Are Dominicans better off?

[Guatiao]

After reading various times NALs and other posters suggest Dominicans are better off today than those of yesteryears; I wonder, is this a true statement? If we compare/contrast the average Dominican income and include inflation, costs of medical insurance, educational costs, rent, and other factors vs. those same factors of 1 to 2 generations ago, would the statement hold true?

Any data to back up the statement?

[Criss Colon]

His observations made from Conn. are not really valid!
The only person on DR1 with a REAL handle on answering your question,is "HILLBILLY"! He hasl lived here for 40 years! "OTHERS" will just give their opinions,AND you know what they say about "OPINIONS"!!!
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC CCCCC

[NALs]

Originally Posted by Heketi

After reading various times NALs and other posters suggest Dominicans are better off today than those of yesteryears; I wonder, is this a true statement? If we compare/contrast the average Dominican income and include inflation, costs of medical insurance, educational costs, rent, and other factors vs. those same factors of 1 to 2 generations ago, would the statement hold true?

Any data to back up the statement?

There are some data which shows towards an improvement in overall living conditions and every rational Dominican (if he/she is 30 or younger, you might want to use the opinions of their parents - if possible) will agree that the Dominican Republic is much better off today.

There are the obvious differences such as a higher purchasing power and this is proven by the presence of a large middle class and higher consumption rates vs. what they were say in the 1960s. There are also social indicators which point towards an improvement.

For example, life expectancy in 1960 was 53 years, but in 2004 it was 68 and today it's 70. Infant mortality rate in 1960 was 149 per 1,000 live births, in 2004 it was 32 per 1,000 live births. Literary rates, access to potable water rates, access to electricty rates, daily calories and protein consumption, etc have all consistently risen from 1960s to today.

The percentage of the population which lives in urban areas has risen consistently through the years. Usually, when people move from the countryside to the city, their living standards tends to plummet on the short-term, but on the long term as many become accustom to the urban environment and begin to emotionally, economically, and otherwise settle into an urban lifestyle, their standard of living increases. For example, while conditions in the shanties of Santo Domingo (which cover around 10% of the urban area) are still quite low, there was a shift in the materials used for construction from wood, cardboard, etc to cement. There are still many wood, cardboard, etc shanties; there are much more cement homes in those shanties. Access to electricity is widespread, television sets are available in most homes, etc which are goods that would have been off reach for many people a decade ago.

So on that hand, conditions have improved considerably.

On the other hand there is the presence of a middle class which is larger than it has ever been, comprising roughly a third of the population (not counting the members of the lower-middle class or working class). This compares favorably with 1960s when the middle class was virtually non-existant and whatever existed was limited to Santo Domingo and was almost entirely composed of civil servants and their families. Today, the Dominican middle class has grown in part because of the growth of government, but overwhelmingly due to the increase in business activity. Not only is the middle class larger today than it ever has been, but it has greater purchasing power than it did in the past as well. Prior to 1960s, the middle class for all practical purposes simply did not exist.

In terms of concrete data comparisons based on the cost of living, it would be hard to do such a detailed micro-level comparisons for the simple reason that the further back in time we go the less available the data becomes. However, per capita income in the 1960s was $1,698 but by 2000 it was $4,967 and from 1950 to 2000 the DR has experienced an increase of 26% in the health share of welfare gain.

Keep in mind that the Dominican Republic experiences various fluctuations on the short term, but on the long term the Dominican Republic has consistently improved it's lot so to speak. This becomes ever more clear when you compare the situation of the country with our neighbor Haiti. In 1960, the DR and Haiti had equal GDP per capita. The disparities have grown since then and much of that has to do with increasing standards of living in the DR vs. a subsequent deterioration of the same in Haiti. However, even if Haiti would had remained stable and its standard of living remained the same, the disparity between the DR and such would still be great to the favor of the DR.

We can also make comparisons with other countries which have done even better than the DR during the same period, such as Malaysia which in 1960s had a similar GDP per capita as the DR but today it's one of the wealthiest countries, particularly if we disregard the data from first world countries which tends to inflate the average GDP per capita on a global level.

If you want, I could embark on a detailed microeconomic comparative analysis of the DR in 1960s vs 2006. However, you will have to give me some time to collect the data, do the regression analysis and reach a conclusion based on hard facts.

For now, indulge in the following readings:

United Nations Human Development Index

Growth in the Dominican Republic and Haiti: Why has the Grass been Greener on One Side of Hispaniola?

Canadian International Development Agency: Dominican Republic

CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (% CHANGE)

Income Inequality in Central America, the Dominican Republic, and Mexico

Population, Health, and Human Well Being: Dominican Republic\

Dimensions of Well Being, Channels of Growth

-NALs

[Don Juan]

I won't give you statistics, just plain, old life experiences.

When I was a child in the 1950's, Trujillo kept crime, inflation, and consumer prices in check.
Blackouts were extremely rare and life was stable/peaceful. Everyone knew his place and didn't complain. Most people had enough to eat but poverty was rampant in the 'campos'.

Today we have lots of freedom and a larger middle class; all well and good but crime is soaring, and prices are going through the roof.

For years, my mother/father made do with one or two pesos per day for all three meals. We didn't get fat but also didn't starve.

Today, Dominicans spend an inordinate number of pesos for food that makes them fat and liable to all the health risks associated with it.

The drug trade was non-existent; few homicides due to crime.

Today, everyone and his brother carries a firearm for "protection". It seems the freaking police are the ones perpetration most crimes and all is utter chaos.

I'd rather lived under a Trujillo-era milieu than the so-called freedom in today's DR. At least back then, if you didn't make a fuzz, nobody bothered you.
Today, trouble comes looking for you.....Sad but true.

[Lambada]

Originally Posted by Don Juan

I won't give you statistics, just plain, old life experiences.

Nothing 'plain' about it, Don Juan. It's that sort of info, personal info from one who has lived it, which is so important and far more meaningful than the dry bookish stuff.

So since you've lived it, I'd like to ask you, if I may, what your views are on the spread of income i.e. is there more 'evening out' of income now than the 50's? Were the wealth differentials between the haves & the have nots more noticeable then, or less so, compared with now?

[Don Juan]

Ms. Lambada, I was born in 1950 in Santiago, and moved to Ciudad Trujillo in '55. All my recollection of life in DR came from the perspective a child with its corresponding naivete and innocence.
But in retrospect, I do recall reading "El Caribe" and watching (canal4) the only existing TV channel back then.
It showed lots of (farandula), socialites having a great time and great shows at the Jaragua hotel with invited international stars.
It seemed real dandy but I doubt many Dominicans were able to afford this kind of upper crust extravaganzas.
I remember seeing pictures of very well dressed men and women. they mostly always had a drink in one hand, a cigarette in the other and an idiotic (drunken) smirk.
The TV news frequently showed grand Dames and uniformed military personnel standing in a circle around dancing rich folks.- Interesting to note that Merengue was not the music played by these big bands.-
Merengue back then, was not what it is today. For one, it does not even resembles today's version and was mostly a campo music. At the time, Boleros, Cha-cha-cha's, mambos etc, is what you mostly heard on the radio.
"La sonora Matancera" was huge back then as well as Eduardo Brito, Lucho Gatica, Tona la negra, Anibal de pena, Javier Solis, Maria luisa Landin, Leo Marini, Los tres aces, Los Panchos, Victor hugo Ayala, etc. Mostly all international stars.
Also, interesting to note was that Trujillo was never featured in any of these bashes. You never saw him dancing with a woman or having a drink. Apparently parties of this genre were not his cup of tea. His appearances in the news were limited to affairs of state; never socialising...odd isn't it?
And to answer the latter question, Lambada, There's no comparison with the chasm dividing rich and poor back then to today's relatively huge middle class.
Yes, everybody was monetarily poor then. But I wonder if they weren't richer in the quality of their lives?

[cobraboy]

Originally Posted by Don Juan

I'd rather lived under a Trujillo-era milieu than the so-called freedom in today's DR. At least back then, if you didn't make a fuzz, nobody bothered you.

I always mentally scratch my head when someone says they prefer peace under a brutal dictator and world isolation over a more chaotic life under freedom and exposure to the world.

I don't get it.

I was born in 1952 in the Southern US. Times were more peaceful back then, too. 3 channels of TV, the worse crimes in school was chewing gum, "wait until your father comes home" had teeth, and the milkman left bottles in the little insulated box by the unlocked front door.

[Lambada]

Originally Posted by Don Juan

And to answer the latter question, Lambada, There's no comparison with the chasm dividing rich and poor back then to today's relatively huge middle class.
Yes, everybody was monetarily poor then. But I wonder if they weren't richer in the quality of their lives?

Interesting & thank you for your recollections, Don Juan. Even more interesting set against an email I received from a friend today who has just got back home after an extended stay in DR - their 20th. visit spread over as many years. The difference they noticed between their first visit, 20 years ago, & their recent one: this is a trend we have noticed this particular trip....more unhappy people....more people asking for -almost demanding- money. This does not bode well for the future. We are well aware that times are hard....but it seems to us there is a truly unfortunate shift in emphasis and attitude among many Dominicans.

An interesting perception set against your comment about quality of life issues. Perhaps also links to quality of pride in oneself?

P.S. I can 'age' both you & cobraboy. I was born in London in 1943 in the middle of WWII.

[Don Juan]

Originally Posted by cobraboy

I always mentally scratch my head when someone says they prefer peace under a brutal dictator and world isolation over a more chaotic life under freedom and exposure to the world.

I don't get it.

I was born in 1952 in the Southern US. Times were more peaceful back then, too. 3 channels of TV, the worse crimes in school was chewing gum, "wait until your father comes home" had teeth, and the milkman left bottles in the little insulated box by the unlocked front door.

Mr. Cobraboy, I certainly do not endorse nor condone living in a repressive dictatorship, but you must admit that today's DR. is much more oppressive due to high crime and governmental/police corruption than just twenty or so years ago.
In the forties, fifties and early sixties, DR experienced a brutal, totalitarian government, I admit. My point is that back then, you only had Trujillo and his goons to fear. Drug dealing and getting killed over a cheap item was unheard of. The police didn't/couldn't shake you down as it is regularly done today.
Life was less complicated and all was peaceful.
Back then, firearms were carried only by the military and other big shots. Today, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of civilians -don't really know for sure-, carry guns. The more guns in the streets, the easier to commit crimes.
I'm comparing people's life situations and relative security, not political dissimilarities.
I certainly do not "prefer" a Trujillo over a Balaguer or Fernandez, but I do long for the good ol' days when life was simpler everywhere in the world.

[slrguy]

This is a fascinating thread!

I remember having a very similar conversation with Hatian friends 2 years or so ago, soon after Aristede left.

Almost no electricity. Corrupt goverment troops. Roads miserable. Rampant crime.

I asked them, as a group, were they not better off with the Duvaliers? In unison, they agreed that Haiti was a far better place to live, then. Then why, I asked, did you support Baby Doc's departure? "Because we weren't free!".

I'm nowhere NEAR smart enough to know the answer- but I'm not convinced that democracy's all it's cracked up to be, all the time. I've visited a number of countries, both in our hemisphere and Africa, that most folks were far better off under "benevolent" dictatorships than democracy.

I do know this much - education is the silver bullet. As long as people are uneducated enough to fall for populists like Chavez, their lives trend downward.

I'm curious from older DR hands than myself - what comparisons can be drawn about the schools now, versus 40 years ago?