150+ killed trying to loot overturned fuel tanker in Pakistan

[Valka D'Ur]

Was it not the person who could afford a smoke to blame? The rest were just trying their best "hunting wild game" to support themselves.

It's still monumentally stupid to race toward a situation like that, instead of away. It wouldn't take much at all to get a fire or explosion. Cigarettes/lighters aren't the only things that make sparks.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Yeah when I was in Cambodia I hired a tuk tuk driver for the day and when it was time to refuel he pulled up to a "gas station". Let me see if I can find the pics
I can't, but it was basically a guy by the side of a road with a wooden shack and a whole bunch of whiskey (and other) bottles full of fuel. Tuk tuk driver pulls up, grabs one of the bottles, and fills up....

That is what most third world countries petrol stops look like
The installation of underground petrol tank, electric powered pumps, garages for repairs are all first world country things we all take for granted. I'd image a lot of poor people were talking below poverty line would take advantage to scavenge fuel from an overturned oil tanker that was leaking petrol out onto the ground.

 

[timtofly]

It is also not safe going into the ground and contaminating it. Getting it up before it does that is also neccessary.

 

[Farm Boy]

Was it not the person who could afford a smoke to blame? The rest were just trying their best "hunting wild game" to support themselves.

Well, yes, if somebody lit a cigarette they were catastrophically ignorant of the behavior of gasoline fumes. Wild game is wild game though and a leaking gasoline tanker isn't anybody's bunnyrabbit. More like spearfishing hammerheads with chum tied to your waist.

Also yes on the contamination, especially if you live near where it's spilling out. Even though you aren't going to make a dent in a multi-thousand gallon truck with 2-liter soda bottles, it's still more salvaging than scavenging.

 

[Borachio]

Is gasoline that polluting?

They don't put lead in it anymore, do they?

I mean, it's certainly not good for the ground in the short term. But it will bio-degrade completely in a couple of years. I think.

Still, not so nice if it pollutes the ground water, and people have to drink it.

 

[Farm Boy]

It can be problematic.

 

[El_Machinae]

It evaporates. In the grand scheme of things, it's a temporary insult to the local ecology. Still, better in a bottle than in the ground.

People should recognize the relative aspects here. This is people who thought it was a net-win to run into a field of fuel to collect a few litres.

We're soooooo much wealthier than that. And we piss away so much of that opportunity

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Why do you keep preaching that message to people who aren't even in the upper centile or decile of their country's wealth/income distribution?

 

[warpus]

That is what most third world countries petrol stops look like
The installation of underground petrol tank, electric powered pumps, garages for repairs are all first world country things we all take for granted. I'd image a lot of poor people were talking below poverty line would take advantage to scavenge fuel from an overturned oil tanker that was leaking petrol out onto the ground.

All of the other gas stations I encountered in Cambodia were "normal". Mind you this particular one (photos below, I found them) was slightly off the beaten path. So in Cambodia at least it seems that cities have regular gas stations and some rural areas have gas stations like this:

Spoiler :

 

[Farm Boy]

Why do you keep preaching that message to people who aren't even in the upper centile or decile of their country's wealth/income distribution?

Is that where noblesse oblige kicks in?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

If by "noblesse oblige" you mean "actually owning or earning enough that money reproduces itself", then yes.

 

[El_Machinae]

It's my job to spend my money wisely. I don't think the burden to actually do good kicks in once I have enough money that my savings automatically grow. I mean, it works fine as a top-level burden.

But for ... um ... thousands of years people have been doing good without actually needing excess wealth. We already have excess wealth. But we don't seem to realize it. And some people refuse to.

 

[Borachio]

I don't think "doing good" is necessarily dependent on wealth (excess or otherwise) at all.

I think it can be just as important to "do good" at the most microscopic level of daily life.

Like smiling at one another. Or telling each other jokes. Or asking how another person is feeling.

(I'm not too bad, actually. Thanks for asking.)

 

[NovaKart]

I don't know what people are really supposed to do to help fight poverty across the world. Throwing money at people doesn't really help the long-term situation and there are just a few people you could help with that unless you were extremely rich.

I've heard a lot of criticism of aid organizations that they squander money on endless meetings and useless projects, but I imagine they do some good as well.

 

[Farm Boy]

I still recommend investigating membership in the International Lions Club if for no other reason to see if they have or could set up community events for local children. Or raise money for camps/events for the mentally handicapped, perhaps specifically adults who may not have a lot of social outlets. I mean, just as an example. Collecting and distributing used eyeglasses doesn't fix the world, but it does help take care of some significant measure of the most easily preventable blindness in it.

 

[warpus]

Throwing money at people doesn't really help the long-term situation

Yeah, I have heard stories of local farmers and businesspeople going out of business when an aid agency shows up and gives everyone free food (or whatever). It devalues the local crop for a while, people go out of business, and then things are back to normal a couple weeks or months later, except that some people are now broke as a result, and in the grand scheme of things not much has changed.

Infrastructure and education are the only answers I think, but they are a long term solution. You also need stability and at times that is just outside of anyone's (who cares) control.

 

[El_Machinae]

Then you ratchet. Pivot. Iterative wisdom. There are enough 'easy' problems out there that need funding too.

 

[Borachio]

Yeah, I have heard stories of local farmers and businesspeople going out of business when an aid agency shows up and gives everyone free food (or whatever). It devalues the local crop for a while, people go out of business, and then things are back to normal a couple weeks or months later, except that some people are now broke as a result, and in the grand scheme of things not much has changed.

It is a problem, yes.

In an attempt to address this kind of issue, in a famine situation, I've heard, the recommended course of action is to buy in food from the surrounding area, rather than fly it in from another continent.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I don't know what people are really supposed to do to help fight poverty across the world.

It's not like they really need to repay debts or have an emergency fund or a nest egg. These are just luxuries compared to what the global poor have.

 

[Farm Boy]

I don't think my suggestion would interfere with either of those significantly. Unless, of course, one is working 16 hours a day or has absolutely no free time to do the stuff with the hands. That does happen, no judgement. But things I treat like trash, because they are my trash, make mostly blind people see. My garbage intermittently contains the power of sight. That's the level of disparity we're talking about, literally, isn't it?