# Invasion enjoying or exploiting pradise?



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

I came across this article:

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23...il&utm_term=0_e00a5122d3-b8ebe3a9fb-129272029

Which raises in my mind the issues of any "outsiders" enjoying and or exploiting the beautiful islands of the tropics.

I don't want this thread to be about politics... but how do we sail to, visit, learn, enjoy and of course RESPECT the paradises we yearn to visit? The so called development that De Niro appears to be associated with looks to me like an imposition of a different paradigm on the ancient cultures. We are essentially destroying what attracted us... or at least the culture which inhabit these regions and call them home.

Many sailors yearn for the crystal clear waters in the tropics unspoiled by commercialization, development and industrialization... the reliable trade winds... the quiet anchorages and the flora and fauna native to these islands of paradise.

But how do we experience and enjoy all this without destroying it in the process? We may get what we wanted but loose what what we had.

Any thoughts?


----------



## amwbox (Aug 22, 2015)

Unspoiled by commercialization, development and industrialization? In the tropics, where everyone seemingly wants to go? Not many unspoiled places left. Off the beaten path islands north of the equator in the Pacific, maybe?


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Unspoiled is a relative term. You can't compare English Harbor to Newport.... can you?


----------



## amwbox (Aug 22, 2015)

I guess in my mind it's something inversely proportional to the ease of acquiring wifi and a latte...


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

We are literally "loving places to death." The best thing to do, is "leave no trace." 

That means avoid trampling vegetation, pack out your trash, no pumping or dumping overboard and avoiding the temptation to say "this place would be perfect if it only had..." Even then, the sheer number of visitors to a place causes change and wear and tear no matter how conscientious people are.

Amwbox sums it up rather well.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

San Blas Islands/Guna Yala.
The Gunas are self-governing inside Panama.

..edit:

Check out the Sentinelese in the Andaman Islands.
And still some Chiefs running their shows in in the Solomons.


----------



## Yorksailor (Oct 11, 2009)

Cruisers are generally deleterious to paradise.

In the San Blas, no longer paradise, the cruisers were bragging about all the fish they sear gunned...

We met a young family in a leaking dug-out who were malnourished because they couldn't catch fish to eat!

Phil, in the Marshal islands where visiting the outer atolls, is restricted to stop the cruisers spoiling paradise.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Ancient cultures?

We are talking about Barbuda here.

The island is uninhabited since the last hurricane.

The resort is already there and has been an eyesore ruin for decades. 

You wish to leave black people impoverished because they are.... Black?

Denero and Jamie packer offered to rebuild EVERY HOME on the island for free.

They just want freehold for their own investment. 

There's 2 sides to every story ☺🙂☺


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Ancient cultures?
> 
> .......
> 
> There's 2 sides to every story ☺?☺


Yes there are. The social order and land ownership / control in Berbuda has been in place for a couple of hundred years or so...Ancient to me for all practical purposes.

The developers are imposing a completely different paradigm on the indigenous culture.

Why don't they buy an island from someone like Branson did?

You don't give with one hand and take away with the other.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

To my understanding, and with only the article and some history to use as my guide, I’d say we’re talking about somewhat different things here. The law Barbuda’s government changed to seemingly hand over public space to private interests (De Niro) is somewhat different than the issue of the impact we make as tourists. Overlapping, yes; but different, and more insidious I would say. 

This transfer of public goods into private goods has been going on since the evolution of capitalism and the creation of the right of private property. Look up England Land Enclosure for a quick history lesson. Of course, this is happening all the time, in all parts of the world. And not just land — other things that were traditionally public goods, from water and timber, to minerals and even air, are constantly under pressure of being “privatized.” 

I’m not saying privatization is always bad, nor that public resources are always good. Reality is usually far greyer and more nuanced. 

But as for the impact WE have as cruisers, travellers and tourists, I’d say our footprints are more easily measured and managed. As Alex wrote, the old camping mantra of “leave no trace,” is the ideal. Not crapping up a place with garbage, etc. is easy and a no-brainer. Not over-exploiting a local resource for our fun and recreation should also be a no-brainer. But having no impact due to our typical disparate level of wealth and power, now that’s a different challenge. 

Cruisers are richer than most global citizens. It’s good to spread this wealth wherever we go. But this also has an impact on local economies and peoples — for good, and for ill. It’s complicated… I think the best we can do is try and listen and learn from the locals, and to be aware of our impacts as best we can.

The more I get out there, the more I think amwbox is correct: I like going to where there are no wifi or cell signals. It’s here you can find places “unspoiled by commercialization” b/c few people choose to go here.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

You do what the Norsemen did:
Name the green place "Iceland" and the icy place "Greenland" and you'll discourage all the nasty tourists.
Basic law of physics that the mere act of observing something changes it. And that's also why island paradises may allow for tourist dollars, but also don't let you overstay your welcome. If they choose to allow too much tourism...that's their choice.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

There used to be a lovely little harbour on Lake Ontario. Bronte Harbour had funky little shops, restaurants, ice cream parlours, lovely park etc. and was busy every weekend as people came to enjoy the ice cream, the park and the guy that set up a massive speaker system on which he played accordion on the sidewalk.

It got so popular that they tore down the funky neighborhood and built massive condos for all the people who loved the place.

It is now a barren concrete canyon with high priced condos and few people walking the streets.

I guess it's inevitable


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

It depends on whose definition of paradise doesn’t it?


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

MikeOReilly said:


> To my understanding, and with only the article and some history to use as my guide, I'd say we're talking about somewhat different things here. The law Barbuda's government changed to seemingly hand over public space to private interests (De Niro) is somewhat different than the issue of the impact we make as tourists. Overlapping, yes; but different, and more insidious I would say.
> 
> This transfer of public goods into private goods has been going on since the evolution of capitalism and the creation of the right of private property. Look up England Land Enclosure for a quick history lesson. Of course, this is happening all the time, in all parts of the world. And not just land - other things that were traditionally public goods, from water and timber, to minerals and even air, are constantly under pressure of being "privatized."
> 
> ...


I think there is some cruising group has a motto about leaving a clean wake... which I take to mean don't leave a mess behind you.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> ....I don't want this thread to be about politics... but how do we sail to, visit, learn, enjoy and of course RESPECT the paradises we yearn to visit? The so called development that De Niro appears to be associated with looks to me like an imposition of a different paradigm on the ancient cultures. We are essentially destroying what attracted us... or at least the culture which inhabit these regions and call them home.......


Two thoughts, but I can't see how your premise is anything but politics. In fact, the governance of a country is the definition of politics.

Anyway, I recall when the Four Seasons opened on the out island, Exuma, in the Bahamas. We had been island hopping for a couple of weeks and thought we at least wanted to check it out. It was awful. While we had been spending our time walking on beaches with zero footprints and wandering in to local places to eat, the look of the modern resort was out of place and gross. It was obvious they had bulldozed every single palm tree, built the resort and then planted trees where they wanted them. It was so fake. It failed. However, I think it failed because the average Four Seasons client couldn't get to Exuma easily enough. First class easily. I also think they had a hard time getting staff. Too remote.

On the other hand, there can't be any indigenous people on Barbuda. The indigenous people died from disease and worse, the new folks decided how they wanted it to be, got wiped out by Mother Nature and the next folks to arrive may just decide how they want it to be. Seems downright organic natural. Just like a rabbit taking over another rabbits hole, after it was eaten by a bear. Nature is cruel, but we can't freeze time.

So, I would find a luxury hotel in these islands to be gross, but others won't. I don't have a problem with a new order, after the old one totally fails. The context of fail, in this case, is the entire country is evacuated.

While I'm big on "leave no trace" hiking, no species can be a true leave no trace policy. Your house is a trace on some ancient hiking land. It's simply to plan where we should leave to trace, and trace the rest. The argument is always over who gets to pick.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Breeze (Mar 30, 2015)

I think it is impossible to have the interface of modern and primitive without an impact of some sort. It is a natural human tendency to want to bring the best of both worlds, so to speak. The prime example is the southwestern United States. People moved to the arid regions to benefit their health when they had allergies and other humidity related conditions but then they started planting trees, grasses, and shrubbery and building irrigation systems to water all of it so now the pollens and other irritants are also in the "healthy" areas. Just a quick perusal of this site makes one wonder if any of the cruisers here could survive in truly primitive conditions given the discussions about wifi, cell service, solar panels, refrigeration, and air conditioning. The folks still living in truly primitive conditions will usually embrace anything that makes their existence easier but the high and mighty learned folks wish to keep them barefoot and pregnant so to speak in order to be entertained. A gas stove beats a dung fire for cooking any day.....


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> .... in this case, is the entire country is evacuated.....


Barbuda is a tad more than 1/3 of the country.
Those people are now on Antigua, the larger and more developed island...or elsewhere.

No one indigenous.


----------



## oysterman23 (Jul 22, 2011)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Ancient cultures?
> 
> We are talking about Barbuda here.
> 
> ...


yes but there are way more sides to the issues on Barbuda and giving a corporate entity a freehold right now with those incentives goes pretty deep into the netherland of "free" labor. The Barbudans need restoration first then decisions as serious as the K Club/DeNiro venture. Development on any serious scale would generate a nearly one source proprietor/worker stratification that really needs to be avoided by careful planning and maybe just a bit of genius. The options presented by deeded property rites by themselve threaten to eface the Barbudan culture in a blur of property consolidations boom and bust development etcetcetc...I pray for them honestly I hope they formalize a Commons and various similar community entity to secure the public welfare and the community's authority to guide its own future!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

The oceans are littered with mylar balloons and plastic shopping bags. Nobody really give a flying fcku. 

Human beings are a parasites that are killing it's host. When the oil dries up we have destroyed half the planet with the inevitable nuclear melt downs, we will cut down all the trees to supply solar energy until we overpopulate to the point that the flu virus begins to mutate 20x faster than we can create vaccines.

Then we go away and the earth heals herself.

But of course a couple of stragglers will pop up out of caves and start the whole painful process all over again.

Have a happy day.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

RobGallagher said:


> The oceans are littered with mylar balloons and plastic shopping bags. Nobody really give a flying fcku.
> 
> Human beings are a parasites that are killing it's host. When the oil dries up we have destroyed half the planet with the inevitable nuclear melt downs, we will cut down all the trees to supply solar energy until we overpopulate to the point that the flu virus begins to mutate 20x faster than we can create vaccines.
> 
> ...


Have you seen my wife ?
I have a happy day every day


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

Lots of ways this concept figures in this discussion.
Leave as small a footprint as you can but there will always be someone behind you wanting to leave a much larger footprint.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

I can only attach 1 photo per post.... So...

Here is the island of Barbuda. The central yellow splodge is Codrington... Now deserted.


The lower red splodgy is the former resort the new resort is being built upon.

Obviously they are distinct a hell of a long way from each other.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

The former resort. It's a fricken dump of old buildings onto a beach you can't fish from and the locals don't go.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Ancient cultures:

The locals are not ancient cultures. I don't know how to say this in these politically correct times so I will just say it in 1990s venacular.

In the Caribbean The Carib Indians were genecided to death by the Arawak Indians prior to white man's arrival.

The Arawak were genecided to death by white people not me not Australians nor Americans. 

But I doubt Barbuda had any caribs or Arawaks.... There was no fresh water there.

The people who left after the hurricane in 2017 are originated from slaves dragged in from Africa. They are not "African-American" et al.

When white plantation owners came to Antigua with their slaves one family decided Barbuda wS worth nothing but the place a few cattle may be bred. They put a few slaves on the island to attend them unsupervised.
These slaves were much more independent than any others in the Caribbean. 
Upon emancipation in the 1860s (?) the Whites simply left. They returned to England. Leaving the slaves to fend for themselves. 

As I understand it virtually all the Barbuda families are descendant from these Barbudan slaves.

The country of Antigua and Barbuda has severe social problems and has zero trade, zero manufacturing (manufacturing is the thing Americans don't think they need.), zero jobs outside of tourism... neatly balanced by a huge crime problem because there's no jobs, no manufacturing and no trade.

Tourism is all there is.

And there's sweet f all tourism on Antigua and Barbuda: a few rssorts, a few cruising boats and a few cruise ships. But nothing that's going to bring the foreign currency to support the country.

Barbuda itself is in a vastly worse situation. No fresh water. No jobs. Little fishing, a few donkeys and there must be a cow hiding somewhere buy I've not seen it. And no tourism.

It's totally buggered.

Nothing to support the community so they had to leave after the hurrucane.
Plus there are *not* an ancient culture worthy of some UN assustance... But the curturally disposessesed, raped and left.
So they must do something for themselves just like you and i.

This resort backed by Australia's richest man (woman, it, tranny etc) James Packer, will be world class. It can bring jobs, wealth and opportunity to Barbuda and its locals (if they return). 
Their return is being assisted: Packer/Denero have offered to rebuild everyone's house.

That's not a bad offer to people who have nothing. 

Mark


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Mark I used the wrong word. I apologize.

The people who live on these islands do not need development imposed on them from outside. They need to develop sustainable economies. I am sure Caricom has studies about this.

The article highlights so salient points about "development" and tourism and that was why I posted the link. The "primitive" by western standard tropics are favorite places for northern (read white) tourists... who believe that their tourism is the savior for these islands. Sure they do not have industrial economies. There is farming (some) and there are distilleries which do export.

The over arching issue in my mind is what to do to help these people carry on productive lives. And it's not for northern whites to determine this. They apparently had some sort of collective ownership of the land which worked for their very low GDP economy. De Niro et al's project and the abandonment of the group ownership model will destroy what was there and introduce banks and capitalism, and all the ills associated with it. De Niro et al's motive is simple... profit. But to develop their plan they need to change laws that have been in existence for a long time. This is odious on the face. 

Whatever an outsider wants to do needs to be acceptable to the local population.

When in Rome respect the Roman practices... Same as people showing respect to the queen of England.... or any of the laws of a place they visit.

Cruising sailors and people visiting on cruise ships need "support". Of course this is framed as economic development which is is to a certain extent. But it turns those cultures and economy into a sort of plantation "mono culture" paradigm completely dependent on tourism. I am not sure this is a good idea.

Some one will set up an offshore tax haven there and build mega mansions and gobble up the real estate leaving the local population as virtual slaves. How about that as a development model?

So... How would you help this island recover from Irma?


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I find the property deed law to be the interesting thing here. While previously a communal deed, now the government is allowing individual deeds. You can put your own spin on it. In Antigua although it is a beautiful island, the contrast between the very rich and the poor natives is vast. I've been there and loved it, but I've never set foot on Barbuda. 

Anyway, as I read the article it's a planning and zoning and deed law issue. Therefore, it should always be in the hands of the local people, whatever type of deed and land use laws they want. You and I , sitting in rich developed countries cannot decide for some local Barbudan family. But the sale of land would finance their reconstruction, and so in the wake of a natural disaster this is a possibly good thing. 

And I think it doesn't have much to do with the impact of a cruising sailboat, as much as it does the local politics. But it is an interesting story. Just don't project your own political view onto some island nation. I don't mind Paker and Deniro building a resort, but the way they went about it, going over the locals, is pretty bad.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Deserted islands are deserted for a reason!


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Sal Paradise said:


> And I think it doesn't have much to do with the impact of a cruising sailboat, as much as it does the local politics. But it is an interesting story. Just don't project your own political view onto some island nation. I don't mind Paker and Deniro building a resort, but the way they went about it, going over the locals, is pretty bad.


No it does not relate to the cruising sailor... except when you consider how the economies of many of these poor islands has been shaped and conformed by the outsider cruising community. This may not be a bad thing. But there is some analogy to what De Niro is doing.

I think the local people need to control their fate not have it imposed from outside by for profit developers who typically have to be forced to provide some sort of give back (crumbs) to the community they seek to profit from.

This is different from the locals seeing cruising boats anchored and reaching out as they do in St Lucia for example... boat boys selling all manner of local produce or arrange tours. Yes Rodney bay Marina provide work for locals, but I wonder if there was an environmental impact statement or did they plow ahead with the marina development?

My sense is that the development De Niro proposes is a secure gated community for rich folks to drop into with little to no interaction or concern for the local people or their "culture"... and maybe hire some workers to wait on the guests.

Partnering with locals is not a bad idea... but I don't see this development as having that paradigm.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I sat with Alan Greenspan in a small group about a dozen years back. He made a profound point that I've never forgotten. He asked the group what we believed was the biggest reason the US became the most prosperous nation the world has ever seen, let alone so quickly. He wasn't suggesting perfect. 

The US does not have the most natural resources, although, it is blessed with many.

It did not have the most people, nor the most space. It's wealth trajectory began before it had huge parts of what we know today.

It does not have the most fertile cropland, but it does have plenty.

It has been very innovative, but many other countries rival that and exceed in many cases.

He claimed it was our devotion to personal property rights, like no other nation ever has. That's the fundamental point of freedom, which is implanted into US DNA. No person, nor the government, is a threat to take away your personal property. We have and enforce laws, beyond our constitution to protect our people. He claimed it motivated one to do what they could to prosper, to work hard, to innovate, to take risk and get an education, because you get to keep the fruits of that effort. Further, your family gets to keep it, which is a huge motivation. It fueled class mobility, because the wealthy ruling class can't prevent one from prospering on their own. If you invent it in the US, you patent it and you reap the rewards. The wealthy in other nations began to realize their investments in the US were more secure than in their own nations, so investment poured in and the fire grew. Think of other capitalist democracies that have adopted 90% tax rates, or nationalized industries, let alone socialism, communism, or outright tyrannies. The US is certainly not a perfect system, but is the first to pull it off on this scale. It's fascinating to think how a nation could do it over, learn from the lessons and prosper again. 

I don't think a nation must live in squalor to prove they are true to their ancestors. I think it can and should be planned properly. Unfortunately, the first thing that goes wrong is not capitalism in these island nations, it's the government that acquiesces to corruption.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> I sat with Alan Greenspan in a small group about a dozen years back. He made a profound point that I've never forgotten. He asked the group what we believed was the biggest reason the US became the most prosperous nation the world has ever seen, let alone so quickly. He wasn't suggesting perfect.
> 
> The US does not have the most natural resources, although, it is blessed with many.
> 
> ...


I am sorry to say this is rubbish...

Another libertarian rant... thanks for that!

++++

The US does not have the most natural resources, although, it is blessed with many.

It probably does have the most "natural resources" if you compare to other developed or undeveloped countries. This is a throw away rubbish comment

It did not have the most people

What does that have to do with it?

nor the most space.

What does this have to do with it?

It's wealth trajectory began before it had huge parts of what we know today.

No it was a product of colonialism and built by slave labor... including the US capitol
It does not have the most fertile cropland, but it does have plenty.

It has been very innovative, but many other countries rival that and exceed in many cases.

No country has had more innovation since the founding of USA... That is a rubbish statement.

Where do you get your information from? They are not facts...


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Please close this thread....


----------



## Rocky Mountain Breeze (Mar 30, 2015)

Because you don't want to be embarrassed by your lack of knowledge and crush on Marxism? Property rights are the key to developing a sustainable culture as most folks do not wish to invest their time and money into something without any direct reward for their investment. I have several copies of the book Animal Farm that I would be glad to share with you if you wish to educate yourself on the benefits of individualism over collectivism.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Thank you... I read Animal farm 55 years ago. Stop with the ad hominem attacks such as asserting I have a crush on Marxism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism)

If anything I have a crush on critical thinking and polite conduct.

Just curious.... where do most folks get the time and money to invest? What is the something most folks are investing their time and money in? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment

I'll leave it at that...


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> The people who live on these islands do not need development imposed on them from outside. They need to develop sustainable economies.


Any suggestions for a "sustainable" economy on a tiny island with no minerals, no fresh water and soil that can only support some scrub brush ?


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Although it is true that this is a politically loaded subject, no one has to swallow the bait, right?

As I said a few posts back --Just don't project your own political view onto some island nation. This seems like an easy enough concept but no one has the self discipline. 

They should have the last word through their laws and government. If they want individual deeds, so be it. If they want some kind of communal deed then that is how it should be. I don't like what Deniro did, the way he went over people's heads, it smells of colonialism. I mean, if it was me with a house there, I'd be loving Deniro - and screaming sign me up - but they may have different values and ideas. 


It doesn't matter what Alan Greenspan thinks about U.S. economics. You could not have a worse example if you tried.It's a primitive island. There is never going to be a golden spike hammered in on the Trans Barbudan Rail road. There isn't going to be a Barbudan Space Program, or a Barbudan Interstate Highway System bringing grain from the plains to the east...... Its a different situation.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Any suggestions for a "sustainable" economy on a tiny island with no minerals, no fresh water and soil that can only support some scrub brush ?


Tourism.

.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

If you placed a beam level on this article, you'd see that the bubble quickly goes all the way to the left.
The writers.... 

Making judgements based on their story would be a mistake.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Tourism.
> 
> .


Wouldn't that require an investor with money ? :devil


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Tourism.
> 
> .


On....and island...in the Caribbean?
Huh....


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Remember the country is "Antigua And Barbuda".

I don't think Barbuda has Self Government or Autonomy etc.


The resort will cost US$250 Million.
Obviously no one will invest 1/4 Billion $ without rights to the land.

Obviously that level investment is far beyond the decision level of a small island... It's a national decision, IMHO.... And that's Antigua AND Barbuda. Not Barbuda by itself. 

Pre hurricane Barbuda had a population of 1,600. Antigua 80,000 pop.

 


Mark


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Tourism.
> 
> .


Thanks for the suggestion but I was hoping for an answer from SanderO as it was him that said that a"sustainable economy" was required


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I agree Mark. And if they are relying on Antigua for aid, then Antigua has a say in what happens.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> .....Stop with the ad hominem attacks.......


And yet you can label my post as rubbish and classify it or me as libertarian rant. Please.

You are pretty thin skinned, when it comes to anyone's point of view you don't agree with. Incredibly intellectually lazy.

The best I can tell, from what you decided to quote and respond to, you didn't even understand the post.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Rocky Mountain Breeze said:


> Because you don't want to be embarrassed by your lack of knowledge and crush on Marxism? Property rights are the key to developing a sustainable culture as most folks do not wish to invest their time and money into something without any direct reward for their investment. I have several copies of the book Animal Farm that I would be glad to share with you if you wish to educate yourself on the benefits of individualism over collectivism.





boatpoker said:


> Any suggestions for a "sustainable" economy on a tiny island with no minerals, no fresh water and soil that can only support some scrub brush ?


agricuture..

Caricom has worked on this for quite some time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARICOM_Single_Market_and_Economy


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> And yet you can label my post as rubbish and classify it or me as libertarian rant. Please.
> 
> You are pretty thin skinned, when it comes to anyone's point of view you don't agree with. Incredibly intellectually lazy.
> 
> The best I can tell, from what you decided to quote and respond to, you didn't even understand the post.


Thin skinned because I found your reference completely inappropriate and libertarian nonsense? How about ballsy because I called BS when it needed to be called?


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> agricuture..
> 
> Caricom has worked on this for quite some time:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARICOM_Single_Market_and_Economy


With their astonishing history of innovation they can work on it for another 10,000 years and be the first to develop a sustainable agricultural economy on limestone and sandstone.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

The article, slanted or not, was discussing the idea that a current form of communal/commons ownership of the land was being changed into private ownership. As I pointed out, this transfer of public good to private good has been going on for hundreds of years. It has produced great benefits for some, and great negatives for others. 

Private ownership is not a panacea of all that is good, just as public collective ownership is not the great satan of failed communism. There are many societies that have functioned with collective approaches to ownership, and many that have pursued private property as the driving force. And there are many in between. As with everything in life, it’s not black & white.

But my understanding of SanderO's question or point is that whatever the choices made, they should be made by the peoples who live and reside in the area or country. They should not be imposed by an external force as appears to be the case in this situation. 

Of course the resort project is presented as ‘the great salvation’ for the local desperate people — these projects always are. And sometimes they ACTUALLY are. I don’t know where the truth lies here, but you can be certain of one thing; the resort is being designed to benefit the people who are funding it. 

In the end, the people who actually live in the country or territory should be the ones to decide their own fate. Seems to me there was a Revolutionary War fought on exactly those principles a few hundred years ago


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

I'm sorry but there is *no* agriculture on Barbuda and never has been. The cattle raised in slave days only fed the families of the white slave owners who owned Barbuda.

Now nothing is there. As I said, only a donkey or 2.

Its not arable land.

The quote below is about Antigua


> Agriculture along with forestry and fisheries accounts for a small proportion of the economy of Antigua and Barbuda, with a 3% share of GDP in 2012. Agricultural land constitutes a significant 29.5% of total land area (2009). With 2.8% of the total workforce employed in the sector (2008), the focus of the agricultural industry is largely on subsistence farming or small scale commercial farming catering for the domestic market, resulting in a private sector of limited size. As a result, the country relies on importation for most of its foodstuffs. Agricultural exports include cotton, largely sent to Japan, and fruit and vegetables sent to other Caribbean territories. Hot peppers and vegetables are exported to the United Kingdom and Canada. The primary fruit and vegetable exports are bananas, coconuts, cucumbers, mangoes, sugarcane and pineapples, alongside an active trade in livestock. This sees the production of cattle, pig, chicken and goat meat. Additionally, cow's milk is the second most lucrative product, after fresh fruit, generating around US$1.8m in 2010. The primary government ministry responsible for the sector is the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing & the Environment.


But tourism in Antigua is big. They have the resources to expand it to Barbuda.


> tourist industry of Antigua and Barbuda was one of the earliest to be developed in the Eastern Caribbean and is now amongst the largest and most established. The travel and tourism sector contributed XCD2,408m to the economy in 2011, supporting 19,500 jobs, a hugely substantial 69.8% of total employment in the country. Indeed it came second in the world (out of 181 countries) in terms of the relative contribution of the industry to the economy, with a 74.9% share of GDP, more than five times the world average of 14% (World Travel and Tourism Council 2011). In 2010 the country saw 231,000 tourists, alongside 557,000 cruise passenger arrivals. Visitors make an invaluable contribution - in 2011 visitor exports generated XCD1,192.6mn, constituting 78.6% of total exports in the country. The greatest source market for the islands is the United States, accounting for 34% of tourist arrivals in 2010. This was closely followed by the United Kingdom with 28% and the rest of the Caribbean with 18%. The Ministry of Tourism is the main government body in charge of marketing the sector, whilst the Antigua and Barbuda Tourism Authority coordinates the efforts of all overseas Antigua and Barbuda tourist offices, markets the islands and drives visitor arrivals. It runs tourism offices in the United States, Canada and the United States.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> In the end, the people who actually live in the country or territory should be the ones to decide their own fate. )


Mike, in a virtually barren,underdeveloped, under populated area where the population has neither skills, appropriate education nor money, that will only work if someone else pays for it. If not tourism investors that implies a political system some of us are not fond of.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

The New York Times has a pretty in depth video article . I found some analysis of the financial and political system starts around 1:40

https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/americas/100000005425833/barbuda-after-hurricane-irma.html


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Mike, in a virtually barren,underdeveloped, under populated area where the population has neither skills, appropriate education nor money, that will only work if someone else pays for it. If not tourism investors that implies a political system some of us are not fond of.


I'm not sure what system you're suggesting BP (I really don't).

As for the other comments, this may be true, or it may not - I have no direct knowledge either way. I do know that history is littered with examples of external forces imposing their will on weaker local populations, usually in the name of "progress" or "benefit to the masses." All too often the main benefactors in these one-sided deals turns out to be the rich 'white knights.'

The point, once again, is that it is the local people who should be the ones to decide. People who respect personal freedom should understand this.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> The New York Times has a pretty in depth video article . I found some analysis of the financial and political system starts around 1:40
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/americas/100000005425833/barbuda-after-hurricane-irma.html


Thanks Sal. Everyone here should take the few minutes to watch the whole thing. As I said, it IS complicated.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Sal Paradise said:


> The New York Times has a pretty in depth video article . I found some analysis of the financial and political system starts around 1:40
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/americas/100000005425833/barbuda-after-hurricane-irma.html


So the Barbudans want perpetual welfare and subsidies. I think it was Margaret Thatcher that said " The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money".


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> So the Barbudans want perpetual welfare and subsidies. I think it was Margaret Thatcher that said " The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money".


Funny how we all hear what we want to hear. I heard them say they want to control their own destiny, and that the current form of land ownership is critical to their culture, and way of living&#8230; Much like private land ownership is critical to American culture and way of living.

The financial questions are complicated. Of course no one can expect a free ride, and if they Barbudans are being financially supported by Antigua, then Antigua does have to have some say. But is this any different than arrangements of the Canadian provinces and our equalization payment systems, or indeed similar payments made to have-not USA States by their federal government? In these cases no one would suggest the federal governments can arbitrarily change the laws of the province or state. Yet that seems to be the case with Barbuda.

It's easy for us to impose our simplistic solutions on these distant situations. None of us really knows the truth, which is why I keep going back the principle that it should be left up to the people who live there.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> Funny how we all hear what we want to hear. I heard them say they want to control their own destiny, and that the current form of land ownership is critical to their culture, and way of living&#8230; Much like private land ownership is critical to American culture and way of living.
> 
> The financial questions are complicated. Of course no one can expect a free ride, and if they Barbudans are being financially supported by Antigua, then Antigua does have to have some say. But is this any different than arrangements of the Canadian provinces and our equalization payment systems, or indeed similar payments made to have-not USA States by their federal government? In these cases no one would suggest the federal governments can arbitrarily change the laws of the province or state. Yet that seems to be the case with Barbuda.
> 
> It's easy for us to impose our simplistic solutions on these distant situations. None of us really knows the truth, which is why I keep going back the principle that it should be left up to the people who live there.


I suggested no solutions, simplistic or otherwise. I just prefer not to pay for other peoples choices.

I believe it should be left up to the people paying the bills.

I've been paying my own way without government handouts since I left home at 15. I expect all but the handicapped (mentally or physically) to pay their own way.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Apparently they were not a welfare state and lived on hunting, farming fishing. But of course the need money to import things like fuel and manufactured products... stoves, lumber and so forth. I am sure they can, if they want with some assistance develop small export businesses. But the point is what they do should not be imposed on them by people who want to ecomically exploit their island and toss them a few crumbs

What they do with their island is their decision.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> Apparently they were not a welfare state and lived on hunting, farming fishing. But of course the need money to import things like fuel and manufactured products... stoves, lumber and so forth. I am sure they can, if they want with some assistance develop small export businesses. But the point is what they do should not be imposed on them by people who want to ecomically exploit their island and toss them a few crumbs
> 
> What they do with their island is their decision.


SanderO, your assumptions have no value.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> I suggested no solutions, simplistic or otherwise. I just prefer not to pay for other peoples choices.
> 
> I believe it should be left up to the people paying the bills.


You pay for a lot of things chosen by others: roads, military, healthcare, infrastructure. We all pay for the locks and marine navigation systems to support your choice of living on a boat. Hard not to "pay for other people's choices" when you live in any society.

It's not black and white.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> Hard not to "pay for other people's choices" when you live in any society.


True ... doesn't mean I like it but I have found methods to minimize it


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> True ... doesn't mean I like it but I have found methods to minimize it


Yes &#8230; me too  :svoilier:


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> Thin skinned because I found your reference completely inappropriate and libertarian nonsense? How about ballsy because I called BS when it needed to be called?


Again, rather than making an intellectual argument for your point of view, you resort to a lazy form of name calling. I would never attribute anyone tapping on their keyboard, protected by the distance of the internet, as ballsy. Really?

Personal property rights are not a libertarian issue. Free will is, but I didn't introduce this political reference. You might not be as educated as you assume.

Best I can tell, you simply prefer the Barbudan people never have the opportunities you had to rise above the standard of living of our "ancient cultures".

They should decide for themselves on this issue of property rights. Suggesting they stay "ancient" so that rich people can go there to "visit, learn and enjoy" them like a museum of people doomed to their recent history for your pleasure, is far more contemptible than what DeNiro is suggesting.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Personal property rights are not a libertarian issue. Free will is,


Does that include the free will of the Antiguans to not perpetually subsidize the Barbudans ?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Does that include the free will of the Antiguans to not perpetually subsidize the Barbudans ?


Sure, if they choose.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> Sure, if they choose.


Then we have no argument because that appears to be what is happening.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> Does that include the free will of the Antiguans to not perpetually subsidize the Barbudans ?


It's not quite as simple as this though. At least according to the article and the short documentary, the issue is the Antiguan government is forcing the Barbudans to fundamentally change the way they run their island. That's different that just stopping the subsidies.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Jesus I wish a few of you would actually go there before blathering on about it..


The fool thing about the internet is someone with actual knowledge (like me saying there is no agriculture) can be dismissed by someone who knows nothing about it saying there is.

Sorry. But there ain't. Please don't dismiss me until you have been :smile :smile :smile


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Ah yes, the kinder, gentler Sailnet. Sigh.

I spent 2 years in the Peace Corps so I have a bit of insight on this issue. At the end of the day - it's a symbiotic relationship. You can't keep "ancient cultures" isolated and pure. They don't WANT to be isolated - not when they see the material wealth beyond their shores. And you certainly can't blame them for that...though idealists tend to work against that humanistic drive "for the culture's own good".

So, the best you can do is guide the symbiosis. But there is very little desire on either side to be "pure" about it. At the end of the day, it's business. But these countries are at an enormous disadvantage.

When I was in the Solomon Islands as a volunteer, I worked with the Ministry of Natural Resources. I was front-and-center between 1st-world business and governmental concerns (US, Australia, UK, China, Korea, etc.), and the Solomon's resources (fish, timber, mining, logging, etc.). For example, if a country wanted to log the jungle in a particular area they would often build hospitals, schools, etc. to sweeten the negotiating pot (i.e. - "modern development" for the area as a "gift"). But they would work such deals so that the "donated" money for the engineering, materials, equipment, much of the labor and management costs, etc. all flowed back to the donating country. There was no "development" to speak of for the Solomon Islands - just donated structures and equipment they had no idea how to build, maintain, staff, etc. And the downward spiral immediately started after the ribbon-cutting.

Gold Ridge on Guadalcanal was another example. There is/was an estimated US$9B worth of gold in this area. At the time the government was working on a deal with an Australian mining company where that company would provide the means to mine the gold for a 90% stake of everything. This left the Solomon Islands with 10% of their own resources - but also without the knowledge or sophistication to manage the huge environmental impact of the strip-mining that would be required. But the government officials were okay with that - it was a huge payday for them. I spoke out against it at that time - advocating for the Solomons to draw on their own labor force (where there was about 95% unemployment) for manual extraction in the beginning - and slowly build up their technologies over time based on need, financing it with their own resources. My report was buried and I was almost sent home for upsetting the apple cart.

The bottom line is that the 10% was much quicker and easier for the government. So they took it. And now Gold Ridge is bankrupt and looks like this...



















The large reservoir you see at the top of the image is mostly arsenic. It's essentially a "superfund site"....with only an earthen dam keeping a tidal wave of death from those who live downstream.










As you can see in this article, it's so bad and such a liability time-bomb that Saint Barbara (an Australian mining company that ended up with the rights after several sales among various interests) sold the entire operation (and all its liabilities) to a Solomon Islands landowner group for *AUS$100*. Yes - one hundred dollars.

And what did the Solomons get out of it? An upfront payment of some amount and a huge lake of arsenic that is now their problem. They will try to start mining again as noted in the article, and it will likely end in disaster as you can see by the statement from the landowner group's chairman...



> "The Saint Barbara board made the decision to leave the mine and we negotiated to take over," the chairman of the landowner company, Walton Naezon, told Radio Australia's Pacific Beat program.
> 
> "A lot of people questioned what experience a local company has with mining.
> 
> "You don't need to know mining to own a company."


They have no idea what they have done. Yet the first-worlders know very well. And that's the problem.

So, the Barbuda thing can either be great thing for the locals who now have absolutely nothing due to Irma - and no one clamoring to help them. Or it can be another lake of arsenic with far more sophisticated business players taking advantage of natural ignorance in these countries and populations. Back to symbiosis.

Sailing and travel is good for these places as an income stream. FAR better than mining, logging, fishing, etc. These people need money, they need progress. But they also need an extra degree of fairness, kindness, and wisdom from those first-worlders who do business with them. They rarely get it. Maybe Taxi Driver will do some good. Who knows?


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

MikeOReilly said:


> .... the Antiguan government is forcing the Barbudans to... .


FFS!

Antigua IS Barbuda!

Antigua IS Barbuda!

Antigua IS Barbuda!


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Guys... chill out. Barbuda's population needs to be involved in any decisions about their future. It's that simple. The occupants were not forced to remain on the Island. They are being subject to imposed conditions by a developer who wants to build a resort.

I was on Barbuda in the early 90s I know what's there... not much. But that does not mean some one can come in and restructure their lives with their consent.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> FFS!
> 
> Antigua IS Barbuda!
> 
> ...


?????

Read the article, listen to the doc. They quote and feature actual people who actually live there. There is far more nuance to the story than your _pounding-the-table_ blather.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

This thread should be closed. It contributes nothing to the tranquility of our fine forum and isn't even about sailing or boats really. Take it to PWRG.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> Again, rather than making an intellectual argument for your point of view, you resort to a lazy form of name calling. I would never attribute anyone tapping on their keyboard, protected by the distance of the internet, as ballsy. Really?
> 
> Personal property rights are not a libertarian issue. Free will is, but I didn't introduce this political reference. You might not be as educated as you assume.
> 
> ...


I am not suggesting first world people visit Barbuda and treat it like a museum and deprive it of any form of development. There are plenty of educated people in the Caribbean who can participate in programs to lift up the economic situation of the islanders.

First worlders down there often have a pretty patronizing attitude... not all but plenty.

I have made my position clear and I stand with the authors of the article cited in the OP.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I actually thought we were having a reasonably civil and interesting discussion — excluding a few aberrant posts of course.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

MikeOReilly said:


> I actually thought we were having a reasonably civil and interesting discussion - excluding a few aberrant posts of course.


The over arching issue and why I posted the article was to raise the issue about how first worlders relate to people in the tropics.... areas that they consider prime cruising grounds or "paradise" at times.

So the climate is optimal... the sea is clear blue... the winds are reliable... So how do we first worlders interface with the locals? De Niro's project sure seems to want to grab a large piece of prime real estate in a walled off community so guest can live totally isolated from the locals aside from being served meals, drinks, and have their rooms cleaned. To accomplish this he needs to have the concept of land ownership change to a private property model. It sure looks like the shock doctrine... "disaster capitalism".

But what and how can the first world assist these people who have limited resources? Are the less "aggressive" means than the total paradigm shift of the De Niro approach?

And since Mark has also sailed there... maybe he can explain what he did and what he did when he got there. I anchored for a couple of days and then sailed back to English Harbor and didn't explore the Island at all.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

SanderO said:


> ...De Niro's project sure seems to want to grab a large piece of prime real estate in a walled off community so guest can live totally isolated from the locals aside from being served meals, drinks, and have their rooms cleaned. To accomplish this he needs to have the concept of land ownership change to a private property model. It sure looks like the shock doctrine... "disaster capitalism".......


That's what the article wanted you to think.
Why were some other facts not included?
There is usually a reason.

So, we don't really know enough to convict...but don't let that stop us from going off all hell-bent...


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

SanderO said:


> The over arching issue and why I posted the article was to raise the issue about how first worlders relate to people in the tropics.... areas that they consider prime cruising grounds or "paradise" at times.
> ...


And this is why I took up the discussion; b/c I think it's an interesting and worthy inquiry for those of us who want to travel the world. I do think there are two issues being raised and discussed here.

The dominate one has become this issue around the change in land ownership laws to, in part, to appease or support this big resort. I don't know if this development is a good idea or a bad one. As I said in my first post, I think this is largely divorced from the issues cruisers need to deal with. But as a general principle, I also think these kinds of questions should be left to the people who live there. I have no real idea what is going on with this issue, but I can tell it's far more complicated than any of us here know.

As for the more important question (more important for us), I'll just quote myself:



> But as for the impact WE have as cruisers, travellers and tourists, I'd say our footprints are more easily measured and managed. As Alex wrote, the old camping mantra of "leave no trace," is the ideal. Not crapping up a place with garbage, etc. is easy and a no-brainer. Not over-exploiting a local resource for our fun and recreation should also be a no-brainer. But having no impact due to our typical disparate level of wealth and power, now that's a different challenge.
> 
> Cruisers are richer than most global citizens. It's good to spread this wealth wherever we go. But this also has an impact on local economies and peoples - for good, and for ill. It's complicated&#8230; I think the best we can do is try and listen and learn from the locals, and to be aware of our impacts as best we can.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I have never been to Barbuda. I've been to Antigua. 

I'm not saying that I know if they should live in communal subsistence like their cooperartive land deed or 
if they should sell out and have the Hilton move in - but I have no doubt that for any of us - if some foreign corporation came in and convinced the President to change our land deeds without our permission we would go absolutely nuts. Deniro was sneaky. 

As for the welfare point - if they are on welfare, then so is Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico. And how can anyone consider this" a result of their choices"?? What choice? To be born there? To have a hurricane hit? I swear it seems sometimes that people take whatever talking points they have heard lately and then just twist them into the conversation. 

I own land in NY. I take it for granted that deed law is very long lasting and nearly unchanging and that I would have to sign off on any change to my land deed.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

I vacation at Antigua. Great sailing, really great, the resort I go to has enough Hobie Getaways that I can always get one for either morning or afternoon slot- wind is awesome.

I have done a fair bit of exploring inland. There are a couple of fairly lush zones on either end of Antigua, its hilly, so I think what happens is the moist wind off the Caribbean or Atlantic hits the hills, climbs, cools and drops rain. The agriculture of Antigua and Barbuda seems to be focused in these two small lush zones. Central Antigua is a plateau, essentially a rain shadow desert. Even English Harbour is a desert, the Harbour there exists because its a great, easily defended natural harbour. Because Antigua has good existing infrastructure and a beautiful climate, it is popular with wealthy tourists, it has an international airport, English Harbour, the cruise ship terminal in St Johns and the resorts and yacht basin at Jolly Harbour and Wilkies.

Barbuda, geographically is a very different place. Its flat, maximum elevation of 38 meters! The result being, there are no mountains forcing damp winds up and causing them to drop rain, The result being that it doesn't have the lush zones to support the pockets of Agriculture found on Antigua, nor does it have a fantastic deep water harbour like English Harbour or the harbour at St Johns, or an international airport or a city with hospital, university etc. Plus it is physically a long way from the infrastructure in Antigua.

Barbuda is more or less a remote desert island with minimal infrastructure. Antigua has embraced foreign investment, both from foreign governments and wealthy tourist developers. Not sure if the folks in the article are doing much different from what has already happened on Antigua. Might be a good thing for the country. I have ex pat Antiguan friends in Ottawa who would rather deal with Ottawa winters, than try and find meaningful employment in Antigua. Visit Antigua and Barbuda in January, then visit Ottawa in January and it will really make you scratch your head.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

MikeOReilly said:


> ... But as a general principle, I also think these kinds of questions should be left to the people who live there. I have no real idea what is going on with this issue, but I can tell it's far more complicated than any of us here know.....


Yes.
It's nice that the World is not ruled on Net forums.
Time to de-wad panties...


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Into a virtually barren,underdeveloped, under populated area where the population had neither skills, appropriate education nor money, and had no concept of private ownership came a skillful ,educated society with a purse of beads .Some lighthearted misunderstandings lead to building a WALL to delineate the concept. Wall Street was the result and it's goodness may depend on ones viewpoint.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Bermuda doesn't have much going for it either.... it's a banking center... and money poured in because of the climate I suppose. They don't allow outsiders to become citizens. Visit and leave.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> Barbuda's population needs to be involved in any decisions about their future. It's that simple.


They do have a say just like every other citizen of Antigua-Barbuda. It's called a vote.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

SanderO said:


> Bermuda doesn't have much going for it either.... it's a banking center... and money poured in because of the climate I suppose. They don't allow outsiders to become citizens. Visit and leave.


Bermuda is one of the highest per capita income countries.
It's also one of the most expensive countries to live.

How does Bermuda relate to Barbuda's problem/questions?


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

SanderO said:


> I came across this article:
> 
> https://theintercept.com/2018/01/23...il&utm_term=0_e00a5122d3-b8ebe3a9fb-129272029
> 
> ...


I just got back from a ten day charter in the Maldives. Stayed at island resorts on both ends of the charter. We go there for the snorkeling. Some of the most wonderful reefs around and also swam with a couple of Manta Rays. Our three Muslim crew members seemed glad to be working as did those we met on the resort islands. Our cook was from Sri Lanka but, would do what ever needed to be done. If I had a business I would hire him for his work ethic alone. The young Maldivian kid not so much. Seemed bored and more interested in his smart phone than making sure we had water for dinner. A 25% tourist tax provides a lot of government services including housing for many on the remote islands. The resort islands also provide many jobs for Maldivians as well as others in the region. The govt also implemented regulations that there be three crew on our 45 foot Knysna Catamaran. Though two crew are all that is needed. I'm sure they appreciated the tip money we leave. They also seem very proud when we tell them what a beautiful country they have and how wonderful their reefs are. All in all I think us visiting the Atolls help them lead better lives and enjoy some modern conveniences. I think it provides a much better life for them just taking us infidels out for a cruise around the Atolls than heading out for a week on a small Dhoni boat fishing for twelves hours a day. Which would be the alternative if tourism where not there.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

Minnewaska said:


> I sat with Alan Greenspan in a small group about a dozen years back. He made a profound point that I've never forgotten. He asked the group what we believed was the biggest reason the US became the most prosperous nation the world has ever seen, let alone so quickly. He wasn't suggesting perfect.
> 
> The US does not have the most natural resources, although, it is blessed with many.
> 
> ...


1. Free land. Really, the land here is free, just take it.
2. Slavery
3. The industrial revolution and a complete and total lack of protection for workers.
4. A near constant state of war.
5. The US Constitution.

It's a wonderful country and I love it, but, seriously now Mr. Greenspan, the vomit meter is pegging.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Good lord - take it to freakin' PWRG already. This is SAILING forum not an old folks home. 

Or maybe I'm wrong. An old folks home with ads? Now there's a business model.


----------



## slap (Mar 13, 2008)

smackdaddy said:


> An old folks home with ads? Now there's a business model.


It Depends.


----------



## RobGallagher (Aug 22, 2001)

Will the self appointed moderator please spend more time on his browser settings. The only advertising I have ever seen here, aside from SailNet self promotion, is for _ _ _ coffee mugs and t-shirts.


----------



## GeorgeB (Dec 30, 2004)

O.K., so right now I'm seeing ads for Cabela's, Mantus Scuba, Aware Manager, Marriott's, and SPG Resorts. My browser is blocking the pop-up ads. How do I get these other ads blocked? is it a Canadian feature we don't get in the USA?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

Primitive? In the West Indies? The indigenous population has been extinct for some 300 *years*!
There's nothing primitive about what's down here now. There is an immense amount of poverty, on the other hand. And though you and I may not like how these islands go about trying to raise the standard of living for their populous, they certainly aren't doing it to spite cruisers. They don't consider them worthy of that much attention.
Anyway, this is not a new trend here. The population of Canouan sold the half of their island so those too poor to afford a place on Mustique, could have a private gated community for themselves. These interlopers have cut away one mountain and half of another, so they can land their private jets on an island that was barely a blip on anybody's itinerary before.
The Chinese are investing heavily in the area, which the islands welcome, but at the cruisers's expense. Grenada sold a part of a national park (and anchorage) to them for a resort and then made the only anchorage outside of St George's a Marine Protected Area, to make up for that lost park land, to get some UN money. An anchorage that's over a hundred years old hasn't much left on the bottom to protect, which shows us all how valuable we are to the government of Grenada.
The horses have all been out of the paddock for a long time now down here, and if you think that sailing and cruisers are ever going to be thought of as anything more than a minor income, I think you are sadly mistaken. One day's cruise ship fees bring more money into a government's coffers than months of bareboat rentals or cruising permits. Same with the businesses ashore, in general.
So, if some rich white guys want to foot the bill for rebuilding Barbuda, then that is surely the best thing for Barbuda, because Antigua certainly isn't going to do it. If that changes the island, well that's something the Barbudans have to live with, just as those in Canouan must. I am absolutely positive that those displaced Barbudans who have no homes, jobs or food to feed their families, can't see this happen fast enough.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

GeorgeB said:


> O.K., so right now I'm seeing ads for Cabela's, Mantus Scuba, Aware Manager, Marriott's, and SPG Resorts. My browser is blocking the pop-up ads. How do I get these other ads blocked? is it a Canadian feature we don't get in the USA?


George...

https://adblockplus.org/


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

hellosailor said:


> You do what the Norsemen did:
> Name the green place "Iceland" and the icy place "Greenland" and you'll discourage all the nasty tourists.
> Basic law of physics that the mere act of observing something changes it. And that's also why island paradises may allow for tourist dollars, but also don't let you overstay your welcome. If they choose to allow too much tourism...that's their choice.


Reminds me of the advice for Californians who are tired of relatives from 'back east' expecting to be put up for free while they do the tourist thing:

"Borrow money from those who have it, and lend it to those who don't. You'll never see any of them again..."


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

SanderO said:


> And since Mark has also sailed there... maybe he can explain what he did and what he did when he got there. I anchored for a couple of days and then sailed back to English Harbor and didn't explore the Island at all.


Brb.

Got to go get on the bus tour (topless, but not that topless) of Paris. Champeys de Leeesees and all that French crap.

:|


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

RobGallagher said:


> 1. Free land. Really, the land here is free, just take it.
> 2. Slavery
> 3. The industrial revolution and a complete and total lack of protection for workers.
> 4. A near constant state of war.
> ...


All these, absent #5, have been the history of many countries, none of which accomplished the same scale.

#5 is specifically connected to Mr. Greenspan's point. It's in the fifth amendment... "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Guess how many countries have that right. Even the Canadian Constitution/Charter, as I understand it, does not have absolute property rights.

Since the Barbudans are considering adopting a form of property rights they've not had before, I thought his point was interesting to add.

Nevertheless, I think the larger point has been properly made. This has been, from post 1, a PWRG thread and should be banned to the sewer. It's a waste of time and just brings out the worst in many.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

USA has a very very different past than any other country. It's only a couple of hundred yrs old... was established from from a several colonies on land appropriated from native Americans... or simply claimed as of right in "manifest destiny"... American has fertile lands and cash groups which fueled its early economy.... cotton, tobacco come to mind.... but wealth coming from plantation using slave labor. The only people who create wealth out of thin air are bankers, wall street and people in real estate. artificially controlled markets like gems... and similar.

Property rights have nothing to do with economic prosperity of a nation.

Greenspan was responsible for the dot.com bubble the real estate bubble to name a few of his accomplishments which we should forget.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

I know my first choice is islands with no potable water and no man made structures on them.
Second is no charter boats.
Third is no cruise ships 
Although Branson seems to be a nice guy giving out Xmas gifts to kids and trying to build green his construction crews buzzing back and forth within feet of us as we were anchored out was a major PIA. The front ramp tramps bringing in construction supplies where ever they are destroy coral. I understand money talks and BS walks but just like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as soon as you observe an area you change it. There are already so few areas unobserved. Yes there are a few nooks and crannies near hurricane hole you can skinny dip and sun bathe with the bride and a few in the Bahamas but nearly none in either the windwards or leewards unless you spend quite some time hunting them out. 
Eco tourism ultimately is just as bad as cruise ship piers. Darwin saw a different world on the Galapagos. The inner passage is a highway. You cruise Washington county Maine and what’s undeveloped in the Caribbean to live in beauty knowing that trade off is desperate poverty for others.
If the purpose of government is to provide the greatest good for the greatest number the destruction by the 1%ers cannot be justified if you consider our descendants.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Still writing my reply.
Currently asking for directions in Paris.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

The Seine is rising... might over spill the embankment watch your head on the bateaux mouche


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Yes the Seine is flooded but I don't know ow how much be a use I don't know this town. 
This photo seems to show water 10 feet over the dock.
Its not eating here at a today, I don't know if it's raising or falling.


----------



## jtsailjt (Aug 1, 2013)

SanderO said:


> agricuture..
> 
> [/url]


What sort of agriculture do you have in mind that could be competitive with similar agriculture in locations where water is readily available?

It seems to me that the ONLY option for Barbuda residents to draw in the amount of money that will make their island livable once again is from well heeled tourists willing to pay for relaxing while enjoying their beautiful climate and beaches. Since most well heeled tourists don't want to pay a lot to do that in a pup tent with no amenities, and there are many other locations available that do have nice amenities, they need someone to provide the amenities that will draw in the tourists $$$ that will support a local population willing to work, either directly or indirectly in support of that industry.

I see nothing wrong with admitting that what you really have to offer is a great climate and natural beauty and then figuring out how to best leverage that to benefit yourself. Leaving the island as it now is benefits nobody but the sand crabs and attempting to establish an agricultural based economy in a place with no fresh water seems to be beyond silly. What other better options do Barbudans have?


----------



## jtsailjt (Aug 1, 2013)

Capt Len said:


> Into a virtually barren,underdeveloped, under populated area where the population had neither skills, appropriate education nor money, and had no concept of private ownership came a skillful ,educated society with a purse of beads .Some lighthearted misunderstandings lead to building a WALL to delineate the concept. Wall Street was the result and it's goodness may depend on ones viewpoint.


That sounds almost poetic, but offering to rebuild everyone's house and make an unlivable island once again livable and also build an engine that will give them employment to put food on their tables, in return for a deed to the land the engine is built upon seems quite a lot different from taking ALL the land in return for some beads. Especially when those who are being offered this deal are not currently living in a happy and prosperous society by ANYONE's definition. For those who are opposed to the idea of this, what other serious option is there to transform Barbuda from remaining an increasingly uninhabited, desert island that is no good to any human?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> USA has a very very different past than any other country. It's only a couple of hundred yrs old... was established from from a several colonies on land appropriated from native Americans... or simply claimed as of right in "manifest destiny"... American has fertile lands and cash groups which fueled its early economy.... cotton, tobacco come to mind.... but wealth coming from plantation using slave labor. The only people who create wealth out of thin air are bankers, wall street and people in real estate. artificially controlled markets like gems... and similar.
> 
> Property rights have nothing to do with economic prosperity of a nation.
> 
> Greenspan was responsible for the dot.com bubble the real estate bubble to name a few of his accomplishments which we should forget.


Why am I wasting my time?

He was not solely referencing real property rights, but all property rights. Meaning, your money, your wealth, your business, the fruits of your labor can't be taken away. Most countries, prior to the US, had rich histories of taking ones stuff away, including England.

Greenspan referred to the tech bubble as "irrational exuberance", he certainly didn't champion it.

Manifest destiny was a cute twist. Name one country prior to the 18th century, that hadn't taken its territory by force in its history. That was not a distinction that drove the relatively huge success of the US.

Fertile lands and salvery were not unique either. Dislike Greenspan all you like, I neither like nor dislike him. But he did offer a unique perspective on US relative growth over all others.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

As if impoverished areas could 'democratically' decided on their development inviting money ashore ,,,cruise ships ,hotels , yachties,.mining, bananas, what ever. The local societies are multilevel and the top jumps with enthusiasm of skimming opportunities while the bottom echelons think a job would be an improvement. Now in a more connected world the benevolent investors from away pay for the buldozers to push the disenfranchised along the beach for hotel complexes .Koh Pi Pi an example as the sea gypsies now recycle beer cans on their ex fishing boats. In Cambodia the government just sold the land to foreign investors (a really good return on the world market) and the indigenous residents (squatters ,because they didn't have a recognised deed to their great grandfathers land) now live in urban slums but are allowed jobs in the condominiums where they used to farm. I guess it comes down to morals having a price and that may cut into the bottom line.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

At best, Greenspan is a poor example for Barbuda. At worst, an Ayn Rand fraud who presided over the worst meltdown in economic history,leading to the biggest bank bail out of all time..a crisis during which he merely stated he used "incorrect models" and then slunk off into obscurity. Choosing him as any example, but particularly for this one, seems more a lack of self awareness than anything.

"Badgered by lawmakers, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan denied the nation's economic crisis was his fault on Thursday but conceded the meltdown had revealed a flaw in a lifetime of economic thinking and left him in a *"state of shocked disbelief"." *

Greenspan, 82, acknowledged under questioning that he had made a "mistake" in believing that banks, operating in their own self-interest, would do what was necessary to protect their shareholders and institutions. Greenspan called that* "a flaw in the model ... that defines how the world works."*

"A critical pillar to market competition and free markets did break down," Greenspan said. *"I still do not fully understand why it happened."
*
Greenspan admits ?mistake? that helped crisis - Business - Stocks & economy - Economy at a Crossroads | NBC News


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

SanderO said:


> And since Mark has also sailed there... maybe he can explain what he did and what he did when he got there. I anchored for a couple of days and then sailed back to English Harbor and didn't explore the Island at all.


I have been there a number of times. Every time I go to Antigua I go to Barbuda often from St Johns.
Sonetimes into the bay east of the resort and sometimes to the long Bay north and west of the rssort.

Both have their own attractions. 
The bay to the east is full of coral bommies. Each bommie encircles a patch of sand where is possible to manouver 1 or 2 boats. You drop the pick well off the beach due north and just vegirate the days till your resources run out. No other boat can anchor near you as each little bommie lagoon is seperated by its coral. Smirking is good for the caribbean.

On the West side and stretching north of the defunct resort is a looong beach, name forgotten. You come inside a reef and anchor off the beach. 
Smirking that reef is good. You'll be the only boat there by 500 meters. 
There's a "lighthouse" mid way on the beach. It's a restaurant but if you want to be fed you have to book because the fly the food And the chef in from Antigua for each meal!

The locals from Codrington offer Frigate Bird colony tours. You drive your dinghy up on to the beech a few hundred. Enters south of the Lighthouse and walk over the sand dune where your local guide in his dinghy will pick you up and take you on the tour. It's good. You look at birds but the tour guide knows F all about them or their science etc.

[*you can not get to Codrington by dinghy or big boat. Only by being picked up a cross the sand dune*]

After that we once went into Codrington for lunch. Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmm well their ain't no restaurants. There's a kinda a canteen near the airstrip (not the resort airport) that has tables seen on the History Channel that you can eat the "food" you ordered. The "food" is the best in town. Probably due to the fact it's the only "food" you can get in "town".

It's quaint and you want to love it because it is real people who have never bumped into a dollar note. You want to love it because you know their history and you want it to be something you can accuse whities as racists for. You want so much to love it. You want to love it because it should be the real Caribbean.

But it's a social +F'ing+ disaster.

There's no palm trees.
Its a fricken desert.
The kids have to leave to go to school.
There's no jobs
No oportinity.
No quaint little fishing wharf just a concrete pile.
No cute fish and chop shops grabbing fresh fish flung, still wriggling, off a colourful fishing boat.

Sorry but it's beneath what even Trump would call a ****hole.

So when the cruisers run out of food or water, or boredom sets in - boredom is theore likely- one plus anchor and heads back to English harbour.

This resort ain't destroying nothing because there is nothing to destroy.

Sorry but it's true.

I really really wanted to love Codrington.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

The issue of what Barbuda does with its land and its approach to property rights should be up to Barbudans. It is the epitome of arrogance and colonialism for any of us to tell them what is best for them.

But the impact WE have while travelling IS something we can and should think about. Just like most of us wouldn’t dump garbage in someone else’s backyard, so too should we be wary of the impact our presence has on the social and economic order of the places we visit. 

Of course we will have an impact. We are as human as the rest of humanity, so in that sense we have a right to have an impact. But that doesn’t mean we should do so ignorantly or without care for others. 

The challenge is finding the right balance. THIS is what I was hoping this discussion would turn to.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

MikeOReilly said:


> The issue of what Barbuda does with its land and its approach to property rights should be up to Barbudans.


Your suburb can not dictate your countries attitide.

Barbuda has a population of 1,600 (actually now after the hurricane 100)

Barbuda is far smaller than any suburb you have ever lived in.

It's too small to even have an elected representative to move the trash cans.

I am sorry but I just cat see how letting a infintessamally small groups screw over a country.

☺


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Has my spell checkers dued?


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Colonialism, exploitation of local poor by wealthy outsiders.

Absolutely and directly in line with centuries of history in the development of the New World.

When it comes to political economics, humanity's spiritual and ethical evolution is one step forward two steps back, and we seem to maybe looking at 3-4 more steps back before taking any more forward.

May they burn in hell.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Your suburb can not dictate your countries attitide.
> 
> Barbuda has a population of 1,600 (actually now after the hurricane 100)
> 
> ...


I get that Mark, and I don't disagree. No one should expect someone else to pay their way. But that doesn't mean WE should impose our will and expectations on others. It's up to them, as a nation (and yes, that includes Antigua), to work it out. The best scenario would have been for the country to decide on a way going forward BEFORE the pressure of this resort came to bear. But of course, life is rarely "fair."

BTW, the doc did state there was an elected council that managed the island. Unless this is a lie, there is some attempt at local management and responsibility going on. It is they who seem to be pushing back.

Tyranny of the majority or tyranny of the minority &#8230; neither is good. But either way, it should be left to the country to decide.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

I am sure the locals would be more than open to help at standing up some sort of viable economy. As has been said it should not be imposed on them and the development plans should be presented to them with all the benefits and risks set forth and let them decide. Development requires money and this needs to come from somewhere... and it needs to be repaid some how. It appears that the development plans were being imposed on the locals without their input.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

One issue is, I don't think they have ever been very successful at economic independence. Its a tiny island nation that is mostly covered in desert. Other common wealth nations helped them out. Now, like so many small nations, China is trying to muscle their way in, in a big way.

Which I guess leaves the local government in a decision making position, they either find a way to take care of themselves, or become indebted to China

https://antiguanewsroom.com/news/featured/chinese-company-offers-new-town-for-barbuda/

https://antiguaobserver.com/port-gets-us-100-million-chinese-loan/

Antigua and Barbuda is, and has been trying to attract foreign investment from folks like Deniro for quite a while, they need the money, check out this citizenship by investment program:

The Citizenship by Investment Program

It looks like the country is in a position where it needs to pick its poison. We don't know the true authors of the above paper, or their intentions.


----------



## jtsailjt (Aug 1, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> I get that Mark, and I don't disagree. No one should expect someone else to pay their way. But that doesn't mean WE should impose our will and expectations on others. It's up to them, as a nation (and yes, that includes Antigua), to work it out. The best scenario would have been for the country to decide on a way going forward BEFORE the pressure of this resort came to bear. But of course, life is rarely "fair."
> 
> BTW, the doc did state there was an elected council that managed the island. Unless this is a lie, there is some attempt at local management and responsibility going on. It is they who seem to be pushing back.
> 
> Tyranny of the majority or tyranny of the minority &#8230; neither is good. But either way, it should be left to the country to decide.


But who is the "country" that gets to decide in this case? Is it made up of the Antiguans who greatly outnumber the Barbudans and don't live on Barbuda and never have, or is it the 1600 who used to live there but may never again unless some outside entity comes up with an infusion of money to repair infrastructure and makes their houses habitable again, or should it be the 100 or so who are currently living there who get to decide this islands future?

I don't see this as an outside entity forcing this on Barbudans at all, just a developer who has offered conditions under which he's willing to invest in a resort on this island. The islanders obviously desperately need someone to step forward for them to have any hope of recovery and nobody's likely to pour the necessary money into Barbuda unless there's something in it for them. Those who are affected (Antigua and Barbuda combined government, the old Barbuda 1600 population, or the current Barbuda 100 population) need to decide whether they want this deal or have a realistic hope for a better deal from someone else. It's the relevant Barbudans or their government that needs to decide, but to me the deal that's been offered sounds pretty good. I realize that i wasn't brought up in their culture so they may have a different perspective, but what other realistic options do they have since it seems that 1500 of the previous 1600 who used to live there have voted with their presence elsewhere that the status quo is unacceptable to them?


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

jtsailjt said:


> ... Those who are affected (Antigua and Barbuda combined government, the old Barbuda 1600 population, or the current Barbuda 100 population) need to decide whether they want this deal or have a realistic hope for a better deal from someone else. It's the relevant Barbudans or their government that needs to decide, but to me the deal that's been offered sounds pretty good. I realize that i wasn't brought up in their culture so they may have a different perspective, but what other realistic options do they have since it seems that 1500 of the previous 1600 who used to live there have voted with their presence elsewhere that the status quo is unacceptable to them?


Exactly right on both counts: THEY need to decide, and WE have no real idea what the impact is for THEIR culture and way of life. I really don't understand why this conversation carries on. What is so controversial with saying: "leave it up to them"??

The more interesting, relevant and challenging conversation WE should be having is about the impact WE have when we visit these places.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

The issue is that this "deal" was not transparently "presented" to anyone.

The foreign sharks applied their pressures to the Antiguan sharks, and both outside groups are changing Barbuda's traditional "operating system" of locally-controlled governance, law and fundamental property rights without the consent of the Barbudans.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> At best, Greenspan is a poor example for Barbuda. At worst, an Ayn Rand fraud who presided over the worst meltdown in economic history,leading to the biggest bank bail out of all time..a crisis during which he merely stated he used "incorrect models" and then slunk off into obscurity. Choosing him as any example, but particularly for this one, seems more a lack of self awareness than anything.
> 
> "Badgered by lawmakers, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan denied the nation's economic crisis was his fault on Thursday but conceded the meltdown had revealed a flaw in a lifetime of economic thinking and left him in a *"state of shocked disbelief"." *
> 
> ...


Geesh. I see you and Sander are conflating whether we was a good FRB Chair, with whether his point was good. I think he was a lousy Fed Chair, but his point on personal property rights being a distinction in the development of our country can still be good. In fact, I couldn't say if he came up with the pint or was just repeating it himself. It has nothing to do with who he is/was. You don't have to agree him, but countering with the rest of his life is a non-sequitor. Substantive, all the rest of the arguments for why we were so successful: land, resources, slavery, brutality, whatever, we're all tried by many before us. Alan's point t is the only unique one I've heard.

If he's right and personal property rights are a factor in overall growth and prosperity, it's something for the Berbudans to think about.


----------



## jtsailjt (Aug 1, 2013)

john61ct said:


> The issue is that this "deal" was not transparently "presented" to anyone.
> 
> The foreign sharks applied their pressures to the Antiguan sharks, and both outside groups are changing Barbuda's traditional "operating system" of locally-controlled governance, law and fundamental property rights without the consent of the Barbudans.


The article I read on the first page of this thread says nothing about "Antiguan sharks" and instead says that the combined Barbudan and Antiguan Senate passed the amendment and presumably that requires a majority vote. Are you accusing the Barbudans and Antiguans of electing "sharks?" If so, that's nothing unusual and they'll fit right in with most other politicians. I've felt exactly the same way when US senators, with whom I disagree, vote for things that negatively impact me or contradict my values, but realize that once my neighbors and myself elected them into office, I'm sort of stuck with whatever they decide, at least until the next election.

If I was king, I'd leave it up to only actual Barbudans to decide, but alas I'm not even a Barbudan peasant (and neither is any other poster here, which is another way of agreeing that it's none of our business) and the government that Barbudans recognized as legitimate before Irma have signed off on this deal, so unless there's a higher authority than their own elected senators for them to appeal to, it looks like they are stuck with it for the time being. Also, this article makes it sound like most Barbudans are against this deal but I wonder how much of that is truth and how much is the authors own bias? I'd like to hear other Barbudans weigh in and, after all, the authors describe Barbuda as a "rare beacon of sustainable development in the Caribbean" when it actually was never much more than a lightly populated sandy island with no significant development at all, sustainable or otherwise. So I have a feeling there may be more to this story than has been presented to us by these two authors.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

You guys need to drink more rum or wine or something and mellow out and concentrate on things you can effect.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Don0190 said:


> You guys need to drink more rum or wine or something and mellow out and concentrate on things you can effect.


Exactly (on both counts!): like the impact WE have on the places WE visit.

&#8230; now, we're my beer :2 boat:


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Guess I think about this differently. Island is nearly at sea level. Was entirely evacuated. No human infrastructure of significance survived. Less than 2000 souls have claim on the land. Likely land won’t continue to exist as repetitive storms occur and sea level rises. Resort will require engineering to alter topology and additional structural modifications to survive further storms and sea rise. Additional engineering to prevent local contamination killing coral and local biology. Access to allow project to be commercially viable will either mean airstrip or deep channel or both.
Place will never be the same.

Screw it. Leave it like culebrita. Bombed out not hurricaned out but basically the same deal. Make it a park.


----------



## jtsailjt (Aug 1, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> Exactly right on both counts: THEY need to decide, and WE have no real idea what the impact is for THEIR culture and way of life. I really don't understand why this conversation carries on. What is so controversial with saying: "leave it up to them"??
> 
> The more interesting, relevant and challenging conversation WE should be having is about the impact WE have when we visit these places.


I'd agree with that sentiment. Obviously we don't want to negatively impact their environment on land or at sea, or commit crimes, or offend their religious or cultural beliefs, but sometimes it's sort of hard to know just what those last 2 ideas amount to when you first arrive on a new island with its own unique culture. Tread softly at first and don't assume they're just like you (or me) are.

One thing we do is to spread around a fair amount of money, at least by the standards of a local population with very little wealth. That in itself can have an impact on the culture of a place when suddenly it pays more to cater to the yachties in the harbor than to go out fishing or whatever else is the traditional local way of earning a living. But that's not something that we can avoid unless we avoid all local contact, and isn't necessarily a negative thing, more of just a different thing. It's also not unique to lightly populated Caribbean islands because I've seen it happen right here in Maine, where a harbor becomes popular with yachties willing to pay more for marine services so they get priority and the local fisherman feels like he's been invaded and pushed aside even though none of the "newcomers" intended to do that to him.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

MikeOReilly said:


> Exactly right on both counts: THEY need to decide, .


Bullshitskiy.

As someone mentioned "the Chinese" they have been setting themselves up weirdly all over the world.
If the gave $1 million dollars to everyone who wanted to give them their whole entitlement then all, of not most, would give up all their land for $1m.

Wouldn't you?


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

jtsailjt said:


> I'd agree with that sentiment. Obviously we don't want to negatively impact their environment on land or at sea, or commit crimes, or offend their religious or cultural beliefs, but sometimes it's sort of hard to know just what those last 2 ideas amount to when you first arrive on a new island with its own unique culture. Tread softly at first and don't assume they're just like you (or me) are.


Yes &#8230; brought to mind a current news item. Not sailors, but some young western tourists have run afoul of local laws and customs: Cambodia charges 2 Canadians, other foreigners accused of pornographic dance - World - CBC News



jtsailjt said:


> One thing we do is to spread around a fair amount of money, at least by the standards of a local population with very little wealth. That in itself can have an impact on the culture of a place when suddenly it pays more to cater to the yachties in the harbor than to go out fishing or whatever else is the traditional local way of earning a living. But that's not something that we can avoid unless we avoid all local contact, and isn't necessarily a negative thing, more of just a different thing. It's also not unique to lightly populated Caribbean islands because I've seen it happen right here in Maine, where a harbor becomes popular with yachties willing to pay more for marine services so they get priority and the local fisherman feels like he's been invaded and pushed aside even though none of the "newcomers" intended to do that to him.


This is what I find so interesting, or personally challenging. As a cruiser I am wealthy, even by Canadian standards. I can afford to spread the joy around, but what impact does that have on the local community? But you're right; NOT spreading my dollars around also has an impact.

I guess what I try and do is to follow the old adage: _when in Rome, do as the Romans do_. In the case of money, I like to not be stingy, but also not over-pay just b/c I can.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Bullshitskiy.
> 
> As someone mentioned "the Chinese" they have been setting themselves up weirdly all over the world.
> If the gave $1 million dollars to everyone who wanted to give them their whole entitlement then all, of not most, would give up all their land for $1m.
> ...


That's what I'm saying: leave it up to them. If they decide to hand over their land, to De Niro, or to the Chinese, then so be it. It's up to them, not us. I'm just chafing against all this "WE KNOW BEST" attitude.

Ideally you would want them to make these decisions outside of external pressure. If Irma hadn't destroyed the island they would be in a far better position to resist the De Niro's or the Chinese, but reality bites. So they have some hard choices. I just think it should be left to those who live there to decide.

We demand no less for our own national decisions.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

MikeOReilly said:


> It's up to them, as a nation


The nation has decided in favour of the resort.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> It appears that the development plans were being imposed on the locals without their input.


Many things have been imposed on my neighbourhood in Ontario by higher levels of government. The only input I have is my vote ..... just like the Barbudans.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

boatpoker said:


> The nation has decided in favour of the resort.


Was that a mic drop I hear? :wink

Yes &#8230; although much like internal discussions in our politics, the reality is less black and white. But yes, the government seems to have spoken.

&#8230; which is why I keep trying to steer the discussion to the other, more relevant question of OUR responsibility when interacting with other cultures.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

boatpoker said:


> Many things have been imposed on my neighbourhood in Ontario by higher levels of government. The only input I have is my vote ..... just like the Barbudans.


When we live in society we have to play by the rules. Many of the rules are made by bureaucrats or representative bodies. Government by referendum is not practical... so we have elected officials and representatives... Yea they impose laws we have to follow.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

If they don't lead themselves, someone else will.

Ask Cemex if they will donate 5 million cinder blocks....start over and build to withstand in the future....

Mexico has dozens of different indigenous peoples to deal with, and it took a very long time for them to 'deal' with it. They have many different laws regarding land ownership...agreements made over different times.

The Lacandon is interesting if you are interested in indigenous people.
There are many indigenous in many different countries around our world. How each country's government deals with them is...different. 

I think we have moved beyond outright exploitation.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Back to Mike's point. Cruisers do change the places the visit in paradise. Tourists do as well... Tourists don't care much.... they are passing time in a hotel property... sailors bring their own hotel... and leave behind garbage of course... require provisions and fuel... dock facilities and boat yards. Sure it's work for locals... That's fine.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Cruisers, 5 star inclusives, backpackers...ALL tourists. Inbetweens of course, too....

Cruisers and 5 star requires large investment.
Backpacker not so much...just transpo.

Tourism = bucks


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"Yea they impose laws we have to follow."
Spoken like a subject and not a citizen?
Actually, in the US, you will find many service oaths are to "The Constitution and the People of..." and very expressly DO NOT require or encourage service and obedience to the State or the officials of any State.
In fact, our founding fathers were quite explicit about the very distasteful possibility that future revolts might be needed--from an elected government. The Nuremberg Defense doesn't always fly very well. Some of us consider it unacceptable at all times.
Rosa Parks didn't follow the rules, either.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

I view cruisers as just another form of tourist. And I’m not using tourist in any sort of derogatory or negative way. Tourists are people visiting an area for a short amount of time. Unless you’re a local, then by (my ) definition you’re a tourist.

Different forms of tourism definitely have different impacts though. Cruisers, much like RVers, can have a range of impacts. If you’re like me, with more limited finances, a boat that is highly self-sufficient, and a general desire to avoid urban areas, I think my impact is quite small. 

On the rare occasions we do go ashore in developed areas it is mostly limited to buying fuel, local foods and drink, and possibly to raise a pint (or two, or three) in the local pub — if such a thing exists. I don’t go on organized tours or shows or other events. I don’t rent cars. If I visit things it’s mostly on foot, with new-found-friends, or on local transit.

I bet I’d be viewed as a cheap skate in some situations. Not sure if this is good, bad, or something in between...


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

The islands are too large to explore by foot and some of them have beautiful rain forests and so forth and you need to take a cab, a bus if the have or a rent a car a moped and hire a driver to take you around. The volcanic islands are a hoot to explore.

Islands

I’m searching for an island 
It's just right for me
A place so special
It’s just got to be

Warm waters lapping
Calm peaceful shores
Quaint little villages
And so very much more

The island has mountain peaks 
With clouds about the top
It rains each day an hour
But then must simply stop

The rains fill the ponds,
Rivers and the lakes
You only see sailboats
Ne’er a power boat wake

This island has meadows 
Grasses of delicious green
Flowers abound in multitudes 
On the hills and by the streams

Palm lined sandy beaches 
and rocky cliffs too
Everything imaginable 
All surrounded by endless blue

I’ll set down my anchor 
Watch the sun arise
Each day will be different 
Hold some new surprise

Local folks with so much charm
A society that seems fair
A dollar's still a dollar 
But no one seems to care

I’ll befriend all the sailors
Who come and drop their hook
The good ones with flair
Have also come to look

I’ll forget the winter season
The cold and freezing rains
And not miss the deserts
nor even the endless plains

The great cities will be
far away distant dreams
Full of crowds, noise and traffic 
In never ending streams

Each island that I’ve sailed to
Meets just part of my need
I'm still searching and exploring
Not missing a good lead

But when to weigh anchor?
And when to make way?
I struggle with this question
Each and every day

The next island beckons
And summons me “sail on”
With promises of new delights
To build a life upon

Not always have I lived 
This searching life at sea
Yet there is something about sailing 
That’s forever part of me


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

SanderO said:


> The islands are too large to explore by foot and some of them have beautiful rain forests and so forth and you need to take a cab, a bus if the have or a rent a car a moped and hire a driver to take you around. The volcanic islands are a hoot to explore.
> 
> Islands...


Ah, so you're a poet. Beautiful&#8230;

I get what you're saying about the islands being too large to explore by foot. But _everywhere_ is too large to fully explore, by foot, by car, by plane. There's always more&#8230;

I guess what I've come to is the understanding that I don't have to see it all. I don't do "bucket lists." There is wonder and beauty everywhere, so I don't feel compelled to try and see everything.

Instead of trying to see all the things people say I need to see, I like to spend time in one place, and get to know it as best I can. Often that just means being still.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

MikeOReilly said:


> Ah, so you're a poet. Beautiful&#8230;
> 
> I get what you're saying about the islands being too large to explore by foot. But _everywhere_ is too large to fully explore, by foot, by car, by plane. There's always more&#8230;
> 
> ...


Well yea.... but there are some real treats up in those rain forests... and definitely worth the effort.

When I was in the Canaries I joined a hiking club which took a bus up into the mountains and then we trekked around... WOW that was unbelievable, I doubt many cruisers in the Canaries get up those mountains... It's a whole different perspective.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

SanderO said:


> When we live in society we have to play by the rules. Many of the rules are made by bureaucrats or representative bodies. Government by referendum is not practical... so we have elected officials and representatives... Yea they impose laws we have to follow.


Then I don't understand where we disagree as that is what is happening in Antigua - Barbuda.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

For me that island was Koh Jum. For 25 seasons (avoiding Canadian winters) Rubber and copra the main sources of Baht . A few coconut leaf bungalows and beaches. Backpacked low to the ground. Other islands like Pi PI and Samui developed quickly with distant developers and the locals were pushed down the beach. Jum moved slowly . Locals built more and bigger bungalows ,started restaurants. tours .Now we have electricity and maybe AC but mostly the same families and now their children,,, it's still my favourite island. Mostly repeat patrons like me. Fishing is disappearing all over and yachts are starting to discover and some big money from France and China is sneaking in (partnering with local families )but it's still the best .We grow our own mint for the mai tais ..cha cha.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Breeze (Mar 30, 2015)

If you personally do not want to impact any given area, then stay the heck out!!!! But getting on your elitist high horse and demanding that everyone else MUST follow your lead is way beyond the pale. Even if you are an architect.....

Besides, if the Progressives are correct and the island is at sea level it will no doubt soon be underwater due the rising level of the sea caused by your indulgences.


----------



## troy2000 (Apr 7, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> Yes &#8230; brought to mind a current news item. Not sailors, but some young western tourists have run afoul of local laws and customs: Cambodia charges 2 Canadians, other foreigners accused of pornographic dance - World - CBC News
> 
> This is what I find so interesting, or personally challenging. As a cruiser I am wealthy, even by Canadian standards. I can afford to spread the joy around, but what impact does that have on the local community? But you're right; NOT spreading my dollars around also has an impact.
> 
> I guess what I try and do is to follow the old adage: _when in Rome, do as the Romans do_. In the case of money, I like to not be stingy, but also not over-pay just b/c I can.


I'd say that was a classic case of foreigners behaving badly, and doing things they wouldn't do at home. I was in a lot of bars here and abroad when I was younger, but was never in one where it was acceptable for people to lie on the dance floor dry-humping each other.

Either I'm out of touch, or they were out of line... Have things changed so much that's considered normal now?


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

Capt Len said:


> For me that island was Koh Jum. For 25 seasons (avoiding Canadian winters) Rubber and copra the main sources of Baht . A few coconut leaf bungalows and beaches. Backpacked low to the ground. Other islands like Pi PI and Samui developed quickly with distant developers and the locals were pushed down the beach. Jum moved slowly . Locals built more and bigger bungalows ,started restaurants. tours .Now we have electricity and maybe AC but mostly the same families and now their children,,, it's still my favourite island. Mostly repeat patrons like me. Fishing is disappearing all over and yachts are starting to discover and some big money from France and China is sneaking in (partnering with local families )but it's still the best .We grow our own mint for the mai tais ..cha cha.


Enjoyed Ko Jum last week. Sorry to have missed you this season. Ko Jum stll retains that laid back atmosphere with low scale development. Biked over to the village for the famous yellow noodle chicken soup. Wandered down the trail to see what the local boat builders were up to. The makita grinder and drill have replace the hand tools...Three sisters restaurant for the best Phad Thai ever! A few blunts with the boys in the FU BAR too. Great time there. Moved on down to another island with a few more activities. Kayaking to shore everyday, riding my bike, a daily yoga class, some afternoon beach volleyball and then back to the boat for a few sundowners and BBQ ribs. It doesn't get much better then this. What are you folks waiting for?
Paradise still exists. You might just have to get out a bit further..


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

troy2000 said:


> ....was never in one where it was acceptable for people to lie on the dance floor dry-humping each other.
> 
> Either I'm out of touch, or they were out of line... Have things changed so much that's considered normal now?


This would be considered pretty tame in Tailand (Bangkok anyway), just next door to where these kids got stupid. Hard to guess cultural norms.

Grinding has indeed become a fad with 20 somethings. Generation gap.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

troy2000 said:


> but was never in one where it was acceptable for people to lie on the dance floor dry-humping each other.


You, sir, have never lived.

Or as the French say in Paris: "You, sir, have never lived".

:devil


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I see Mark's point. I don't see why a country of 80,000 can't help out 1600 people without peddling their land. It's 2% of the population. That would be like saying Long Island gets wiped out by a hurrican ( Population about 8 million) and the United States couldn't fix it without selling Montauk to Gordon Ramsey. 

Not saying the place is great as is, or that they have the economic power of the U.S. but I wonder why a country of 80,000 can't fix up 500 or so simple wood houses. Antigua looked to have some fairly rich residents and tourists when I was there - they should start taxing them now for their own sake for a fund against future hurricane damage. If they get hit this bill will seem like small potatoes.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> You, sir, have never lived.
> 
> Or as the French say in Paris: "You, sir, have never lived".
> 
> :devil


Well, I was dancing on the tables in Siam Reap in September...The bar was YOLO..You Only Live Once..perfectly fine in this establishment. hey encouraged it..as well as a few other fun things to do whiling away the evening in a tropical bar...YOLO!


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

aeventyr60 said:


> Well, I was dancing on the tables in Siam Reap in September...The bar was YOLO..You Only Live Once..perfectly fine in this establishment. hey encouraged it..as well as a few other fun things to do whiling away the evening in a tropical bar...YOLO!


I find it disgusting a man your age dancing on the tables!

How old was the girl????


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Sal Paradise said:


> I see Mark's point. I don't see why a country of 80,000 can't help out 1600 people without peddling their land. It's 2% of the population. That would be like saying Long Island gets wiped out by a hurrican ( Population about 8 million) and the United States couldn't fix it without selling Montauk to Gordon Ramsey.
> 
> Not saying the place is great as is, or that they have the economic power of the U.S. but I wonder why a country of 80,000 can't fix up 500 or so simple wood houses. Antigua looked to have some fairly rich residents and tourists when I was there - they should start taxing them now for their own sake for a fund against future hurricane damage. If they get hit this bill will seem like small potatoes.


If they want foreign investment... these islands become tax heavens for the rich... I am not sure taxing their wealth... and there is plenty of ex pat wealth in these islands... would bring in the tons of revenue... If it did there wouldn't be open sewers and so forth.

http://www.taxhaven.org/tax_havens_of_the_world/tax_haven_antigua/

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...hose-who-use-tax-havens-contribute-to-repairs


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Infrastructure porjected/developments are not profitable for banks/capital/investors... Maybe the contractors make out and they do provide jobs... but the ROI is 0.... Infrastructure is a commons effort and it requires big bucks and that can only come from grants or taxes... but if the workers are poor and the economy is subsistence... there is not money for infrastructure.... So the only way to attract capital... is to provide a quid pro quo.

This may or may not be a high price to pay for the locals.


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Dancing styles are always evolving. Often faster than the accepted norms for a region. Have you seen down in Jamaica,where booty is as beautiful as it can be. Getting wild is accepted. If you look closely at our own cultural displays there seems to be a focus on surgically enhanced breasts (gender neutral of course since recent events) Only fair that surgically enhanced genitalia become a new norm. Bit late for me but I would consider a flashy embroidered codpiece when that becomes a new social statement.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Do you think, if these Island nations were to amass a fund large enough to handle the next hurricane hit, it wouldn’t be raided by local corruption or squandered? 

There have been several successful models that tax the transfer of ownership to establish land funds. However, put that kind of money in the hands of people that have so little and the outcome is inevitable. I’ve read that over three quarters of big multi-million dollar lottery winners are broke again, inside a decade. Same problem.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

the best bars are the ones that don't get upset with you dancing on the tables as long as you keep buying drinks


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I find it disgusting a man your age dancing on the tables!
> 
> How old was the girl????


Like I can really remember...Epic evening.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

aeventyr60 said:


> Like I can really remember...Epic evening.


The depth of your depravity staggers me.
Does she have a sister?


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

Dancing on the table is hardly a mark of depravity How about naked in a resturant with familys with preteens,boasting that Thailand is great.."you can buy anthing you want.... little girls....little boys" That's a quote from John mak mak ,A danish doctor ..He introduced himself to you, Matt. the last time we dined in Koh Jum village ,.Is that exploiting or just enjoying?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Capt Len said:


> Is that exploiting or just enjoying?


That's exploiting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just because someone is willing doesn't make it not exploiting!


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Capt Len said:


> Dancing on the table is hardly a mark of depravity How about naked in a resturant with familys with preteens,boasting that Thailand is great.."you can buy anthing you want.... little girls....little boys" That's a quote from John mak mak ,A danish doctor ..He introduced himself to you, Matt. the last time we dined in Koh Jum village ,.Is that exploiting or just enjoying?


Sounds like a person who has over stayed their visa, regardless if still valid.

People remember the highest and the lowest. The middle just slips along, like everybody else...


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> The depth of your depravity staggers me.
> Does she have a sister?


Nope, but you wouldn't kick her Mom outta bed for eating crackers..


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

This is a video of Sailing RAN that was taken on Barbuda a year before Hurricane Irma struck. It gives you an idea of what the island was like.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

I really like them...very straightforward.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Breeze (Mar 30, 2015)

You guys confirm my belief in the quality of folks inhabiting this site.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

Rocky Mountain Breeze said:


> You guys confirm my belief in the quality of folks inhabiting this site.


Glad to be of service :grin


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

eherlihy said:


> This is a video of Sailing RAN that was taken on Barbuda a year before Hurricane Irma struck. It gives you an idea of what the island was like.
> 
> Nice! Of course that is the beach where Robert DeNiro bought land for his resort. As the Eagles sang:
> *"Call some place Paradise then kiss it goodbye!"*


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot spot


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

eherlihy said:


> This is a video of Sailing RAN that was taken on Barbuda a year before Hurricane Irma struck. It gives you an idea of what the island was like.


One cute girl on a pretty patch of white sand. Tells nothing else about the island or the people .... fluff.


----------



## eherlihy (Jan 2, 2007)

boatpoker said:


> One cute girl on a pretty patch of white sand. Tells nothing else about the island or the people .... fluff.


I guess you missed the parts with the walk through the town, the anchorage, and the tour guide that brings them through Frigate Bird sanctuary. I guess that you lack the bandwith...

and you offered which video, exactly, as a better alternative to gain insight into an island that few cruisers have visited?

Hey, I get it, you saw the picture and passed your judgment.


----------



## boatpoker (Jul 21, 2008)

eherlihy said:


> Hey, I get it, you saw the picture and passed your judgment.


So I'm not allowed to have an opinion, so sorry. I haven't been there since 1992.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Joni Mitchell' Big Yellow Taxi

Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got til its gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

With a pink hotel, a boutique
And a swinging hot spot

A big yellow bulldozer took away the house and land.


----------



## mbianka (Sep 19, 2014)

Then there are places in this world where exploitation is not even considered a bad word. Exhibit A:


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Back when I was a boy scout they taught me don’t even leave footprints. Still try to live that way. Will stay off the beach when the piping plovers are nesting but they do taste like chicken 😁😁😁
I’m particular about my single malt so bring my own islay and mostly stay out of bars.
I’m not interested in one nighters as I love my bride and she’s with me 24/7.
I like local cuisine so go to restaurants where I’m the only foreigner or one of few.
I like diverse people so I’m more likely to hang with local folks although I enjoy fellow cruisers.
Thought the whole idea of cruising is seeing stuff the cruise ship folks don’t see.
If I wanted a mickyDs or lousy pizza or a lite beer I’d have stayed at home.
Just like you can put fixed anchors in rock and not ruin a good climbing spot by overuse you can visit and not crap it up. 
We’re not alone. Used to be ugly Americans now it’s ugly germans, French, rich South Americans, Arabs etc. etc. etc. 
guess I turned into my father but I’ve always been this way.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Breeze (Mar 30, 2015)

How do you know what the cruise ship folks see or don't see? Why are you so driven to continually put down those who choose to hire their passage to the seven seas rather than parking a yacht in the marina and pissing at everyone else? I cruise and sail, although my sailboat and location do not allow me to cruise to uninhabited or destroyed islands. I don't have a power yacht with a helicopter and 20' runabout either, but I have kayaked through a lot of mangroves from Curacao to Key West, and sailed on several 12 meter America's Cup racing yachts from the 1990's. Do you still feel superior or are your feelings hurt?


----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

When I backpacked Med and Carib and got about crewing on sailboats I'd meet friendly locals Often time conversations led to invite to their homes. meet family ,,supper Later I came as crew of a 5000 ton hydrographic vessel and usually met with 'friendly 'locals offering to sell their women. Once in Ponta Delgada I hiked across the island and ran into nearly complete compliment of my ship. Mom and daughter in back rooms Dad collecting at the gate, Kids playing in the yard .A home based economy when not much else available. Not judging. but only the Capt, doctor and I escaped the pox.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

The claim that X beach is the most beautiful in the world is just dumb. So many idiots and so little time...


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Rmb actually have several friends who are cruise ship addicts. I’m excited to be doing an Alaska cruise this coming summer and the wife is looking into a Rhine canal boat trip as well. 
Please accept I use the phrase as a short hand to describe a phase of development in the islands. Unfortunately it’s also a short hand for not only a mode of travel but a attitude towards traveling. Think it’s comparable to going to a gated self contained resort. Have had occasion to visit the same island when invited to a destination wedding and when cruising. It’s a totally different experience. In the first case I remained solidly in my native culture. In the second had at least a brush with theirs. It’s great fun traveling either way so not being judgmental about the people nor experience. However cruise ships, gated resorts, beachside high rise hotels, tourist shops by the cruise ship piers is not treading lightly. Neither is a high density of cruisers (think BVIs, George Town, the lagoon etc.). 
Too Many People. Yes both you and I account for two.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

SanderO said:


> The claim that X beach is the most beautiful in the world is just dumb. So many idiots and so little time...


Where's X Beach? I've never heard of it.


----------



## john61ct (Jan 23, 2017)

Rocky Mountain Breeze said:


> How do you know what the cruise ship folks see or don't see? Why are you so driven to continually put down those who choose to hire their passage


I don't think he meant it to insult you personally.

We all have ways to tell ourselves we're superior don't we?


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Where's X Beach? I've never heard of it.


between W and Y beach... over there


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Just drove home from picking up some -100. Bilge gets water in it from the slot in the mast and I also want to check the batteries. Tomorrow will finally be above freezing. On the radio was a discussion about how to give a sex Ed talk without using the words male and female. Teacher felt the need to use penis or vagina owner as some “owners” might identify with the opposite sex or neither sex. She was having quite a struggle with this as even “—— owner” could also be construed as politically incorrect. 
See the same thing here. Folks want to convey information or an opinion devoid of ego or self reference however every word is parsed and judged ultimately impeding meaningful conversation.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

SanderO said:


> between W and Y beach... over there


Y Beach? Because it's better than snow.

.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Outbound, you must have been a recent Boy Scout. Leave no footprints is very different from the old "dig a trench around the tent to divert rain".(G)

Wait till that sex ed teacher tries to figure out how to describe the variations in hermaphrodites, and just what percent of the population doesn't mention being one. (Always interesting to see just what shades of magenta and purple people can turn.)


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)




----------



## Capt Len (Oct 9, 2011)

The Rhine valley has had tourists for some time now so is a mature business. The high end tours we see advertised sure look good and very little impact on the local economy. Years ago my partner and I did the river on the regular ferries. Off and on again over a period of many days as long as continuing in the same direction. Upstream takes longer of course and would be my choice as I like watching others take the responsibility of battling heavy currents. Would be so much easier now with AirbnB and smart phone. We just had pot luck to find pensions. hostels and even camp sites and spread our meager marks amongst the locals at every stop.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I came across this article. I guess it relates to the OP indirectly but it's rather interesting on it's own -

Dutch government to run 'lawless' Caribbean island

HE HAGUE, Netherlands (AFP) - The Dutch government said Monday it will take over the running of one of its Caribbean island municipalities, denouncing "physical neglect" and "lawlessness" on Sint Eustatius.

The island's ruling council will be immediately dissolved with Dutch Interior Minister Raymond Knops travelling there this week to explain the decision to residents.

"The current administrative situation is one of lawlessness and financial mismanagement," the interior ministry said.

"Discrimination, intimidation, threats and insults and personal enrichment flourish at the expense of the people of Sint Eustatius," a statement issued in The Hague said.

Mismanagement "has had a serious effect on the running of the island and the daily lives of the population of Sint Eustatius," the ministry said, adding "the island has been physically neglected."


----------

