Don't Let That Earthquake Spoil Your Caribbean Vacation!

[Walter Ego]

Are you a fat rich white guy with Viagra in your pocket (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/27/national/main1753947.shtml)? There's no need to let that earthquake in Haiti spoil your Caribbean vacation!

As a Royal Caribbean cruise passenger you can visit sunny, beautiful Labadee Beach, a walled resort only 60 miles from the epicenter of the quake. You can enjoy pristine beaches, breathtaking scenery and native charm while armed guards patrol the perimeter, even under "normal" conditions!

Don't let that non-refundable deposit with your travel agent go to waste!

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/royal-caribbean-cruise-ships-dock-in-post-earthquake-haiti/19321187

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/royal-caribbean-cruise-ships-dock-in-post-earthquake-haiti/19321187

[GreyICE]

Uh, okay, I bet I know how to help Haiti, lets suspend all business that's normally done with the island so they don't have a hope in hell of ever getting any viable income sources going there.

That will make things better, yes sirree!

[Walter Ego]

Uh, okay, I bet I know how to help Haiti, lets suspend all business that's normally done with the island so they don't have a hope in hell of ever getting any viable income sources going there.

That will make things better, yes sirree!

You might have a point there (http://travel.latimes.com/daily-deal-blog/index.php/royal-caribbean-defe-6261/). :rolleyes:

Royal Caribbean International, which last week pledged at least $1 million in relief for quake-ravaged Haiti, this week defended its decision to continue cruise-ship calls on its private Labadee resort on the country’s northern coast, which was undamaged.

[Adam Goldstein, the company’s president and chief executive] said that by supporting the economy, “People enjoying themselves in Labadee helps with relief. ” He explained:

“My view is this — it isn’t better to replace a visit to Labadee (or for that matter, to stay on the ship while it’s docked in Labadee) with a visit to another destination for a vacation. Why? Because being on the island and generating economic activity for the straw market vendors, the hair-braiders and our 230 employees helps with relief while being somewhere else does not help.”

Plus... you're not going to get your money back (http://travel.latimes.com/daily-deal-blog/index.php/you-can-cancel-your--6279/)!

[Retrograde]

I lived in the area hit by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake (still do, and really intend to fix those plaster cracks one of these days). I remember being annoyed with the national news people who seemed amazed that people were going around doing what they normally did as opposed to sitting around bemoaning their fates.

Earthquakes can totally flatten some areas while leaving others intact. And eventually people have to go back to the day to day business of living. I have personal issues with these mega-cruise ships, but if they're going to help the locals more power to them.

[r0ast_p0tat0es]

While I wouldn't actually want to go there now (I'm not sure it would have been my thing to begin with), shutting off the tourist industry probably wouldn't help the locals.

[Eddie Dane]

I hear (didn't see it) that a local working in the tourist industry was interviewed by Dutch TV. He was asked about his indignation about all those tourists still coming of those cruise ships. The guy got seriously pissed off. He's one of the few people making a decent living there and now the overly moral Europeans are making his clientèle feel guilty about ordering cocktails from him.

He told the journalists to sod off and stop ruining his business.

As for Mr. Limbaugh:

Unlike Mr Limbaugh, I am of the opinion that people should be allowed to use drugs for fun.

[TragicMonkey]

One article I read asked if it would be morally better to take your vacation in Hawaii rather than in Haiti. If you're upset at the earthquake's aftermath when you're sixty miles from the epicenter, would you be less upset if you were further distant? Why? What's the necessary distance before you stop caring?

[Darat]

The issue should be whether the stop-over interferes with the necessary aid and relief effort - if it doesn't then why not?

[Neally]

The issue should be whether the stop-over interferes with the necessary aid and relief effort - if it doesn't then why not?

Agreed. Someone is starving/dying/suffering in the world always, therefore I can't enjoy my life and family? I should cease all vacations and declare a vow of poverty?

[stilicho]

Uh, okay, I bet I know how to help Haiti, lets suspend all business that's normally done with the island so they don't have a hope in hell of ever getting any viable income sources going there.

That will make things better, yes sirree!

Ordinarily the jackboot two-step of coffee-house socialists is "tourism good/industrialisation bad": http://www.fnen.org/?q=node/37. We must, of course, stop economically viable activity if it interferes with Scarlett Johannson's wedding: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=bc07b59c-e6cf-4b82-bd9e-e671e4dfea3c. The aboriginal claimants took their cut (literally) from the timber cropland owned by the proprietors: http://wildernesscommittee.org/clayoquot_sound_backgrounder. Then they found that they were essentially broke and, to continue, they would have to harvest at many times the rate the previous owners had: http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/forest-share-how-subsidies-cheat-first-nation-communities.


[The] company is still figuring out how to be viable. It has managed to turn a profit in just two of the years it has existed.


Thousands of people on our own west coast in Canada have been thrown out of work by others insistent on creating a playground for the rich. I can't imagine Haiti's experience is that much different. But now these commissars want to discourage the Scarlett Johannsons (or their overweight male counterparts) from enjoying the fruits of their victories.

Next thing you know, they'll complain about eco-tours to the Arctic Sea or retreating Himalayan glaciers because of global warming. Walter, those Inuit and Nepalese need your money.

[Beady]

Let's personalize this: Should TAA5 be cancelled because it passes through the area?

[Walter Ego]

As for Mr. Limbaugh:

Unlike Mr Limbaugh, I am of the opinion that people should be allowed to use drugs for fun.

I assume that would include both oxycontin and Viagra.

Rush was addicted to the hillbilly heroin and took a hiatus from his radio show to dry out, thought it was never announced to my knowledge if he got off the drug completely or just reduced his dependency.

As to the Viagra, Rush was busted by customs with an unprescribed quantity the drug when returning with an all-male vacation party from Santa Domingo (which shares the same island as Haiti).

Rush defenders opined at the time that Rush had a lady friend who was traveling seperately through his critics couldn't resists pointing out that San Domingo is known for its cheap and easily available prostitutes, including child prostitutes of both sexes.

I've got nothing against old rich fat white guys using Viagra while vacationing in third world countries (oxycontin is another hill of beans altogether). I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of Rush morally lecturing others about drug use and sexual promiscuity while engaging in the same behavior he is condemning.

[Walter Ego]

Ordinarily the jackboot two-step of coffee-house socialists is ...

That would be me I assume. Though I am a white guy who voted for Obama and do frequent coffee houses, I'm not a socialist and donated my last pair of jackboots to Goodwill years ago.

Thousands of people on our own west coast in Canada have been thrown out of work by others insistent on creating a playground for the rich. I can't imagine Haiti's experience is that much different. But now these commissars want to discourage the Scarlett Johannsons (or their overweight male counterparts) from enjoying the fruits of their victories.

Huh? The OP was not about the morality of affluent westerners (even fat rich white guys with unprescribed Viagra) vacationing in impoverished third world countries. It was a head scratch wondering how those affluent vacationers could enjoy those sunny private beaches in their gated resort while people are dying and suffering a short distance away. Presumably the armed guards will prevent the desperate and starving locals from invading their sanctuary and making off with the lobsters and cocktail sauce.

Next thing you know, they'll complain about eco-tours to the Arctic Sea or retreating Himalayan glaciers because of global warming. Walter, those Inuit and Nepalese need your money.

My income is well above the Haitian level (as is the average McDonald's worker in the U.S.) but I can't afford to travel to the Himalayas... or even Canada... the latter being too bloody cold in any case. ;)

[Eddie Dane]

Rush defenders opined at the time that Rush had a lady friend who was traveling seperately through his critics couldn't resists pointing out that San Domingo is known for its cheap and easily available prostitutes, including child prostitutes of both sexes.

I've got nothing against old rich fat white guys using Viagra while vacationing in third world countries (oxycontin is another hill of beans altogether). I was merely pointing the hypocrisy of Rush morally lecturing others about drug use and sexual promiscuity while engaging in the same behavior he is condemning.

We are in agreement. Rush is a git and a hypocrite.

[Dragonrock]

Huh? The OP was not about the morality of affluent westerners (even fat rich white guys with unprescribed Viagra) vacationing in impoverished third world countries. It was a head scratch wondering how those affluent vacationers could enjoy those sunny private beaches in their gated resort while people are dying and suffering a short distance away. Presumably the armed guards will prevent the desperate and starving locals from invading their sanctuary and making off with the lobsters and cocktail sauce.

Why is there a problem with it? Is it somehow morally superior to enjoy sunny private beaches in Hawaii rather than Haiti? Would you please explain why proximity makes a difference in the morality of the situation?

[Walter Ego]

Why is there a problem with it? Is it somehow morally superior to enjoy sunny private beaches in Hawaii rather than Haiti? Would you please explain why proximity makes a difference in the morality of the situation?

Has a tsunami or earthquake hit Hawaii recently? I'd feel a bit queasy and probably not be able to enjoy my lobster if I knew people were dying and suffering outside the gates of my protected private vacation retreat.

That's just me, though...

[Darth Rotor]

Has a tsunami or earthquake hit Hawaii recently? I'd feel a bit queasy and probably not be able to enjoy my lobster if I knew people were dying and suffering outside the gates of my protected private vacation retreat.

That's just me, though...
Where do you vacation, just out of curiousity?

DR

[Dragonrock]

Has a tsunami or earthquake hit Hawaii recently? I'd feel a bit queasy and probably not be able to enjoy my lobster if I knew people were dying and suffering outside the gates of my protected private vacation retreat.

That's just me, though...

Ah, so you are turning your personal discomfort into outrage at those whom you feel are not showing the proper respect for suffering. Because, proximity to suffering is all that's important. If you're far enough away then it doesn't matter.

[Whiplash]

Can I ask just what in the world is the reference to Limbaugh for here at all? You are citing a story about him from years ago, while talking about this current situation. Maybe I am missing something here?

I think it's pretty sad that these people are still taking their vacations as well. But I don't see the reason to include Limbaugh in any way. It strikes me as a chance to cheap shot him, yet again.

Does this current situation have something to do with Viagra or drugs??

I've got nothing against old rich fat white guys using Viagra while vacationing in third world countries (oxycontin is another hill of beans altogether). I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of Rush morally lecturing others about drug use and sexual promiscuity while engaging in the same behavior he is condemning.


Which has what, exactly, to do with these stories? If you want to have at Limbaugh, perhaps a seperate thread is in order? I see no reason at all why you have chosen to include him into this discussion.

[GanipGnop]

Haiti asked them to continue the cruises because of the desperately needed income and supplies.

"Martinez says Royal Caribbean continues to port at the peninsula resort at the behest of the Haitian government. “We welcome the continuation of the positive economic benefits that the cruise ship calls to Labadee contribute to our country,” Leslie Voltaire, Haiti’s special envoy to the United Nations, is quoted saying a company press release.

“We’re very sensitive to the idea of delivering a vacation experience so close to the earthquake zone,” Martinez says. “[But Haitians] really need this positive economic benefit.”

The cruise boats have delivered 120 pallets of supplies to the island since the earthquake hit on Jan. 12, which Martinez says is the equivalent of six semi-trucks of rice, dried beans, powdered milk, water, and canned goods. The non-profit Food for the Poor is in turn retrieving the supplies from the resort and delivering them. Royal Caribbean is also donating $2 million to the relief effort along with all current revenues from the Labadee resort. The first three post-earthquake cruises brought in $110,000.

“We went to Haiti because it was the right thing to do,” Martinez says, explaining that the company has a 30-year relationship with the island and is one of its biggest investors. The Labadee resort employs 230 Haitians and provides incomes to several hundred more who earn tips and sell wares at the resort’s market, she says. “You don’t desert your friends when they need you the most.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2010/0125/Caribbean-cruises-to-Haiti-Sickening-or-the-right-thing

[AvalonXQ]

My wife and I took a Caribbean cruise for our honeymoon last year. If something like this had happened at one of our planned stops I think we would have wanted to continue our trip unmolested -- although if the ship had provided some opportunity to contribute materially or financially to the relief effort, we almost certainly would have.
I'm not sure what exactly the benefit of cancelling the stop would be.

[Walter Ego]

Where do you vacation, just out of curiousity?

DR

My job doesn't allow me long vacations but when I have a few extra days off I take day trips to the Georgia and South Carolina coast or to the mountains in North Georgia. I've been to Chicago and Washington, D.C. other places and I had enough of trips to Florida as a child to want to go there again.

Give the time and the leisure (and the money) I'd probably stick to the U.S. or Europe.

I wouldn't waste my money on a cruise if that's what you're asking. Pigging out on hourly buffets is not my idea of a good time. But why is this important?

[Walter Ego]

Ah, so you are turning your personal discomfort into outrage at those whom you feel are not showing the proper respect for suffering. Because, proximity to suffering is all that's important. If you're far enough away then it doesn't matter.

I have no personal discomfort because I'm not vacationing in Haiti. But don't you think it's a little bizarre to vacation in a disaster zone where thousands of people may be dead or homeless? I'm sure the armed guards will keep the "discomfort" away for those who didn't cancel, though. What would keep you away from your "no refund" deposit-paid vacation? Armed insurrection?
The plague?

[AvalonXQ]

I have no personal discomfort because I'm not vacationing in Haiti.

Right, and that's the fallacy -- why should someone vacationing close to the disaster feel more discomfort than someone who's vacationing somewhere else?

[Walter Ego]

Can I ask just what in the world is the reference to Limbaugh for here at all? You are citing a story about him from years ago, while talking about this current situation. Maybe I am missing something here?

I threw Rush in because he's the sort of pig who would vacation in a disaster zone (and being rich he wouldn't have the excuse he couldn't get his deposit back from the travel agent) and he was busted coming back from Santa Domingo which is on the same island as Haiti.

Yeah, it was a cheap shot. I guess we could start a new about the degenerate if you'd like.

[AvalonXQ]

I threw Rush in because he's the sort of pig who would vacation in a disaster zone

... and yet you still can't answer the question: What's wrong with vacationing near a disaster?

[Walter Ego]

Right, and that's the fallacy -- why should someone vacationing close to the disaster feel more discomfort than someone who's vacationing somewhere else?

I see no fallacy here. Haiti is not "close" to the the disaster zone it is the disaster zone, though (once again), the port of call is a gated resort patrolled by armed guards which would keep the "discomfort" at bay, I'm sure.

I guess it would depend on how close to the death, destruction and suffering you are on your vacation... or how callus you are.

[AvalonXQ]

Haiti is not "close" to the the disaster zone it is the disaster zone,

No. Parts of Haiti are the disaster zone. Parts of Haiti (including the location of the cruise ship) are reportedly undamaged.
Again, I don't see how your proximity to disaster changes the morality of taking a vacation. Especially considering how easy it is for you to contribute to the Haitian relief effort from right here in the States.

[Walter Ego]

No. Parts of Haiti are the disaster zone. Parts of Haiti (including the location of the cruise ship) are reportedly undamaged.
Again, I don't see how your proximity to disaster changes the morality of taking a vacation. Especially considering how easy it is for you to contribute to the Haitian relief effort from right here in the States.

I don't think we're going to agree on anything here (and today is my day off and I have other things to do) but you seem to be saying if your vacation "proximity" to death and suffering is not too close to spoil your fun, it's "okay" and no moral issues are involved.

And I don't know what point you're making about contributing to Haitian relief from the safety of the U.S.

Or are you taking the same tact as Royal Caribbean International CEO by saying getting your hair braided or buying straw baskets from the Haitians who survived and who came to work is contributing to the disaster relief?

Answer if you wish but don't expect an immediate reply.

[Dragonrock]

Walter, you are yet to explain why vacationing near a disaster area is somehow amoral. And what is the minimum distance to allow for a guilt free vacation?

[fuelair]

I hear (didn't see it) that a local working in the tourist industry was interviewed by Dutch TV. He was asked about his indignation about all those tourists still coming of those cruise ships. The guy got seriously pissed off. He's one of the few people making a decent living there and now the overly moral Europeans are making his clientèle feel guilty about ordering cocktails from him.

He told the journalists to sod off and stop ruining his business.

As for Mr. Limbaugh:

Unlike Mr Limbaugh, I am of the opinion that people should be allowed to use drugs for fun.

Actually, the old arse entire agrees with you - as long as you are wealthy and get them by paying off doctors and buy them through pharmacies that don't check the prescriptions for the wealthy all that thoroughly!!!:D:D:D:jaw-dropp

[kerikiwi]

I see no fallacy here. Haiti is not "close" to the the disaster zone it is the disaster zone, though (once again), the port of call is a gated resort patrolled by armed guards which would keep the "discomfort" at bay, I'm sure.

I guess it would depend on how close to the death, destruction and suffering you are on your vacation... or how callus you are.

How close is too close? Seriously. Would it be acceptable to call in if the port of call were not gated?
Preventing people from making a living will in no way ease the plight of those more directly affected by the earthquake. In fact it will only exacerbate the disaster.
What do you expect those who survived unharmed to do?
Stop making a living and turn to relief to maintain them and their families?

[Checkmite]

Or are you taking the same tact as Royal Caribbean International CEO by saying getting your hair braided or buying straw baskets from the Haitians who survived and who came to work is contributing to the disaster relief?



I believe I will take the same "tact". If I already paid for the trip, I don't see why vacationing in Haiti now, after the earthquake, is suddenly "immoral". If anything, it makes buying straw baskets and getting your hair braided a bit more meaningful. It IS contributing to the disaster relief - in a much more personal way, I think. It's putting money directly in a victim's hand, as opposed to buying a box of rice that (to tell from all the reports) will get no closer to ANY victim than the airport tarmac. I think even the mere suggestion that somebody who managed by chance to survive and is able to attempt some semblance of a normal existence is somehow less worthy than someone else of any kind of assistance to be positively monstrous. Those vendors come to work every day because they're counting on help from the cruise line and the tourists.

[Darth Rotor]

But why is this important?
Context for your remarks. Thanks. :)

DR

[Neally]

I don't think we're going to agree on anything here (and today is my day off and I have other things to do) but you seem to be saying if your vacation "proximity" to death and suffering is not too close to spoil your fun, it's "okay" and no moral issues are involved.

YOU are saying that if your vacation is too close to death it is morally bad. Yet you refuse to expand and explain the rational of this position and exactly how far away one has to be for it to be morally acceptable. Further you keep repeating about guards and fences keeping out looters as if it is something evil--that enjoying a vacation that helps the local economy to a degree is evil.

[Silly Green Monkey]

Because the closer you are, the easier it is to help. The easier it is to help, the more you look like a selfish git when you, instead of helping, sit on your butt and relax while people who are dying can see you.

[AvalonXQ]

Because the closer you are, the easier it is to help. The easier it is to help, the more you look like a selfish git when you, instead of helping, sit on your butt and relax while people who are dying can see you.

So in other words, the problem is that it looks bad.
Personally, I think the Royal Caribbean customers are behaving properly.

[Denver]

Letter sent out from Royal Carribean:


...The first objectives were relatively straightforward. We could and did provide immediate tangible assistance by transporting supplies of water, food and medical supplies on our ships. So far, we have already delivered over 120 pallets of material to the stricken country and more is on its way in the holds of our ships. The situation is so dire that even our lounge chairs have proven useful - in Haiti, they make a real contribution as hospital beds.



...Bringing our guests to Haiti could be characterized by some as insensitive to the suffering of the Haiti people in the rest of the country, and we wrestled with this sentiment ourselves. After the government of Haiti asked us to continue to call on Labadee, there really was no choice; bypassing Haiti would do more harm to an already ravaged people by taking away essential income from our employees and their families. The Haitians told us they were desperate for our return and we couldn't refuse. This plea came from all levels: from government officials to taxi drivers. It even came from UN representatives.


Full text (http://www.royalcaribbean.com/findacruise/contentDisplay.do?pagename=letter_from_the_chairma n)

While I expect there is some spin in that article, I think it's true RCCL is still able to do more good than not by continuing their cruise stop there.

[ponderingturtle]

Are you a fat rich white guy with Viagra in your pocket (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/27/national/main1753947.shtml)? There's no need to let that earthquake in Haiti spoil your Caribbean vacation!

As a Royal Caribbean cruise passenger you can visit sunny, beautiful Labadee Beach, a walled resort only 60 miles from the epicenter of the quake. You can enjoy pristine beaches, breathtaking scenery and native charm while armed guards patrol the perimeter, even under "normal" conditions!

Don't let that non-refundable deposit with your travel agent go to waste!

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/royal-caribbean-cruise-ships-dock-in-post-earthquake-haiti/19321187

http://www.sphere.com/world/article/royal-caribbean-cruise-ships-dock-in-post-earthquake-haiti/19321187


You know that the 50 million dollar resort is the largest foreign invenstment in the nation right? And that the cruise ships are dropping off all the excess supplies and bringing extra supplies into the country right?

[ponderingturtle]

I see no fallacy here. Haiti is not "close" to the the disaster zone it is the disaster zone, though (once again), the port of call is a gated resort patrolled by armed guards which would keep the "discomfort" at bay, I'm sure.

I guess it would depend on how close to the death, destruction and suffering you are on your vacation... or how callus you are.

Why does proximity make someone more callous? Why is a carribean cruise that is dropping supplies off on the island more callous than a trip to say australia that will in no way benefit the people of haiti?

[ponderingturtle]

I don't think we're going to agree on anything here (and today is my day off and I have other things to do) but you seem to be saying if your vacation "proximity" to death and suffering is not too close to spoil your fun, it's "okay" and no moral issues are involved.


I think it is best to not deal with companies that make investments in nations like Haiti. That will resolve the problem nicely. Isolate the country even more than it was, it will not actualy help them, but it makes you feel better.

[Soapy Sam]

By the logic of the OP, we might expect everyone in the next door Dominican Republic to be looking grim and not eating pudding. Especially if they are white, male and use viagra.

Somehow I doubt that's what they are doing.

I've spent too much of my life offshore to ever want to set foot on a cruise ship, but if that's what floats your boat, I can't see any reason not to.