Why should he has any interest for a tiny failed state?
Because America appointed herself as the Leader of the free world and the shining example of Democracy ! Wether or not they admit it, under develop nations such as Haiti, are equivalent to Canaries in the mines.
When America last took her eyes off Afganistan , The Talibans took control, They took their eyes off East Africa and pockets of lawless militias emerged on the borders of Ethiopia. If they continue to neglect the needs of Latin America and the Carribeans, leftist governments such as Venezeula’s Hugo Chavez and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa will begin to look appealing to the people.
Emerging economic giants like China are keeping a close watch on these smaller nations, not to mention the African continent. As JC pointed out “there is a political and ecomical aspect to everything in foreign affairs.” I agree with Gunner that NGO's are being used as a subdifuge to keep the Haitian people pacified, but how long will that Last ?
BENZ, there is a political aspect to everything in foreign affairs. Economics however almost always wins the day.
Was there a "sabotage" of US manufacturing in favor of China and others....of course not.
Politicians simply follow the advice of economists and if they can please a constituency at the same time, then that is another plus.
You are all over the place. Let's forget about China for now and stick to what Clinton and his team did to the Haitian rice industry.
Constituencies and special interests ALWAYS come first. It's not just some added benefit to please your supporters. Any issue you can find 100 economists to argue for either side. Clinton did not push to cut tariffs in Haiti for the sake of economic theory. In fact, the trade liberalization they pushed on Haiti is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the US does at home, especially in agriculture. It was simply to get US rice growers to make money in Haiti. The Haitian rice growers were thrown under the bus.
Actually I am not all over the place. If the example threw you off, just ignore it for now.
Haiti does not exist in a vacuum. It is part of and affected by policies that also affect other nations.
What happen to the haitian rice industry is no mystery and is similar to things that happened to other industries the world over.
But I am glad you want to stick to what you claim Clinton and Aristide did to the rice industry.
Are you also against what Clinton and the Martelly team are actually doing right now......the same policies are in place.
Or is it just the Aristide part that upsets you???
Unlike Richard Morse, God love him, I try to avoid ADD moments and make the mistake of thinking Haitians are little more than an afterthought on anyone's "AGENDA". It was a nice letter to say the least. Many have been penned and many will continue to be penned in years to come; the result: "DOO WAH DEE, DOO WAH DEE DUM, DEE DEE DOO" and the beat goes on. Haiti has known no peace since 1963 when Papa Doc unleashed his version of Storm Troopers the Tonton Makouts and with the help of our powerful neighbors and international exploiters created a Fascist state replete with corrupt family monopolies and state capitalism. The UN and member nations perpetuate this condition. Every time the Haitian people attempt to stand they are crushed into submission by those who, in the name of peace and security, act to support, protect and maintain the status quo of forcing them to die on $2.00 a day. Although this too is my ADD moment, my only saving grace is that I have had my eyes open through the tenure of the naive African: Kofi Atta Annan, the gullible hillbilly: President William Jefferson Clinton, and hopefully through the Johnny come lately lack luster performance of the brute from Asia: Ban Ki-moon.
In July of 2008, I initiated the following topic in this forum:
If these goals are unattainable in Haiti: how can we believe?
Papaille - 11 January 2010 12:55 PM
All of this posturing is too little too late. Many on Hx just want more luxury hotels. The consensus IMHO is Haiti would be a nice place if not for those god awful “Haitians/Negroes”. "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Clinton was a hillbilly who regarded all Haitians as he did his naïve CBC and AA supporters; big mistake. The Bush family has long maintained economic ties to the under-developed nations particularly in this hemisphere as do most exploiters. There is no political class in Haiti only lackeys of European global hegemony.
BENZ, there is a political aspect to everything in foreign affairs. Economics however almost always wins the day.
Was there a "sabotage" of US manufacturing in favor of China and others....of course not.
Politicians simply follow the advice of economists and if they can please a constituency at the same time, then that is another plus.
You are all over the place. Let's forget about China for now and stick to what Clinton and his team did to the Haitian rice industry.
Constituencies and special interests ALWAYS come first. It's not just some added benefit to please your supporters. Any issue you can find 100 economists to argue for either side. Clinton did not push to cut tariffs in Haiti for the sake of economic theory. In fact, the trade liberalization they pushed on Haiti is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the US does at home, especially in agriculture. It was simply to get US rice growers to make money in Haiti. The Haitian rice growers were thrown under the bus.
Actually I am not all over the place. If the example threw you off, just ignore it for now.
Haiti does not exist in a vacuum. It is part of and affected by policies that also affect other nations.
What happen to the haitian rice industry is no mystery and is similar to things that happened to other industries the world over.
But I am glad you want to stick to what you claim Clinton and Aristide did to the rice industry.
Are you also against what Clinton and the Martelly team are actually doing right now......the same policies are in place.
Or is it just the Aristide part that upsets you???
Again you try to change the subject. Leave martelly out of this for now. Haiti does not exist in a vacuum but Haiti's poor leadership makes it vulnerable. We are drifting from the original point here. Clinton and his cronies specifically targeted the Haitian rice industry for extinction so that they could make money. They demanded that the government drop tariffs while they heavily subsidized their own farmers. They are not stupid they did it on purpose. Why is that so difficult for you to understand???
Why should he has any interest for a tiny failed state?
Because America appointed herself as the Leader of the free world and the shining example of Democracy ! Wether or not they admit it, under develop nations such as Haiti, are equivalent to Canaries in the mines.
When America last took her eyes off Afganistan , The Talibans took control, They took their eyes off East Africa and pockets of lawless militias emerged on the borders of Ethiopia. If they continue to neglect the needs of Latin America and the Carribeans, leftist governments such as Venezeula’s Hugo Chavez and Ecuador’s Rafael Correa will begin to look appealing to the people.
Emerging economic giants like China are keeping a close watch on these smaller nations, not to mention the African continent. As JC pointed out “there is a political and ecomical aspect to everything in foreign affairs.” I agree with Gunner that NGO's are being used as a subdifuge to keep the Haitian people pacified, but how long will that Last ?
Between me and you, the only reason why they have a tiny interest upon us is to avoid an invasion of Boat people to Miami; If Haiti was in the middle of Oceania we would have been even more alone. Leftist or not, 90% of Haitian poliiticans have american vizas, cut them and they will kindly agree to anything on the table.
Again you try to change the subject. Leave martelly out of this for now. Haiti does not exist in a vacuum but Haiti's poor leadership makes it vulnerable. We are drifting from the original point here. Clinton and his cronies specifically targeted the Haitian rice industry for extinction so that they could make money. They demanded that the government drop tariffs while they heavily subsidized their own farmers. They are not stupid they did it on purpose. Why is that so difficult for you to understand???
I don't know why you are getting so excited because I mentioned Martelly.
I hear your screams of SABOTAGE.....it's your view and I don't see it that way.
I see it as implementation of bad economic theories...as Papaille stated by NAIVE people..hence Clinton's apology.
The fact that some people made money is part of all trade decisions/activities.
So we disagree on that one.....and it is settled.
I have moved on and I am following with a question for you, who sees it as SABOTAGE.
Clinton is more involved than ever and the same policies are in place....so what do you think of the CURRENT Clinton/Martelly administration? Is this one free of sabotage??? if yes, what policy changes points in that direction?
BENZ, there is a political aspect to everything in foreign affairs. Economics however almost always wins the day.
Was there a "sabotage" of US manufacturing in favor of China and others....of course not.
Politicians simply follow the advice of economists and if they can please a constituency at the same time, then that is another plus.
You are all over the place. Let's forget about China for now and stick to what Clinton and his team did to the Haitian rice industry.
Constituencies and special interests ALWAYS come first. It's not just some added benefit to please your supporters. Any issue you can find 100 economists to argue for either side.
Clinton did not push to cut tariffs in Haiti for the sake of economic theory. In fact, the trade liberalization they pushed on Haiti is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the US does at home, especially in agriculture. It was simply to get US rice growers to make money in Haiti. The Haitian rice growers were thrown under the bus.
Benz,
I am worried about you and your fact checking. It's lax to say the least.
Perhaps you are unaware, but the Haitian diet (especially rural) consisted of a lot of maize and millet because rice was too expensive in the 70's and early 80's.
Today, rural/poor areas are eating more rice than either one.
Doesn't seem like a big deal, unless you are used to eating what is fed to pigs in the USA.
I don't blame the squatter farmers for not wanting to sell or "aid the poor" when they're in the same boat.
Operating a 1 acre plot is only going to feed your family anyhow.
===============================================
This is a joke!
93,000 thousand farms producing 110,000 mt's or about 1 metric ton (2000 lbs) per "farm".
That is minuscule and the definition of sustenance farming only.
Do you understand Benz?
Your allusion that "rice farming" is some sort of "hidden jewel" stolen from Haitians is absurd.
=================================================
Squatter farmers are producing the same amount of rice they did 30 years ago.
Why? Because on a 1 acre plot of land, you cannot make any money to buy other land, equipment, fertiliser, etc.
It is DIRT POOR Farming.
NOTHING to be heralded as "stolen from Haitians"
The only "stealing" was squatters moving onto land they didn't own or have any title too.
==============================================
Haitians have been able to move from maize and millet to rice.
The poor can now enjoy eating rice that was unaffordable to them in the past prior to imports.
When Bill Clinton was president there was more dedication.
I'd be interested in hearing Romneys take on Haitian issues. Being an independent I pride myself on not voting along party lines, but rather for individulas, meaning that I am not committed to any one.
Bill Clinton also admitted how he and Aristide sabotaged Haiti's rice farmers for the sake of Arkansas so maybe it's better Haiti is off the radar for these guys.
That is not what he said BENZ.
He admitted that the neoliberal policies prescribed by international institutions, and supported by him and his government and forced upon Haiti were counterproductive.
But the yanks keep on imposing them.
Unfortunately haiti is not off the radar....they have simply delegated it to lower ranking people (as did BUSH) to do as they please....so the mafia running haiti can continue doing as it pleases.
So diaspora money is being taxed with no accountability, contracts are being secured by bribes, the so called president is an employee of a corrupt dominican senator, and the banboche continues.
As for Obama, I have said from day one that he has absolutely zero interest in Haiti.
ALL the U.S.rats need to be sent back to their northern cages.
Interesting. Yes I know Chicago School economics and trade liberalization. What you fail to grasp here is that there is a political aspect to this, which is more important.
Chicago School economics was not invented in the 1990s. Yet the sabotage was successful in the 1990s. So there is a political aspect to this story that explains why.
Put 2 and 2 together. Clinton is from Arkansas, the rice capital of the US. These subsidized farmers are always lobbying the government for favors and Clinton knew he had leverage over Aristide who desperately wanted to get back in to power. Clinton knew he could make his people back home happy and put Aristide back in power at one shot. So they cut a deal. So that is the story.
Forget about search for price efficiency...blah blah...They wanted to make money exporting rice to Haiti.
BENZ, there is a political aspect to everything in foreign affairs. Economics however almost always wins the day.
Was there a "sabotage" of US manufacturing in favor of China and others....of course not.
JC, sabotage of US manufacturing in favor of China is not a good comparison because the manufacturing jobs were outsourced to China by private U.S companies and not by the U.S government.
The agricultural policies that undermine production in third world country were the direct result of U.S /1st world policies. These policies were purposely put in place to protect subsidized-rice exporters and under local rice producers whose price couldn't with the subsidized rice. ( Keep in mind quantity of locally produced rice differs from quantity sold).
These policies were/are implemented either by dumping (from private companies to local markets with the approval and the protection of the U.S/1st world governments) or by the NGOs (through monetization).
The governments that wrote these policies and guaranteed their implementation were aware of the consequences that they would have on third world/Haiti's production/economy. They used their power to protect their farmers and assure that the duming/monetization never stops.
With all that in mind, the intent was to SABOTAGE local production.
Once again, business is business, may the bigger/more aggressive vendor win.
The legitimacy and fairness of this business process is open to question, but to say that it was not pure SABOTAGE is lying to yourself.
JC, sabotage of US manufacturing in favor of China is not a good comparison because the manufacturing jobs were outsourced to China by private U.S companies and not by the U.S government.
Alain; the haiti government did not tell the haiti farmer to stop producing rice.
Both haiti and USA followed trade, tax and tariff policies that allowed job outsourcing in USA's case and rice imports in Haiti's case.
The US private sector was free to reduce cost...as the haiti private sector was free to increase productivity and reduce price.
As GUNNER's data shows, the haitians were engaged in subsistence farming and would suffer the consequences in a global market.
Haiti was a basket case before the massive importation.....so nothing was lost.
Yes haiti was pressured, but that is the reality for beggar countries.
Many of Haiti's leaders also brought into that theory. They were not trying to SABOTAGE Haiti.
The idea was to steer human resources to areas where Haiti could be competitive....and it was not in rice production...it never produced enough affordable rice for the population.
It is a global economy and outsourcing is a GOOD THING for the consumer.
Haiti as a failed state does not have a government able to set and implement a plan of development.
And my question again, what now? Bill Clinton the SABOTEUR is in charge and the same policies are being advanced....what do you guys suggest?????
The legitimacy and fairness of this business process is open to question, but to say that it was not pure SABOTAGE is lying to yourself.
SABOTAGE would be doing something to affect the productivity of haitian farmers.....nothing of that kind took place.... they were under-productive and remain under-productive.
The US/International/Haitians simply provided the consumer with a cheaper alternative.
You may question the trade practices imposed on beggar nations....that is a valid argument.....SABOTAGE however is something else.
The legitimacy and fairness of this business process is open to question, but to say that it was not pure SABOTAGE is lying to yourself.
SABOTAGE would be doing something to affect the productivity of haitian farmers.....nothing of that kind took place.... they were under-productive and remain under-productive.
The US/International/Haitians simply provided the consumer with a cheaper alternative.
You may question the trade practices imposed on beggar nations....that is a valid argument.....SABOTAGE however is something else.
if they wanted to provide a cheaper alternative they should have done so with the same tariffs in place. That would be only fair considering rice growers in the U.S. receive probably hundreds of millions of dollars from the American taxpayer.
Your mistake is using economic theory to justify their actions. If this comes down to economic theory subsidies would abolished asap because they distort prices for agricultural products.
