Puerto Rico: A U.S. Territory in Crisis
cfr.org
cfr.org
1. It has three bioluminescent bays : https://www.discoverpuertorico.com/article/guide-to-explorin....
2. It has one of the top 10 beaches in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamenco_Beach
3. I can't find the stat now, but I think Puerto Rico produces a ton of engineers relative to it's population. Also has pretty good representation at NASA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Puerto_Ricans_in_the_U...
DM if you want recco's on the island! I'm from Aguada so can help on the west coast :-)
The amount of grifting that goes on focusing on PR being a 3rd world hellscape for their own views/clicks/etc is insane.
Where else can you drive 3 hours and go from dense rainforest to absolute desert, spend your morning snorkeling pristine reefs and your evening deep in the mountains, and see a mix of old and new everywhere?
I live outside the metro area and there are definitely 4x4 only areas as far as transportation and it becomes quite rural pretty quick in the hills. Not to mention the chupacabra.
But 100% worthwhile.
I've never been to Puerto Rico. Rainforest I can imagine, but where on that island is there a desert, even a relative one?! When you say "absolute desert" I'm imagining, I don't know, something like the Sonoran Desert.
Wear a big hat, go before 8am, and stop by the salt flats.
Average annual rainfall of 24-39" is not exactly anyone's idea of a desert (I believe 10" a year is the typical definition), though looking at the photos it does appear to be more similar to the transitional area in Texas Hill Country, for example, with short trees and more shrubs. Certainly a far cry from the lushness that I expected to encompass all of Puerto Rico.
Offhand thought 24 inches in a hot climate doesn't go as far as 24 inches in a temperate one.
And yes, you can get to the desert driving 3 hours east (albeit into Oregon)
Washington!
Hawaii, except I didn't drive, I walked; and it took half an hour, not 3 hours.
The people in tech who live in Puerto Rico are practically a net negative for the locals and people who are actually from there. 90%+ of them are not local to Puerto Rico and rarely is anyone hiring locals for these tech jobs, they are working remotely or getting their more well off friends/family to come join them.
They outprice locals from living arrangements since they drive costs up but the amount locals make is nowhere near what these tech workers do. And in my opinion its even worse than what happens in mainland US, since they are stuck on an island uprooting and moving is even harder than what happens to people in the states.
Yep. I find it weird and annoying that Puerto Rico (and most of Southern and Central America and Mexico) are treated as 3rd world (read: "poor"/undeveloped). The only undeveloped countries (below 0.650 HDI) in the Americas are Haiti, Honduras, and Guatemala. It's just pure racism tbh.
Economic turmoil aside due to the shutdown of Naval Shipyards in the 90s, Puerto Rico is by every definition a developed country, and they are a massive player in both the financial and pharmaceutical manufacturing world.
P.S. Don't give me the pedantic Cold War 3rd world definition. No one uses that definition anymore
Most people who leave do so because it's like living in a bottom 50 state like Mississippi or Alabama, why stay when your quality of life will improve significantly just taking a 2 hour flight to another state? I was able to attend a top engineering school in the US and most of my high school friends were also able to get great jobs elsewhere too. We would love to go back but the drop in quality of life makes it a difficult choice.
> The big spending was fueled by a translation error between Spanish and English in the island's 1952 constitution. It enabled Puerto Rico to issue debt to fund many activities, including day-to-day operations. It all comes down to the interpretation of the phrase "recursos totales" -- total revenue or total resources? It was interpreted as resources, which is a broader term allowing the government to fund regular operations (e.g. education, policing, health care, etc.) via bonds.
In Spanish "recursos totales" is better translated as "total revenue" not "total resources".
[1]: https://money.cnn.com/2016/05/12/investing/puerto-rico-debt-...
The same can be see in this etymology dictionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/recurso#Spanish
No mention of "revenue"-- not even in the latin root.
> The legal framework for a balanced budget dates back to Section 34 of the 1917 Jones-Shafroth Act, which states that “No appropriation shall be made, nor any expenditure authorized by the legislature, whereby the expenditure of the Government of Porto Rico during any fiscal year shall exceed the total revenue then provided for by law and applicable for such appropriation or expenditure, including any available surplus in the treasury, unless the legislature making such appropriation shall provide for levying a sufficient tax to pay such appropriation or expenditure within such fiscal year.” A provision in Puerto Rico’s Constitution, which was approved in 1952, contains similar language in English: The appropriations made for any fiscal year shall not exceed the total revenues, including available surplus, estimated for said fiscal year unless the imposition of taxes sufficient to cover said appropriations is provided by law. P.R. Const., art. VI, §7. The Spanish translation of the Constitution, however, translated revenues as “recursos” which can also be interpreted to mean resources. A 1974 ruling by Puerto Rico’s attorney general clarified the legal meaning of “recursos” to a broader general definition of resources available to the government, including proceeds of bond issuances. P.R. Op. Sec. Just. 1974-15, 19
The way this reads is backwards to what I previously read (and stated) where "revenues" was translated into Spanish later to "recursos" in 1952, which was interpreted to include debt, bypassing the original 1917 act for a balanced budget.
[0] https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/...
Yep. It's a holdover from WW2 - most of Japan's island territories in the Pacific were handed to the US, UK, France, NZ, and AUS by the UN to be managed and governed. Most of those territories were given independence and sovereignty in the 80s-90s, but because of their tiny size they still remain dependent on those countries, Taiwan (development grants for recognizing Taiwan), and China (development grants for not recognizing Taiwan).
I watched the restructuring pretty closely for a while but eventually lost interest after a series of will they/won’t they court decisions. I hope it delivers a sustainable outcome to the island. It’s a wonderful place and deserves better than what it’s been through in recent years.
https://www.un.org/dppa/decolonization/en/nsgt
They do call the USVIs a colony though, and I do accept that the US has outsize influence in these matters and has gotten off easy in the decolonisation game.
https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insight...
How does it compare to South Australia? SA reaches from 38-26 degrees of latitude, with empty scorching desert in the north (towards the equator) suitable for mass solar generation.
Puerto Rich is just north of 18 degrees of latitude with a predominantly tropical climate, meaning lots of clouds and rain. San Juan, for example, gets just under 3000 hours of sunshine a year, which is similar to places like Memphis or Oklahoma City (vs. Las Vegas, for example, at 3800 hours).
Renewable energy ought to be a no-brainer for PR, though. I just wish the utility wasn’t stuck in a spot where it has to triage the basic delivery of electricity and a minimally functioning grid, and instead could focus on investing on rebuilding the overall generation and distribution system.
My parents have batteries as well for the solar power. Sorry not super helpful...
It is interesting that the proposed act would allow PRcans to vote for independence, but Washington would get to shape the constitution.