this country is better off so fuck em, I don't care how many people died or are homeless"

(although I know that's not what you, specifically, are saying)

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 i blame wyclef... youd think that this guy of all people would be the first to step up. Just shows u how non altruistic these people really are. Help my homeland but fuckkit for everyone else.

Of course you blame him, you always end up blaming someone.

or he is just busy helping his homeland.

You are really the opportunist of the worst kind. If Chile's disaster happened prior to Haiti's you would be on here bitching that no one cares about Haiti.

You cant win.

quote:

Originally posted by 7-4-7 Of course you blame him, you always end up blaming someone. or he is just busy helping his homeland. You are really the opportunist of the worst kind. If Chile's disaster happened prior to Haiti's you would be on here bitching that no one cares about Haiti. You cant win.

actually my friend, if you read my posts i usually postulate that the person to blame is usually themselves.

Anyways... I have no problem with the massive outpouring for haiti. But again i question why suddenly for that event when there have been so many huge disasters in the past? And why not for chile? And why not for the events in the future that will come and go with perhaps a story for one or 2 days in the paper and thats it?

What are the factors involved that made the media so wrapped up in that one event? Who was pulling the strings? Who had what interests in it? etc etc.

When i see an anomoly, i question it.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 altruistic

awesome!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.