Concealing the misery.

[Soulforged]

This is happening right now, in my country, in the third world, and why not, in yours too probably. Luckily I found a bunch of articles in english from the event. The truth is that I don't need that article to discuss this, but it makes my point in reality.
A leftist with an agenda for the poor and jobless, though I admit that a bunch of them only like to look for trouble, opens a soup kitchen, with the permission of the owner, in one of the richest hoods of Argentina. This place is, of course, where rich people and turist (i.e. again, rich people) pass their time, they eat there, they walk there, they sleep there, they go out at night there, because in Buenos Aires there's little to see out of that place and other reach hoods. Then the polemic begins. Some people state that this is good because it helps the poor, though they've to travel for hours to rich that place for any "villa" they live in. Some others are, like always, apathic. And then there's the ones that opine that this is detrimental to our society, that it reduces turism, that it will be a problem to the economy, that this is their hood and they don't want people like "them" walking around, and so on. In middle of this debate, that luckily ended up well with the "soup kitchen" opening this week, there was an interesting opinion from one of the locals and other from a turist. There first one told something like this: "It's ok that he (refering to Castells, the leftist leader) wants to open a place so the poor can eat and all that, but when you've misery you don't put it where everybody can see it, you try to hide it". The turist (don't know from where, but it was european) says: "It's ok (...) but I didn't came here to see them, they're ruining a good place...". This would be good enough to start a discussion, me thinks, but the thing gets even better. Not so long ago, perhaps not even a year, a group of tours were organized in the zones were usually the turist come to visit, mostly centric and harbor areas. The tour was about taking the tourist to visit the "villas", they took a bus and then they passed through the "villas" while seeing how this rare species, the poor, lived they little lives. I know that many of you have no idea of what happens in other places (as me), and it's not necessary, since what I ask is about morality, is about if this two things are right for you and why, or wrong. Is this about hiding the poors or concealing them? Is this about economy? Is this about how we see ourselves as society and our values? Or is it just a trivial matter? Finally I may add that tourism is one of the bigger industruies we've here.

[Csargo]

Doesnt Argentina have a bunch of Nazi's there?

[Papewaio]

To quote a friend

"A good city is not one in which it requires you to be rich to have a good life. A good city is good regardless of your wealth."

Tourists do not tour to see people in poverty... although I can imagine some sort of Safari version with "Do not feed the poor" signs on the land rovers as they tour through the poor ghettos. They also do not generally tour industrial areas or swim in major ports.

Tourists tour to see nice things. They go away to have fun. To escape into a fantasy world of warm sun, crystal clear waters or snow covered mountains.

====

Reading the article (btw why the Taipei Times???)

It seems this is a political gesture and not really done for any reason then to score points... a populists approach. He also shows his lack of either economics or logic or both...

After a 2002 meltdown marked by a debt default and devaluation, the economy began growing again. But Castells charges that rebound has hardly benefited the poor whose biggest slums are far from view on the capital outskirts or located in remote areas nationwide.

Castells charged that Argentine President Nestor Kirchner, instead of repaying more than US$9 billion to the International Monetary Fund -- as he did in January -- should instead have paid the poor.

So the economy had a meltdown because of a debt default and Castells thinks that it would be better for the poor by creating another debt default?

Susana Alicia Munoz, an unemployed mother, took her daughter for the free food.

"For those that don't suffer, this place is an annoyance, but for those who live in poverty, it's good," she said, promising to return three times weekly.

Agreed, but wouldn't it be more easy if it was located in the poor neighbour hoods for the locals to access it AND wouldn't the cheaper rent in those areas mean that more people could be served food.

Instead it is used as a political stunt.

[BigTex]

I hate hate hate the rich who see the poor as something less then human. The past few years has been horrid for the poor in the U.S.A. The rich are finding obscure things to donate to like say a new theatre that will show old films to children, instead of donating to a local soup kitchen or a charity for the poor in your country. Donations overall have gone up, but donations for poor charities have droped like a brick and are continueing to drop, the poor in America have hard times ahead. A country should be judged by their care for the poor of their society. Why should a country be ashamed to have a soup kitchen near a turist stop. It would show the character of that country, they care more for the poor in their society then they do for a rich turist. I for one donate my time and money to a local soup kitchen, I believe its the responsibility of all who's lives are better off to care for the weak and poor if possible.

[Soulforged]

Doesnt Argentina have a bunch of Nazi's there?

LOL- Yes, as in every place there's skinheads here. But this has nothing to do with it.

Tourists do not tour to see people in poverty... although I can imagine some sort of Safari version with "Do not feed the poor" signs on the land rovers as they tour through the poor ghettos. They also do not generally tour industrial areas or swim in major ports.

Tourists tour to see nice things. They go away to have fun. To escape into a fantasy world of warm sun, crystal clear waters or snow covered mountains.

I agree, but the problem in this particular case is much more complicated than that. I'll try to explain it beneath.

Reading the article (btw why the Taipei Times???)

Because it was the first one in the list.

It seems this is a political gesture and not really done for any reason then to score points... a populists approach. He also shows his lack of either economics or logic or both...

Not exactly. The thing is that not so many people are compromised to offer their properties to open a soup kitchen, so mister Castells had to open it in the only quarter in wich he got permission, he has now even the permission of the government, wich is unnecessary because it's private property, but in this country you never know. The actitud of the tourist quoted above particulary disgust me, some come here to see the poor others protest when they see them because they're ruining a "nice place", I don't know about you, but if I go to Austriala and see the poor, if they even exist there, and I start making selfish and superiority claims such as this, I'm sure that a lot of people will get mad, and tha will be justified.

After a 2002 meltdown marked by a debt default and devaluation, the economy began growing again. But Castells charges that rebound has hardly benefited the poor whose biggest slums are far from view on the capital outskirts or located in remote areas nationwide.

Yes the economy here had a lot of growing stages through our history, but the bunch of them were only to the rich, and some to the middle class, as it's now we're one of the countries with the biggest margins between rich and poor, that includes a lot of villas being marginalized, and a lot of little towns too, wich never were included in the picture of some real nation, many are so at the margin that they're above and beneath the law, they are outlaw, the police doesn't even gets there, for fear most of the times.

So the economy had a meltdown because of a debt default and Castells thinks that it would be better for the poor by creating another debt default?

Well, Castells is not an educated man you know... What he means is simply increasing the quantity and quality of social plans, wich can be bad, but I think that there's a lot of area to cover there, like free "soup kitchens", a good start, but not enough, what is needed is work.

Agreed, but wouldn't it be more easy if it was located in the poor neighbour hoods for the locals to access it AND wouldn't the cheaper rent in those areas mean that more people could be served food.

Yes it would. But think about what it's now, why should anyone, wheter it's a local or a tourist, start ranting about a place that belongs to everybody or at least to a person that offers permission, it's not their place to argue, and frankly it disgust me seeing argentinians bothered about this, and tomorrow talking about oh, those poor people...

I hate hate hate the rich who see the poor as something less then human. The past few years has been horrid for the poor in the U.S.A.

Well USA is THE capitalist country, the spirit appears to tend to liberalism in such manner that they forget to check reality.

The rich are finding obscure things to donate to like say a new theatre that will show old films to children, instead of donating to a local soup kitchen or a charity for the poor in your country.

Is good to see someone from afar concerned about this, and I agree with you totally, but it would be really good, at least, if your country started caring about their own poors.

Donations overall have gone up, but donations for poor charities have droped like a brick and are continueing to drop, the poor in America have hard times ahead.

Well as I've experienced in this forum a lot of people here, mostly americans, want it to drop even more, they believe in the fullness of the individual as a machine that can provide for survival, and in unlimited resources (it seems), so they don't want taxes to help others, they should be proud instead, that in their country the taxes are charged mostly proportionally to the riches of the individual, here you'll find rich people paying the same as poor, or not paying anything.

A country should be judged by their care for the poor of their society. Why should a country be ashamed to have a soup kitchen near a turist stop.

That's what I say, but some people believe that misery should be hidden in the backstreet where no one can see it.

I doubted about posting this topic only because I've the image in my head that in other countries, mostly first world ones, the poor don't exist, or at least are very few. Or are they well hidden?