If they could see me now...
January 19, 2010 6:18 PM Subscribe
It's business as usual in Labadee. While Haiti reels from the worst earthquake in it's history, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines continues to dock ships of pleasure-seekers at its network of beaches leased from the Haitian government. Meanwhile, Dominican tourism goes on relatively unaffected.
This post was deleted for the following reason: nothiner personal but there are two very good open threads and two newsy update stories don't maybe seem like they need a separate post? -- jessamyn
Not surprising, but at the same time, not sure I see a problem. Would you have people go spend their vacationing dollars elsewhere?
posted by cjorgensen at 6:27 PM on January 19, 2010
posted by cjorgensen at 6:27 PM on January 19, 2010
Previously, those people were okay with partying on the beach of a desperately impoverished country suffering from mundane things like starvation and disease. What's the difference?
posted by lullaby at 6:28 PM on January 19, 2010 [6 favorites]
posted by lullaby at 6:28 PM on January 19, 2010 [6 favorites]
Those foreign currency earnings are going to be especially important for the country seeking to rebuild in the face of such a terrible disaster. I'm glad to see that businesses are returning to normal operations where possible.
posted by humanfont at 6:28 PM on January 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 6:28 PM on January 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
Also, as mentioned in the story you link, each cruise ship is bringing relief supplies to the island. And apparently the government of Haiti specifically asked them to keep coming (see this morning's NPR story).
Of course the CEO has every incentive to be self-serving here, but it is kind of a good point that there's no particular reason to cut off what viable economic activity the island does have right now.
posted by rkent at 6:31 PM on January 19, 2010
Of course the CEO has every incentive to be self-serving here, but it is kind of a good point that there's no particular reason to cut off what viable economic activity the island does have right now.
posted by rkent at 6:31 PM on January 19, 2010
On the one hand, the notion that "we are helping by spending tourism dollars in Haiti" is a good point.
On the other hand -- it seems that perhaps waiting a more discreet length of time before DOING so may be just a bit better received. Haiti's going to need the money for a long time to come, after all, not just right now; and people frolicking on the beach only one week after the fact just feels....oogy.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:32 PM on January 19, 2010
On the other hand -- it seems that perhaps waiting a more discreet length of time before DOING so may be just a bit better received. Haiti's going to need the money for a long time to come, after all, not just right now; and people frolicking on the beach only one week after the fact just feels....oogy.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:32 PM on January 19, 2010
Royal Caribbean's CEO discusses it on his blog. I think it's a good thing, all told.
Consider the alternative: they're not going to cancel the cruises, so they'd go to an alternate port instead, depriving Haiti of the tourism revenue, and the additional supplies the RCCL ships are bringing in. It would be kicking the country while it was down, just to avoid ... what, exactly?
posted by Kadin2048 at 6:35 PM on January 19, 2010
Consider the alternative: they're not going to cancel the cruises, so they'd go to an alternate port instead, depriving Haiti of the tourism revenue, and the additional supplies the RCCL ships are bringing in. It would be kicking the country while it was down, just to avoid ... what, exactly?
posted by Kadin2048 at 6:35 PM on January 19, 2010
On the other hand -- it seems that perhaps waiting a more discreet length of time before DOING so may be just a bit better received. Haiti's going to need the money for a long time to come, after all, not just right now; and people frolicking on the beach only one week after the fact just feels....oogy.
You'd cost Haitians a week's worth (or more) of foreign currency trade, plus the relief supplies the cruise ships are bringing, because you're feeling oogy?
I think this is one of those situations where the superficial appearance of something inappropriate should be completely ignored in light of the actual, practical benefits.
posted by fatbird at 6:37 PM on January 19, 2010 [7 favorites]
You'd cost Haitians a week's worth (or more) of foreign currency trade, plus the relief supplies the cruise ships are bringing, because you're feeling oogy?
I think this is one of those situations where the superficial appearance of something inappropriate should be completely ignored in light of the actual, practical benefits.
posted by fatbird at 6:37 PM on January 19, 2010 [7 favorites]
Previously, those people were okay with partying on the beach of a desperately impoverished country suffering from mundane things like starvation and disease. What's the difference?
Perhaps you should ask the many Haitians that have jobs in Labadee. They're "okay" with it. I've been to that part of Haiti and there's very little economic development other than tourism. Cutting into the country's tourism income would be a man-made disaster for the northeast coast.
posted by foggy out there now at 6:42 PM on January 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Perhaps you should ask the many Haitians that have jobs in Labadee. They're "okay" with it. I've been to that part of Haiti and there's very little economic development other than tourism. Cutting into the country's tourism income would be a man-made disaster for the northeast coast.
posted by foggy out there now at 6:42 PM on January 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
For anyone interested in the moral issues surrounding excess/affluence and proximity to tragedy, check out Peter Singer's book The Life You Can Save.
posted by Alt F4 at 6:43 PM on January 19, 2010
posted by Alt F4 at 6:43 PM on January 19, 2010
Well, I guess this means that Royal Caribbean is actually coming out and saying that "Labadee, Hispaniola" is in Haiti. They've been kind of cagey about that in the past.
posted by neroli at 6:44 PM on January 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by neroli at 6:44 PM on January 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
EmpressCallipygos, I think that the Haitian government's plea for tourism to continue would absolutely outweigh any of my "oogy" concerns. Why diminish any potential source of revenue for a hard-hit economy?
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:44 PM on January 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Sidhedevil at 6:44 PM on January 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
You'd cost Haitians a week's worth (or more) of foreign currency trade, plus the relief supplies the cruise ships are bringing, because you're feeling oogy? I think this is one of those situations where the superficial appearance of something inappropriate should be completely ignored in light of the actual, practical benefits.
I didn't say I was hell-bent against the idea, I was simply acknowledging both sides of the issue. It is a complicated issue, and both sides have a point.
But -- alright, since you've taken one stance, I'll take the other; what ARE the actual, practical benefits of a single weeks' worth of tourist dollars? How quickly do the tourist dollars in that one specific area filter to the rest of the economy? How much of the regular foreign currency trade is being expended on relief efforts as it is? What would the actual impact of a weeks' dip in trade actually be?
As for the relief supplies -- wouldn't Royal Carribbean be able to pack a whole lot more relief supplies onto the ships if they didn't have vacationing passengers taking up room?
Ultimately, that was my point -- that I believe both the "pro" and the "con" have compelling arguments, and thus I can't decide.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:46 PM on January 19, 2010
I didn't say I was hell-bent against the idea, I was simply acknowledging both sides of the issue. It is a complicated issue, and both sides have a point.
But -- alright, since you've taken one stance, I'll take the other; what ARE the actual, practical benefits of a single weeks' worth of tourist dollars? How quickly do the tourist dollars in that one specific area filter to the rest of the economy? How much of the regular foreign currency trade is being expended on relief efforts as it is? What would the actual impact of a weeks' dip in trade actually be?
As for the relief supplies -- wouldn't Royal Carribbean be able to pack a whole lot more relief supplies onto the ships if they didn't have vacationing passengers taking up room?
Ultimately, that was my point -- that I believe both the "pro" and the "con" have compelling arguments, and thus I can't decide.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:46 PM on January 19, 2010
I think that the Haitian government's plea for tourism to continue would absolutely outweigh any of my "oogy" concerns. Why diminish any potential source of revenue for a hard-hit economy?
I wasn't aware they'd said this. Thanks for the heads-up.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:50 PM on January 19, 2010
I wasn't aware they'd said this. Thanks for the heads-up.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:50 PM on January 19, 2010
what ARE the actual, practical benefits of a single weeks' worth of tourist dollars?
"Dear employees, please do not show up for work this week due to to the earthquake. Yes, we are aware the resort was not damaged, but appearances must be maintained. You will of course not be paid. Don't call us, we'll call you. Regards, Royal Caribbean".
posted by smackfu at 6:52 PM on January 19, 2010
"Dear employees, please do not show up for work this week due to to the earthquake. Yes, we are aware the resort was not damaged, but appearances must be maintained. You will of course not be paid. Don't call us, we'll call you. Regards, Royal Caribbean".
posted by smackfu at 6:52 PM on January 19, 2010
Perhaps you should ask the many Haitians that have jobs in Labadee. They're "okay" with it. I've been to that part of Haiti and there's very little economic development other than tourism.
That doesn't take away from the fact that prior to this highly publicized horrible tragedy, the vast majority of the people on those boats didn't give a fuck about Haitians.
posted by gman at 6:55 PM on January 19, 2010
That doesn't take away from the fact that prior to this highly publicized horrible tragedy, the vast majority of the people on those boats didn't give a fuck about Haitians.
posted by gman at 6:55 PM on January 19, 2010
« Older Uniting American Families Act | Kiss U.S. Healthcare Reform Goodbye Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by peeedro at 6:25 PM on January 19, 2010