Manbird wrote: 
I was thinking about this... every body that is there to help needs to be fed, watered and housed... and is producing garbage and waste that has to be dealt with.

The crisis there is simply finishing stage one.  There's ongoing trauma, and so many practical concerns with waste and housing and clothing and the many things we humans need.

Trying to make money for Haiti social and economic development. Ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170434395828 Youtube clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abnDlDISEbE
Hey everybody...Pete Seeger's banjer head is up for auction!

 hippiechick wrote: 


Thanks, hippiechick. I'm afraid it's not very much. Anyway, I can do with a few less trips to the favorite coffee shop and restaurant. *patting my tummy* ... need to lose a few inches.

As much as I would want to help, I don't think going to the island would be a good idea. I'm not trained, I'd only get in the way. I have a compromised immune system and surely, pestilence and disease will be everywhere.

 jadewahoo wrote: 
Hate 'em

 jadewahoo wrote: 
It's enough to make you nauseous.

Travolta to help with the evil thetans...

 Manbird wrote: Coaxial wrote:Rich Haitians riding around on the backs of Spontaneous Untrained Volunteers, and texting while doing so?

 Coaxial wrote: 
and twitting... or is that the same thing...

 Coaxial wrote: 

 Manbird wrote: 

I hear they do a lot of texting...

 dmax wrote: 
Professionals call them SUVs - Spontaneous Untrained Volunteers  - and they don't want them around. 

 rbigelo wrote: 
That's very generous of you!

To keep things simple ... after the first set of news reports, I sat down with a pencil, paper, calculator and bank statement, and set aside enough money to feed the catties ^..^~ and myself, then donated the rest of my spending money to the International Red Cross.

 JrzyTmata wrote: 

One of my team just asked if I'd support her going there, and I told her that I think 1) there's enough help in a practical sense and it's not being deployed in a functional, useful manner and 2) by the time she gets there, there won't be many people left to save.... but I'd still support her going.

Frankly, I think it'll just turn into a cluster, with scores of "helpful" people running around trying to find ways to be truly useful.

 samiyam wrote: 
pay their milk bill? is this the 60s?
on the other hand, they are employing others. that's not a bad thing. we can't second guess how others choose to donate. all that money is no good if there aren't people on the ground to make it all work.

 Beanie wrote: 
There's one thing I heard of today.  Those who have gone there on relief missions need people to help keep their lives going on the home side while they're working.  Shovel their driveways, take in their mail, pay their milk bill, watch out for burglars... etc.

(or you can give money to UNICEF)

 samiyam wrote: 
This is also true.  We look at people from the outside — how are they dressed, do they have money, how do they speak, what do they do for a living, how do they make their money — and we make assumptions about the kind of people they are.  Sometimes, the people we think are materialistic SOB's end up being generous in ways we don't know (because they are anonymous) and sometimes, those who appear to be pious do-gooders are really Pharisees...

Anyway, we digress from the real point of this thread, which is what can we as individuals do in small ways (or big ways) to help the folks in Haiti...

 hippiechick wrote: 

I find (some) rich people to be monetarily rewarded for hard work, but then reflexively and unnecessarily and wrongly looked down upon by those without.
If there is no reward in hard work, then there is no impetus for that sort of sacrifice. "Get good grades, get a good job, and then - as a reward - there will be no reward. But keep going."
Hard work needs to be rewarded, and it can make someone wealthy because they have sacrificed. They don't deserve your "rich people in general" disdain.

Wealth isn't wrong, per se. Exploitation, greed, usury - those are what folks should have problems with. Not the general disdain for the reward that comes with effort.

Tangentially, it used to be the role of the wealthy to take their fortune and improve the lot of the folks who were without. Start a fund, open a zoo, create a scholarship. In the last few decades, we've seen those folks shy away from generosity and more towards a selfishness that has ruined our country's greatness.

The wealth didn't do it. It was the misuse of their fortune.

 Beanie wrote: 
Some of the nicest people are the unglorious bastards we're supposed to hate.