Talk:Costa Rica

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Costa Rica was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on January 2, 2005.

For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Costa Rica article.
Article policies
This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Costa Rica, or visit the project page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on its quality.
Costa Rica is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Peer review This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated B-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
SICA ZP
Latin America Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Central America, which collaborates on articles related to Central America. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.
Cleanup Taskforce article This article is being improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of article quality. It is likely to change frequently until completed. Please see its Cleanup Taskforce page for more details.

Cleanup Taskforce page → Edit | Purge

(Please replace [[ARTICLENAME]] with the name of the article when using this template. Thank you.)


Contents

[edit] Opening comments

165.123.142.82 did what I would call vandalism: changing from a country in central america to a mexican state: I reverted it. I´m a Costa Rican and since we didn´t join the Mexican Empire of Iturbide we haven´t been part of Mexico!.----Crio de la Paz 23:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The official language of costa rica is spanish. I removed the English entry: in the caribbean the native language of a lot of the population could be refered to as english but it is usually classified as some sort of creole or patois language from what I remember of reading the ethnologue. Bribri and cabecar are also native languages from this native people and are not the official language of Costa Rica. There are also some colonies of menonite germans and of italians, etc. The point being that these are not "offical" languages. --Crio 20:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know where I could find a summer job in Costa Rica?? I am a student from the America. LeviFunk

Hmm, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, please use Wikitravel or a web search engine, maybe you can get better luck there. EliasTorres 07:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Most of this info is in the main economy article (and, of course, the cia w-factbook). I may whack it down a bit and move other info to the main economy articxle as time allows. Zosodada 19:49, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC) --

Does Costa Rica and Belize really have the same coat of arms? Den fjättrade ankan 21:40, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Compare Coat_of_Arms_of_Belize and image:CostaRica_coa.jpg EliasTorres 07:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If anyone needs some pictures from Costa Rica of, say, the plantlife and terrain, I took some on my last trip down there and would gladly upload them... I have things like coffee fields, living fences, lots of tropica flora, rainshadow effect pictures, epiphytes, etc. Rei

Please do not use the Wikipedia increase your rank in the search engines. It may be considered spam. EliasTorres 07:44, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There's no language section in the article - if anyone can add something I'd be very grateful. Hughcharlesparker 12:48, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

There is a big mistake where it says Costa Rica was the richest colony in Central America. The whole paragraph argues for it being the poorest, which it was. I cannot review it, so please someone that can do so. User:HernandoP 4:45, December 17, 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpantigoso (talk • contribs) 21:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Famous Costa Ricans

I'm trying to add Gil Chaverri - Chemist, Physicist to the list of famous Costa Ricans, however I cannot. He rearranged the periodic table, has numerous publications and books that he authored and sold around the world, he taught at the UACA Medical School for several years. Also Madeleine Stowe, Actor. She is Costa Rican. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccuffster (talk • contribs) 12:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

For what compelling reason did El_C delete my section about famous Costa Ricans like astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz? I'm putting it back and adding another famous Costa Rican to boot, Nobel Peace Prize winner Oscar Arias. GreatAlfredini aka 66.80.5.229 08/03/2005 12:17 PM PDT.

I have some concern about this list of famous Costa Ricans: personally I agree with some choices but disagree with others. Any way I think the actual contents of the list are POV. From my own POV I think the list in the spanish site is much better.--Crio de la Paz 02:32, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Why does the opening paragraph of the the article state that "Costa Rica has one of the biggest armys [sic] in the world"? The article later states that the army has been abolished.

Costarica does have an army. They have the same uniform and use the same weapons such as m-16 and same military vehicles use by teh united states army, so why not call it an amry?

Costa Rica has not army. It has a "Civil Police" and "Judicial Police". The first one is intended to protect the civil population from domestic criminality. In the latest years, this force has been improved in training and equipment, but still under the command of civil authorities, so it cannot be considered as an army. The Judicial Police, also called O.I.J. (from Organismo de Investigación Judicial) is supposed to be a scientific police, in charge of investigations for the crimes such homicides, narcotics, organized crime, and all sort of different investigations, that are stipulated on it creation rules book. The O.I.J. depends from the Court and responds to it. Beside the fact that the Civil Police use an uniform ( as every police in the civilized world ) and some of them has been trained to handle urban conflicts ( that exists in almost every country ), comparing this forces with an army is not only inaccurate but even funny. (Randall solano (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Fsol)

I bet most big city police forces have more fire power than all of the police forces in Costa Rica!!! There is no army as such: no conscription, no generals, no military coups... See the history of our neighbours including El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Colombia...--Crio de la Paz 23:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Nicaragua has filed a complaint against costarica before the interamerican court of human rights for violating the rights of immigrant nicaraguans in costarica. So far the most "important" is the case of a nicaraguan killed in costarica by two rotweilers mean while costaricans including the owner of the dogs, bystandars and security forces stood watching and didn't do absolutely nothing to portect the nicaraguan screaming, crying for his life. Not so peaceful and non violent of a society seems to me.

The sad episode aforementioned, is a scare that Costa Rican, we will hold as a black dot on our common memory. The fact is that it is sad, not because the victim was an illegal immigrant involved in a breaking up of a private property, with a large criminal record for same kind of violations, but because he was a human been. What happened was large and deeply investigated and the two police officers who didn’t react in front of such situation, by killing the dog involved in the attack, are now facing criminal accusation, and they will pay by their negligence according to the penal code of Costa Rica. Trying to use such episode as an example to define the hectic an moral values of the people of Costa Rica, is unfair and fanatic. It is sad to conceive opinions with such a little information on hand.

What´s your source for saying this episode (2 possible inept cops one rotweiler... go check on riots in LA disturbs in France, manifestiations in Australia, kidnapings in Colombia... I could go on and on!) is the "most important"? What really is going on is a problem of excesive illegal inmigration, it´s toll on social services and what to do about it! The biggest issue has been costarican police incursions in poor neighbourhoods where a lot of illegal inmigrants from nicaragua (and other countries, and legal inmigrants and poor costaricans!) live and discussions about policies regarding social services to illegal inmigrants, not 2 rotweilers, a couple of police officers and a whole bunch of people behaving in this awful way!!! I do worry tough because a lot of my fellow costaricans are becoming (from my point of view) xenophobic towards nicaraguans _and_ a lot of nicaraguans (here in Costa Rica and in Nicaragua) are becoming xenophobic towards costaricans!!! --Crio de la Paz 23:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Costa Rica does not have an army. PERIOD. Our constitution from 1948 abolished ::it. Our police forces obviously use guns, in which other way could they defend ::the people?.
The case about the rotweillers is out of place in this discussion what it has::to do with the army?.
I wonder if you ever been in Costa Rica?. If not please come by and take a look ::for yourself. More than 1 million tourists a year seems to me a measure of how::safe and peaceful the country is. It is not like violence doesnt exist,
the human race is far away from forming a single society without violence, (if it ever had been
possible) so don't preach on what you don't know. Heosphoros

I have just came from Costa Rica and I can tell you they dont have an army but they do have strong security at their banks and malls. The security gaurds at the bank have large semi automatic weapons and at the mall they have shotguns. It is far from tranquil in Costa Rica. (FreddyG)

I just came from a visit to the Vatican, and there were guys carrying semi automatic weapons, and I had to pass trough metal detectors to visit a church. Is that meaning that the Vatican is a dangerous place?. Common sense motivate to have discouraging measures in such places like banks and malls, it is better to prevent than to be sorry. I been travelling for almost half of my life, and I haven’t been in a bank in any country were I been, that doesn’t have some source of preventive measures. That is not because the country is unsafe but as and effect of the global grown in criminality acts all around the world. Costa Rica is not the exemption but either the example (~~Randall Solano~~)

[edit] Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board

I would like to announce the establishment of the Wikipedia:Caribbean Wikipedians' notice board. Anyone with an interest in the Caribbean is welcome to join in. Guettarda 1 July 2005 03:56 (UTC)

[edit] Culture section

The culture section seems like it has poor quality (esp. with the parens (and sub parens)). The second para were y'all try to explain the dimunuative seems esp. silly. Couldn't you just link to Diminutive or Tico

[edit] The Switzerland of CA? Blatant POV.

The article states that CR "is often refered [sic] to as the Switzerland of Central America". I ask, by whom? As far as I can tell, only Costa Ricans themselves ever use the expression (stating an opinion which is in actuality not shared in many other countries), which would then make this statement blatantly biased. I suggest removing the sentence altogether. --SaulPerdomo 18:21, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, it's been over 6 months, and the statement is still there, in the same form. Evidently this talk page hasn't been very fruitful in that respect; but I'm not very familiar with WP's policy in these cases (nor do I want to get into a petty flamewar regarding an affectionate nickname), so I won't take it upon myself to edit it. However, the point remains valid: it is POV, and while WP likes to be enriched by differing points of view (in the sense that every unique individual has his/her own unique POV), that does not mean that we shouldn't strive for a neutral POV. In any case, I ask what is so great about comparing CR to a country that was proven to be anything but neutral in aiding the Nazi regime to hide the gold looted from Jews killed in the Holocaust? --SaulPerdomo 19:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It is the Switerland of the Americas because Cananda has been part of the British Empire up 40 to 50 years ago. So that means it canada is not even close lol. In fact no one will ever say that about canada that Canada is "the Switzerland of the Americas" so yes it even surpasses Cananda in peacefulness and longer Standing Democracy.


Oh i reivewed your sources and they said what i said before that urugauy used to be " the switerland of the ameircas" and it is still for South America but for the ENTIRE Americas. Thats where Costa Rica still wins and that why it should be of the Americas not just of central America. Just as my sources proved before you totally deleted everything i said and took a way all my sources so i will revert without even asking you just like you did to me. Your logic makes no sense as you posted also "sources" that state it is refered to as the Switzerland of the Americas". Your sources all state it being the Switerland of the Americas and some even contridict them selves which shows how there some are not very accurate. Also NONE of them say Costa Rica is "the Switerland of the Central America" as you put so dont make things up or come to conclusions you dont even know about because not one of YOUR source is stating it "the Switerland of Central America".

Urugauy is no longer the Switzerlander of the Americas it used to be but ever since it military dictatorship it has lost its title. Costa Rica has NEVER had a military dicatorship and only had two periods of unrest there for Costa Rica is the Switzerland of the entire Americas while Urugauy is just in South America. I will revert the page and this time show you my sources. Unsigned by 24.60.161.63, please review WP:SIG. El_C 21:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Both Costa Rica and Uruguay (relatively recently) have been called the Switzerland of Latin America (or the Americas), but only Costa Rica has been called the Switzerland of Central America and only Uruguay has been called the Switzerland of South America. It makes sense to be specific. References bellow are fairly random, but illustrate this usage outside of my own mind. El_C 08:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
But as I said, it was so noted recently enough; there is no need to clutter the lead with sources, we have the talk page here; your sources are not particularly authoritative (read: WP:RS), and you did not close the quoatation marks; you deleted a section of my response, and you placed your comments at the top rather than at the foot of the section — please refrain from that and please put grearer effeorts in learning how Wikipedia works; finally, Americas also implies Canada. El_C 21:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] References

[edit] Uruguay

[edit] Costa Rica


The fact of this highly POV contentious statement being sourced does not legitimise its presence in the article. our duty is NPOV and so this praising Costa Rica opinion has no place in the opening paragraph, SqueakBox 18:26, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Nobody is saying it isn't true but it is not appropriate for the opening paragraph so I have moved it to the top of the culture section, SqueakBox 18:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Calling Costa Rica the Switerland of the Americas is not a culture thing. Many Americans who come to Costa Rica also use this term including many travel services. it not a POV its just what it been refered to by others.

Well find somewhere else in the article that is not the opening for it. Trying to compare other American and Central American countries unfavourably with Costa Rica in the opening is pure POV. Please read NPOV, SqueakBox 18:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with Costa Rican Culture it belongs and i dont believe it violates the NPOV saying that people openly say Costa Rica is more Peaceful then other American Countries because it history proves it.

Yes it does in the opening. People say the US is Satan, does that mean that should go into the opening there. Have you read NPOV? SqueakBox 19:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

it doesnt belong in the culture section though and it introuduces a little about how peaceful costa rica is.

Well that is cultural, though I have to say I don't personally believe Costa Rica is either a particularly safe or peaceful country, SqueakBox 19:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Just becuase you dont believe it doesnt mean its right sorry. You could be the one saying US is satan. Please you are pretty much admiting that you deleted the qoute in the first place because you dont agree with it. Not becuase of the NPOV. We have creditable sources on this very talk page. You on the other hand are NOT a creditable source.

I said I don't think it is a peaceful country because you said it is, this after I had done my reverts, so your imputation of my motivations is false. I removed it because it is opinion that in the opening paragraph pretends to be fact while showering praise on Costa Rica, but my personal beliefs don't come into it. try reading Wikipedia:Assume good faith, SqueakBox 19:17, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I have made it clear that I am not disputing that some people think this, but big deal as I say some people think the US is Satan but we dobn't put charged POV statements like this in the opening. Please follow wikipedia policies in how you edit, SqueakBox 19:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Your statements are so wishwashy thought You first Delete the statement entirely then when I revert it you put it in another section. Seriously something is up. And just because You dont think its a peaceful country, the Creditable sources at top by El_C dont lie. Seriously looking back at the log now heres what you wrote the first time " (rm contentious statement and untrue statement about political stability) " haha now you say its true it just doesnt belong there. seriously read the talk full of the creditable sources before changing things you dont like to hear.

If you won't argue respectfully I won't bother arguing at all. Please be civil, see Wikipedia:Civility. What has El C got to do with this? (I know what he has to do with you). Costa Rica is not an example of political stability in the region. You said you are trying to promote how peaceful Costa Rica is on this site. Please don't, there are many places you can do that on the web but this is not one of them, SqueakBox 19:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

What is your source for saying that "costa rica is not an example of political stability in the region". In Central America Costa Rican history compared to guatemala´s, el savadors´s, honduras, nicaragua, and panama does prove the point: costa rica has been a democratic state since 1948. In the rest of this countries there have been wars, military coups and the like in this period!--Crio de la Paz 23:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


The "Centralamerican Switzerland" issue got popularised among costaricans by means of a very popular folk song called "Linda Costa Rica", where it's lyrics state "Por ser tan linda Costa Rica la llaman la Suiza centroamericana" which roughly translates into "for being so beautiful Costa Rica is called the centralamerican Switzerland". This verse is repeated over and over again throughout the song. Another of the verses says "Es Costa Rica la reina del café" (Costa Rica is the queen of coffee", refering of course to the role of coffee as a major export. This very song is thus very patriotic, and of course reflects mostly an idillic Costa Rica. It really shouldn't be taken at face value.

I agree that the claim to costa rica being "la suiza centroamericana" and that stuff shouln´t be taken at face value. It´s a cultural thing, based on this song that has being popular and used in political speaches and such. I do think it has a place here regarding costarican culture and beliefs. The fact is also that this is a point of discussion (even here!) Is costa rica "like" switzerland in any way? what does this really mean? are we (costaricans) really that peaceful? I think this whole thing is important regarding what costa rica is but should be written in a way that is NPOV.--Crio de la Paz 23:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why this discussion would go on after the references were posted. Uruguay and Costa Rica have been called the Switzerland of America. And...one last thing...Even Wikipedias bylaws state that POV ARE useful, because, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, so the stoic rejection of POV is just not true. I think some of the contributors here have to calm down. Just because they don't ike the facts, doesn't mean they are not true.Manuzel 03:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

POV : I am Costa Rican as well as Swiss citizen. I can tell you that I feel proud of been both. The two country shares a lot of great values : democracy, tolerance, preference for peace solutions, both are neutral to military conflicts from their political constitution, both have a great development in aspects as industry, education, health care, and even geographically, they are very alike, with the distinction that Switzerland has snow on its mountains and Costa Rica not. In any rate, is there any relevance in the fact that Costa Rican feels proud to compare themselves with the Swiss ? , I will concern the day we like to compare to dictatorial regimes with not respect for human life or freedom of rights of the minorities. Randall solano (talk) 14:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] stability

Please source that people generally think Costa rica is an example opf political stability in the region. Sure in the eighties, but the whole region is stable right now. IMO this is a cheap shot at the other CA countries. Stop trying to add your pro Costa Rica opinions to this article as if they are fact, SqueakBox 19:36, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You must source your POV. I dopn't need to source it is wrong. Are you listening to what I anm saying. You have provided no argum ents for your stance today and for such an inexperienced editor you seem to be a great edit warrior, SqueakBox 19:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

"====Costa Rica====


OMG. Ive have told you just about every time to scroll up! But no you dont do so. Ok! jesus you need to listen more El_C has gotten these Creditable sources. ok? did i really have to put them on here.


Please be civil. No, these only say it is the Switzerland of the Americas, I want a surce that it is generally accepted tha\t Costa Rica is the most political stable copuntry in the region in 2005. Please provide that source, SqueakBox 19:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

ok WoW ? seriously that what the "swtierzland of the Americas" means damn it! jesus christ

Once you source your claim that it is currently the most political stable country in the region I will put it back in but I bet you can't source it because it isn't true, though it was probably up till about 10 years ago, as there has been no civil war in the region for since 96, SqueakBox 19:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


Are you kidding? wow ignorance... anyway here are a bunch of sources. I'm finding more as this is posted.


http://www.costaricainfo.com/

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cs.html

http://www.immigration-usa.com/wfb2004/costa_rica/costa_rica_economy.html

http://www.businesscostarica.com/

http://www.cocori.com/library/crinfo/nutshel.htm

http://www.vivacostarica.com/costa-rica-retirement.html

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107430.html

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761572479/Costa_Rica.html#s1

Only http://www.vivacostarica.com/costa-rica-retirement.html claims it is the most stable country in the region, as would I if was trying to persuade retired Americans to live there. Then others just say it is stable which is very different from making a comparison, SqueakBox 20:06, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You are not reading correctly then.

Infoplease.com a creitable sources state this "Costa Rica has a reputation as one of the most stable, prosperous, and least corrupt Latin American countries."http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107430.html

http://www.cocori.com/library/crinfo/nutshel.htm "Costa Rica is home to one of the oldest democracies in the Americas. The country has been noted for its friendliness and preoccupation with peace. Its policy of active neutrality has twice earned it the nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1987 this prestigious award was presented to then-president of the Republic Dr. Oscar Arias. This, the fact that over a quarter of its territory enjoys protection in the ever-growing network of national parks and reserves, its continued dedication to environmental protection, and many other reasons answer why Costa Rica has repeatedly been referred to as the Switzerland of the Americas."

So trust me i am right

I have now added It is seen as one of the most stable countries in Latin America. in the politics section. Favourable comparisons with other CA countries is unnecessary, SqueakBox 20:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

No because if you look at the two sources they state it is the most. and this is why it is refered to as the "switerzland of the Americas" Thats what the title "Switerland of the Americas" mean

As I have said, I am not disputing the switzerland of the Americas statement merely its placing. The only thing you have to credibly source is that it is currently the most stable country in ther region, and even then I would argue it is an unnecessary comparison that insults other CA countries, but you have only sourced that claim with a retirement in Costa Rica ad, which doesn't count, SqueakBox 20:17, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe it is necessary, it shows how stable and peaceful Costa Rica has been in history comapred to its others. http://www.cocori.com/library/crinfo/nutshel.htm "Costa Rica is home to one of the oldest democracies in the Americas. The country has been noted for its friendliness and preoccupation with peace. Its policy of active neutrality has twice earned it the nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1987 this prestigious award was presented to then-president of the Republic Dr. Oscar Arias. This, the fact that over a quarter of its territory enjoys protection in the ever-growing network of national parks and reserves, its continued dedication to environmental protection, and many other reasons answer why Costa Rica has repeatedly been referred to as the Switzerland of the Americas." This not a retirement site and states very clearly

And what are you talking about https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cs.html states the same too."Costa Rica is a Central American success story: since the late 19th century,"

http://centralamerica.com/cr/info/"Don Pepe died in 1990 a national hero, his deeds having set the scene for the social and economic progress that would earn Costa Rica the reputation as a peaceful and stable island of democracy in one of the world's most politically unstable, and often war-torn regions"

http://www.intel.com/jobs/costarica/sites/heredia.htm"...politically and economically stable countries in Latin America and is its oldest democracy, with a long-standing democratic tradition and one of the highest education standards in the region. "

This is not the place to either prove what a great country Costa Rica is or that the other CA countries are not so good. That is your POV not encyclopedic material. If you just want top promote CR do so elsewhere, SqueakBox 20:31, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Now i think your just biased because I have shown you plenty of encyclopedic material that states this and you just won't accept it. Which makes sense after reading that you live and have an Honduranian wife.

Your 1990 quote is out of date and you still fail to source the disparaging claims about other CA countries. You have clearly failed to source your claim. You bet I won't accept your claims that disparage Honduras. Why should I? SqueakBox 20:34, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't make opinionated claims about Honduras, and I am wanting you to not make them about CR, SqueakBox 20:36, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You have sourced that it is considered the switzerland of the Alps and that it is considered politically stable, and both those bits of info are now in the article. What more do you want? Does it have to be the best, the most opeaceful or what? SqueakBox 20:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

IMO the quote about CR being a success story with $9,490 average wage is a joke, I wonder what the minimum wage is, clearly high enough to attract Nica workers but not anyone else. The CIA may consider that to be a success story but I think in saying that they are just being patronising, SqueakBox 20:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes it should say so. you dont get it i had an exact conflict the other time with the user El_C and im tried of this coming up. I proved my points and its pretty obvious that some of my sources that arent even retirement websites state it. I dont believe it is being biaist if it was to be it would be like "Costa Rica is the most peaceful country in the Americas becuase the rest of Latin America has to many wars" all it stated was that many refered it to as such. And please everything you have said has just been shoved up ur mouth becuase you are speaking with NO SOURCES. I am. like that Igorant qoute right above. PS that GDP is a lot better then all the other central american countries. And it is 200 dollars off of Russias GDP to date

You have not sourced your claims. Give me a cached version with your claim about Costa Rica being better and then you will have sourced it. I don't have to source that your extreme opinion is not true. your gfzailure to source your claims other than with ads is glaring. Stop being juvenile and rude. If that is how you are and you are not willing to change hyou won't last very long here as rude boresd are not tolerated, SqueakBox 20:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You are the one who is acting like this and as i can see from your log many people feel the same way about you. I have given you the sources and now you state that i dont? please. Besides, how am i going to respect you for saying ignorant things about Costa Rica?

Nobody thinks that. Nor have I insulted you but I am willing to take on trolls. You have blatantly insulted me on various occasions, you have been blocked for vandalism, you have made false claims and pretended to be an admin. Now stop insulting me, SqueakBox 20:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC) \ Why revert. Your opinions shouldn't go in the opening. We don't all share your belief CR is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Your arguments ahve failed, your harrassment does nobody any favours and so now you revert back to your opinion. Obviously you care a lot more about CR than you do about wikipedia, very sad, SqueakBox 21:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


I do care a lot about Wikipedia that is why im putting this Factual piece of Information up, I'm glad one of the users moved it to more suitable spot thought. So you can not say i dont care about Wikipedia. Now you are putting words into people's mouths. I never said Costa Rica was the most "superior" thing. All I state is what the page used to state before you kept reverting: "Costa Rica is seen as an example of political stability in the region, and is referred to as the "Switzerland of the Americas"." that's all.... nothing about being better than sliced bread.

I am very happy with what is there at the moment. Nothing in the opening paragraph, and the comments aren't implying Costa Rica is the best country in the region. That is all I wanted. Are you happy with what we have? SqueakBox 22:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

See here's the difference, that comment has been seen by many other users god knows how many times now, and no one but you has brought atention to it althought they have added to the page lots. I don't honestly think anyone thinks this statement means "Costa Rica is better", neither do I. It's just an important qoutation about what people have said about Costa Ricas history of peace and the abolishment of the army. And I am sorry if I misunderstood you, but since you deleted it entirely the first time I just thought you did because you had not liked it.

Pabloalbv 19:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)Claims on CR's political stability have an empirical foothold , nevertheless in order not to make any comments that might despise the rest of Central America the title Switzerland of CA must be used with care, also no one in Costa Rica these days considers our country to be a Switzerland. With regards of CR's GDP a good source of first hand information is CR's yearly State of the Nation, a compilation of statistics coupled with analysis of social and economic trends: http://www.estadonacion.or.cr/. With regards of the term "Nica" workers my suggestion of to refrain from making desparaging comments or engage into verbal abuse against Nicaraguans, after all people who fought an alleged "Satan" for a whole decade and prevailed deserve some respect.Pabloalbv 19:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I read through the argument, and I think what the article says now is fine, but I'm not sure why the same bit appears word for word in two locations. History section as well as politics section. Perhaps it is more relevant in one section, and should appear exclusively there, or one section could have it reworded a bit.NewishUser 15:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Costa Rica has had a democratic and stable government since 1948, the rest of the central american region hasn´t (there have being wars, military coups, and nondemocratic regimes). I don´t see how stating that within this region Costa Rica has been stable. It does seem POV to me to state that "generally people" believe in this stability. This is a gross generalisation. I think it would be best to state that "some sources have mentioned costa rica as an example of political stability in the central american region". --Crio de la Paz 01:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Crio. Stating that Costa Rica is the most stable country in the region is not insulting to the other Centralamerican countries. It's the truth, and insisting otherwise is just anoying reflects a personal subplot. You can even look at the CIA world factbook and they mention that "Costa Rica is a Central American success story"...Could it be that it's because other Central American nations have had a harder time? Stating that one country is good does not mean others are bad. For that matter all Central American nations are relatively stable if you compare them to some african nations, and I think most would agree to that statement. Drop the issue, it's a no brainer.Manuzel 02:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This is my very first post on wikipedia. I studied at a University in Costa Rica (but am from the US) and am now a graduate student in Political Science in the US, currently doing a research paper on democratic peace, stability and consolidation in Costa Rica. I wanted to note that John Booth (1998) in his book "Costa Rica: Quest for Democracy" notes Costa Rica as the longest standing democratic regime in Latin America (the wikipedia page notes this, but says a citation is needed). He cites John Peeler's (1985) book: "Latin American Democracies: Colombia, Costa Rica, Venezuela" as a further citation. Thank you. kyoars 11:24, 8 Nov 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits speak for themselves

See [1] and [2] -- I think these speak for themselves :-) Let's enjoy the rest of 2005 as we welcome 2006! --HappyCamper 22:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC) Pabloalbv 18:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)I have added some notes on trade and international policy, is someone wants to take a look at APEC membership or Costa Rica stance on foreign policy you are advised to check the electronic archives of La Nacion newspaper for December 2005 and January 2006: www.nacion.com, pabloalbvPabloalbv 18:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting problem

I don't see this behavior in IE, but when viewed using Mozilla this page has serious formatting issues, and I'm not sure how best to address the problem.

To begin, the Foreign Affairs section is missing entirely in Mozilla. It doesn't even appear in the TOC. The only way to see this section in Mozilla is to click the [edit] link that appears to the right of the Flora and Fauna section! In order to edit Flora and Fauna, one must click the [edit] link that appears to be associated with the Demographics section.

All other [edit] links are piled at the bottom of the page like cordwood, instead of being at the top-right of each section, as they should be. I suspect that these problems are at least partially related to the fact that there is a large number of pictures in the Demographics section pushing the [edit] links to the bottom. I'm at work and have already spent more time on this than I can spare. Could some very helpful Wikipedian who knows a great deal about Wiki markup, as it relates to various browsers, take a look at this? Unfortunately, being at work, I have only IE and Mozilla with which to test the article. —CKA3KA (Skazka) 19:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Authenticity of Picture of Valle Central de Costa Rica

This picture looks suspiciously like a computer-generated (CGI) landscape. Can someone confirm that it's genuine? Thanks.

210.23.157.78 03:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm pretty sure your right (Its CG). Not sure whether or not its a problem though.


Yes, its text actually mentions it's from NASA's Visible Earth program. It's computer-generated and while it's an accurate representation of the topography of the region, it does not belong here amid actual photographs. I have removed it. CGameProgrammer 23:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Continuity Amongst Wikipedia Articles?

In this Costa Rica article, it is stated that "Costa Rica was the first country in the world to constitutionally abolish its army." However, in the linked "List of countries without an army" article, in reference to Liechtenstein it is said that they "Abolished their army in 1868 because it was too costly." Later on in the Costa Rica article, it is said that "In 1949, José Figueres Ferrer abolished the army". Obviously, there is discontinuity between these statements; which are correct? 68.52.68.18 02:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I read a little bit about this so I think I can say this...It's true that Lichenblabla dissolved it's army first, but I think there are 2 diferences, which I may be wrong in the first, but am sure about the second. First, Lichenblabla is a a Kingdom/Dutchy/Principality or something of the sort, they are not a democracy, or were not one at the time of abolishing its army. But as I said I'm not so sure about that one.

The second, and I am sure of this, is that beacuse they have no army, they depend on another country for defense. Before WWI they were more friendly to Austria, however with the increasing problems of the Austrian-Hungry Empire leading up to the war, they turned to Switzerland. To this day, Lichenblabla trusts it's national security to the Swiss, who in fact DO have an army, so in some way...They do have an army. In fact there are a number of islands in the South Pacific who also have no army, but rely on old Colonists for their defense. On the other hand Costa Rica has no army and depends on no other foreign army for their protection. So I guess it is trully WITHOUT ARMY.

And I hope somebody can inform me about this, but maybe Lichenblabla pays a certain amount of thier GNP to the Swiss for defense?? Does anybody know this? But anyway, that is why CR is thought to be the first country to abolish it's army. Although it could just be a mistake. Somebody would have to referee if what Lichenblabla actually did in 1868 is a valid abolishment of thier army. Hope it helped.--Manuzel 08:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Foreign Affairs question/concern

The last paragraph reads poorly, and makes statements that seem a bit dubious:


Costa Rica's main foreign policy objective is to foster human rights and sustainable development as a way to secure stability and growth. Nevertheless, economic pragmatism may prevail over ideology. For instance, during the Cold War Costa Rica was the first Central American country to have diplomatic ties with the Soviet Union as a way to boost its coffee exports, to the dismay of the Nixon administration.


It is unclear whether the "objective... to foster human rights" is an objective within Costa Rica, or a worldwide objective. If it is worldwide, fine, but if it is only within Costa Rica, it doesn't belong in the foreign affairs section. The bit about "economic pragmatism prevail[ing] over ideology" and then about Costa Rican ties to the Soviet Union during the Cold War doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It means that the "ideology" of fostering human rights and sustainable development was contrary to selling coffee to the Soviet Union. That is either blatantly POV or just plain nonsensical.

In addition, "main foreign objective policy" seems to be referring to the present, whereas the bit about the Soviet Union refers to the past, and "economic pragmatism may prevail" is a statement about what might happen in the future. The author has tied all three together, which doesn't really seem logical.

This paragraph seems to serve no concrete purpose in the article, so if there aren't any objections, I will delete it. NewishUser 03:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


Ok, I went ahead and deleted it. I also noticed something some word choice/spelling issues in the following sentence:

The U.S. instead set up such a center in El Salvador, a country alleged to have a tradition of human rights equivocacy.

The word "tradition" doesn't really seem to fit. Also, I wasn't sure what equivocacy meant, so I looked it up and it wasn't a word. Perhaps the author meant "equivocation", but that is not something that can really be alleged. A country either "uses ambiguous language" or doesn't. The accusation seems to be of "human rights violations", and this is why "tradition" doesn't really fit. I believe it should read

The U.S. instead set up such a center in El Salvador, a country alleged to have a history of human rights violations.

Once again, if anyone objects, let me know, otherwise I will change it tomorrow. NewishUser 14:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm not sure you want mention of body parts in this article. Someone has been having fun with body humor....

sorry, but what does it matter if costa rica's policies dont line up to the usa. i dont belive it needs to be mentioned.

[edit] Paragraph length and specifics

I deleted the part in the politics that stated that Arias had beat Solis and Guevarra, because I think it's irrelevant to mention such specific information in a general paragraph. Actually the Arias stuff is a little specific, but I left it in for now. It should go on the Oscar Arias Page, not in the Politics of Costa Rica page and even less in the Costa Rica page subsection on politics. The subsections should be general and should give readers a quick idea about Costa Rica, but not the whole story.Manuzel 02:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC) they said oooo what a great place to be There were also other candidates in that election. The reelection thing could be important regarding costarrican politics (it has been a big issue). Politics shuld be rewritten (I might try to work some time to rewrite part of it): here in Costa Rica we elect a president and 2 vicepresidents. The rest of the executive changes a lot every 4 years (i.e. Oscar Arias has named one production minister that will oversee and maybe try to unify the ministry of economics industry and commerce and the ministry of agriculture. There are also some other big changes in the executive branch going on just now). So the cabinet and the number of ministers that conform it changes a lot. (Abel Pacheco even distanced a vicepresident from all of his government!) --Crio de la Paz 23:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A map

The article needs a map of Costa Rica with the major cities. Page Up 16:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is most of the content taken from another source?

Dont wnat to sound like a prude, but is this infomration taken from another source, it looks like it's taken from a USA textbook about costa rica in the manner in which it compares the two countires. GeorgeBuchanan 19:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)GeorgeBuchanan

[edit] Vandalism

For some reason I can not understand someone placed a picture of slums and had them labeled as "housing", nice try, I am Costa Rican, and to begin with those are not even Costa Rican slums. Whoever you are, refrain from doing that. Do not vandalize this page again (pabloalbv)

Agreed I its been removed already. So yeah its fine now Il put up some pictures of the San Jose and other houses soon hopefully. (FR-Altas 17:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC))

Given the recent number of vandalism attacks on this entry, I'm beginning to think editing should be restricted to those users who are logged in. croll 16:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geography

I eliminated the Volcan Tajublabla and other 3 Guatemala peaks references...Nice try guys, but this is a CR page...Not that I have anything against Guatemala, but obviously somebody wrote it trying to include one countries peaks in anothers...And that is unacceptable because it allows anybody to include their facts...For example...Chirripo is the Highest mountain in CR, although it's 3000 metres smaller than Aconcagua in Argentina/Mount McKinley in Alaska/5000 m less than Everest in Nepal-China/700 m taller than Mt. Fuji in Japan...all true references...but not relevant.--Manuzel 08:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Where's the sports?

No mention about popular sports in Costa Rica. I noticed that football (with goals, not touchdowns) is popular there. Perhaps someone with better insight can add a section on Costa Rican sports.

DaDoc540 23:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm...good point. Maybe a separate article would be better thoughManuzel 02:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Da Doc is right, there is no mention of any popular sports in CR. Maybe we could include a chart with the names of the most important football teams, championships won, city they represent. We may also create a page of Football of Central America mentioning the major teams in the area

Pabloalbv 7:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Motto

So what do we call the motto, ¡Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz!, or ¡Pura Vida!. I've looked online, and they both seem to be used. -Patstuart 13:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


"Pura vida" is not a motto, it's like saying US motto is "Wassup, dude?". Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz is the final line of our National Anthem and it reflects Costaricans will to strive and live in peace. Quidnovi 16:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC) Quidnovi

[edit] General editorial problems

In the section 20th century, the last paragraph looks like the caption to a photograph; it begins "Below: photo of..." or to that effect. Mulp 17:55, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


I was wondering why the English page about Costa Rica and the Spanish page about Costa Rica have different information. For example, the english page saya that Columbus visited Costa Rica on his first trip in 1492. However, the Spanish page says Columbus went there on his fourth trip in 1502 and made the first european contacts with the indigenous people. What is right??

Well that is easy to correct. Columbus' 4th trip was in 1502, so it was definitely 1502 (1492 was his first trip). The english page is wrong.Manuzel 08:26, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Animal Sounds of Costa Rica

I think visitors would enjoy hearing some of the wonderful sounds of the diverse Costa Rican animal kingdom.

REMOVED SPAM FROM TLAK PAGE (as well as rest of wikipedia) --Shakehandsman 05:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Columbus expedition

I've changed the mention of the Columbus expedition, as it was in his fourth travel that he arrived at what is today Limón. Thats what we are teached since primary school, anyway when I have a little bit of time I will look for a couple of sources and expand a bit on the conquest period. Not to do it overly long, but to add certain key aspects (the principal conquistadores, Hernandez de Córdoba, etc. the fact that most of the first conquest was done from Panama through the pacific coast and that the hinterland -so-called Central Valley- was settled by spaniards only after the 1560s, much later than most of the region) 201.198.104.118

[edit] Proposed WikiProject on Costa Rica

There now is a proposed WikiProject for Costa Rica at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Costa Rica. Any parties interested in joining should add their names there, and we will see if there is enough support to make this an active project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 21:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-CAFTA Documentary on the links section? POV

Someone put a link to the anti-CAFTA documentary "Costa Rica SA" on the External Links section, under the Government and Administration subsection. I am removing this, since this documentary is not endorsed by the Costa Rican government and only represents certain people's point-of-view.

[edit] Motto of Costa Rica

The motto of Costa Rica: "Vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz" is taken directly from the Costa Rican national anthem (Himno Nacional) and means "Long live (or 'hurrah for') work and peace."

Noble patria, tu hermosa bandera expresión de tu vida nos da; bajo el límpido azul de tu cielo blanca y pura descansa la paz.
En la lucha tenaz, de fecunda labor que enrojece del hombre la faz, conquistaron tus hijos labriegos sencillos eterno prestigio, estima y honor.
¡Salve, oh tierra gentil! ¡Salve, oh madre de amor! Cuando alguno pretenda tu gloria manchar, verás a tu pueblo valiente y viril, la tosca herramienta en arma trocar.
Salve oh Patria tú pródigo suelo, dulce abrigo y sustento nos da; bajo el límpido azul de tu cielo ¡vivan siempre el trabajo y la paz!

"Live in work and peace" is an erroneous translation. The motto is NOT in the imperative, and if so would have to read:

"Vivan siempre en trabajo y paz"

and without the article "la" in front of "paz." Mkhkoh 19:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geography Section.

So, on the main page under the geography section it says "people in costa rica poop alot." Could someone who knows how to use this please remove that?

[edit] Review

Please check the parragraph on Oscar Arias and the TLC. It's full of errors. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.169.11.192 (talk) 00:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

IF SOMEONE COULD PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT COSTA RICAN ARCHITECTUR THAT WOULD BE A BIG HELP!Thanx a lot and yes I know its in the wrong section but i didn't know where to put it.

[edit] No Tourism Section???

costa rica being the main central american tourist destination and why not add a tourist section when this country is known for their extreme beauty and beautiful country?Bacanaleranica

The risk is writing the section in a way that doesn't turn into an advertisement. Regardless, it's a huge part of the economy (largest single portion?) and would be a worth addition to the article IMO. croll 14:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I would like to suggest a link to www.travelext.com, a very comprehensive Costa Rica travel site.
  • Looks like linkspam to me.Notmyrealname 16:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add El Semanario to list of new sources

I feel that the University of Costa Rica newspaper El Semanario should be added to the list of news sources. It is prominent and offers a different viewpoint from some of the mainstream news sources.

here is the link http://www.semanario.ucr.ac.cr/

Sarahs1024 05:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Sarahs1024

[edit] Geography: List of Rivers

I'd like to see a list of rivers of Costa Rica. Shall i just start one, under the Geography section? Thanks naomi 19:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, good idea, SqueakBox 19:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Typos in Costa Rica article

There are two typos of the same word in the article about Costa Rica (english version.) Under the "Politics" header, 4th paragraph reads "...each directed by a major. Majors are choosen..." The word "major" is used instead of the correct "mayor"

I am not allowed to fix this error and appreciate it if someone could help correct this "minor" error.

get it-

Thank you, Amuniz78

I've never wriiten here before so in case you need proof - Major and mayor are homophones meaning that they sound alike but have different meanings.

The definition of the word mayor is 1. the chief executive official, usually elected, of a city, village, or town. 2. the chief magistrate of a city or borough.

whereas major is generally used to refer to a position in the military 1. a commissioned military officer ranking next below a lieutenant colonel and next above a captain. 2. one of superior rank, ability, etc., in a specified class.

source: www.dictionary.com

--Amuniz78 02:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Done with the major / Mayor correction Elegarth 22:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting a source

  • "It is also the only country in which both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans can be seen from the same point." Does anyone have a source for this? I would delete it, but i simply don't know whether its true or not. LaNicoya 05:05, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
You can see the Pacific, and the Carribean sea at the top of Mt. Chiripo for about 250$. (FreddyG)
  • Thats great, i was requesting a source not original research. The sentence claims.. "It is also the only country in which both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans can be seen from the same point." Since Costa Rica is larger in width than Panama i doubt its the only country, I'm deleting it until a source becomes available. LaNicoya 03:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • LaNicoya, you are right, both oceans can be seen from Panama also. One clarification first, even though Panama is narrower than most of Costa Rica, the key for this sight to happen is altitude. All reported places are above 3000 m.

Here are the references for both countries:

  • In Costa Rica, from three places: (1)Volcán Irazú (3432 m), access by car to the National Park and then a short trek, (2) Cerro Chirripó (3823 m), access only by a two-day trek, this is the highest summit in CR, and (3) Cerro de la Muerte (3400 m) can be seen from the Inter-American Highway, just before the summit. There are plenty of references, as this opportunity is sold to tourists:

http://es.centralamerica-photo.com/volcano-irazu.php; http://www.joluva.com/Toursxsp.html; http://www.viajeshvtour.com/America/InfoAmerica/CostaRicaInfo.htm; http://coastsmountainscr.com/ES/about_costa_rica/about_costa_rica.phtml; http://www.diariofrontera.com/index1.php?action=show&type=news&id=31687; http://www.sunnylandtours.com/PDF/SLT_Costa_Rica07.pdf; http://www.guiascostarica.com/magia.htm; http://www.chirripo.com/classic.html; http://www.guiascostarica.com/magia.htm; http://coastsmountainscr.com/ES/about_costa_rica/about_costa_rica.phtml;

  • Note that in all cases there is a warning: "on a clear day one can view both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts". This condition is in fact very rare, because you need not to have clouds at those altitudes (usually they are lower than the summits), so your changes are better if you are there early in the morning (at dawn), and hope for the best.

Finally, I do not know where this curious fact was mentioned, but I think it belongs more properly to some article o section about tourism in CR. Mariordo (talk) 18:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Source coming soon....

I added some information about the colonial history of costa rica as well as a mention of the united fruit companies role in the construciton of the railways. I read this information in a book on costa rican history, in two volumes, pulbished by oceano, written in spanish. I do not have the exact details, however, to use it as an inline source, and I wish I did. Also, can someone help me with the dates for the part I added? It was in the middle of the history section, the part about the isolation of costa rica from guatemala city, etc... that paragraph and the next one. tahnks Friendly1013 23:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slave Trade

There was a bit of recent editing back and forth concerning the slave trade in Costa Rica. A quick google search turned up a number of links indicating that Costa Rica did, in fact, have slaves. (See http://www.infocostarica.com/people/black.html and Atlantic slave trade.) I don't want to revert this though without discussion due to a possible revert war. croll 16:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, There was slave trade in Costa Rica, as there was in all Central American states. The article should be changed to indicate that there were fewer slaves and far less accessibility to slaves than other central american nations, not that there were no slaves at all.

Friendly1013 09:55, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Glaring factual inaccuracy, too big for me to feel comfortable editing

But...

The article twice references the distance from Guatemala City, present day capital of Guatemala.

Firstly, and most worryingly, as being capital of Guatemala during "Spanish colonial times"

In fact, the principal city of Guatemala, capital of all Central America, was Antigua, Guatemala. Guatemala City is not even founded until the 18th Century (1773)

The article then makes a second mention of distance from Guatemala City, that is perhaps incorrect for the reason cited above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinhut (talk • contribs) 03:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually what is today "Antigua Guatemala" was the second capital of Guatemala. Current Guatemala City is the third capital that the Capitanía, Central American Republic and República de Guatemala has had. --Crio de la Paz (talk) 06:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rearrangement of sections

Being new to this article, I don't want to make this change without agreement. I suggest moving the section "Provinces and cantons" from under "Politics" to under "Geography." Do you agree? DBlomgren 15:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with this idea. Provinces and cantons are political subdivisions and not geographically based. Green Giant (talk) 08:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biased on the Tourism section

Before doing some editing and to avoid an edit war, let me raise the point that this section was written with a complete biased regarding sexual tourism. Tourism is key to the Costa Rican economy, it is well known and recognized around the world becuase it does have true ecotourism, but someone decided to emphasize only sex related tourism. First, prostitution IS NOT legal in Costa Rica, even some of the references included regarding sexual tourism says so. Second, the article is completely unbalanced, just look at the irrelevant details regarding sexual tourism, that belong somewhere else, but NOT in a country article. Third, just follow the sources, are these valid for a Wiki article?. After the discussion, if one occurs, I would like to work on the real issues regarding tourism in Costa Rica, including sex related, but with the proper proportions of the issue. Mariordo (talk) 13:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, sex-tourism does need to be de-emphasized. However, I don't see anything wrong with the sources used. But it is too detailed on sex tourism for the country-level article. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Dear User:Kww, If you want to discuss sex tourism, the country´s main article is not the place to do it. Instead, go to the sex tourism article and contribute over there. I included real info about tourism and left a short mention to sex tourism, with all the references, just in case someone is interested. I also placed the subject on the talk page for discussion, and the only other participant agreed this is not the place to discuss this subject. I will not start an editing war with you but instead I am requesting a Wiki administrator do undo your changes, or you can do it, and please, keep the real tourism info that´s already there. Mariordo (talk) 02:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
    • PS: and by the way, a newspaper article is not a good enough source to include that sex tourism is 10% of total tourism earnings. By Wikipedia standards you need a more reliable source, like the World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, etc. I seriously don´t know if you are criticizing sex tourism in Costa Rica or trying to make propoganda for single men to go there. Either way, wiki is not a blog to express personal opinions or do personnal researd. Check your facts, despite what one of your sources says, prostitution is ilegal in Costa Rica. Mariordo (talk) 02:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no particular interest in sex tourism. I did not write that information originally. I simply noticed that you had removed sourced information for an invalid reason. If you can find reliable sources that contradict the information, feel free to revise it. If you want to expand the other tourism information so that it appears larger and more important, feel free. Deleting sections because you think it doesn't belong in a mainstream article doesn't make sense to me at all.Kww (talk) 03:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I was asked by Mariordo to have a look. I think Kww is correct in the amount of material he has retained, which amounts to only two sentences and is a small part of the tourism section. The material is sourced, and is presented in an objective fashion, without inappropriate detail. The amount of material quoted in the note is reasonable, in order to show that the statements in the text are supported. This topic could well be expanded elsewhere, but I do note that attempts to expand similar material have met with various difficulties. But Mariordo is also correct in expanding to a reasonable extent the material on ecotourism, and adding an appropriate picture from Commons. This could also be expanded elsewhere, and should meet with fewer dffficulties. For this summary article, my advice is to leave well enough alone. DGG (talk) 04:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Where is Costa Rica located? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.86.254.74 (talk) 23:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Central America: between Nicaragua and Panama.

  • Since there is a new article on Tourism in Costa Rica, and sex tourism was clearly not a subject that belongs to a country article, I exported the entire paragraph to the new article, where there is a whole section on the environmental and social impacts of tourism in Costa Rica. Besides sex tourism, I will edit on the impact's section issues regarding the boom of beachfront developments, environmental impact of some hotels and resorts (such as Tambor and Caribbean Village in Papagayo), overload of national parks carrying capacity, etc. Feel free to contribute. Mariordo (talk) 19:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anexation of Nicoya

There seems to be a misconception here: the anexation of the Nicoya Party was at a time when this party was mostly independent: they responded to the authorities at Guatemala City, not Nicaragua (at an earler period even Costa Rica's governor resided in Nicaragua, but later on this wasn't the case) and it was through a Cabildo Abierto, that is: the independent territory of Nicoya (La Alcaldía de Nicoya) decided, on it's own, that they wished to be part of Costa Rica. This was mainly because most trade was with Costa Rica through the sea and both countries had even a political history together: since neither had enough population to be represented at the Concejo de Indias they joined together and designated a representative for both. Saying that "Costa Rica anexed Guanacaste _from_ Nicaragua is oversimplified and doesn't reflect real events. Some nicaraguans would wish that Guanacaste was part of Nicaragua, as some guatemalans still seem to think that they are the Capitanía General of all of Central America and some mexicans still believe they Mexico City still is the capital of the Virreinato (Vicekingdom). --Crio de la Paz (talk) 06:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Costa Rica, the less poor

Mexico: 13.8% note: food-based poverty. Asset based poverty amounted to more than 40% (2006)
Spain: 19.8%
Uruguay: 27%
Colombia: 49%
Venezuela: 37%
Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay, Guatemala, Honduras, Belize and El Salvador: All over 20%
Brazil: 31%
Chile: 18.2%
Costa Rica: 18.0%

Costa Rica's urbanization level compared to: Norway.

Cocoliras (talk) 01:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Where are the sources. Don't forget to cite sources? -- LaNicoya  •Talk•  02:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, CIA World Factbook, all sources... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.140.233.103 (talk) 18:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Follow-up. There are several definitions of poverty, and this one just seems as if the right one was picked to support he conclusion. Please check the latest UN databases, or the World Bank, or the Inter-American Development Bank or even USAID, or any similar reputable source (the CIA fact book is not!!). For the record, CR does not rank well in poverty (as income per day, which is the std definition in developing agencies) nor in income distribution (Gini coefficient). If an updated and standard definition/data is found and referenced, then the text in the leading paragraph can be kept (where the citation was asked). Otherwise, that assertion will have to go as WP:OR. Mariordo (talk) 04:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I deleted the sentences about least impoverished. Clearly WP:OR. See below the detailed justification. Mariordo (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ecoconomy

I'm not very familiar with the editing of pages in Wikipedia. However I want to make a comment with regard on the segment of the economy. The page has been updated by stating that Costa Rica faces the second highest inflaction in Latin America. The article used as reference does not mention that. Also the unemployment rate is wrong see below(4.6% for 2007)

This is information is according to the resource being used [8]. Where did the person that gathered these facts found in the source that the unemployment rate was 6.6% when the source says 4.6%

After experiencing 7.9 % growth in 2006, the Costa Rican economy settled down to an estimated 6.5% in 2007. Compared with its Central American neighbors, Costa Rica has achieved a high standard of living, with a per capita income of about U.S. $5,100, and an unemployment rate of 4.6%. During 2007 the annual inflation rate rose to 11.5% as the Costa Rican Government sought to reduce its large fiscal deficit.

Can someon please correct these wrong facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wysiwyg2 (talk • contribs) 06:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Linking to [3]

A couple of days back, User:AndreszCostaRica replaced the references section with the above link. I assumed it was spam and reverted, but Andres e-mailed me, asking me to review the link again. I did, and it's actually an excellent source. So I tried adding it to the article again, but my change was undone. I think it's a good link, and we should link to the site.
But perhaps you're correct that just linking to it probably isn't the best choice-would anyone object to it being used as a footnote reference? I don't have time to do it now, as I'll be without internet connection from tomorrow until 2 March but when I come back I'll find the statements supported by the linked source, and cite it in-line. Would that be okay with everyone? Puchiko (Talk-email) 22:28, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

What reason do we have to believe it satisfies WP:RS? It looks like a pretty typical commercial real estate site.Kww (talk) 23:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I consider that to be spam, as well. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Economy

The CIA World Factbook doesn't state the same figures as the U.S. Department of State. For example the estimated unemployment rate for 2007 is 5.5% in CIA WF and 4.6% at USDS, which figures are to be trusted?. And in the first paragraph in the economy section it states that "The Costa Rican economy grew nearly 5% in 2006 after experiencing 4 years of slow economic growth" although I can't find any figures on that in the refrence-note next to it. /Natox (talk) 08:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] APEC

"the country is expected to obtain full Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum (APEC) membership by 2007 (the country became an observer in 2004).", so, what's the status nowadays? Have they recieved full membership? /Natox (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Politics Section is wrong. Wrong President

"Pepe Figueres (Nobel Peace Prize laureate, 1987) to run for President for a second term. In 2006, Pepe Figueres was re-elected in a tight and highly contested election, running on a platform of promoting free trade."

It was Oscar Arias not Pepe Figueres. Oscar Arias won the Nobel Peace Prize. The link their for Pepe figueres is bad too. Oscar Arias ran for a second term and won. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.129.150 (talk) 01:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Second thing in Politics that seems odd or out of place.. vandalism?

"Costa Rica has no military by constitution but maintains domestic pacos forces for internal security. These include the Guardia Civil and the Guardia Rural."

What is the pacos force? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.129.150 (talk) 01:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

"pacos" is slang for police men. It is kind of disrespectful and it is vandalism --65.182.30.26 (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Editing of sex tourism paragraph

Since this short paragraph about sex tourism in CRC has been subject to many edits and undo's, the following is a justification for the editing I did today. Please, let's keep the discussion here for a while before any undo or new addition on the subject. Also, take into consideration, as already has been discussed above, this paragraph used to be "...too detailed on sex tourism for the country-level article". I believe that anyone wishing to edit about this subject with more detail, can do it at will at the sex tourism article, where this subject properly belongs. The following is the old text before my edit, including references, and thereafter, I present a brief discussion on every polemical issue:

Sex tourism has become a popular form of tourism and has been gaining popularity in Costa Rica where it already amounts for 10% of the billion dollar tourism industry.[1][2] Costa Rica has been hailed as a national destination for sex tourists,[3] this is largely because of legal prostitution.[4]

  • The assertion that "sex tourism... already amounts for 10% of the billion dollar tourism industry" is not supported by the first source provided (#1 as transcribed here), which is about sex tourism in general, and child prostitution in particular (I relocated this ref to the second sentence, which now talks briefly about child sex trade), and source #2, from the Tico Times is related, but is saying something completely different, which makes the old text WP:OR or simply a mistake of interpretation of the editor. The Tico Times (on-line is not available for free, I paid the two bucks to have it in PDF) is reporting based on a book published by Jacobo Schifter,[5] which reads: "Along with other value-added tourism niches that have seen a surge thanks to Costa Rica's booming $1.7 billion-a-year tourism industry, sex tourism is enjoying a growth spurt...Up to 10% of tourists who come to Costa Rica engage in sex tourism engage in sex tourism..." (the bold is mine). So, this information is what I edited in the new revised paragraph. A 10% of sex tourists does not mean 10% of all income from international tourists, as the old edit said. Not only the old edit would be original research, but is not logical to assume a direct proportionality, this is, that those sex tourists would spent a 100% of their money on sex services, they also have to pay for taxis, food, beberages, hotel, and all the typical expenses of an international tourist. So I included as references both, the Schifter book (which by the way in Spanish is called "Viejos verdes en el paraiso") and the Tico Times article.
  • Source # 3 (as reproduced here), as the title says is about child sex trade and child prostitution in Central America, and particulary about Costa Rica, as "It is also believed to have the region's most pronounced child-prostitution problem." I also move this ref to the second sentence. I am providing a better reference to support that CR is a destination for sex tourists (see references from La Nacion, here numbered #6 and #7). These are new sources from a the leading local newspaper.[6][7]
  • As a matter of fact, prostitution is NOT legal in Costa Rica, as the old text said, and this needs an explanation from the legal point of view to avoid confusion. Some patience here. First, for a general understanding of the different legal status of prostitution read the section legality of prostitution in the world in the wiki link provided. Prostitution is legal in places such as France and the Netherlands (see prostitution in the Netherlands, prostitution in Germany and prostitution in New Zealand) or most counties in Nevada, USA. This sex workers paid taxes, and have social benefits. As correctly explained in the Wiki article: "...in many jurisdictions, the act of obtaining money for sex is not illegal, but many of the activities surrounding it are illegal. For example, in England and Wales, Scotland, Rhode Island, Canada, Bulgaria, Brazil, Denmark and Costa Rica, amongst others, activities such as solicitation, pimping and owning or running a brothel are illegal. Therefore, prostitution for persons 18 and older is not illegal, but this does not mean it is legal, it just not penalized." By anology this is the same difference made by Common Law and other legal systems in the world, when a defendant is found guilty or not guilty. Not guilty does not means innocent. The fact that prostitution is not penalized does not means it is legal, as the old edit said, and ref #4 wrongly notes. See also Costa Rican Penal Code at: http://www.oas.org/Juridico/MLA/sp/cri/sp_cri-int-text-cpenal.pdf See SECCIÓN III: Corrupción, proxenetismo, rufianería, art. 167 to 172). I kept ref #4 just to support that "many of the activities surrounding it are indeed illegal", and also included this article,[8] which clearly explains that prostitution is not penalized in the country, but a third-party soliciting clients for a prostitue (proxenetismo) is commiting a crime. The following is a transcription of the text in Spanish: En Costa Rica la prostitución no se penaliza, siempre y cuando sea la voluntad de una persona adulta. Cuando un tercero se beneficia eso es proxenetismo",. This declaration is from the Costa Rican Deputy District Atorney on sexual crimes, Lilliam Gómez. The original sources for the info on this website are also found in the local newspaper La Nacion, refs #6 and #7.
  1. ^ Wright, Phillip. "Sex tourism: Lessons learned in Costa Rica", BBC News. Retrieved on 2007-12-21. 
  2. ^ Schmidt, Blake. "Businesses Say No to Sex Tourism Industry", Tico Time, July 27, 2007. Retrieved on 2007-07-30. 
  3. ^ Kovaleski, Serge F.. "Child Sex Trade Rises In Central America", Washington Post Foreign Service, Washington Post Foreign Service, 2000-01-02. Retrieved on 2006-12-20. Archived from the original on 2006-12-20. "... "an accelerated increase in child prostitution" in the country ... blamed largely on the unofficial promotion of sex tourism in Costa Rica over the Internet." 
  4. ^ "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Costa Rica", U.S. State Department. Retrieved on 2007-09-28. "...Prostitution is legal for persons over the age of 18, and was practiced openly throughout the country, particularly in areas with heavy concentrations of tourists.... There are no specific laws against sex tourism, which was growing" 
  5. ^ Jacobo Schifter-Sikora (2006), Mongers in Heaven: Sexual Tourism and HIV Risk in Costa Rica and in the United States, ISBN 978-0761835974 
  6. ^ Unos 130 sitios de internet promueven turismo sexual Costa Rica. La Nación (2004-12-05). (Spanish)
  7. ^ Otto Vargas (2004-12-04). Agencias ofrecen en el exterior damas para vacaciones eróticas en Costa Rica. La Nación. (Spanish)
  8. ^ "PROMOCIÓN DE LA PROSTITUCIÓN: Unos 130 sitios de internet promueven el turismo sexual de Costa Rica". LaFlecha.net (2004-12-07). (Spanish)

Finally, I will also change the text in the article Economy of Costa Rica, which will be briefer. I hope this detail explanation will settle the issues and further discussion is welcome. Mariordo (talk) 06:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Age of consent is 15 indeed

The Civil Code and Family Code were reformed in 2007. See http://historico.gaceta.go.cr/2007/03/PLLE_01_03_2007.html Transcription in Spanish: Artículo 1º—Refórmanse los artículos 14 y 64 del Código de Familia, Ley Nº 5476. Los textos dirán:

“Artículo 14.—Es legalmente imposible el matrimonio:

........

7) De la persona menor de quince años”...............That settles the issue. Mariordo (talk) 22:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

......

Comment: Perhaps I´m confused, but isn´t the age of consent for marriage different than the age of consent for sexual activity in general? For example, in California a 16 year old can marry with parental permission, but even a 17 year old cannot have sex with an adult of over 18 years (the state will usually only prosecute if the adult is over the age of 21 or 22, however). On the other hand, two 15 year olds can have sex with each other without any problems.

I am concerned that saying that the age of consent in Costa Rica is 15 may cause problems. I understand that foreigners can be prosecuted for having sex with anyone under 18. Obviously marriage is not in the equation for most visitors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.194.7.234 (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Justification for deletion of assertion about poverty

This following is the text in the leading paragraph I deleted, it is not only unsourced but clearly WP:OR as explained below.

Costa Rica is among the safest countries in Latin America and is currently the least impoverished Spanish speaking country in the world, with poverty percentages lower than that of Spain and other developed countries and levels of urbanization that nears those of countries such as Finland and Norway.[citation needed]

Reasons for deletion:

  • The claim that CRC is the safest is unsupported. What is the index or indicator used? Homicides per 100,000 inhab.? Robberies? A properly published index should justify such assertion. Unless one reliable source is provided, this text must be kept out of the article.
  • When talking about poverty there are several definitions, but, in ALL of them, indicators are different for developed countries (such Spain) and developing countries. See the Wiki articles Poverty threshold and Measuring poverty for further explanation. Therefore, this assertion is making a comparison between oranges and potatos, clearly WP:OR of the user who edited.
  • Even when developed countries are left out of the comparison, there are at least three indicators frequently used in the development agencies and by scholars: (1) the UN's Human Poverty Index (HPI-1 for development countries, and HPI-2 for OECD countries, Eastern Europe and the CIS); (2) the World Bank's pop. income below $1 per day (used as benchmark for the Millennium Development Goals, it is called extreme poverty; and (3) again the World Bank's pop. income below $2 per day, called moderate poverty. All these indexes are presented in the UN's 2007 Human Develovemnt Report ( see Tables 3 and 4, pp. 238-242[4]) and data is not available for all developing countries, and comparisons are difficult, since date of the last survey varies by country between 1990 and 2005. Other indicator is the national poverty line (included in the 2007 HDR), but this one DOES NOT allow for comparisons, since countries used different definitions.
  • Despite these limitations, Table 3 of the 2007 HDR shows the following about CRC:
CRI ranks 5th in the HPI-1 index (among 108 developing countries with data available), and within Latin America is behind Uruguay (2nd), Chile (3rd) and Argentina (4th). Therefore, by the HPI, CRC IS NOT the least impoverished Spanish speaking country as asserted.
In terms of the $1 per day indicator, the percentage is low by developing countries standards, just 3.3%, but it ranks behind Chile (<2%), Uruguay (<2%), Dominican Republic (2.8%), Mexico (3.0%) and nine other countries outside Latin America. The sample for this index does not includes the 108 countries from HPI-1. Obviously, CRC IS NOT the least impoverished Spanish speaking country as asserted.
Finally, by the $2 per day indicator, Costa Rica ranks better, 2nd in Latin America (9.8%), again behind Chile (5.6%) and Uruguay (5.7%), but there are five other developing countries ahead (then 8th among developing countries), but the sample shrinks again. Anyway, by this indicator again, CRC IS NOT the least impoverished Spanish speaking country as asserted.
  • Conclusion, the deleted paragraph is unsupported by the most reliable sources and indicators. Because of the complextity of measuring poverty and lack of data, the best indicator available for most developing countries is HPI-1, so this CRC ranking I will include, but only in the "International Rankings" section/table. The HPI considers a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. Becuse it does not consider minimum income, the $2 per day ranking will be included in the table too (still, later on I will check the World Bank's digital database to see if there is a more updated figure than the HDR). I hope this detailed explanation serves as a guide for other editors to include this kind of data in other country articles. Mariordo (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Guatemala City reference

Pinhut (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC) - I changed this last year and somebody has changed it back. It is factually incorrect to state that Guatemala City was the capital of Central America during Colonial times. I checked the dates on the period agreed as the Colonial era in Central America and Antigua, Guatemala, was the capital of Guatemala, along with the whole of Central America, for the entirety of that period.

Guatemala City was not founded until after the Colonial Period. There's been a lot of activity to combat vandalism, maybe that is what undid this glaring factual error.

If there is some agreement from people working on this entry to accept this change, I'll change it back Towards Independence: Throughout the colonial period Costa Rica remained one of the provinces ruled by the Spanish viceroyalty in Guatemala (together with the provinces of El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua). Its position as the farthest province from the crown's representative and the fact that great mineral wealth was not discovered here meant that interest in this distant territory was minimal, which in turn allowed Costa Rica to develop in an atmosphere of relative autonomy not found in the other provinces of Central America.

The provincial Governors were always Spaniards appointed by the monarchy, although once settled in the new territory they inevitably set about attending to their own personal interests rather than those of the province and its colonists. This practice was by no means limited to the province of Costa Rica but was apparently commonplace throughout the New World colonies, which lead to much discontent among the colonists.

During the latter part of the 1700's, Spain's concern for the welfare of its American territories decreased as its interest in taxing them increased in order to help solve problems at home (including those brought by a feisty Frenchman by the name of Bonaparte). Discontentment with the crown in other parts of Latin America led to wars of independence. There was even some sporadic insurrection in other areas of Central America between 1811 and 1814.

Deliberation over the situation of the Guatemalan territories with respect to their relation to Spain ended in the signing of the Guatemalan Independence Act on September 15, 1821.

News of independence from Spain reached Costa Rica by messenger in mid-October and in November of 1821 the first provisional government of Costa Rica was formed. This body drafted the "Concord Pact" on December 1, a document which is considered the original Costa Rican Constitution. The Pact established the sovereign right of Costa Rica to decide its political future and guaranteed to its citizens civil liberty, the right to property, and other natural rights.

However, this new-found independence from the mother country was not met everywhere with total acceptance. Throughout Central America there were groups of imperialists who still felt their loyalty to Spain and clashed with the separatists over the issue of becoming part of the Mexican Empire or remaining completely independent. Costa Rica was no exception. The majority of the town elders of both Cartago and Heredia proclaimed themselves imperialists, in contrast with the predominant republican sentiments professed in San José and Alajuela.

Thus, although Costa Rica did not have to fight to gain its independence, ironically it battled over the future of this status and in April of 1823, in the area of Ochomogo (halfway between Cartago and San José), a battle was waged between groups from the two factions. Those favoring independence were victorious.

The other significant outcome of this skirmish was that the capital of the country was then transferred to San José from its previous site in Cartago.

The Beginnings of an Economy: The exportation of agricultural products to Nicaragua and Panama and the importation of cloth, metal implements, and other goods that characterized the trade which Costa Rica conducted beyond its frontiers during the colonial period, resulted in the concentration of wealth in the hands of local merchants. By the mid-18th century, much of the agricultural produce came from small family-run farms since shortages of indigenous labor caused the failure of many of the former large land holdings that had been a prominent feature of the Central Valley's landscape a century earlier.

Because currency was in short supply, most of the trade between farmers and merchants was conducted using a barter system in which the merchant inevitably got the better part of the bargain. Relatively little local commerce existed in the 1700's since most people were farmers and most farms were designed to be self-sufficient. Thus, the majority of the trade consisted of surplus crops or livestock that were bartered to obtain imported items from the merchants.

In spite of continued population growth and agricultural expansion across the Central Valley, this bucolic, non-capitalistic life style might easily have continued for many years after independence had it not been for the introduction of a foreign plant species: Coffea arabica, more commonly known as coffee.

The spread of coffee cultivation in the Central Valley resulted in numerous profound changes in the development of the fledgling republic. As more and more of the small subsistence farms converted to coffee plantations, it became necessary to import food crops from other countries, principally Nicaragua. The merchant class also became active in growing coffee on lands they owned and this necessitated the hiring of laborers. The operation of coffee mills also required salaried workers. Thus, the beginnings of a capitalistic society, in which labor itself becomes a commodity, were established.

Fortunately, just prior to the expansion of coffee growing, a source of mineral wealth had at last been discovered in Costa Rica, and in 1815 gold mining began in the Montes de Aguacate -- a mountainous area along the route traveled between the Central Valley and the Pacific port of Puntarenas. As a result of this activity, the government began minting coinage for the first time in 1824. By 1833, gold exports accounted for 48% of the country's total exports.

One year earlier, coffee had for the first time been shipped from Puntarenas to Chile, from where it would be sent on to England. This was the start of what was to become a very profitable relationship, so profitable that from 1843 until 1880 coffee made up between 85 and 95% of the nation's exports. By then, most of the coffee production was being shipped directly to England.

The rich volcanic soils of the Central Valley and an ideal climate for growing coffee, combined with the agricultural tradition of the majority of the inhabitants and the marketing experience of the merchant class, propelled Costa Rica to an economic position far superior to most of the rest of Latin America, where many countries were so embroiled in bloody civil wars that concern for developing a national economy took a definite back seat.

Associated with the coffee boom were many advances in development, including the founding of banks (with a combination of British and Costa Rican capital), the construction and improvement of roads and port facilities, the establishment of the country's first telegraph system which connected Cartago with Puntarenas (via San José, Alajuela, and Heredia), and the building of the nation's first railway linking Alajuela, San José, and Cartago. Even the construction of the country's premier architectural showpiece, the National Theater, can be traced to the prosperity brought by coffee production.

During the second half of the 19th century, however, advances in health and education did not keep pace with the development of infrastructure. This is not to say that the governments of the time were not active in trying to provide improved education and health care, but simply that it took longer to see the results. Poor sanitary conditions were the principal cause of periodic outbreaks of infectious diseases, such as cholera and dysentery, and life expectancy at the turn of the twentieth century was only 30 years. With increased attention paid to the public health sector, life expectancy rose from 35 to 56 years between 1920 and 1950. Likewise, an expanding public education system resulted in a decline in illiteracy from 55% in 1910, to 33% in 1930, and to 21% in 1950.

Trains, bananas, chocolate, and gold: The oxcart, which has become something of a national symbol of Costa Rica, was instrumental in transporting sacks of coffee beans from the Central Valley to the port of Puntarenas, but this was made possible only after the path through the mountains was sufficiently widened in the mid-1840's to allow the oxcarts to replace mules as a form of transportation. Nevertheless, shipping coffee to England from the Pacific side of the country meant a long, arduous voyage around Cape Horn. The obvious solution was to open a route that would link the Central Valley with the Caribbean coast. And the way to do it? A railroad!

In 1884, the Costa Rican government signed a contract with Minor Keith, a North American who agreed to construct a narrow-gauge railroad from San José to Limón in exchange for 300,000 hectares of land on the Atlantic side of the country. On this vast acreage Keith began banana production, and in 1899 joined with the Boston Fruit Company to form the United Fruit Company.

Afro-American laborers were brought from Jamaica to work the banana plantations and build the railroad because they were better adapted to the climatic conditions of the Caribbean lowlands than were the European-descended inhabitants of the Central Valley. Due to the relative isolation of the banana producing regions from the other populated areas of the country, a unique culture evolved on the Caribbean side of Costa Rica with a distinctive Jamaican flavor.

By 1913, Costa Rica was one of the world's leading banana exporters, although coffee was still the nation's principal foreign revenue earner. At about this same time, the United Fruit Company began converting some of its extensive monoculture banana plantations to cacao because of a fungal disease, known as "Panama disease," that was affecting the bananas. By 1925, cacao figured third on the country's list of export products.

Minor Keith also used his fortune in the purchase of 40,000 hectares of land in the Tilarán mountains, where he started the Abangares Gold Mining Company. Although seemingly worlds apart, this gold mining operation held much in common with the way banana production was carried out. Immigrant labor from Honduras, Nicaragua, and also Jamaica was employed along with Costa Rican workers. The work was demanding, and even though well-paid, the workers were isolated in the mining villages and had little choice but to spend their hard-earned pay in the company store owned by the mining company.

Since most of Keith's holdings were essentially vertical monopolies whose production came from land they owned or controlled, and his dealings with the government gave him the advantage of numerous tax breaks, a relatively small percentage of the income generated by his various activities ever entered the national economy.

The Revolution of 1948: Of the relatively little that might be known about Costa Rica beyond its borders is the fact that this tiny Central American nation is unique in having a functioning democratic system and no army. However, these conditions have only existed since 1949.

It is true that in Costa Rica the democratic tradition dates back to 1889, although direct voting for presidential candidates did not go into effect until 1910 and women gained the right to vote as late as 1953. Nonetheless, from 1821 to 1948, electoral fraud and coups d'état were a regular part of the local political reality -- witness to the fact is that in the 93 years between 1821 and 1914 there were a total of 92 political conflicts characterized by violence, albeit brief and limited in scope.

Many factors combined to create the political situation that resulted in the revolution, or civil war, of 1948.

Costa Rica's century-long economic dependence on a single export crop, coffee (bananas have never had the same direct influence on the national economy), inevitably tied the economy to the vagaries of an international market. Coffee prices had already been on a decline for several years when the worldwide depression hit in 1930. This resulted in a drastic reduction of both coffee and banana exports along with a severe drop in imported goods. Because most government revenue was then generated by taxes on imports, the depression also decidedly diminished state funds.

The economic conditions produced a serious social crisis marked by unemployment, food scarcities, lowered wages for government employees, and a general decline in the standard of living to which Costa Ricans had been accustomed. The growing proletariat had already been making increasingly vehement demands for better working and living conditions prior to the onset of the depression, and thus the stage was set for the inception of the Costa Rican Communist Party in 1931. Several strikes by urban workers and by thousands of banana plantation workers in the Atlantic lowlands in 1934 demonstrated the power of this new political force and sent a clear signal to the traditional ruling class elite.

The government was obliged to take a more active role in social and economic problems. Banking had traditionally been controlled by foreign capitalists and the local coffee oligarchy, but in 1936, the state intervened in this area with the creation of the National Bank of Costa Rica and the General Superintendent of Banks, designed to exercise certain controls over the private banks. Previously, in 1933, a federal institute had been created to establish prices paid for coffee by the coffee mills and to regulate relations between the independent growers and the mills.

The end of a seventy-year period of governmental liberalism and laissez-faire was being heralded. At the same time, a generational change was taking place in the national political arena and, in 1940, Dr. Rafael Angel Calderón Guardia was elected president with an overwhelming 85% of the vote. His ambitious platform, however, was limited by the federal fiscal deficit and a new period of difficult international economic times brought on by World War II.

Nevertheless, during his four years in office the University of Costa Rica was founded (1940), the Seguro Social -- a national health care program -- was created (1941), the "Social Guarantees" were amended to the Constitution (1942), and the Labor Code was enacted (1943). History will perhaps best remember Dr. Calderón for having promoted the Social Guarantees which include the right to work, minimum wage, an 8-hour work day, a 48-hour work week, paid vacations, the right to unionize and to strike, social security, and the formation of the Labor Courts to litigate disputes between workers and employers.

Despite the sweeping popularity that brought him into office, by the second year of his presidency Calderón was beset by critics from all sides. Those wielding economic power were not enamored of many of the social reforms, the communists were not in favor of legislation that instituted religion classes in public schools, and nearly everyone opposed the government's handling of the country's economic problems. To make matters worse, accusations of corruption were frequent.

Among the many critics was a politically unknown farmer/businessman, José Figueres Ferrer, who, during a radio program on July 8, 1942, denounced the government's economic policies and claimed that it had given in to the Communist Party. Incensed by his oratory, the government had him arrested and deported to Mexico. However, that was not to be the end of Mr. Figueres.

It was not until a year later that the government of Calderón Guardia actually did form a pact with the Communist Party in hopes of assuring a victory in the 1944 Presidential elections. Both groups had a mutual interest in preserving the social reforms that had recently become law, and it is thought that perhaps Calderón, being aware of the decline in his popularity, imagined the communists could be useful with their capacity at organizing and mobilizing masses of people.

The election campaign of 1944 was marred by numerous violent confrontations between followers of the Calderón/communist coalition, known as "The Victory Block," and those of the León Cortés Democratic Party. Cortés had been president from 1936 - 1940 and was running for reelection against Teodoro Picado, the man picked by Calderón to succeed him. By an ample margin, Picado was declared the winner, although the opposition party denounced that the results were tampered.

Attempting to placate the opposition, Picado instituted several reforms aimed at improving public finance and, most importantly, promoted the creation of the Electoral Code which included the formation of the Electoral Tribune, supposedly a politically neutral organism charged with safeguarding election results and eliminating fraud.

Any advance that might have been gained towards smoothing over differences with the opposition was nullified, however, by the changes made to the tax laws in December of 1946. Both small agricultural and industrial producers as well as those with large capital were equally vocal in their discontent over having to pay higher taxes, especially the agricultural exporting class that was long accustomed under the liberal regimes to not having their activities taxed.

Meanwhile, in 1944, José Figueres had returned from exile committed to forming the "Second Republic" and a year later created the Social Democratic Party. Six months later, this party entered into an alliance with the León Cortés Democratic Party and the National Union Party, led by Otilio Ulate, who was later elected as the party nominee for the presidential election of 1948. Their platform centered on free elections and anticommunism. The Victory Block's candidate was Dr. Calderón Guardia who aspired to a second term in office.

The months leading up to the elections on February 8, 1948 were filled with tension and frequent acts of violence perpetrated by members of both major political forces. The level of conflict escalated from that of the elections four years earlier with the inclusion of terrorist attacks on newspaper companies, radio stations, and even important political figures, including Calderón himself. And, of course, both sides alleged that the other party intended to rig the election results.

Officially, Otilio Ulate outpaced Calderón by 10,000 votes, but the Victory Block garnered a greater number of seats in the legislature than did the National Union Party. Calderón Guardia refused to acknowledge the defeat. Also, the day after the elections, a fire of suspicious origin destroyed many of the ballots. It seems that the Electoral Tribune was not very successful in its first trial by fire.

By majority, the members of the Electoral Tribune declared Ulate to be the President-elect, pending confirmation by the Legislative Assembly. Calderón petitioned the legislature to nullify the results, which they did (the majority of representatives were members of the Victory Block party), although they ruled that the legislative position results were valid.

That was the spark that ignited the fuse which had been set years ago. On March 12, 1948, word reached San José that a band of revolutionaries led by José Figueres had taken over the town of San Isidro del General in the southern part of the province.

The revolution lasted for five weeks with sporadic fighting in which Figueres' troops, self-proclaimed as the National Liberation Army, proved victorious over the badly organized and poorly directed Costa Rican army. In fact, much of the defense of the government was provided by armed communist party members. However, the government was reluctant to give them enough material support to be truly effective, and on April 19, the government of Teodoro Picado opted to surrender to Figueres.

The "Second Republic": The Figueres-Ulate Pact was signed on May 1, 1948 giving Figueres 18 months to govern the country without a legislature before turning over power to Ulate. Amazingly, in the context of Latin American politics, this pact was fulfilled on November 8, 1949.

During those intervening 18 months, the Government Council presided by Figueres instituted many profound changes. Among these were the nationalization of the banking system, the establishment of a 10% capital goods tax, the prohibition of the Communist Party, the abolishment of the country's armed forces, and the creation of the Costa Rican Electric Institute (I.C.E.). Not all of these measures were met with pleasure by all sectors of the population.

Despite its reformist intentions and promises made at the end of the revolution, the temporary government was characterized by a very authoritarian style and even embarked on a veritable witch hunt against members of the Calderón and Picado governments. On December 10, 1948, the exiled Dr. Calderón and his supporters invaded Costa Rica from Nicaragua. With the aid of the Organization of American States, this overthrow attempt was squelched.

The Government Council also drew up a proposed new Constitution to be ratified by the National Constitutional Assembly, elected in January of 1949 for just this purpose. This assembly rejected the Council's draft and set about writing its own version based on the nation's previous Constitution of 1871. The new Constitution of Costa Rica, which maintained the Social Guarantees established under the presidency of Dr. Calderón Guardia, was ratified on November 7, 1949.

As evidenced during the mere year and a half that José Figueres held power over the decision-making process of the country, the government would become a much more active player in the nation's economic and social affairs. The period from 1950-80 can be typified by unprecedented growth of the public sector, the modernization and diversification of the country's economy, and the accumulation of a tremendous national debt.

With the expansion of government services and the proliferation of state institutions, the number of public employees rose from slightly more than 15,000 in 1949 to nearly 130,000 by the year 1979. On the positive side, Costa Rica now possesses better health and education systems and more infrastructure, particularly roads and electrification, than most other Latin American nations. The cost of this has been the creation of an unwieldy and often ineffective bureaucracy, along with the dubious distinction of having the world's second largest per capita debt in 1980. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.199.68 (talk) 23:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


Pinhut

  • Go ahead with the change, it was Antigua indeed. Mariordo (talk) 23:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] President's Name

Why isn't it written properly in the English version as Óscar Arias Sánchez or Óscar Arias? Why is the accent not there in English? 141.133.168.177 (talk) 01:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] recent edit

Unless I am mistaken, the article on Costa Rica recently included the following text but no longer does:

"...Costa Rica is among the safest countries in Latin America and is currently the least impoverished Spanish speaking country in the world, with poverty percentages lower than that of Spain and other developed countries and levels of urbanization that nears those of countries such as Finland and Norway. In 2007 the government of Costa Rica said it wants to be the first developing country to become carbon neutral by 2021. "

Am I correct that it used to be there and if so, why was it removed? Was any/all of it not accurate? Not properly verified? Or what?

[Note: Although I use Wikipedia frequently, this is the first time I have gone to a 'discussion' page or done anything other than search, so I hope I will be forgiven for any improper protocal or anything else I may need to be excused for as a result of my inexperience in this regard.]

Esteve22 (talk) 00:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there was something like that in the article. It was deleted on a few grounds. There wasn't reliable sourcing for "safest countries in Latin American", and the statistics used for "least improverished" were grossly misleading, because the standard for poverty in Costa Rica is different than used in other Spanish speaking countries.Kww (talk) 00:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the immediate reply. What about the statement about Finland and Norway? [Also: Am I doing this right with regard to 'discussion' and asking these questions?] Esteve22 (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Also: Is there some way I can find where or from whom that those statements came from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esteve22 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] San Juan River issue

Costa Rica also has had a lifelong battle with Nicaragua, it's neighboring country over the San Juan River (rio San Juan) which denotes the border between these two countries;although it geographically is within the borders of Nicaragua Costa Ricans like to claim it as their own.

I assume this is vandalism, it is just too evident: Costa Rica have never claimed ownership over the San Juan River. There is a dispute over the right of navigation of the Costa Rican patrols, that's all. The phrase "Costa Ricans like to claim it as their own" cannot be just a mistake, that is vandalism. 201.201.137.58 (talk) 08:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC) [[ Jordan is amazing at life & loves Jamesy!]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.80.244 (talk) 01:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)