The population of Haiti is 9 Million may be even less now, the annual income is US $450.00
Money donation from around the world is estimated to be $2022702837 is does not include the value of food, clothing, medical, potable shelters and the other material thing required for emergency support.

I’m all for giving, supporting and helping in situation like this but when is too much ..too much.
With so much funds the accountability of the funds are difficult track and at what point does this become a hinder to Haiti people to rebuilding for themselves. This is like creating a welfare state that at some point the money will stop and then what?
Is there a point when to much is not a positive benefactor for the people of Haiti but a negative effect creating the population dependences of short term prosperity?

What worries me is we are pouring all this money into Haiti for relief while Haitian "presidents" have been known to notoriously use the money designated for their country on their own personal exploits. I feel bad for those who were hurt/maimed/killed in Haiti but haven't we stopped, thought about the history of Haiti and their constant misuse of foreign aid and figured out "waitaminute- how do we know they won't do the same thing?".

I agree that their need to have a stipulation with this money, maybe use this disaster to establish some order in there, but Haiti will not economically become stable until they get an actual altruistic president to run things. If you know anything about the geography of the island of Haiti/Dominican Republic, the two countries are cut off by a mountain and Haiti got the raw end of the deal when it comes to natural resources, which is why they can't really rely on that for any economic stability- putting the burden of the economy on someone who knows how to run a country- who they never had.

If you don't like the cause, or you feel enough has already been done, don't give to them. Seems simple enough.

Gobuckeyes1 wrote: If you don't like the cause, or you feel enough has already been done, don't give to them. Seems simple enough.

There's nothing wrong with questioning how this money is going to be used. I don't think anyone on the huddle can say that this money will probably be spent wisely if left up to the Haitian government. They will probably rebuild using the same poor standards and this will all happen again in the future.

How much does it cost to rebuild the country to its already substandard conditions? If that is what they are shooting for, then there should already be enough money. If they are going to try to rebuild the country to be something other than a third world nation some additional funds might be required.

So let's say they rebuild everything to modern standards, will we also have to give money to maintain the country once it is up and running.

Reminds me of an old saying from my Texan Grandmother..."that's like putting a $200 saddle on a $20 horse."

After all the countries helping decide to leave there will be massive infighting for control of the money. I can see Haiti turning into another Somalia in a couple of years, and our military will have to go down there and try to settle it.

THE4RINGZ wrote: How much does it cost to rebuild the country to its already substandard conditions?

$7.29

The people from Haiti are making out like bandits from this situation.

We've been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years and haven't been able to rebuild those countries, what makes anyone think we'd be anymore likely to be able to rebuild Haiti? The U.S. isn't very good at rebuilding.

Belly has a great point, and one I tend to agree with.

I mean it's great to help people struggling like they are. But I think we should only help in the rescue effort, not the rebuilding. When you do that you create a welfare state basically. We don't need them relying on us and it only hurts them to have to rely on us. Until a country like Haiti stands on it's own feet then it's just going to be the same way it was before the disaster. I'm totally down with the cause to go and help people medically and use our resources to help find people, etc. But I don't think we should push any effort to rebuild. You have to get yourself out of the bottom--if you rely on help to get up, you'll never be able to get up by yourself.

tk421 wrote: We've been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years and haven't been able to rebuild those countries, what makes anyone think we'd be anymore likely to be able to rebuild Haiti? The U.S. isn't very good at rebuilding.

:huh:

We aren't at war with Haiti. We're certainly going to rebuild.

GoChiefs wrote:

THE4RINGZ wrote: How much does it cost to rebuild the country to its already substandard conditions?

$7.29

unfortunately, I lol'd

SQ_Crazies wrote:

tk421 wrote: We've been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years and haven't been able to rebuild those countries, what makes anyone think we'd be anymore likely to be able to rebuild Haiti? The U.S. isn't very good at rebuilding.

:huh:

We aren't at war with Haiti. We're certainly going to rebuild.

Why does it fall on the U.S to rebuild? It's one thing to send aid, but we shouldn't get stuck rebuilding that country, hell, the we haven't even rebuilt N.O. yet.

Gobuckeyes1 wrote: If you don't like the cause, or you feel enough has already been done, don't give to them. Seems simple enough.

It just does. I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's how it works. It's part of the job of being the worlds only super power and it's a precedent that we've set for ourselves over time.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just move the 9M residents off of Hait and put them into various spots in this country to live on the public dole? At least in that regard, we would be sure they are getting what they need and not be concered about Haitian elite taking it all.

I would think the Democratic Party would be all for this. After all, it would be 9M more voters for them.

GoChiefs wrote:

THE4RINGZ wrote: How much does it cost to rebuild the country to its already substandard conditions?

$7.29

about tree fitty

tk421 wrote:

Gobuckeyes1 wrote: If you don't like the cause, or you feel enough has already been done, don't give to them. Seems simple enough.

There's nothing wrong with questioning how this money is going to be used. I don't think anyone on the huddle can say that this money will probably be spent wisely if left up to the Haitian government. They will probably rebuild using the same poor standards and this will all happen again in the future.

Exactly.

Haiti has a history (the government) of corruption -- and here we are, pouring tens of millions of dollars that you just KNOW is going to end up in those same corrupt hands.

I have NO problem with providing these people with help; I just find it hard to believe the dollars will end up where they can do the most good if Haiti's government has control of the purse strings.

Sounds so familiar this song......let's see.....what is it??? Africa, that's it. Millions to fight aids, with Bush II gifting the largest amount ever by a US admin, and yet hmmmmmm. What's the rest of the world done???

As long as it is not taxpayer money, I don't think much about it. I disagree with the US government giving aid to countries out of taxpayer money, when we in fact are in a terrible economy.

Now private donations are a totally different and I am all for that, but the government should not be a charity to other countries.

If people want to privately donate to Haiti then the money can keep on going there as long as people let it as far as I'm concerned. However, I agree that taxpayer money should be going to better places. I don't recall Haiti sending relief to New Orleans

krazie45 wrote: If people want to privately donate to Haiti then the money can keep on going there as long as people let it as far as I'm concerned. However, I agree that taxpayer money should be going to better places. I don't recall Haiti sending relief to New Orleans

What might be some more urgent, moral and better places to spend taxpayer money?

krazie45 wrote: If people want to privately donate to Haiti then the money can keep on going there as long as people let it as far as I'm concerned. However, I agree that taxpayer money should be going to better places. I don't recall Haiti sending relief to New Orleans

How in the hell could they have been expected to send relief to New Orleans?

I understand what you're saying, but the New Orleans reasoning is a rather shitty argument.

krazie45 wrote: If people want to privately donate to Haiti then the money can keep on going there as long as people let it as far as I'm concerned. However, I agree that taxpayer money should be going to better places. I don't recall Haiti sending relief to New Orleans

I didn't realize that helping other people who desperately need it required a quid pro quo.

As someone who is fairly comfortable financially, I would never expect a neighbor who is destitute to help me monetarily if my house burned down.

"For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

It would be one thing if America's streets were paved in gold and we had extra money just laying around collecting dust, but in our current state it is foolish to give any tax payer money to anyone.

It is like a family that is in debt up to it's eyeballs and filing for bankruptcy, charging money on their Visa card to help out their neighbor.

Heck, Haiti is probably in better shape than the U.S. They don't have anything, but at least they don't owe anyone either.