Should Trump Resign Over "Hellhole" Comment?

[Teallaura]

It can quickly become 'careful what you wish for'. new development is especially sensitive to political/economic climate. Lots of pretty beaches to choose from, and the more red tape, the more desirable some other beach becomes.

There isn't a one size fits all solution - but I think it's better to attract industry (not completely unregulated, granted) than to try to leverage industry into doing social and governmental jobs.

What can they do besides just tourism? Develop that - and tourism. Eggs in multiple baskets and all that.

So much easier said than done, of course.

[carpedm9587]

So you are saying that because the company's don't give back and help the community that the people live in squalor that equates to a hellhole?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26182[/ATTACH]

As with MM, Sparko - I think I'm going to start being more careful about sorting out serious responses that merit discussion from trolling. This one is clearly of the latter type. Or perhaps it's just a poor attempt at humor?

[Mountain Man]

Sparko makes a valid point.

This is intended as satire:

conan mud.jpg

[Sparko]

As with MM, Sparko - I think I'm going to start being more careful about sorting out serious responses that merit discussion from trolling. This one is clearly of the latter type. Or perhaps it's just a poor attempt at humor?

no humor. I am wondering because you made it a point to say that Haiti wasn't a hellhole and I should never have said it was, but then you argued that the people have it so horrible because of the way the resorts take all the money and don't give it back. So do they live in squalor or not? The photo above is a haiti slum. I would describe it as a "hellhole" but you might not. Just curious.

[carpedm9587]

no humor. I am wondering because you made it a point to say that Haiti wasn't a hellhole and I should never have said it was, but then you argued that the people have it so horrible because of the way the resorts take all the money and don't give it back. So do they live in squalor or not? The photo above is a haiti slum. I would describe it as a "hellhole" but you might not. Just curious.

My objection was to the over-arching characterization of Haiti as a "hellhole." As far as I am concerned, it's one step up from "s---hole" and "s---house." As with most countries, Haiti is a blend of many attributes. Much of the nation is poor. Much of the nation is beautiful. Much of the nation lacks the kind of infrastructure Americans are used to. Some areas, especially in suburban areas, are not only poor, they are violent and truly "hellholes" in much the same way a project in outer Chicago is likely a "hellhole."

My objection is that it does a disservice to the people of this country to label their entire nation with a single, pejorative description/word. At no point did I intend to suggest that every place in of Haiti is "beautiful," and I acknowledged that my initial statement, "Haiti is a beautiful country" erred to the positive as badly as "hellhole" errs to the negative. Most of the country is indeed very beautiful. And I make these observations on the basis of trips there I have taken to that country in the last 18 months.

[Sparko]

My objection was to the over-arching characterization of Haiti as a "hellhole." As far as I am concerned, it's one step up from "s---hole" and "s---house." As with most countries, Haiti is a blend of many attributes. Much of the nation is poor. Much of the nation is beautiful. Much of the nation lacks the kind of infrastructure Americans are used to. Some areas, especially in suburban areas, are not only poor, they are violent and truly "hellholes" in much the same way a project in outer Chicago is likely a "hellhole."

My objection is that it does a disservice to the people of this country to label their entire nation with a single, pejorative description/word. At no point did I intend to suggest that every place in of Haiti is "beautiful," and I acknowledged that my initial statement, "Haiti is a beautiful country" erred to the positive as badly as "hellhole" errs to the negative. Most of the country is indeed very beautiful. And I make these observations on the basis of trips there I have taken to that country in the last 18 months.

Just like I didn't think you were saying all of Haiti was beautiful and perfect you should not have assumed I was talking about all of Haiti when I said that while the resorts are paridise the people are poor and live in a hellhole.

[carpedm9587]

Just like I didn't think you were saying all of Haiti was beautiful and perfect you should not have assumed I was talking about all of Haiti when I said that while the resorts are paridise the people are poor and live in a hellhole.

I'm not assuming that is what you think, Sparko. I am saying that such a sweeping negative statement is harmful. I may be have equally over general, but at least it was on the positive side. These sweeping negative statements are VERY harmful when they are made by POTUS because of his bully pulpit and is assumed authority in the eyes of so many. It is much less harmful when it is done by you or I because our audience is much smaller and our authority perceived as much less. But I still think it promotes a way of thinking about these countries that denigrates them, and perhaps even leads some people to say, "well, I guess I'm not going to vacation there - apparently its a hellhole." That harms the people of these countries, who depend (to some degree) on tourism dollars for their livelihood and their economy.

It's not the end of the world. It's not going to end life as we know it. But I work with these people, as well as people in other countries. Anything we can do to raise awareness here, and to promote a different way of speaking/thinking about these people is, IMO, important - however small.

[Sparko]

I'm not assuming that is what you think, Sparko. I am saying that such a sweeping negative statement is harmful. I may be have equally over general, but at least it was on the positive side. These sweeping negative statements are VERY harmful when they are made by POTUS because of his bully pulpit and is assumed authority in the eyes of so many. It is much less harmful when it is done by you or I because our audience is much smaller and our authority perceived as much less. But I still think it promotes a way of thinking about these countries that denigrates them, and perhaps even leads some people to say, "well, I guess I'm not going to vacation there - apparently its a hellhole." That harms the people of these countries, who depend (to some degree) on tourism dollars for their livelihood and their economy.

It's not the end of the world. It's not going to end life as we know it. But I work with these people, as well as people in other countries. Anything we can do to raise awareness here, and to promote a different way of speaking/thinking about these people is, IMO, important - however small.

How is saying they live in abject poverty, in what we would consider a "hellhole" harmful to them? If anything it makes them look sympathetic and makes people want to help them and understand why they want to leave.

In fact going around saying they live in a tropical paradise would be more harmful because then people would say, "great! Then why don't they just stay there?"

[carpedm9587]

How is saying they live in abject poverty, in what we would consider a "hellhole" harmful to them? If anything it makes them look sympathetic and makes people want to help them and understand why they want to leave.

In fact going around saying they live in a tropical paradise would be more harmful because then people would say, "great! Then why don't they just stay there?"

I give up. Call it a hellhole if you wish.

I have to admit, this site, and the other right-leaning sites I frequent, are the only place where a call to be more balanced in our language about these countries has ever been challenged. In all other places, the response I hear is generally, "I never thought of it that way. Maybe I should be more careful with how I talk about these countries/people." Only here (and on other such sites) do I get endless argument defending these broad, negative, generalizations. And then people wonder why the right is so often seen in negative terms by moderates and the right.

I'll leave the last comment to you. Hopefully, at least a few people will have picked up on the issue.

[Sparko]

I give up. Call it a hellhole if you wish.

I have to admit, this site, and the other right-leaning sites I frequent, are the only place where a call to be more balanced in our language about these countries has ever been challenged. In all other places, the response I hear is, "wow, I never thought of it that way. Maybe I should be more careful with how I talk about these countries/people." Only here (and on other such sites) do I get endless argument defending these broad, negative, generalizations. And then people wonder why the right is so often seen in negative terms by moderates and the right.

I'll leave the last comment to you. Hopefully, at least a few people will have picked up on the issue.

wow.

[Cow Poke]

That I cannot solve tthe problem does not mean we should turn a blind eye to it, or give it a "pass."

And nobody said that's what it means. I just wonder why you spend so much time and so many words pontificating on things over which you have zero control.

It still needs to be highlighted so that, whenever/whever possible, people can make choices in line with the ethics of the companies whose products they use.

I actually do that in my retirement portfolio - I choose to support companies and entities I believe in, even if it means I don't earn as much for retirement. I can also choose not to purchase products that support causes with which I disagree. Sometimes, that's not practical, but when it is, I do.

If you had led with this, it would have made more sense, but it just seems you like to argue, pick nit, 'research', find charts and graphs and data to support whatever it is you want to believe, and generally just disagree to disagree.

I appreciate that you do it, for the most part, pretty civilly - that's a bit unusual and refreshing, but sometimes...

[Cow Poke]

...The photo above is a haiti slum. I would describe it as a "hellhole" but you might not. Just curious.

That looks like a picture from "the shadows", which I mentioned earlier. Kids in their undies play in ditches filled with poop and household waste, and even splash it on each other, laughing and having a great time.

[Cow Poke]

...At no point did I intend to suggest that every place in of Haiti is "beautiful," and I acknowledged that my initial statement, "Haiti is a beautiful country" erred to the positive as badly as "hellhole" errs to the negative.

Most of the country is indeed very beautiful.

In my experience, these are, for the most part, the places where people don't live. "the wilderness", so to speak.

And I make these observations on the basis of trips there I have taken to that country in the last 18 months.

There are absolutely some very beautiful places in Haiti - been there, done that, left the t-shirt!

[carpedm9587]

And nobody said that's what it means. I just wonder why you spend so much time and so many words pontificating on things over which you have zero control.

Pontificating I plead guilty to in prose. I am wordy. Pretty much always have been. As for why? Because I beleive there is value in raising awareness, even if we cannot immediately solve the problem.

I actually do that in my retirement portfolio - I choose to support companies and entities I believe in, even if it means I don't earn as much for retirement. I can also choose not to purchase products that support causes with which I disagree. Sometimes, that's not practical, but when it is, I do.

As do I. If more people did, it might actually cause companies to see a decline in their stock value, with a corresponding change in their behavior.

If you had led with this, it would have made more sense, but it just seems you like to argue, pick nit, 'research', find charts and graphs and data to support whatever it is you want to believe, and generally just disagree to disagree.

I probably could have led with it, had I thought to enter in the discussion that way. As for the rest of your comment, it might surprise you to find that is exactly my impression of many folks here. If I say, "red," they head off on every argument under the sun to say "black." The impression left is that I am atheist/liberal (true to the former, not to the latter), so I must be wrong.

I appreciate that you do it, for the most part, pretty civilly - that's a bit unusual and refreshing, but sometimes...

I do make every attempt to remain civil in my discussion. I cannot say the same for many who choose to respond. There is a true predeliction here, and on most public fora (left, center or right) I visit, to ridicule, disparage, and demean. I work hard not to respond in kind, but I do have to admit it is somewhat tiresome. I'm reasonably sure most people would not engage with so little basic civilty one-on-one. Such is the Internet; anonimity gives people license to let go of their civility.

[Darth Executor]

I have been in the Carribean, and seen what American corporations do. Check out the history of the aluminum industry in the Carribean for an example.

Let's stick to the topic.

There are ways major corporations could build and make money and still help support the local economy more than they do.

No kidding. How about you apply this reasoning to the locals instead though. It amazes me that you place more responsibility on foreigners with no skin in the game than the Haitians themselves. The corps have zero responsibility, presumably Haiti finds it profitable enough to let them build resorts and it's good enough for them. As far as I'm concerned they've done more than enough for a place that isn't actually their home.