-
True, and then as a Sherpa you face the choice between taking the underqualified guy up the mountain or losing your contract/whatever with the agency who hired you. There are several points in the chain where there are people saying "you'll be fine up there, don't worry".
Ultimately the problem needs to be handled by the Nepalese government. Deaths look bad for them and have an impact on tourist numbers. But with such limited resources (and corruption to contend with) the deaths of a few tourists per year is small fry in comparison with the other problems in the country.
I don't think Nepal/Everest is particularly unique in this regard, it's just like any other country in the world where you have rich westerners, poor uneducated (as in, there's barely any schools in the Himalayas) locals and an ineffective government. People ignore regulations and procedures and take risks because they want or need the life-changing amount of money on offer.
Everyone shares part of the blame. The westerners fund the whole thing, the government fails to manage it, and a subset of Sherpas convince unqualified westerners that they can handle the trip. We have this concept of liability over here, that if an expert says "I can take you up the hill, don't worry", that they are qualified to assess your abilities and their own, and the responsibility for that decision lies on the expert's shoulders. But that breaks down when the expert is terribly poor and it's a international trip - an American family can't really sue a Sherpa in Nepal who's got £100 to his name, can they? And a westerner could be forgiven for trusting an expert who says they're qualified, even if they should know better.
I don't mean to blame Sherpas with this comment, I'm just pointing out one aspect of the situation that has been overlooked. It's a combination of several factors together that makes the whole thing as shit as it is.