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

Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

batimes.com.ar

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 224 posts

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#151

Post by ratww »

rglullis wrote: post #142
ratww wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In theory that makes a lot of sense. Truly. In reality, believing that and going froward with this plan was an immense setback to the country and the population. Europe/US/etc letting Brazil keep doing what it's doing is mostly helping Europe/US/etc at the expense of Brazilians and the environment.

I am not arguing in favor of the US or Europe, and I am also not arguing that Brazil should keep putting down trees just to sell more soybeans for the US and China. What I am saying is that the rich countries need to quit their double standard. The EU keeps putting absurd trade barriers to protect their own farmers. The US subsidizes their corn farms, effectively killing the Brazilian industry for biofuels. European…

Alright then we're in agreement.

> What I am saying is that the rich countries need to quit their double standard. The EU keeps putting absurd trade barriers to protect their own farmers. The US subsidizes their corn farms, effectively killing the Brazilian industry for biofuels. European NGOs are financed to disparage Brazil's investments in hydropower, while depending on Putin for gas and coal.

Oh, I agree with all that. That's an important post.

> So, yeah, agro business is far from ideal, but now is the only feasible alternative for Brazil to come up with any chance of development, and they will also work against that? I'd be more than willing to listen what they have to say if they were setting the example...

I guess my whole point is that foreigners saying "we did it before to grow, Brazil should do it too" is nonsensical, hypocritical and very self-serving, precisely because of your second paragraph. At the same time, I'm ok with foreigners telling Brazil to stop cutting trees because it opens the door to us at least replying with something like the second paragraph.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#152

Post by ratww »

lvass wrote: post #148
ratww wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh nice, more condescension. I'll let it pass. Here's a real reply: This might work in aggregate, but doesn't really help the average Brazilian, nor makes the country become developed. If the economic measures are only favouring the primary sector, the "vast majority of goods made in [my] country" is only making money for an extremely small part of the population. Plus, these measures are causing shrinkage of other s…

Quoted post unavailable.

Alright, so now it seems I want Zimbabwe-style Socialism in Brazil, whatever that means. It seems you're too busy putting words in my mouth to care about what I wrote, so goodbye I guess.

EDIT: Rightfully flagged/dead and I didn't even had to flag it myself. Nice. There should be no room for this type of discourse on HN.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#153

Post by squarefoot »

specialp wrote: post #31

The United States once had one of the largest forests on Earth. The Eastern Forest covered almost everywhere east of the Mississippi. 2,560,000 km2 of forest. Now it is largely gone. Replaced with farmland and sprawl. So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. The Amazon should be preserved, but to do that the world is g…

It all depends on when it happened. We evolved as a species and what was perceived as normal way less than 100 years ago would be considered outrageous by today's standards. As an example, if you take 10 highly successful Hollywood movies from the 1950s, chances are that in 7 of them a woman is forced into kissing the male lead; do it today and your career is over. And we're talking about people, not trees. Back then we didn't know what damage we were bringing to the environment, now we do, so I think it's perfectly logical to call Bolsonaro a corrupt criminal while closing an eye on similar events from over a century ago.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#154

Post by ratww »

is_true wrote: post #75
ratww wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. As someone born in Brazil, I don't see why it's hard. Please criticise away. My country should be learning from the mistakes of others, not repeating them in order to favour some higher political caste. To quote flaviojuvenal below, "Brazil had no trouble to grow in 90s and 20…

Think of it this way: The countries pointing fingers at Brazil all did the same to become more developed and to make their population richer, they just want to stop Brazil from doing the same so they can keep the prices of commodities they sell higher. They cheated but now don't want you to do the same in order to keep other countries in check, I mean, Europe is burning more and more coal, they are just a bunch of hy…

> The countries pointing fingers at Brazil all did the same to become more developed and to make their population richer, they just want to stop Brazil from doing the same so they can keep the prices of commodities they sell higher.

My point is that what made US/EU rich isn't what Brazil is doing. And even if it were, what makes a country rich pre-1900 won't exactly work in 2022. Brazilians could buy machinery from other countries. They don't have to go trough some mini industrial revolution again.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#155

Post by pibechorro »

ratww wrote: post #93
rglullis wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that every rich country first became rich, then started worrying about the environment. It is hypocritical from rich countries to ask Brazil to stop deforestation if that means halting its economic development. If the rich countries really believe that preserving the environment is more important than the economy, then they need to either (a) pay underdeveloped countries to preserve their forests or (b)…

And my point is that Brazil won't get rich by doing what it is currently doing. The primary sector won't enrich the general population or make the country more developed. Only some people favoured by the current government. That's what's currently happening, not some cuckoo theory.

You just described what basically goes on in every country.. some more blatantly than others.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#156

Post by vitorbaptistaa »

flaviojuvenal wrote: post #132
specialp wrote: post #31

The United States once had one of the largest forests on Earth. The Eastern Forest covered almost everywhere east of the Mississippi. 2,560,000 km2 of forest. Now it is largely gone. Replaced with farmland and sprawl. So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. The Amazon should be preserved, but to do that the world is g…

Note this is probably a false dilemma. According to Brazilian federal police, the recent deforestation surge is caused by illegal logging, not agriculture or cattle raising. Source in Portuguese: https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/nacional/pf-grilagem-e-madeira-... Brazil had no trouble to grow in 90s and 2000s while reducing Amazon deforestation.

Ilegal logging is the first step. Take down the valuable trees, burn the remaining, and finally start raising cattle.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#157

Post by kmeisthax »

rglullis wrote: post #83
ratww wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. As someone born in Brazil, I don't see why it's hard. Please criticise away. My country should be learning from the mistakes of others, not repeating them in order to favour some higher political caste. To quote flaviojuvenal below, "Brazil had no trouble to grow in 90s and 20…

The point is that every rich country first became rich, then started worrying about the environment. It is hypocritical from rich countries to ask Brazil to stop deforestation if that means halting its economic development. If the rich countries really believe that preserving the environment is more important than the economy, then they need to either (a) pay underdeveloped countries to preserve their forests or (b)…

The thing is, "paying Brazil to not raze the Amazon" has already been tried and failed. The government sees it as a way to fleece rich environmentalists and has no interest in abandoning their meal ticket.

Even if the government was aligned on keeping the Amazon as it was, they have their own enforcement struggles. Once an illegal developer has razed a plot of land, there's not really much the government can do to stop them. The damage has already been done. Even worse, by the time the government is even aware of a particular section of illegally cleared land, it's already been sold off, developed, and has people living in it. The only option now is to either:

1. Grandfather in the illegal land

2. Forcibly evict and ruin the lives of people who bought into the illegal purchase so that the scarred land can remain fallow for decades

Overwhelmingly Brazilian courts have chosen #1 over #2. Enforcement is too far behind land development to make any sort of "pay to save" scheme work.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#158

Post by vitorbaptistaa »

skilled wrote: post #76

It's not unheard of that in Africa many groups/tribes form together to fight back against poachers. Is there anything like this happening in the Amazon rainforest? And if no, then why not? Do people think a politician with his fancy suit is going to step his foot into the swamp to try and meet halfway? These assholes are literally destroying the world and the human race is none the wiser.... I sometimes wonder what w…

Of course. The local tribes are fighting the invaders since 1500.

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#159

Post by 9dev »

Maybe, and this is a big maybe, we should think about whether some countries have a disproportionately large access to, or responsibility for, resources relevant to all of humanity.

Specifically, I would like to question if Brazil can or even should be trusted to handle the Amazon forest in a responsible manner. Over the past decades, objectively, it has shown that the country, or maybe primarily its government, doesn't: The forest is continuously decimated, ever faster, with full and open support by the government itself.

Considering that the Amazon is of broader concern than just Brazil's jurisdiction alone, would it -- and I'd include other, similar areas around the globe here too -- make sense to move administration to a more responsible body, the UN for example (not specifically the UN, but you get the idea)?

This may sound offensive to you for all kinds of reasons, especially if you're Brazilian, and I sincerely apologise for that. But please consider that maybe the challenges ahead of humanity as a whole require new solutions, new ways to think about who "owns" land?

Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021

#160

Post by ajot »

beeforpork wrote: post #150
specialp wrote: post #31

The United States once had one of the largest forests on Earth. The Eastern Forest covered almost everywhere east of the Mississippi. 2,560,000 km2 of forest. Now it is largely gone. Replaced with farmland and sprawl. So it is hard to criticize. Even areas that are now heavily forested like Vermont were clear cut almost entirely by the turn of the century. The Amazon should be preserved, but to do that the world is g…

Killing the Amazon is a crime. Nothing done in the US or anywhere else changes that, regardless of whether that was a crime, too. It is also not hypocritical unless you personally cut down a tree, or unless you believe in the collective responsibility of nations. I don't think 'the Brazialians' are responsible for killing the Amazon -- it's probably a minority of people and we shouldn't care which nation they belong…

Well, crimes should not go unpunished, and if we can, revert the wrongdoing.

What are US or Europe citizens, NGOs and governments doing to restate their forests to, at least, their pre-industrial magnitude? Recover your environments before lecturing and chastising us third world humans.

Post reply on HN