Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 146 posts

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#131

Post by rorykoehler »

pqdbr wrote: post #34
antsoul wrote: post #11

A cocaine addict, refusing reality. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-48787996

If you just read the article you posted, one military that was flying in a different airplane than the president was (it was a stand-by backup aircraft) was arrested with 39kg of cocain. The president's response? "I just wished the arrest happened in Indonesia", where they have death penalty for such crimes. (source https://g1.globo.com/jornal-nacional/noticia/2019/06/29/pena... ) Just so that you know, when Bolsonar…

Good way to ensure they won't rat on him

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#132

Post by bharam »

defterGoose wrote: post #108
FailMore wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, only if the environment is given financial value will things change. I can see that being the only solution to the current situation. It enables financial optimisation, but results in protection. There will be much resistance though.

> only if the environment is given financial value will things change. Or maybe we should try to help people understand that it's futile to see in terms of human concepts (like profit) the entity which literally created our species. Perhaps financialization of literally everything we should hold dear is the problem? The value of human life itself has at times been boiled down to a dollar amount, but that doesn't mean…

> it's futile to see in terms of human concepts (like profit) the entity which literally created our species.

Why is it futile to understand our planet in terms of human concepts? What alternative means of understanding do you have in mind? Direct perception or revelation? Feelings?

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#133

Post by bharam »

AnthonBerg wrote: post #62
bharam wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A global body needs to be created to handle environmental policy I think some people have too much faith in the ability of politicians and bureaucrats to protect the environment. A better solution would be decentralized decision making. Place ownership of the rain forest in private hands and let the market determine the most valuable use of the land. If a sufficient number of people believe the rain forest should b…

What if we took the “sufficient number of people” and unified them into some sort of power?

If you mean form a government then I can't blame you. It seems so logical and yet the last 50 years have demonstrated the futility of this approach (as demonstrated by the article).

Power corrupts - politicians and bureaucrats act on whims and pressure from special interest groups. It doesn't matter if the entity is a county, a state, a nation or the world.

Privatization is the solution.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#134

Post by AnthonBerg »

bharam wrote: post #133
AnthonBerg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we took the “sufficient number of people” and unified them into some sort of power?

If you mean form a government then I can't blame you. It seems so logical and yet the last 50 years have demonstrated the futility of this approach (as demonstrated by the article). Power corrupts - politicians and bureaucrats act on whims and pressure from special interest groups. It doesn't matter if the entity is a county, a state, a nation or the world. Privatization is the solution.

First, will contend that, say, the atmosphere cannot be effectively privatized.

Nor can courts. Who will uphold the correct fundamental rules of privatization? Who sets them?

Finally, it is the case currently that we have democracy, wherein the individual has power and domain via a vote and participation in discussions. Then we also have effective privatization, where pure financial acumen can make things happen, or stop them. That is the case currently. We do not need to increase the power of money such that more things can happen for us to be able to pay for the salvation of the environment. We can do that now. The suggestion to switch to privatization is to ask people to relinquish the former power and leave everything to those with the latter power. I don’t see the benefit. Especially as when I have done business, it has clearly been private money that has done stupid and greedy and inefficient things, and governmental structures prevented it for the benefit of all.

Government attempts to be a non-monetary contractual union that represents the mutual benefit of game-theoretical cooperation, in e.g. information sharing and consistency. It does work to do that.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#135

Post by bharam »

AnthonBerg wrote: post #134
bharam wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean form a government then I can't blame you. It seems so logical and yet the last 50 years have demonstrated the futility of this approach (as demonstrated by the article). Power corrupts - politicians and bureaucrats act on whims and pressure from special interest groups. It doesn't matter if the entity is a county, a state, a nation or the world. Privatization is the solution.

First, will contend that, say, the atmosphere cannot be effectively privatized. Nor can courts. Who will uphold the correct fundamental rules of privatization? Who sets them? Finally, it is the case currently that we have democracy, wherein the individual has power and domain via a vote and participation in discussions. Then we also have effective privatization, where pure financial acumen can make things happen, or…

> atmosphere cannot be effectively privatized. It could be done. After all the ground below us is privatized (i.e. your property extends from the surface borders to a point at the center of the planet). Similarly it could be extended outward. > Nor can courts. Agreed. Courts are a necessary part of government by definition. I'm only arguing for the privatization of government controlled land - not anarchy.

I'm having difficulty unpacking the last part of your comment but I think the essence is that private individuals will act in ways you find disagreeable and that government can prevent that for the benefit of all. I would counter that a government is just as capable of acting in the same ways. Unfortunately in the case where an individual acts this way the consequences are limited to what that individual can do (and can usually be corrected by the courts) whereas when the government is the actor no competition is allowed and the only recourse is to challenge the power in periodic elections.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#136

Post by AnthonBerg »

bharam wrote: post #135
AnthonBerg wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, will contend that, say, the atmosphere cannot be effectively privatized. Nor can courts. Who will uphold the correct fundamental rules of privatization? Who sets them? Finally, it is the case currently that we have democracy, wherein the individual has power and domain via a vote and participation in discussions. Then we also have effective privatization, where pure financial acumen can make things happen, or…

> atmosphere cannot be effectively privatized. It could be done. After all the ground below us is privatized (i.e. your property extends from the surface borders to a point at the center of the planet). Similarly it could be extended outward. > Nor can courts. Agreed. Courts are a necessary part of government by definition. I'm only arguing for the privatization of government controlled land - not anarchy. I'm having…

I stand by my words, fully, and challenge you to approach them.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#137

Post by toyg »

polotics wrote: post #129
toyg wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farage is as controversial as any of the recent populist leaders, otherwise we wouldn't have the rivers of ink his outbursts command. Trying to paint one as less controversial than the other is just an attempt at making him more acceptable. > You didn't point me at anything objective. Want more? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11465505/Nigel-Far... Refusing to accept that Farage's campaigns are fundamentall…

@Toyg, you write: "otherwise we wouldn't have the rivers of ink his outbursts command". Is this argument not backwards? Seeing an outsider, who will most likely remain so, get shot down with lots of ink, fits a pattern of repression does it not? Is no one in your country feeling also repressed? This was davesmith1983's point I believe. There is co-dependency between TINA (there is no alternative) technocracies and po…

The ink on Farage is overwhelmingly in his favour - thanks to British tabloids. He's never been "repressed", to the contrary: he has a regular talk show, gets frequently invited on TV, and enjoys very favourable treatment by tabloids. He is not in opposition to "technocrats" at all, and typically votes in line with the EPP on anything related to the economy - the only exception being on increasing controls on tax evasion, to which he is strenuosly opposed.

I know Varoufakis, his parable was very different - he was ostracized after reaching power, by people who could not match his academic skills and felt threatened. The similarities with movements like Trump or Farage are barely skin-deep - Varoufakis does not enjoy the support of entire sectors of the media.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#138

Post by toyg »

davesmith1983 wrote: post #125
toyg wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Farage is as controversial as any of the recent populist leaders, otherwise we wouldn't have the rivers of ink his outbursts command. Trying to paint one as less controversial than the other is just an attempt at making him more acceptable. > You didn't point me at anything objective. Want more? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11465505/Nigel-Far... Refusing to accept that Farage's campaigns are fundamentall…

> Yeah, and no UKIP supporter would likely be able to describe any of it, except the bits on discriminating foreigners and closing borders. Because, frankly, that's pretty much the only thing they care about. Farage's latest outfit, the brexit party, smashes together old marxists and capitalist cronies, in single-minded pursuit of discrimination. Well you've just changed the goalposts again. After being quite clearly…

> I've spoken to UKIP when they knocked on the door and they seemed like pretty normal people.

Yes, they are quite banal people, mostly. That means little - the worst political movements of the last century were full of very banal people, a certain Ms. Harendt even wrote a famous book about it.

> but when asked for specifics it is too tedious

I was explaining why most people in these debates cannot be bothered to go into detail. If we had to explain every term in the book, we'd end up reciting the opus of Bertrand Russell at every meeting.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#139

Post by polotics »

toyg wrote: post #137
polotics wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

@Toyg, you write: "otherwise we wouldn't have the rivers of ink his outbursts command". Is this argument not backwards? Seeing an outsider, who will most likely remain so, get shot down with lots of ink, fits a pattern of repression does it not? Is no one in your country feeling also repressed? This was davesmith1983's point I believe. There is co-dependency between TINA (there is no alternative) technocracies and po…

The ink on Farage is overwhelmingly in his favour - thanks to British tabloids. He's never been "repressed", to the contrary: he has a regular talk show, gets frequently invited on TV, and enjoys very favourable treatment by tabloids. He is not in opposition to "technocrats" at all, and typically votes in line with the EPP on anything related to the economy - the only exception being on increasing controls on tax eva…

Definitely was not making a parallel between the two. Just saying the one explains the existence of the other.

Re: Amazon deforestation: Brazil's Bolsonaro dismisses data as 'lies'

#140

Post by defterGoose »

bharam wrote: post #132
defterGoose wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only if the environment is given financial value will things change. Or maybe we should try to help people understand that it's futile to see in terms of human concepts (like profit) the entity which literally created our species. Perhaps financialization of literally everything we should hold dear is the problem? The value of human life itself has at times been boiled down to a dollar amount, but that doesn't mean…

> it's futile to see in terms of human concepts (like profit) the entity which literally created our species. Why is it futile to understand our planet in terms of human concepts? What alternative means of understanding do you have in mind? Direct perception or revelation? Feelings?

Maybe I should clarify: I didn't mean that it's always futile to build mental models to understand the world. More that in this instance, our attempts to rationalize our behavior and use that understanding to guide future behavior (via economics, esp.) have clearly been at least partially a failure. If we continue to see profit as the ultimate goal of human endeavor, we do so at our peril. I think it's clear that economics is lagging behind the physical sciences in it's ability to successfully guide our behavior. It needs modifications to be able to properly deal with externalities; otherwise we're on a collision course with a future that I think most people would consider highly dystopian.
Post reply on HN