Decline of the West

OK, Gaius Marius, you're right. Western civilization is in a state of terminal decadence:

Engineer Paul Cunliffe, from Manchester, arrived on an almost empty flight from Malaysia. Gin and tonic in hand, Mr Cunliffe said he and two friends were booked into a beach-front hotel that had escaped serious damage, and had been assured of a "wonderful holiday".

"Our friends think we're mad. The only risk we face I think is if there's another quake. We love the place that much and we thought we would take the risk," he said.

Link courtesy of Drudge.

Comments

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 1:22pm | #

I would like to assume that all these tourists are relaxing after spending the earlier part of the volunteering with relief agencies.
Otherwise, its makes me kinda sick.

db | December 31, 2004, 1:23pm | #

Supporting commerce and tourism in the affected areas is surely be up there next to direct aid in helpful ways to help the victims of the disaster get themselves and their economy back on their feet.

For the utterly devastated areas, certainly direct aid is needed, but keeping the local economies going in areas that have been less affected is going to be a major help in overcoming this disaster.

Matt In Cincy | December 31, 2004, 1:40pm | #

Wow, thanks for throwing the brakes on my objection db. Hell, if the locals feel o.k. opening up for business, patronizing them seems reasonable.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 1:45pm | #

Why is this so bad? If everyone avoids this area as a tourist destination, then the people are worse off than before. Yes, there is mass disaster, but the last thing the area needs is mass unemployment to follow...

The Lonewacko Blog | December 31, 2004, 1:50pm | #

Ayn Rand Institute: U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims

The ferret candidate and Mr. Druid were funny. But this is just sad.

(Via Josh)

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 1:51pm | #

"Hey honey... lets go to Thailand. With all those rotting bodies filling thier streets, they have cut prices in half! What a deal!"

Yes, they need thier economy to get back on tract, and tourism is a major part of that economy.

But, to use this tragedy as opportunity for a cheap vacation....seriously, its sick.
I would be ok with it, if somebody said, "We donoted the money we saved to the their local relief agency." or, "We spent one of our vacation days helping to move bodies into mass graves."

Pro Libertate | December 31, 2004, 1:51pm | #

There are plenty of places in the affected regions that derive large percentages of their GDPs from tourism (Thailand in particular). I can assure you that the natives want the tourists now more than ever, and they'll make a lot more money from tourists than from all of the donations--assuming that people don't stay away in fear (we're dealing with that on a much, much smaller scale here in Florida). On the other hand, going over there just to see the devastation is disgusting.

It is beautiful there, for anyone who hasn't been. I was quite impressed with Malaysia.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 1:56pm | #

But, to use this tragedy as opportunity for a cheap vacation....seriously, its sick.

Whoa - where does it say "cheap" vacation? The implication is not needed.

I would be ok with it, if somebody said, "We donoted the money we saved to the their local relief agency." or, "We spent one of our vacation days helping to move bodies into mass graves."

What better for these people, some rice and blankets, or the ability to keep their jobs?

John Irving | December 31, 2004, 2:02pm | #

The World According to Cunliffe.

Gary Gunnels | December 31, 2004, 2:03pm | #

Coarsetad's comments make wonder what sort of bizarro world I live in. Indeed, they remind me of comments made by anti-GMO types who have the luxury of being paranoid while complaining about its use in the developing world where people don't generally have such an option.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 2:14pm | #

Its not an either/or decision. I never said they shouldnt go on vacation there, in fact i agree that is what they need. But when there are thousands of bodies STILL rotting in the streets!, it is simply sick to turn a blind eye to that and ask for another gin and tonic.
Yes, spend your tourist dollars there, they need it.
But for god-sakes show some repect, the lady that made your bed that morning probally lost her entire family less than a week ago!

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 2:16pm | #

Thomas,

It doesnt need to say cheap vacation. Im sure your familar with the concept of supply and demand.

Pro Libertate | December 31, 2004, 2:18pm | #

Gary Gunnels, I saw a great attack on the anti-GMO crowd in a Penn & Teller: Bullshit! episode. I'm all for reasonable amounts of caution with genetic tinkering, nanotech, the environment, etc., but some of these anti-everything folks are plain crazy. If advanced technology is our doom, well, I'd rather go out trying to improve the world than scaring myself into a cave, eating plankton that had died of natural causes (or munching on some tasty Soylent Green).

Maybe some of these anti-wealth-for-other-people advocates (oops, did I say that?) should go to the devastated regions and see what it means not to have an "excess" of wealth and technology.

Tim Cavanaugh | December 31, 2004, 2:24pm | #

There's a middle ground between shunning the place as a tourist destination for all time and taking your vacation while thousands of bodies are still rotting in the open air. A week or two of lost tourist dollars will set back the economy less than it will show a decent respect for the dead.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 2:24pm | #

Its not an either/or decision. I never said they shouldnt go on vacation there, in fact i agree that is what they need. But when there are thousands of bodies STILL rotting in the streets!, it is simply sick to turn a blind eye to that and ask for another gin and tonic.
Yes, spend your tourist dollars there, they need it.
But for god-sakes show some repect, the lady that made your bed that morning probally lost her entire family less than a week ago!

The entire post contradicts itself in every other sentence. Alright, so according to you, when EXACTLY are people allowed to go back to spend their tourist dollars? What is the acceptable period?

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 2:28pm | #

Thomas,

It doesnt need to say cheap vacation. Im sure your familar with the concept of supply and demand.

Ah, so this is purely exploitation to you. I know that those that are able to continue working and earning feel differently.

Tim Cavanaugh | December 31, 2004, 2:30pm | #

Alright, so according to you, when EXACTLY are people allowed to go back to spend their tourist dollars? What is the acceptable period?

Wow, there's a slippery slope argument. We can't have any mourning period at all because we're not exactly sure how long it should be (despite two million years of thought and custom to provide some guidance on this very matter). Where were all these complaints when the NFL and MLB took a week off after 9/11? America needed the money from those games too.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 2:36pm | #

Wow, there's a slippery slope argument. We can't have any mourning period at all because we're not exactly sure how long it should be

How long should it be? If he would have flown in next week, would you be upset with this guy? Is a week okay? Is it two weeks?

Were you ticked off at people that were still flying into New York the week after 9/11? Were they awful?

Where were all these complaints when the NFL and MLB took a week off after 9/11? America needed the money from those games too.

Not nearly as much as the people that are working in those resorts.

Eric II | December 31, 2004, 2:36pm | #

"Ayn Rand Institute: U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims"

But an open-ended democracy-building project in Iraq, with reconstruction aid that easily dwarfs what we're providing to the victims of the tsunami (even after Bush's recent announcement), is quite kosher, right?

The ARI might want to think about the fact that Aceh has been the home of a seperatist uprising where some of the rebels have Islamist sympathies. It's not hard to envision Jemaah Islamiah and other SE Asian Islamist groups exploiting the tragedy to their advantage if starvation, disease, and chaos reign. Not to mention that providing aid generates goodwill in all of the countries it goes to, which in turn can yield economic and defense benefits over time. They're deluding themselves if they think our motives are purely altruistic here.

$350 million might be too much, given all the other aid that's being provided (I think the number has as much to do with one-upping Europe, Japan, and China as anything else), but it still amounts to less than 1/1000 of our annual defense budget. I feel less squeamish about $350 million for the victims of a once-in-decades, Hiroshima-class disaster than the $5 billion that's split between Israel and Egypt, and the untold billions wasted in pork-barrel politics related to the development and manufacturing of weapons systems.

Captain Awesome | December 31, 2004, 2:39pm | #

It shouldn't be cheap. There's a shortage in supply so tight the whole world is making donations. Also, this poor guy probably spent thousands of dollars on non-refundable plane tickets for his un-re-schedulable vacation time (just speculation). But should anyone show up to point and laugh they should probably be killed by survivors for their inhumanity.

Tim Cavanaugh | December 31, 2004, 2:47pm | #

How long should it be? If he would have flown in next week, would you be upset with this guy? Is a week okay? Is it two weeks?

Like I said, slippery slope...

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 2:50pm | #

Thomas

Please read my posts. I NEVER said that people shouldnt go there on vacation, But IF YOU DO. Take a little time out and show some respect for a tradegy that is still VERY raw. Spend half a day passing out food, donate some savings to a relief group, Hell ask the manager of the hotel if any of the employees lost loved ones and donate something for them.
Im not saying that every vaction to a poor country needs to be like joining the Peace Corp, but come on, you cant tell that that simply enjoying the sun and surf in the midst of such death, and not show some respect to those affected is appropriate?

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 2:57pm | #

captian

the most expensive parts of vactions to 3rd world countries is the airfare and hotel room. Food and water may be at a higher premium, but it will be easlier offset by the desire of United and Hyatt to fill planes or undamaged resorts at a fraction of the normal cost.

Dave Straub | December 31, 2004, 3:04pm | #

Lonewacko -

Here's an "op-ed" from the ARI that will make your head spin.

http://tinyurl.com/6fyvs
(links to article on aynrand.org)

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 3:08pm | #

Thomas,

While I agree that captialism should basically trump government. You attitude seems to place captialism even over human dignity. Are you willing to defend the tourist that complains to the hotel manager about the smell of rotting bodies? would you defend thier right for refund? Do you think its ok to leave the waiter that broke down crying cause he just lost his entire family an extra small tip, because "Hell, its better than nothing, and besides he forgot to bring extra bread due to that crying fit."?

Captain Awesome | December 31, 2004, 3:15pm | #

I'm not saying people should be heartless to their fellow humans. I'm saying that somepeople can't change their vacation days, and already paid for tickets. Would it be better to leave that paid for seat empty? Dude probably can't wait a week because his vacation time will be over. And like I said before, anyone too heartless should accept the risk of retaliation.

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 3:19pm | #

"Spend half a day passing out food, donate some savings to a relief group, Hell ask the manager of the hotel if any of the employees lost loved ones and donate something for them."

"Do you think its ok to leave the waiter that broke down crying cause he just lost his entire family an extra small tip, because "Hell, its better than nothing, and besides he forgot to bring extra bread due to that crying fit."?"

Coarsetad, are you sure you want to go there?

The guy just lost his entire family, so I should help him with his grief by leaving a larger tip?

WSDave

Captain Awesome | December 31, 2004, 3:20pm | #

And speaking of "profiteering??" I know several people who used the time off during the 9-11 aftermath in college to crack open a few beers and get laid. Some even got their asses kicked. Anyway, I don't even know where I stand on this issue anymore. I don't even know what we're debating here. Yes, somethings are tasteless, but the guy we are all speculating about hasn't done anything yet but get on a plane. Let's see the effect first and then question it's moral verascity.

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 3:21pm | #

By the way, how do I go about creating Italics of other posts that I'm quoting?

Thanks,

WSDave

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 3:24pm | #

Dave

Yeah, id leave him a larger tip, thank him, and might even give him a hug.

bob | December 31, 2004, 3:26pm | #

Ayn Rand Institute: U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims

I wholeheartedly agree with this column. Show me in the constitution where the govt is give the right to take my earnings by force to redistribute to natural disaster victims in Thailand (or Florida for that matter)? I have no problem with voluntarily donating (and have donated) but I do have a problem with the money the govt extorts by force being used in this manner (or for most of the things its used for).

Lewis | December 31, 2004, 3:34pm | #

I guess this is the a bad time to discuss business opportunities along the Indian Ocean coasts. I have a very good friend in Sri Lanka who has already contacted myself and others about investment capital to rebuild privately owned resorts. As he stated, your dollars are now needed more than ever. I must admit, my ears and savings account are listening. I expect returns to be slow early on, but the appeal of obtaining limited ownership of a resort or 2 is striking. Am I some sort of an American Asshole if I choose to invest in rebuilding 3rd world economies following a major disaster? Would it appease the Guardian of Ethics if I match every investment dollar with a donated dollar?

The Lonewacko Blog | December 31, 2004, 3:38pm | #

While tens of thousands of corpses are rotting in the sun is not the time to complain about redistributing money to victims of a natural disaster. Even if you agree with the editorial there must be some small voice in your head that says, "wait."

"U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims", Badnarik, Ferret Guy and Mr. Druid, passing out toy guns in the ghetto,... I'd wonder if the Libertarians had been infiltrated by COINTELPRO, but I don't think anyone cares enough.

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 3:43pm | #

Coarsetad,

It's WSDave actually (there's already a "Dave" posting the board) : )

I doubt that any amount of money will make any difference to the emotional cost of these events. Personally, I wouldn't presume that my pittance of dollars would bring back his family or offset his grief.

He doesn't need money, he needs to figure out why he even wants to keep living after his world has been shattered.

I can assure you (having worked in the medical field for 10 years) that people who have lost thier families don't care about food and water. In fact, they're not sure that they want to wake up tommorrow.

The best thing we can do (IMHO) is feed the people we care to (I'm a small "L" libertarian, so I don't think anyone should be forced to give), and leave an open invitation of "whatever you need" to those who are grieving; they'll tell us what they need when they are ready.

Life goes on, and since systems work best under a condition of "normal", the affected areas should try to get back to "normal" as quickly as possible. Grief is personal and will last as long as it lasts. The economy (the long-term well-being of the society) can't be ignored just because of unfortunate events.

WSDave

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 3:45pm | #

There is a certian naunce in the quote from the guy going on vacation to Thailand. That his only concern while there is not being swept away himself and the promise of a wonderful time. No mention or acknowlegment of the horrible suffering possibly just yards from where he is staying. Now its very possible that his concern or respect for the dead was edited out of the article and the guy is planning to rebuild a hut while there, but by reading it on its own, he comes across as being very shallow and oblivious.

Pro Libertate | December 31, 2004, 3:50pm | #

WSDave,

You do it using HTML tags. You can find the basic tags at the
W3C's HTML Tutorial site. There's something specifically on bold, italics, etc. on their text formatting page.

One of the Hit & Run editors can tell you specifically what tags will work in their Comments section, but usually only the basic formatting, layout, and hyperlink tags will work in a blog's comments area.

I was going to try to type out the code for you, but I couldn't do it, even within a comment tag. I suppose I could try harder to figure out how to do it, but I need to get ready for a party :) Oh, and you can always see how formatting is done by looking at the source of a web page.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 3:53pm | #

WSDave

where did forceful giving come into the agrument? Sure, the money may or maynot be a big deal to him. But treating the people of a greiving nation the EXACT SAME as you would a lousy waiter in Paris is not appropriate.
Humans (even in grief) can recognize a gesture of goodwill. Yeah, he may be in the denial phase or whatever and momentarily be offended by the few extra bucks, but I would err on the side of a little more goodwill than normal in this situation.

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 3:54pm | #

Coarsetad,

The guy is on vacation. Do you take all of your vacation to build Habitat For Humanity houses, or help dig wells in people in blight countries?

You may not like what this guy is doing, but he's simply making a choice that you don't agree with, he's not actually hurting anyone.

WSDave

thoreau | December 31, 2004, 3:54pm | #

"U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims", Badnarik, Ferret Guy and Mr. Druid, passing out toy guns in the ghetto,... I'd wonder if the Libertarians had been infiltrated by COINTELPRO, but I don't think anyone cares enough.

Lonewacko, I frequently disagree with you, but not on this one!

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 4:03pm | #

Pro,

Thank you.

Coarsetad,

The "forced giving" is just my .02, not something I picked up from the posts.

If you would err on the side of goodwill, why not pay to have his family buried in the family plot instead of a mass grave? It couldn't cost much with the exchange rate. And how about the other waitstaff? They lost family, too. And the woman who lives next door to that guy lost her kids. They should get a real burial, too.

I'm sure you see the problem with helping individuals in a huge event vs. helping en mass.

WSDave

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 4:08pm | #

WSDave

I already mentioned that a vacation need not be a Peace Corp trip, and the gesture a person makes could be small or large, and you right hes not hurting me.

But.

To party in a city that just lost thousands to a natural disaster and to be there while the the bodies are still piling up in the streets and not show some form of respect is simply gross.
I wasnt in New York in days following september 11, but I imagine that mood was alot respect and goodwill for fellow humans going around, than on normal day in New York.

Nobody expects a lone vactioneer to save Thailand. But small gestures add up.

(Warning: gross hypebole below:)
By the way, if someone wants to fly to Thailand and shout Tsunamia jokes in the streets, by all means be my guest. I respect thier right, Im certain they wont be hurting anyone. ;)

WSDave | December 31, 2004, 4:26pm | #

Coarsetad,

"I much rather have the choice to distribute help to the people that impact my life (even if only briefly as a waiter)..."

Agreed, but then you can't realy fault this guy for choosing NOT to help the people around him.

If you want to view him as bad for what he does, you certainly have my blessing, but his action is niether right nor wrong, just his choice.

WSDave

Pavel | December 31, 2004, 4:30pm | #

Ayn Rand Institute: U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims

Indeed.

In doling out money to tsunami victims we're really endowing privation. Soon everyone will want to be a "natural disaster victim" instead of pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, or ragged shawls or whatever it is they have.

Andy D | December 31, 2004, 4:38pm | #

I believe those ARI folks are right that the government shouldn't help the tsunami victims because charity isn't the proper role of government. But that sort of thing is among the least objectionable government actions. Of all the excess billions and billions our government spends, disaster relief is one of the last things I'd cut.

BTW, I've been looking at Amazon.com's Red Cross donation thing... it's over $9 million on the US site right now. Since yesterday, the same link has sprung up on most of their international sites. Interestingly, the second-highest donations are from Canada's site, with about $23,000 (USD). It's good to see that Americans can be generous.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 4:43pm | #

WSDave

we are in agreement, anybody and choose to help or not to help. anybody can choose to be respectful or not to be respectful. Whether or not people CAN choose anything is a no-brainer for a libertarian web-site. I think everyone on here will agree with choice.

But within the "right to choose" is the agrument of "what we choose to do, and why?" Are there any obligations to be a tourist? Somebody earlier commented on investing in rebuilding resorts, sounds great to me. but a question I would pose? Will you pull out because profits will be lower due to sturdier building construction? We are all proponents to the free market system, but what do we do when the market is washed away? How do we behave humans to rebuild it?

gaius marius | December 31, 2004, 5:29pm | #

told you so. :)

jeffie | December 31, 2004, 5:41pm | #

Engineer Paul Cunliffe, from Manchester, arrived on an almost empty flight from Malaysia.

Cunliffe may or may not be crude enjoying his vacation amidst tragedy. But at least he'll spend some money there. Sorely needed money. How much money will be contributed by all those empty seats?

gaius marius | December 31, 2004, 5:53pm | #

Many in bathers and bikinis, some lounged on sunbeds and others took a dip in the water that had claimed so many lives a few days earlier.

Their fun in the sun came despite warnings that aftershocks could follow the disaster that is likely to have killed as many as 100,000.

the thing that gets me is that this oblivious cunliffe is apparently far from the only one. absolutely amazing. even i have a hard time believing that these people so completely fit the form of indifferent hyperindividualists.

Bill | December 31, 2004, 6:11pm | #

It's been about a week since the tragic event. How long is appropriate? I'd suppose that it depends upon local custom.

I wonder what Mr. Cunliffe will do? Will he simply relax and party? Will he be moved by suffering and get involved with the lives of local people?

What is the purpose of a vacation? To let off steam? To take a break from work? To have different experiences?

I think that a vacation of involvement in the lives of the affected by the tsunami would remove one so fully from their routine that, upon returning home, the vacationer would view their life through very different eyes. A break from work, indeed.

Cunliffe may not care about the suffering. It's said that 3% of human males are to some degree sociopaths. He may also have a life-changing experience, for good or for ill.

If 100 million Americans donated $25 each, the total would be $2.5 billion. I bet that if there were no income taxes, the American people would donate much more than that.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 6:11pm | #

"In other tragic news, forced moments of silence held at celebrations world-wide for victims, causes a 400million dollar reduction in News year Eve spending."
God, that must be the real tradegy, huh?

Tim Cavanaugh | December 31, 2004, 6:21pm | #

I think that a vacation of involvement in the lives of the affected by the tsunami would remove one so fully from their routine that, upon returning home, the vacationer would view their life through very different eyes. A break from work, indeed.

What is it that is exactly the same about every vacation you've ever taken?... You. You're the same. No matter where you go, there you are. Always the same old you. Let me suggest that you take a vacation from yourself. I know it sounds wild, but it's the latest thing in travel. We call it an "Ego Trip".

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 6:25pm | #

are their travel agents for "Ego trips?"

Ted Bell | December 31, 2004, 6:47pm | #

It's obvious that a lot of you don't understand what it is to be wealthy.

We have to fit in our vacations when we can, where we can on accounta we have invested so much time accumulating our wealth. This means we deserve a bit of latitude that the Average Joe hasn't yet earned.

And he wasn't drinking a gin & tonic, he was drinking a Ted - the drink I invented which is one part rum and two parts Coca Cola over ice.

Don't forget, we give a discount to any Hit&Run bloggers anytime you're in town. I'll give you the best sirloin strip we have, our specialty baked potato wrapped in foil and of course, all the Teds you can drink - all for just half our normal meal ticket of $350.

Bill | December 31, 2004, 7:01pm | #

Actually, Tim, you are never the same. We all change.

I always thought that an ego trip was when you embrace your own ego to an extreme. A vacation from oneself seems less ego trip and more Tao.

I admit that I'm not sure what to make of your post.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 7:03pm | #

What does everyone think of our military being used to help with the crisis? (ie, sending drinking water ships, etc.) I personally think its a good thing. Disasters this magnitude happen so infrequently in the US that its reasonable to assume that these events give our military a nesseccary expertise, so that if it ever happens to us, our military will better know how to handle the situtation.
(By the way, I believe "providing defense of the public" as including defense from any catastrophic event, natural or man-made.)

jim yatt | December 31, 2004, 7:22pm | #

Glenn Reynolds is wrong--you people died a long time ago.

Bill | December 31, 2004, 7:24pm | #

It's good PR for the US military (if nothing embarassing happens).

Abu Qa'Qa | December 31, 2004, 7:30pm | #

Can't you folks remember Rudy Guliani begging people to come to New York immediately after 9/11? There are people and businesses in those countries which desperately need the work and the commerce. There are people who have time and money and had already planned a vacation. I say if there is a place you want to go to, Godspeed.

There is a lot of financial aid and in kind contributions on its way there. Almost none of it will end up in the hands of the taxi drivers, the hotel wait staff, the restaurants and small businesses that depend on daily cash flows to survive. Donating your vacation money today won't reach those people for weeks or months if ever. They need the donations, but they also need to get on with life as soon as possible.

It's a personal choice, and I say to hell with those who somehow believe it is better to shut down what is left of some peoples lives as if the dead need more time to sort it out.

You don't care about the living, all you care about is feeling good about your concern for the dead. Disgusting.

abc | December 31, 2004, 7:55pm | #

What a pathetic post. Give it a rest, Cavanaugh. We get enough easy, trite moralizing elsewhere. What a joke this is.

Alan Dawson | December 31, 2004, 7:59pm | #

I am writing from Thailand. It is not a MASS disaster, it is a terribly localised disaster, extending a few hundred yards back from some beaches in seven of 76 provinces. One of the best things for people not directly involved in disaster relief is to get on with their lives. The thousands of hotels, restaurants and businesses in Thailand NEED the tourist-season tourists. Boycotting them helps no one. ALMOST ALL places are open for business, and do not deserve contempt or sarcasm because they are doing business.

alfa romeo | December 31, 2004, 8:05pm | #

It's been about a week since the tragic event. How long is appropriate?

How about "not until all the bodies are cleared up"?

Every gallon of water or gasoline used by a tourist this week is one gallon that won't go to a person in need. Don't kid yourself--tourists are just in the way right now.

RDale | December 31, 2004, 8:09pm | #

So much for 'Free minds and Free markets'.

I'm guessing that those of you who are 'sympathizing' with those poor, disaster stricken people have completely failed to grasp the possible fact that poor, disaster stricken people might actually WANT the vacationing vistors to show up.

But, no, we can't have that! Libertarian principles only apply when in the absence of a disaster. Because if there's been a disaster, then it must be obvious that we know so much better than those poor, disaster stricken people what is best for them, both in terms of allowing them to resume their lives, and in the context of what constitutes a proper period of grief and concern.

How about this: We let the people in those areas make up their own minds about this issue, and those of you who've had your precious little sensibilities bruised can just shut up.

Kip Watson | December 31, 2004, 8:11pm | #

Maybe this will happen, he'll go to Thailand and come back in a blaze of notoriety telling of his wonderful holiday, while everyone thinks 'what a jerk'.

Then in a few weeks when others are wondering whether it's OK yet to travel to Thailand they'll think 'remember that jerk that went before the bodies were even buried? He had a good time', and decide it is OK to spend their tourist budget in Thailand.

He might have done a good thing - inadvertently.

Seth | December 31, 2004, 8:12pm | #

It's nature's way of thinning the herd. You bleeding heart jerks need to get real. If the guy has the bucks to vacation there and can stand the stench, it's his business. He doesn't have to view the world the same way you do.

James B. | December 31, 2004, 8:15pm | #

What is it that is exactly the same about every vacation you've ever taken?... You. You're the same. No matter where you go, there you are. Always the same old you. Let me suggest that you take a vacation from yourself. I know it sounds wild, but it's the latest thing in travel. We call it an "Ego Trip".

Thanks, Tim! I just spit soda all over my screen and keyboard from laughing so hard.

D Anghelone | December 31, 2004, 8:17pm | #

Glenn Reynolds is wrong--you people died a long time ago.

And the comments are a twitching corpse.

Auld langsyne!

Zimnor McRoberts | December 31, 2004, 8:25pm | #

Glenn is right; so long as the current crew is in charge, Reason becomes less and less interesting.

Once upon a time, Reason used to ridicule folks who spewed crap like this.

S m | December 31, 2004, 8:28pm | #

Engineer checks into a beach-front hotel. Why? Because it's open for business. The engineer offers cash for lodgings and service. The proprietor accepts the engineer's cash and pays his staff. The engineeer, proprietor and staff are all aware of the recent catastrophy. The engineer looks up from his laptop to ask the proprietor, "Ever heard of Tim Cavanaugh?" "No sir. Who is he?" "Exactly. Who the hell is Tim Cavanaugh?"

John Dunshee | December 31, 2004, 8:28pm | #

Those who are complaining about the people showing up for vacations since the tsunami , "A week or two of lost tourist dollars will set back the economy less than it will show a decent respect for the dead." obviously don't know what the hell they are talking about.

Thailand is dependent on tourism. Tourism brought in $7.6 Billion (with a B)in U.S dollars. Without this, their economy would probably collapse. They have just come out of the previous Asian Flu. I hope people won't push them down again.

Go to Thailand. Got to Chiang Mai, Koh Samui, Pattaya, Ayuttayah and Lopburi. Go do all the tourist stuff, buy the fake Gucci bags and T-shirts that shrink into handkerchiefs when you wash them. Go enjoy the women, they don't mind...really. Just don't go to Phuket or Phrang Nga right now. But Phuket is about the same size and distance in relation to Thailand as Alaska does to America. It's still part, what happened is still a tragedy, but don't shut down the rest of the country with your misguided shows of sympathy

Daver | December 31, 2004, 8:28pm | #

Treat the staff with respect?! Aw, hell, what do you higher-principled people think us red-staters go on vacation FOR, if not to treat the help like dirt?! You see, that's how we get over the way you treat us the other 50 weeks of the year.

Drawingblood.com | December 31, 2004, 8:35pm | #

What's really amazing here is the verbatim "Recall" of the lines. Growing up I watched the film enough times to recognize this as absolutely accurate. Indeed, indeed. Impressive.

But let's be honest: it's the cinematic dissociation here that's truly noteworthy, as in "how blithe and insensitive can you be?!" I must be opposed to this disapprobation, since I lose many friendships by talking like a Hollywood villain. It's always the guy who distances himself with dark, cold self-interested reason that earns our contempt. Hey! Maybe the media IS liberal.

Jarod | December 31, 2004, 8:43pm | #

Well, Tim, as long as you're on the topic of fallacies...

A week or two of lost tourist dollars will set back the economy less than it will show a decent respect for the dead.

False analogy. How can economic activity be compared to "decent respect for the dead" in such a way that a conclusion can be drawn as to which is preferable? And even if you could, do you have estimates for how much impact reduced tourism would have on the Indonesian economy, and is your claim based on them?

Where were all these complaints when the NFL and MLB took a week off after 9/11? America needed the money from those games too.

False analogy. The U.S. economy, even in a time of recession and turmoil, cannot remotely be compared to the economy of a country where the average annual income is something like $500. In the U.S, maybe the family doesn't get a TiVo for christmas. In Indonesia, maybe the family doesn't eat.

John Dunshee | December 31, 2004, 8:44pm | #

Daver, obviously you have never been to Thailand and seen how the Europeans act. Being in a third world country seems to bring out the supressed racist in them. I was appalled at the way they treated the locals. They all seem to have that "Colonel Blimp in Inja" attitude.

I also speak Thai, so I have been able to eavesdrop on conversations where they would talk about the tourist. Scandanavians are kind of fun, Russians are cheap, Germans are tolerable, dealing with Arabs is considered an chore and the Japanese are considered boors. On the other hand, Americans, they love. Just as long as they don't take themselves too seriously.

Dan | December 31, 2004, 8:51pm | #

A week or two of lost tourist dollars will set back the economy less than it will show a decent respect for the dead.

The author of the "Nearly Headless Nick" post is lecturing people on respect for the dead? How quaint.

Tim's rules for respect of the dead:
(1) Cracking jokes at the expense of murder victims: Good
(2) Patronizing the businesses of victims of natural disasters: Proof of the decline of western civilization

Daver | December 31, 2004, 8:59pm | #

John D., as a matter of fact I have not only travelled but lived abroad for many years, so I am quite familiar with the foibles of my own countrymen and those of others (and I have some too, I am told).

If you read my post again, I hope you will see that I was not talking about anyone except someone who self-evidently DOES take themselves too seriously! Anyone who would post "But for god-sakes show some repect, the lady that made your bed that morning probally lost her entire family less than a week ago!" is "probally" trying for the Nobel Prize in Pretensiousness, IMHO.

Matthew Goggins | December 31, 2004, 9:00pm | #

From now on, whenever I meet a "libertarian", I will ask him if our government should have sent aid to the tsunami victims. If he says no, I'll say, "Really", and move on, cause I'll no longer be interested in anything else he/she might have to say.

Attention all "taxes=extortion" folks: if you found yourself in the middle of a calamity like this, your tune would change pretty damn quickly. If American government aid is not appropriate in this situation, then government has no role in anything whatsoever.

john | December 31, 2004, 9:02pm | #

My wife and I had a New Year's dive trip planned for Phuket. When the poop hit the propeller, we contacted the dive operator. Even though their office had been wiped out, they were still running their boats out, and that they encouraged us to go down there.

Well, because of travel restrictions, we couldn't, but we told the dive operator to keep our deposit (about 1/3 of the trip cost) and use it as they saw fit. Maybe they gave it to their employees. Maybe they bought hookers. Who knows. But Thailand DOES live and die by the tourism industry. Telling people not to vacation there out of respect for the dead is like telling people to stop driving cars and buying gasoline if there's a disaster in the oil-producing countries.

Finally, I don't know of some of you people have no concept of relief work. They don't let you sign up to go move corpses. In fact, they generally don't let you volunteer to go anywhere near a disaster area. They're trying to minimize "follow-on" casualties, the spread of disease, the gawkers, and the squeamish. Going down there and "volunteering" is akin to grabbing your helmet and axe and "volunteering" to help the fire department put out an inferno. You're pretty much just in the way.

Jay Kominek | December 31, 2004, 9:18pm | #

Attention all "taxes=extortion" folks: if you found yourself in the middle of a calamity like this, your tune would change pretty damn quickly.

Oh yes, you're such an expert on how everyone else will behave. Some of us have the moral fortitude to stick to decisions and principles that aren't always in our best interest. My home can spontaneously combust tomorrow, and even if I didn't have home owner's insurance, I still wouldn't want government money to rebuild, because it is morally equivalent to robbing each and every one of my neighbors.

You don't know me. You sure don't know everyone on here.

STFU.

If American government aid is not appropriate in this situation, then government has no role in anything whatsoever.

No shit. Thats the whole point.

And as far as what Tim said, I'm disgusted, and wondering why I havn't already cancelled my subscription to Reason. This isn't Libertarianism, this is just ignorant and pathetic.

zorel | December 31, 2004, 9:34pm | #

> The engineer looks up from his laptop to ask the proprietor, "Ever heard of Tim Cavanaugh?" "No sir. Who is he?" "Exactly. Who the hell is Tim Cavanaugh?"

Tim is the pathetic little dude that has lost his "reasoning" ability some time ago and has been name-calling stuff he doesn't like.

D Anghelone | December 31, 2004, 9:36pm | #

Reynolds is wrong. Cavanaugh wrote as an individual and not as as avatar of libertarianism. Any libertarianism without individualism would be a hollow shell.

Matthew Goggins | December 31, 2004, 9:44pm | #

Jay Kominek:

I believe what you say about your home burning down. But that's not the kind of calamity I'm talking about.

I'm talking about 1,000 people in your neighborhood being killed by an earthquake or a volcano or a bomb, including most of your family, and a hundred thousand or more homeless with nowhere to go. Throw in thousands of businesses destroyed (including yours and all your neighbors').

If you think American government aid is not justified, I'm not going to tell you to STFU, but I'll be satisfied in knowing that the number of people who agree with you could fit in the back seat of a Volkswagen.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 9:52pm | #

"Any libertarianism without individualism would be a hollow shell."

D Anghelone,

thanks, great comment. It can be a blurry line between the two sometime, but its good know that somebody out there realizes there is a difference.

Coarsetad | December 31, 2004, 9:58pm | #

So Jay,
When the firefighters come, you would just tell them to leave?
If your loved one is in an accident would call your insurance agent before you dial 911?
Of governments few responibilities, I would rank being a first responder to tragedy as one of them.

kevrob | December 31, 2004, 10:30pm | #

In the town I grew up in, the first responders were Volunteers! There is nothing sacrosanct about government running the fire service, EMT and ambulance service, or even, as Great Britain's Life Savers show, civilian search and rescue at sea.

That being said, since we made the poor choice of municipalizing or nationalizing those functions in much or all of the U.S.,* when disasters strike, we should all cooperate with those going into harm's way. If one wants to volunteer, there are plenty of opportunities with many a private group.

Kevin

*Our Coast Guard search and rescue is supplemented by a volunteer auxilary, along with the Civil Air Patrol, more volunteers under the aegis of the Air Force. Then there's the Red Cross, the Scouts...the list foes on.

Bill | December 31, 2004, 10:32pm | #

Coarsetad,

Libertarianism does not exclude firefighters from the world of professions, but it does exclude taxpayer-funded firefighters. If you own a home, you pay for any number of products and services to maintian it. Why can you not pay for private fire service? (It is way down on my list of government agencies to abolish. Anyway, most firefighting funding is local.)

Billy Pilgrim | December 31, 2004, 10:44pm | #

Hello, Goodbye, Hello again....

Joe L. | December 31, 2004, 11:20pm | #

This thread simply points out problems inherent in Libertarianism. It seems to run afoul of humanity. Mr Cavanaugh has made a perfectly reasonable point, it FEELS obscene for people to return to Thailand for fun. He's wrong, of course, but it FEELS right. I think that this might be a moment for Mr. Cavanaugh to take a few minute for introspection and ask, "Which is more important to me, my humanity or my philosophy?" Because his philosophy ought to have told him that his post was incorrect, from the outset. Yet it was not so apparent, for he did post it. Just a thought, mayhap it's not so easy to be a Libertarian and if someone like Mr. Cavanaugh can make such a mistake, surely he can then understand that in OTHER areas it's not so clear what is "right." Just a thought.
And Jay Kominek, I don't think STFU is a particularly effective response. If that is the extent of your ability to argue for Libertarianism, I'd recommend that you cede that position to someone else.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 11:38pm | #

Please read my posts. I NEVER said that people shouldnt go there on vacation, But IF YOU DO. Take a little time out and show some respect for a tradegy that is still VERY raw. Spend half a day passing out food, donate some savings to a relief group, Hell ask the manager of the hotel if any of the employees lost loved ones and donate something for them.
Im not saying that every vaction to a poor country needs to be like joining the Peace Corp, but come on, you cant tell that that simply enjoying the sun and surf in the midst of such death, and not show some respect to those affected is appropriate?

I think that continuing to allow those that survived to earn a living is plenty of respect. Ride in their taxis, take their tours, tip them, eat in their restaurants...allow them to earn.

Avoiding these places, or going to these places and 'rescuing' the country isn't going affect these people nearly as much as allowing them to keep their jobs.

For something that hits VERY close to home, go to the Alabama gulf coast and ask those people what they want...you to respect them, or you to drop by and spent four grand throughout the week.

I was also traveling in Central America five days after 9/11. I saw how badly the lack of tourists was already affecting Costa Rica and Belize. I also saw the impending impact of mass unemployment in the region if tourism didn't pick back up.

It's the ability to carve out a living that allows people to get back on their feet -- not condolences.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 11:40pm | #

While I agree that captialism should basically trump government. You attitude seems to place captialism even over human dignity. Are you willing to defend the tourist that complains to the hotel manager about the smell of rotting bodies? would you defend thier right for refund?
Do you think its ok to leave the waiter that broke down crying cause he just lost his entire family an extra small tip, because "Hell, its better than nothing, and besides he forgot to bring extra bread due to that crying fit."?

This entire post is a strawman intended to tug at heartstrings. None of this in central to the debate.

Orion | December 31, 2004, 11:42pm | #

There's a middle ground between shunning the place as a tourist destination for all time and taking your vacation while thousands of bodies are still rotting in the open air.

Actually, most of the bodies have already been buried in mass graves. The places you're thinking about are the isolated villages on low-lying islands and other remote regions where rescue workers haven't made it in yet. Those places are not where the tourists go, anyway, and if the authorities can't make it in there then the tourist buses surely can't either.

This whole "How DARE the tourists come back!" storyline stinks. After 9/11 everybody was trying to get the tourists to come back to New York as fast as possible; everybody. Somehow it's OK for the NY Times to beg tourists to come back to NYC after a disaster, but they turn around and complain about tourists returning to SW Asia now...? I guess it all depends on which end of the money-losing stick you're on.

Thomas Paine's Goiter | December 31, 2004, 11:43pm | #

I doubt that any amount of money will make any difference to the emotional cost of these events. Personally, I wouldn't presume that my pittance of dollars would bring back his family or offset his grief.

And your avoidance of the area would only serve to worsen that waiter's situation. Lack of tourists means lower demand for waiters means the waiter is out of a job.

Andy | December 31, 2004, 11:50pm | #

Joe L.,

Who said Mr. Cavanaugh had to stick to his Libertarian guns in every instance? In celebrating "Free Minds" should we belittle someone who has a thought different from the determined groupthink? It would seem that Mr. Cavanaugh was speaking as a human being, not as a cold, rigid mouthpiece for "Libertarianism". His grasp of the realities may or may not be accurate, but I can hardly chastise him for his ability empathize.

Mr. Goggins,

Why SHOULD the government be in the business of helping people in other countries? We have what's called "charity" which is VOLUNTARY and tends to consist of much less of the BEAURACRACY that corrupts governmental agencies and decreases their effectiveness, no matter how seemingly benevolent they are. Were our government more effective or able to get the aid there more quickly than other organizations you might have an argument, but until then you're just spouting hot air.

Aaron | January 1, 2005, 12:24am | #

Why do some posters assume that there are "thousands" of bodies in the streets and that every hotel staff must have lost a relative?

I lived through a huge earthquake in Taiwan where 10,000 died and did not know anyone who died or had a relative die. These people still needed to go to work on Monday morning - you're in shock, yes, but doing your job is part of the recovery.

just wondering | January 1, 2005, 12:34am | #

Jesus, Jennifer brings up "Nearly Headless Nick" in another thread and suddenly people with refreshed memories start jumping on Tim.

As far as Mr. Cunliffe is concerned, more power to him. He may help out, he may not - I just hope he gets those G&Ts.

just wondering | January 1, 2005, 12:35am | #

Jesus, Jennifer brings up "Nearly Headless Nick" in another thread and suddenly people with refreshed memories start jumping on Tim.

As far as Mr. Cunliffe is concerned, more power to him. He may help out, he may not - I just hope he gets those G&Ts.

gs | January 1, 2005, 12:38am | #

Anecdotal comments on this thread suggest that tourism continues to be important to Thailand; for example, the terminally decadent Western engineer Paul Cunliffe was allowed to disembark from his flight.

If I want to sightsee in Thailand, I'll begin making arrangements. The Thais are civilized adults; respecting them as such, I trust them to let me know if they consider pleasure trips to their country currently inappropriate.

The Thai embassy Website (www.thaiembdc.org) announces national days of mourning during 28-30 December 2004, but it does not dissuade foreigners from traveling to Thailand. The Tourism Authority of Thailand (www.tourismthailand.org/home.php) highlights the disaster and its continuing effects on tourists who were caught up, but it does not discourage new visitors. There are no keep-away notices at tatnews.org/others/2385.asp and www.phuket.com/hotel-status.htm; clicking through to www.allamanda.phuket.com, I read about "Laguna Phuket returning to normal". Hmmm...suddenly my Red Cross donation seems so inadequate...

Kevin L. Connors | January 1, 2005, 12:58am | #

I think your post was a poorly considered knee-jerk reaction, Cavanaugh. But just for the sake of discussion, just what is the appropriate morning period before an economy, having suffered a traumatic losscan again entertain foreigners?

Kevin Connors
The Daily Brief

Xboy | January 1, 2005, 2:08am | #

"Club Med: a cheap holiday in other people's misery."

AST | January 1, 2005, 2:20am | #

I'm all for patronizing their major industry, but it seems a little premature to show up while they're still trying to find all the victims.

That said, I suspect that spending $ in the local economy is more effective than trying to stuff it through a funnel that can't assimilate it or enriching the coffers of a lot of NGOs. Sometimes they seem to be the war profiteers of the twenty-first century, particularly the U.N.

pok | January 1, 2005, 3:09am | #

I came away from Tim's post on Tim's side, honestly. My initial reaction was exactly like Tim's, it does seem cruel and obscene to be drinking and sunbathing in Thailand long before the last mass grave has been dug up. I'm not sure I want to get over the tragedy that fast. But after reading the arguments from both sides, I do see now how even someone's callousness, at worst, can ultimately still be life sustaining. If the grieving waiters/waitresses in the hotels think the best way to rebuild what's left of the living is to continue making a living, then patronizing their services may not actually be as unkind as we think. Again, I would not show my sympathy in this way, but looking at it from the point of view of the grieving waiter/waitress, a paycheck may help them get back on thier feet faster than saying "I respect your dead so much more than you do to give you a tip or to allow you to work."

Initially, I thought a vacation in Thailand at this time is tasteless. Again, personally I still think it is. But now I think someone who would deny a grieving waiter his income is probably just as tasteless. In a perfect world, the grieving waiter wouldn't have to work for a while. But in an imperfect world, I think imposing on the waiter our ideas on proper grieving only serves our own needs more than the waiter's.

PW | January 1, 2005, 3:23am | #

Reynolds is wrong. Cavanaugh wrote as an individual and not as as avatar of libertarianism. Any libertarianism without individualism would be a hollow shell.

How ironic, then, that Tim Cavanaugh and several commenters slagged that guy for not falling in line and not observing some arbitrary period of "decent people-approved" mourning. Individualism must not be for everyone, I guess.

kevrob | January 1, 2005, 3:34am | #

I'm a libertarian and an individualist, but the two things are not congruent. I know perfectly sound religious libertarians who believe all that altruism stuff that I don't. They want a minimum level of government, just as I do, in no small part because they believe the virtue of charity is authentic when it is not coerced.

I certainly stand ready to help those I love. If our Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, animist, etc, friends have a wider definition of who they love than I do, I doubt if it would be wise to try to argue them out of it.

Kevin

Ron Hardin | January 1, 2005, 3:52am | #

Evidently the waiter is refusing to lie down and live life as a proper victim, his assigned role here.

Well! We'll see about that.

James Kielland | January 1, 2005, 4:24am | #

Bob, in referring to the absolutely insane Ayn Rand Institute column, asks:

"Show me in the constitution where the govt is give the right to take my earnings by force to redistribute to natural disaster victims in Thailand (or Florida for that matter)?"

Let's start with the declaration of indepedence: "as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do."

I think that pretty much leaves the door open, don't you? As for the constitution, it actually leaves open the possibility for the government to do quite a bit, with the exception being the bill of rights. But yes, the Congress and the President do have the right to engage in foreign relations, diplomacy, and to take action around the world that assists in US interests. (This is not to say that they are always successful, but it would appear that they have the right to do it according to the Founders.)

Bob continues:

"I have no problem with voluntarily donating (and have donated) but I do have a problem with the money the govt extorts by force being used in this manner (or for most of the things its used for)."

Extorts by force? My, that's rather vivid language. But I don't really think anyone is extorting anything from you by force. You are free to leave the country any time and go live in Libertarianonia or even Ayn Rand's Atlantis. But then again, these are fictional places and what happens in those places is about as relevant as what happens in Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. Fiction is fun but don't let it go to your head or you'll come up with some silly ideas.

If you accept that the government can "extort" money from you in order to pay for national defense, it pretty much follows that the government has every right to engage in any kind of foreign aid program that it desires. Presumably, these aid programs are initiated for the sake of providing some kind of stability in the world and reducing the need to utilize US forces directly. In the case of this tsunami, the US military is getting fantastic training, operational experience in working with many nationalities, and consequently building stronger relations in a region that is critically important to the on-going dispute with Al Qaida. All of this aid could be classified as a national security investment, not as forced charity.

And that's where the Ayn Rand people get this all wrong. It's not just charity. It's building connections that will increase US influence and security in the region. It's also of benefit to the US because we have many businesses that operate in these countries; when their economies are doing well we profit from additional trade. This is more than charity; it's diplomacy, international business, and national security. And our government does have the right to engage in it.

Tom Vamvanij | January 1, 2005, 4:34am | #

As a Thai living in an area unaffected by the tsunamis (that's actually most of the country), I was much heartened by reports of normal tourist activities returning to the disaster area only hours afterwards.

Bar workers resuming their work are:
1. Not dead;
2. Not injured;
3. Making a living.

What's not to like about that? Please note that showing respect through cancellations would be problematic for number 3.

A TV report showed tourists in their swimsuits helping to clear all the rubbish on the beach. That would be pretty hard to do if they weren't there, wouldn't it?

If you really want tasteless, there were also (local) people hawking photos of the tsunamis the way they normally do pirated DVDs. Still, I like them better alive and kicking rather than dead or dying.

D Anghelone | January 1, 2005, 6:31am | #

How ironic, then, that Tim Cavanaugh and several commenters slagged that guy for not falling in line and not observing some arbitrary period of "decent people-approved" mourning. Individualism must not be for everyone, I guess.

Cavanaugh is Cavanaugh and each commenter hermself.

I still read him as giving a personal opinion. One knock on libertarianism is that, in its more radical forms, there is no one to set the rules and draw the lines. A typical response to that is to say that it is a developed society or culture that truly sets parameters. That of course opens a new can of worms but it is much so.

Alan Dawson | January 1, 2005, 6:36am | #

Me again. From Thailand.
At least before you knock people in Thailand, or those who come to Thailand, find out what people IN THE DISASTER think. Try this:
Phuket web site of photos
hmmm??? html not working? Here's the raw URL:

http://www.phuket-photos.com/frameme.php?page=phuket-tidal-wave.htm

Here's the money quote from this website:
If you want to help Phuket and people living here, come back for holidays!
Feel free to confirm that feeling by visiting any of hundreds of other websites in the Thai South.

raymond | January 1, 2005, 8:34am | #

Head v. Heart

Sometimes the heart and the head are in conflict. Sometimes even the REASONable choice feels - in the hea(r)t of the moment - morally unacceptable. Inhumane.

If some people here react with disdain to the idea of sun bathing on piles of the dead, well... That's only to be expected. For my part, so long as Mr. Cunliffe respects the dignity of the people he comes in contact with while he's on holiday, I have no right or desire to judge his choice.

Even some of the people here who contend that taxes are "theft" (and I'm one of those) might feel a certain... contentment? pride? at the idea that the government of the country they live in has chosen to use their tax francs to express solidarity with the victims of this tragedy. And that the individuals whose government it is have not stinted in their own individual generosity.

Frankly, I find this far more cynical that poor Mr. Cunliffe's vacation plans.

Kathy K | January 1, 2005, 8:36am | #

Listen to Alan Dawson. He knows what he is talking about.

I lived in Phuket for two years. The people there depend on tourism. Those 'mad tourists' are doing a lot more good than those who insist on staying away 'out of respect' and simply donating.

If I had the money, I'd be over there now, tipping waiters, taking taxis, and buying tacky souvenirs.

Justafool | January 1, 2005, 9:10am | #

Surely it is beyond Reason to judge the actions of free markets and free minds.

Hank Fenster | January 1, 2005, 10:00am | #

I think tourists should stay away from Phuket forever as a solemn tribute to those fallen. Leave it a wasteland in memoriam to the power of nature to bring man low. As for those who formerly worked and lived there, find them an uninhabited island somewhere and make them permanent refugees and wards of the UN.

Yeah, it's sarcasm. The Paul Cunliffes of the world are the lifeblood of the island. May there be many more like him.

Ken Shultz | January 1, 2005, 10:50am | #

It seems like some of the commenters in this thread are reading things into Cavanaugh's post that just aren't there. I don't think Tim's suggesting that market solutions to Tsunami devastated areas should be abandoned out of probity; I think he's pointing out that...

I, like many others, would argue for a market solution to the Irish Potato Famine. That doesn't mean that the first guy to show up mid-famine on a boat with food for sale at ten times the price of the same food in Britain is a nice guy--he's probably not very nice at all. "If you won't pay me $20 for a head of cabbage...", I imagine him saying, "...then you must not be very hungry. I can wait. How long can you wait?"

There's something nasty about the character of a person who, in negotiations with a starving family, holds out for the highest price he can get for food. Someone who wants to go to a tsunami devastated area, lay on the beach and party it up among the carnage isn't as bad as that, but I don't think he's the kind of guy you want your daughter to marry either...

...If he is the kind of guy that a lot of people would want their daughter to marry, then isn't that further evidence that gaius marius is right?

kevrob | January 1, 2005, 11:14am | #

Ken:

Oh, please, don't get started on An Gorta Mor. If an Irish peasant had four quid to his name he could have bought food. The country produced beef and grain for export all during the potato crop failure. The system of land ownership and tenure by the conquering UK made the reliance on the spud as a monocrop a biological timebomb. In many ways, it was a political, as much as a natural disaster.

The lesson we should derive from Ireland's Great Famine is that relief efforts by religious groups should take it easy on the evangelizing. Among the Irish and their dispersed descendants, those Roman Catholics who accepted aid from Protestant charity projects, on the condition that they affirm protestantism, earned the sobriquet "soupers." I'd expect that the NGO's aiding the stricken in South Asia won't be pulling that trick in 2005.

Kevin

Ron Hardin | January 1, 2005, 11:17am | #

Why not make them real victims? Deprive them of the right to work, make them take handouts only. If there's a shred of dignity anywhere, wipe it out. We're nice guys and that will prove it.

Hannah Arendt had it right - public doing-good turns to the worst sort of evil. It takes only a week, in this case.

Dreary economics lesson : the reason you want economic activity is that both sides of any voluntary transaction profit. The money is worth less to the tourist than the coffee, and the coffee is worth less to the native than the money. Both sides come out ahead. The standard of living miraculously has gone up on both sides! The more voluntary transactions, the higher the standard of living. Amazing. Employment turns out not to be about keeping people busy, but raising their well-being.

Dreary morality lesson : the only sour