There is much to be appreciated in Latin American countries, but that stuff is one-sided propaganda lies.

I have read the climategate emails: change the data, cut government grants of people who disagree, and change the conclusions of the report in several places in the report.

The “scientists” in agreement with “global warming” receive corporate and government grants, and their “opinion” is paid for.

There is nothing “objective” about their “science”.

You got me interested in your website, because on the first page you said read John McPhee. After that, well, I don’t see a reason to read further.

Living a long time, in poverty, and having practically no opportunity for bright young kids to achieve is no example of any kind of “happiness” or what is good for the planet.

My college town had a Japanese family, that raised fresh eggs and fresh vegetables for the entire area on a small amount of land, using new “advanced” and “old” techniques.

They supplied the grocery stores, the restaurants and the hotel.

They were a successful small business and their family was prospering, including sending their children to the college of their choice.

They were ran out of business, by the same big grocery store exploiting Mexico now. That would be Safeway, using DDT and other chemicals in Mexico that are not allowed in USA because of the “green movement” here.

The problem is big business, big corporations, and big money (i.e. the financiers).

It is not a problem that has national borders, nor racial overtones.

(Report comment)

“Latin America. Let’s not beat about the bush. The region has had, and continues to have, its fair share of misery: decades of civil wars and coups, the destruction of the Amazon, sharp inequality, and the favelas and slums of metropolises from Mexico City to Sao Paulo. For some, the region represents a sad tale of lost opportunity. In 1900, Chile, Argentina and Mexico all had higher per capita GDPs than Japan. Even Colombia’s GDP per capita was only half that of Italy’s or Norway’s (nowadays it is behind by factors of four and six respectively). But, while Italy, Norway and Japan have all strengthened into rich and relatively equal societies, Latin American countries have, for the most part, fallen down the list of the richest countries.

And yet, the top two sub-regions in terms of the HPI are those of Latin America. What sense can we make of this success? Are Latin Americans as happy as they say they are? And what, if anything, can the rest of the world learn from Latin America?

Survey data reveals two key features of Latin American culture. One is the presence of relatively unmaterialistic aspirations and values, compared to countries with similar economic conditions. Latin Americans report being much less concerned with material issues than, for example, they are with their friends and family. Secondly, social capital is particularly strong in the region. Civil society is very active, from religious groups to workers’ groups to environmental groups. The data on ‘formal’ social capital is reflected in anecdotal evidence of informal social capital in terms of strong family and community ties.

We have already seen, in Chapter 3, how these two factors – non-material aspirations and social relations – are crucial to well-being. In Latin America, they combine to create a society that is able to rise above economic hardships, whilst drawing great benefit from its social links. It is worth noting that, despite a poor economic record in terms of average income and an even poorer record in terms of inequality, Latin America still enjoys levels of health that are close to those of Central Europe and often superior to Eastern Europe. As well as reasonable state provision in many countries (e.g., in Colombia almost half of the country’s 44 million people enjoy free public health care), this is likely to be in part due to strong social networks forming a safety net for those who are less fortunate.

Some have mocked the high levels of reported life satisfaction in Latin American countries as belying a lack of knowledge of anything better (i.e. Western lifestyles). On the contrary, Latin America is perhaps more exposed to North American culture than anywhere else in the developing world. Yet somehow it has been more resistant to idolising this lifestyle, or at least more able to be happy with its own way of life despite this influence. Pura vida is a popular expression in Costa Rica which is used somewhat like the English term ‘cool’. It translates literally as ‘pure life’ and represents in itself an attitude to what is important.”

(the bolding is mine)

(Report comment)

DR:
Whilst the Dominican Republic’s condition is similar to many other countries in the region – a medium score in the Human Development Index, dependence on the USA for trade, relatively high life expectancy given its income levels and, high levels of inequality – unlike many of its neighbours it manages to achieve a life expectancy of over 70 years with a very small footprint.

Jamaica:
Jamaica’s appearance in the top three of the HPI table comes somewhat as a surprise. It is fair to say that the country has been in some economic trouble for over 30 years, resulting in high levels of inequality and unemployment, and some of the highest homicide rates in the world. Moderate levels of life satisfaction perhaps reflect this reality.
And yet, despite these problems, the island is able to maintain some of the best levels of health in the developing world, as indicated by its high average life expectancy. Together with its very small ecological footprint, it is this which puts Jamaica towards the top of the HPI table.

(Report comment)

(Report comment)

(Report comment)

(Report comment)

(Report comment)

(Report comment)

(Report comment)