Last week's highlights

Last week we've visited a number of schools, in which you could notice real differences. For example, the first school (which was about to open in the new school year) we visited was brand new and huge, and it even had its own athletics field. Somewhere else in Sichuan you see an area with temporary buildings (like containers) where you would only encounter a chalk board, tables and chairs. It's good to see though that the children can go to school, but you wonder how long they would stay on the temporary area.
 
What's the cause of one having good buildings/facilities and the other not? I noticed that it could have a relation with the school's reputation. Of a school that has achieved good results for a long time, it's alumni's have gained better positions in society which automatically improves the school's 'network'.
 
Then we also visited an old factory-area. It was close to the epicenter, so the earthquake's results were significantly visible. While we were driving to the place we saw newly build houses (like the normal houses in the Netherlands). Those looked good, but many were still empty, and close to the factory there were still families living in huts which they build with their own hands. 

During the walk through the factory area I heard that the ruins on that area would be preserved to memorize the earthquake, and that the area was bought by an organisation who wants to make it (more) accessible for tourism. I think it's good to keep it preserved so that people still know what happened, and it would also stimulate the economy there if tourists come there again. But isn't there a chance that it will be done in a commercial way and would the local economy really get a profit from this?

---

Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger