Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where the Poor Pay More for Water

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 04:24 PM
Original message
Where the Poor Pay More for Water
Published on Thursday, April 9, 2009 by Inter Press Service
Where the Poor Pay More for Water
by Ángel Páez

LOMAS DE MANCHAY, Peru - In Lomas de Manchay, an area of slum-covered hills outside of the Peruvian capital that is home to 50,000 people, mainly poor indigenous migrants from the highlands, clean water is worth gold - almost literally.

Local residents of the shantytown pay 3.22 dollars per cubic metre of water, compared to just 45 cents of a dollar that is paid a few blocks away, across the main avenue, in Rinconada del Lago, one of Lima's most exclusive neighbourhoods.

"The contrast vividly illustrates the inequality in the distribution of water," María Teresa Oré, lead author of the new book "El agua ante nuevos desafíos. Actores e iniciativas en Ecuador, Perú y Bolivia" (roughly "New Challenges Facing Water; Actors and Initiatives in Ecuador, Peru and Bolvia"), told IPS.

The book is a study of the situation in those three countries by the development and relief agency Oxfam International.

"The poor have the least access to water; this is a pattern that was seen over and over in the countries we studied," said Oré.

"There is a gap between rich and poor. The rich pay less than the poor for drinking water - an offensive, shocking, insulting reality," Abel Cruz, the head of the Peruvians without Water Movement (MPSA), told IPS.

More:
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/04/09-9
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Could someone explain "indigenous migrants" please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grinchie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Philipino's, Portugese, Chinese and other laborers
That are imnported into a region to provide labor, and then when the Capitalist systems peters out, are left behind and become relatively "Indigenous". It's a lot like the Asian and Philipino community embracing that fact thet they resemble Native Hawaiians, and then capitalize upon their culture to exploit the Tourist trade by acting "Hawaiian". Nothing wrong with that, but it really pisses off Native Hawaiian's who are fiercely protective of their disappearing culture.

Indigenous migrant can also mean farmers displaced by monocrop agricultural systems and have chosen to migrate to more urban environs in search of a living that no longer exists in their native areas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Huh?
"In Lomas de Manchay, an area of slum-covered hills outside of the Peruvian capital that is home to 50,000 people, mainly poor indigenous migrants from the highlands, clean water is worth gold - almost literally."

Are you joking, or what? The article is referring to internal migrants--displaced peasants, Peruvians--not to imported workers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
4. Water was the issue that brought the Left to power in Bolivia--
specifically, the prior rightwing government's sell-out of Cochbamba's water system to Bechtel Inc. Bechtel then began increasing the price of water to the poorest of the poor, even attempting to charge poor peasants for collecting rainwater! The people rose up in rebellion. There were huge demonstrations against the privatisation of water and other U.S.-dictated "neo-liberal" policies. Evo Morales was elected--the first president of Bolivia to actually receive the majority vote, and the first indigenous president of Bolivia (a largely indigenous country). (Prior governments had operated at the margins, winning mere pluralities, and serving the rich minority.) With Morales as president, Bolivia just passed a new Constitution (with nearly 70% of the vote) which, among other things, makes access to water a human right.

Alan Garcia, who, like the prior rightwing governments of Bolivia, is operating at the margins in Peru (with an approval rating in the 20% to 30% range), had better keep his promises about water for the poor majority. It is the issue that could easily get him tossed out in the next election.

It's interesting that Garcia was the one absentee at the UNASUR meeting this last September, where the fate of his neighbor Evo Morales, in the face of a Bushwhack white secessionist coup, was the issue. UNASUR unanimously voted to back the Morales government, and took strong action in support of Morales. And Garcia didn't bother to attend and vote. Even Colombia attended (and voted with the majority)! I have been suspicious that Garcia was colluding with the Bushwhacks and the white separatists, because of his absence at the UNASUR meeting. It seemed rather pointed. He certainly played the toady to Bush, and may be a Bush Cartel 'made man' (sworn to fealty; protected--will always have a room at the mansion). The Peru "free trade" deal was a particular payment that Bush Jr. needed to make to the corporates. CAFTA was the other, along these lines. And I wonder if Jr. would have gotten his immunity from prosecution without having something to show, for his eight years in office, on Latin America.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mbperrin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
5. I teach economics, and my students are always amazed to find the perverse
result that poor people pay more for everything.

Fees for check cashing. Higher prices in stores in poor areas. Taxis won't come to certain areas, so residents pay the higher prices of gypsy cabs. Payday loans. Pawn shops.

The more affluent get comped on extra days in hotels, fees waived for a variety of financial transactions because they hold certain balances. Gift baskets from all sorts of people. No charge short term loans in the form of waived check charges. And on and on.

Kleptocracy. The rich steal, the poor pay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC