Is there a reason...
 

That Haiti is so poor? I have not googled or studied it enough to have an answer. Kinda strange since the Dominican Republic is not nearly as bad off.

From what little I've read, the DR has had a somewhat less corrupt government over it's life; and Haiti has higher population density, going all the way back to having a larger slave population when it was a colony. In one of Jared Diamond's books, he makes the case that the DR has had less environmental damage from logging because one of the DR's past leaders was actually in the lumber business and prevented everyone except his buddies from logging public land. I assume the biggest issue is their history of corruption, resulting in more poverty and more overpopulation.

Yeah, corruption (human nature) may be a big issue.

There is no doubt corruption existed after 1960 when independence was granted. However, in the 25 years following independence, the not so eco-minded greedy lumber people bought out the sugar cane farmers, the rum distillers moved (I knew a guy in one of the rum distilling families named Betaincourt) and deforested Haiti completely, causing much of the topsoil to blow into the sea, leaving what is known as boue-gadoue or slushy mud. Nothing can grow in it, and in places where the water table is low, roads just melt away.

Personally, I believe that the populace lacks the know-how and the will to do what must be done. The earthquake didn't help matters, but other islands have had serious quakes and storm damage, yet they have bounced back.

^Wouldn't surprise me.
They didn't learn from Easter Island.
Seems even Banda Ache has rebuilt.

Debt to the West; mostly to French and the US.

Some debt has been forgiven, don't know any details tho.

It wasn't the pact with the devil?

LOL, forgot about that. :D

I'll blame the population. Its their country, if its so bad they need to fix it. Either vote the corrupt leaders out of office or hang them, one way or another fix it.

A few years ago in Nat'l Geographic I think, or maybe Scientific American, they had a world map, color coded by arable land (that stuff will grow in). There was almost a 100% correlation between arable land and wealth. Even in industrialized areas, there was a correlation to agriculture. So if you can't grow anything there then that is an issue.

"A little revolution now and then is a healthy thing, don't you think?"

The numbers are staggering, an estimated 150,000 dead. But the total population count is even more incredible - they must have been barely surviving as it was.

I don't agree. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Peru, Ecuador, all have very little land, but either used other resources or created new industries like Abu Dhabi and UAE.

On the flip side, most of Central America is poor and highly arable.

It's the will of the people and their tolerance for corruption or incompetence.

For example Michigan is very arable but poor, mostly because of the tolerance for corrupt leaders like Kwame Kilpatrick, the felon-mayor who lives in a gated community but only has 6.00/month to pay as disposable income on his restitution bill of $1,000,000.00.

Not to mention greedy leaders in the UAW, GM and Chrysler who ruined their companies and the state for personal gain.

Then there's the incompetence of the Michigan legislature.

I could go on and on. Instead I will say:

HA HA I don't care, my boss just sent me to ORLANDO for a week and it's sunny everywhere! I have left the dungeon-state!! Haven't been back in 25 years since I lived here.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Makes sense.
Check out the link.
The U.S. is behind Haiti.

http://www.sitesatlas.com/Thematic-Maps/Arable-land-and-permanent-crops.html