Hacker News Reader

Comment by onetimeusename | Hacker News Reader

the federal appropriations bill signed last December cleared the way for the EPA to transfer $300 million to the International Boundary and Water Commission for infrastructure projects.

So is the US paying for sewer works in Mexico? This doesn't feel right to me when the article points out the problem is a failure of Mexican government and citizens to properly address the problem. How do we even know the money will be put to good use?

View on HN

US (and EU, and Japanese…) aid to much of the developing world goes to building sewage, it is one of the key steps to improving community health.

None build as much as China, which is pretty crazy.

How do we even know the money will be put to good use?

I guess that is why it is going to an international organization that the US is a part of, instead of directly to the Tijuana, Baja California, or Mexico governments.

How does an international organization solve that problem? Are international organizations known for never being corrupt and wasteful? I wasn't aware. How does an international organization enforce illegally attaching sewers to storm drains?

How do you know any money used by any government isn't wasted. What would you like to do about it?

If you look at foreign aid the US is ranked far from the best givers (those are mostly from Northern Europe) simply because of the strings attached: "We give you X if you buy Y from our War Industry" is not really foreign aid but war industry aid. International organizations are more often than not better at this as they don't give with one hand while taking with the other. Of course some are even worse, like the World Bank Groups.

Some of it goes to a plant on the US side of the border, near the point where the Tijuana river crosses it, flowing north. Think of it as a kind of very direct foreign aid.

https://timesofsandiego.com/politics/2023/06/05/san-diego-ha... https://www.water-technology.net/projects/tijuana/ https://www.ibwc.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Press_Releas...

If its already affecting American territory, what are the other options? Invade Mexico and take over the land and administration of it? Bury our heads in the (contaminated) sand?

Diplomatic relations?? I don't think every international issue was solved by agreeing to throw money at an issue for a project that hasn't clearly stated how it will solve the problem permanently and all inside of a country with a relatively high location on the corruption perception index.

>How do we even know the money will be put to good use?

The IBWC is its own thing, directly run under the State Department, with its own engineering staff and field offices.

When we give similar water/sanitation aid to other countries, it goes through the USAID branch of the State Department. The US sends its own experts who live in the countries and direct the money to the best possible uses. https://www.usaid.gov/water-and-sanitation/us-global-water-s...

Because Mexico hasn’t or can’t fix the problem, so the US builds a massive sewage treatment plant that can take the entire flow of the Tijuana river.

> This doesn't feel right to me when the article points out the problem is a failure of Mexican government and citizens to properly address the problem.

Cleaning up Imperial Beach is very low on the Mexican government’s priorities

Mexico is a failed narco state, set your expectations accordingly.

It would be fixed overnight if the US didn't import. That is at least as much a part of the problem - the bad neighbour.

Mexican drug dealers who snuck into America import drugs from Mexicans in Mexico. Americans to blame. Nice victim-blaming.

I remember the US briefly had a president who wanted to protect the US-Mexico border but he got called racist by the people who profit from importing problems into America.

The OP seems to be making the commonly made point that drugs wouldn’t flow into the USA if there were not lots of Americans (rich and poor) who wanted to consume said drugs. Before you attack me, I am not trying to argue for or against that point, just noting that it is a common one on any of these HN threads.

That doesn't change the facts. The problem is the buyer, not the seller. If Mexico doesn't sell, someone else will. If Americans doesn't buy there's no other buyer. Mexico isn't the problem. The rich neighbour with bad laws is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com