Citations For Economy After Haiti Earthquake

1) Dougherty, Conor; Shwiff, Kathy, "Earthquake in Haiti: A Feeble Economy, Knocked Flat." Wall Street Journal, January 14, 2010, www.proquestk12.com

About how the Earthquake in Haiti creates a setback for the Haitian economy and how they have to emerge from the aftermath of lots of political insability and hurricanes.

2)LaFranchi, Howard. "Haiti economy shows signs of life after earthquake: Across Port-au-Prince, indicators of a renascent economy after the Haiti earthquake are unmistakable: bustling street markets, reopened clothing shops, and long lines at cellphone providers, remittance-receiving agencies, and banks." The Christain Science Monitor, Jan.27,2010, www.proquestk12.com.

Talks about all of the money that is going to be going into Haiti and that if it is managed well then it will create a lot of jobs.

3)Boodhoo, Niala. "A look at rebuilding Haiti's earthquake-shattered economy." McClatchy - Tribune Business News, Mar. 18, 2010. www.proquestk12.com.

Talks about the exact economic damages in Haiti, especially Port- Au- Prince.

4)The Washington Post. "Hoping to turn the tide; Haitian planners count on seaside town of Jacmel to revitalize shattered country." The Washington Post, Mar. 16, 2010, www.proqestk12.com.

This one also talks about how the earthquake has effected Haiti's economy. But this one goes more into specifics.

5) Kinzie, Susan. "Texts and tweets speed donations for Haiti; 'Unprecedented' giving during recession surprises aid groups." The Washington Post, Jan. 15, 2010, www.proquestk12.com.

This article talks about what other countries are doing to help Haiti's economy and also how other countries can help.

Thesis Statement: Mesopotamian and Indus Valley

In history class on Tuesday, we were put into groups of three and given the assignment of answering this question though a thesis statement and a "T" chart comparing the two civilizations. We had just finished two readings as homework, one about Mesopotamia and the other about Mohenjo- Daro. We were given sites to look at to help us find information and also we could use our notes that we took on the previous readings.

Why did the Mesopotamian civilization thrive for thousands of years and the Indus Valley civilization disappear relatively quickly.

We thought about this and decided that the main reason that Mesopotamia lasted a lot longer was because it was more of a location to settle in, apposed to a civilization. Mohenjo- Daro, however, was a civilization, or nation as I should call it after that one history class, therefor it had more of an opportunity to be a) taken over or b) just end because of societal flaws. In out T chart, we said that some similarities between the two were that they were both located near a water source and had some type of irrigation system. Also they both had some form of pictographic language. Those were the only major similarities that we found but I am sure that there are probably more similarities. But also, since Mesopotamia wasn't an actual civilization, it didn't have just one language, but thousands of forms of a similar language. An interesting thing that we found about Mesopotamia and also put in out T chart was that it has tons of information about it on the internet and throughout other sources as well. We determined that this is because it lasted a lot longer then Mohenjo- Daro civilization and frankly, a lot longer then a lot of civilizations. But I guess that is because it wasn't even a Civilization at all, but a place for tons different societies to locate themselves. When we researched Mohenjo- Daro, there were very little sources and also very little information if we did find a source. This is because this civilization didn't last for nearly as long as Mesopotamian. The fact that Indus Valley has very little info and lasted for not that long, there isn't any proof on religion or leaders, so we don't know if there was or wasn't a religion. There also isn't any evidence on what ended this civilization but we are lead to believe that the civilization ended due to floods. There were statues found that could possibly depict religious leaders or also society leaders. But the city lacks palaces, temples or any obvious central government. We learned that Mesopotamia's written language is called Cuniform while the Mohenjo- Daro written language is called indus- script.  

Our two options for thesis statements:

1)While Mohenjo-Daro was a civilization with a rise and a fall, Mesopotamia was an ongoing city-state that lasted countless societal changes.  Mesopotamia never fully declined, which is why historians know so much about it. 

2)Mesopotamia lasted for thousands of years because it was a city-state inhabited by various cultures, and underwent numerous societal changes, while Mohenjo-Daro was one civilization with a rise and a fall.

We chose to go with "Mesopotamia lasted for thousands of years because it was a city-state inhabited by various cultures, and underwent numerous societal changes, while the Indus Valley was one civilization with a single culture." So it is kind of a mix between both. 

Our essay, if we were to write one, would mostly consist of and talk about the comparisons between the Mesopotamian and Indus Valley Civilizations. I feel like that is what the thesis conveys but would be something that would require a lot of research because the Mesopotamia and Mohenjo- Daro are both very different. I think that also the paper would talk about how Mesopotamia was more of a city- state because is was inhabited by many different civilizations. And also it would talk about the possible ways Mohenjo- Daro could have ended and why Mohenjo- Daro ended. 

What's Wrong With the Word Civilization?

A question that we discussed a lot in History today was the question "What is wrong with the word civilization?"
We read a reading last thursday and discussed it in class today. 


We came up with a few answers for this question. The word "Civilization" suggests a higher form of society. And the opposite of civilized is barbaric, savage and uncivilized so therefor the word civilization implies civilized. This is a problem because not all civilizations are civilized and some can actually be very uncivilized. Savage is also the way that many civilizations thought of neighboring cities, so does that make those neighboring cities "uncivilizations"? No, because there is no such thing. A civilization, if thats what we think they called it back then, also implies that they even knew and had to same recognition of a bigger society as we do in modern time, but in actuality they had no idea. There is no way they could have known to call themselves a civilization because they most likely didn't travel to see all of the other civilizations out there so to them, they are the only thing out there that matters. The word civilization also implies that they so-called civilizations had distinct boundaries, which they didn't. And also that the people felt part of a shared community, which they probably didn't because the boundaries weren't really clear if there even were boundaries at all.  


In class, we decided that a more accurate word to describe the societies back then is the word "nation". The Dictionary definition of nation is "a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory : leading industrialized nations."    This makes a lot more sense to describe the "civilizations" back then because it doesn't imply them being civilized and but it still describes it perfectly. It also doesn't imply that there are strict boundaries, just that this one place is where a group of people inhabited.

Environment and Basic Needs

So going back to a question I previously posted, "Does your geographic location determine your success and well- being?" 

I don't really think I did the best job answering that specific question. I mostly just talked about the Pyramid/ Hierarchy of Needs. But to answer the question, I do think that your location can effect the amount of success you have. Ok, so if you are thinking about the Hierarchy of Needs for an individual, the bottom is the basic needs. You are never going to do well if you don't have these basic needs, you actually wont do well at all because you will die. But pretty much any location that you chose you are going to be able to get these basic needs unless you chose to live either in the middle of the dessert or on the moon, and I don't really think that anyone would want to live there anyway. So if you look at the next level, it is safety and there are less places in the world that are safe then places that have food and water obviously, so there for people are more likely to live in an unsafe environment then a place with no basic needs. So this already cuts of a portion of people that are less likely to be successful. And these people won't be successful because you need to fulfill all of the levels of the Pyramid before you can reach success.  The next rows of the Pyramid have more to do with you as a person because esteem and actualization have more to do with yourself then your environment. But you will never be able to focus on your self-confidence or being creative if you are starving or are worrying about your safety all the time. So to finally answer the question "Does your geographic location determine your success?" yes it does just like your safety would, your sense of belonging would/ your esteem would and your self-actualization would.

Earthquake in Haiti Economics

I found an article, on ProQuest, that talkes about the economic effects on the apparel and global textile industries. The article talks about the global impact of the earthquale in Haiti and in Japan.

"Research and Markets: After the Earthquakes: Impact on the Textile and Clothing Industry Assesses the Wider Economic and Industrial Impact of the Earthquakes in Japan and Haiti." ProQuest. http://search.proquest.com/docview/859764889/1328C99344F2EEA703F/2?accountid=3360 (accessed October 21, 2011).

Connecting The Hierarchy of Needs with Civilization

How does the Hierarchy of Needs connect with the resent civilization project?
Today in History class, after we all shared our posters about our civilizations, we were asked to just write for a few minutes about how the Hierarchy of needs connects with a whole civilization, not just one person. I said that it connects because when you are making a civilization, everything about the hierarchy of needs has to come into consideration. Especially the physiology/base of the pyramid. When you are making a civilization, you are thinking about how the people who live in the  civilization are going to get food and water, like what is on the bottom of the pyramid. Safety is the next thing that you are going to think about because there is always the possibility that there will be forest fires, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and also tons of other natural disasters. When you think about it, any and every location that you choose to start a civilization is naturally going to have some possibility of having a natural disaster, you just have to weigh out the pros and cons and which natural disasters are more devastating and which ones are going to be less of a concern. It is harder to know whether a civilization is going to have good esteem or "achievement" as we called it today in history, based on the geographic location because that has everything to do with the actual people who live in the civilization. Also, you can't know if there is going to be love/belonging or "community" also as we called it today, based in the location of the civilization. But, you can know that there for sure wont be any sense of achievement or community if there is no sense of safety or physiology.

Environmental Unit Reading

Does your geographic location determine your success and well-being? 

So help visualize what I am talking about. 

In the reading, it talked a lot about the Hierarchy of Needs; a list of what is mandatory for survival and what is not as fundamental. I thought this was a really interesting because the idea of the Hierarchy of needs was developed about 100 years ago but to some it might still apply today. That is kind of the thing that I wanted to look more into and think about; does the Hierarchy of Needs still apply to today’s society. Well I think that the basics of the Hierarchy of Needs do still apply to today but as you go up the pyramid they might be different. I think that breathing, food water and everything else on the bottom of the pyramid is where it should be. As the pyramid goes up, the categories start to blur and mix into each other a little bit more. Something on the pyramid that I don’t agree with is the Esteem and the Love/ Belonging rows. I think that they should be switched and that Esteem should be the third row and Love/Belonging should be the fourth row. Because the pyramid is made so that once you have one row covered you can have the next row, then I think that you need to have to Esteem row covered in order to get the Love/ Belonging row covered. If you have a low self-esteem, low self- confidence, and no respect for others or from others, I am sorry but you probably will not get any friends. Maybe that is just the way it would be today but I wouldn’t want to be friends with someone that doesn’t respect me or who I don’t respect. But I do agree with the top of the pyramid when it says Self-Actualization. But I believe that you are not going to get very far in life if you don’t have creativity, morality, spontaneity, problem solving skills, lack of prejudice, and acceptance of facts. So maybe there should be one more row to the Pyramid; Success and in this row would be education and job. You are not going to have success without self-actualization, esteem, love/belonging, safety and physiological well-being. 
 

Creating a Civilization

In history class, we were given the assignment to create our own ideal civilization using the knowledge from the year so far. We were told that we could make the civilization placed in any part of the world or even a made up place. For my group of three, we chose anywhere along Lake Michigan because we all felt that this is one place in the world that we know the best. We mapped ours out so that the civilization was based near the lake but not on the beach. Being near a freshwater resource is very important in the survival of humans and this water will obviously be used to drink by the members of the civilization. On the other side of the town is a forest. This forest is there so that the humans that belong to the civilization can hunt and gather food. On the two outer ends of our civilization are fields for livestock. Also near the fields are more fields but these are used for farming crops. The houses are arranged in to long but not perfect lines with a street/ path down the middle. We arranged our houses like this so that every part of the civilization is easy to get to. Because the lake is not super close, water would not be the easiest to transport to each house although it is still an option for water supply. To solve this problem we have made three wells in our civilization that way there is a more efficient way to get water and people wont have to travel so far. The three wells are located in the middle of the path so that they as well are easy to get to by every person who is a part of our civilization. Surrounding the well is a market where people can buy/trade for food and other goods. This is also important if not everyone is a farmer and owns live stock. The farmers and livestock owners can sell/trade in the markets for other things that they might need.

How has Humanity Abused the Environment?

How has humanity abused the environment? 

Humanity has abused the environment in many ways including pollution, over population, releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and putting many harmful chemicals into the earth.

Pollution is a huge problem in America and all over the world. Although it is against the law in almost, if not every country, people still disrespect that law and litter anyway. This only creates an unhealthy and ugly earth that and if people continue to litter and pollute, it will eventually become filled with garbage and pollution. Also, humans are putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere which it burning holes in it, this contributes to global warming which will eventually also become a major problem and a threat for humanity.

Humans are also over populating the planet. This is extremely hard to prevent because unless you are communist, you tell people how many children they can have. And I am not telling people that they shouldn't have children but humanity as a whole needs to come up with a solution to prevent the world from becoming over populated. And also, the more people in the world the more garbage and pollution and chances to make the earth even more messed up.

We also have eliminated a lot of trees and wildlife on the planet. A ton of animals have become extinct because of us. Everything such as the plants and animals have grown and adapted on this earth for a reason or a purpose and as the animals, trees and plants die because of us, we are only taking away something that helps the earth in some way.

I think that what people don't understand about all of this is that the earth can actually over populate, or be taken over by global warming or in other world "die". I even find it kind of hard to wrap my head around the fact that the earth could die if we don't help it and stop all of the destructive things that we are doing.

Environmental Unit Introduction

In regard to the environment, what does the concept of balance mean?
Throughout the introduction balance was a theme that came up a lot, environmental balance is the impartiality between humans and the natural world and how humans and the environment keep each other in line.
Expanding in the idea of balance, in this reading, it was said that, in some people's opinion, that humans are going to end the world, that we are over populating the it and are killing the environment. I don't think that it is possible to believe in this statement and to believe in environmental balance, they contradict each other. Another point of view, relayed in the reading was that the environment will adapt to what humans are doing just as it always has. This also doesn't quite answer the question of "do you believe in balance." In the reading it said that "When that balance is upset, the environment simply corrects that balance through a number of different actions, many of which are deadly to humans." This is a statement that defends the concept of balance and I also agree with this statement. I believe that balance can, at times, get out of line, but something will happen on either end to make the balance kosher. It is really interesting to think about because it kind of if you believe in fate or not when dealing with the "over populated" aspect of it. Because if the world gets over populated, how is the earth supposed to know to have an earthquake to kill a ton of people? But when talking about the pollution part of it, it makes a little more sense. But still, while I semi- agree with the idea of environmental balance, I don't exactly see how they balance each other out or do things to bring each other back into line.

ProQuest Sources

What was the economical impact of the earthquake on Haiti?
This is the essay question that we have to find a source that could answer this question and help us write an essay about the question. I used an artcle from ProQuest called: "Estimating the Direct Economic Damages of the Earthquake in Haiti: The Journal of the Royal Economic Society" by: Eduardo Cavallo, Andrew Powell and Oscar Becarra. I got to this article by searching (Haiti Earthquake) AND (economic impact). This article uses both historical data and science to make their estimates on how much it would cost to rebuild Haiti. It also talks a lot about the economical effects on Haiti and makes an initial estimation of to economical damages from the earthquake using Haiti's economic and demographic data. It states that the base etimate is 8.1 billion US dollars but this may be on the lower side and could be as much as 13.9 billion US dollars. If there was 200,000 then the estimate on the damages would be 7.2 billion US dollars but if there were 250,000 dead and missing people then the estimate would be 8.1 billion US dollars. Becasue most estimates say that the amount of dead and missing people is closer to 250,000 that means the estimate is 8.1 billion US dollars or more. To estimate the economical damages in Haiti, they had to combine the world's data from about 2,000 natural catastrophes that all happened between 1970 and 2008. But there have been few catastropes this big so that is also taken into consideration when making estimates. They use the damage of each event as a function of the number of missing and dead people, size of the country, the real GDP per capita and linear trends to model the dollar amount of damage.

I chose the article because I thought that is clearly addressed the essay question given. Not only did it talk about econimcal effects but it went on to talk about what it would take, economically to re-build Haiti. It also used a different kind of approach by using both history and science to make estimates and I thought that was kind of interesting.

The Earthquake in Haiti

Major Facts from the Reading:
In the reading about the earthquake in Haiti, I found that some of the most valuable information to me was the fact that people didn't even know who their leader was, or at least they were confused about it. I think that alone says how much these people lost and how catastrophic this earthquake was to these people. Another thing was, since everything was so damaged, Haiti's communication and transportation centers were not functioning properly. This hindered the whole country because they couldn't get the aid and supplies that they needed from helping countries. Everything was slowed down by this. Some people said that they delay in supplies lead to angry people who committed crimes such as looting and violence.  A doctor said that the violence and crimes were only delaying the supplies even longer, but citizens countered that the crime rate actually went down after the earthquake . Also, so many people died in this earthquake, there were so many people that Haiti had to bury them in mass graves. By January 22, the United Nations declared that the "emergency phase" was almost over and the government called off search for survivors. The airport control was passed onto the United States and before January 14, no relief efforts were organized by groups.  Many people were crossing the border into the Dominican Republic because they needed medical assistance and all of the hospitals in Haiti were filled. The Dominican Republic said that people could only come into their country if they are in need of medical help but they could only stay temporarily.

A question that I thought of while reading, but couldn't come up with an explanation for was: How is a country with no experience supposed to be prepared for catastrophe?
This kind of relates to the Hurricane Katrina story, because they were not prepared. But these situations are actually very different because the New Orleans government actually lied to their people about being prepared enough, in this case the government is at fault. In Haiti, the government never lied to their people, they just simply didn't prepare at all for earthquakes because they didn't have the funding or the experience with earthquakes. So in this case, it is the rest of the world at fault because they didn't provide money or knowledge to the Haitians.

Given the fact that many government officials and leaders were killed, how did the Haitian government and the citizens function and know what to do in the after math of the earthquake?
This is a question that two other people and I formulated in class on Tuesday. The issue of many government officials and leaders were killed leaves Haiti in a terrible situation. They have hardly no one to turn to or to direct them. It is very difficult not to be told what to do, especially after an incident like a deathly earthquake. Even though the president survived the earthquake, people were still confused over who was in charge. This shows how little the government informed the people and how bad the situation really was. And this kind of leads to another question that we came up with: Given the delays in supplies and angry people, how was the Haitian government supposed to control the people? The previous question is very relevant to this question and actually pretty much answers it. There was very little government and even the government that there was, people were confused about.

Given the fact that many of the Haitian people who died in the earthquake were buried in mass graves, how was the morale of the people effected by this?
Tons of people died during this earthquake, so many that the government and the country couldn't handle it. They had to bury a lot of people in mass graves. I am sure that this must have really effected the people's families and friends because being buried in a mass grave is kind of inhumane and doesn't show respect to the person who just died. I know that if one of my family members or a friend died and was not buried properly I would be very angry. And also, just the fact that there were so many people that died, they didn't even have enough room to bury all of them correctly. That alone is very heartbreaking because it means that so many people died.