on the other hand there's a video of a guy planting one tree per minute here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbA-hoIuHM4
Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
191–200 of 224 posts
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#192Earlier 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)…
Brazil is a rich country though. It's considered 2nd world due to violence, income/wealth inequality and sanitation problems, which are mainly political and not due to lack of money
It's considered "3rd world" actually, as much as the term is a bit useless. The term "2nd world" is reserved to former Soviet-aligned countries.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine outsiders telling you that half your country is untouchable As a Brazilian, I would be completely ok with that. We can handle people telling us those things.
> As a Brazilian, I would be completely ok with that. We can handle people telling us those things. Would you? Because this would absolutely escalate from words to actions. I could foresee this leading to quotas that if they're not met carry economic sanctions with them. That doesn't improve Brazil, does it? Sovereignty means that nobody outside of Brazil gets a say without offering something major in return.
> That doesn't improve Brazil, does it?
I happen to believe that it does.
In the worst case, we get to keep the forest.
> Sovereignty means that nobody outside of Brazil gets a say without offering something major in return.
First world countries used to give us money for keeping the forest but the current government (prior to 2019, "the annual donations to the Amazon Fund have amounted to nearly $1.3 billion" [1]). We could get back to that.
However I also happen to believe that, at best, the deforestation part is not important for Brazil's economy at all.
Several others have mentioned [2][3] (and I agree with them) that the deforestation part is actually damaging to the economy and to the livelihood of law-following Brazilians, and is borne out of illegal activity.
The current government could just start following the (Brazilian) law and the issue would disappear. Ah, but police is expensive, you say. Well, they could have used the 1.3 billion from EU/US. Maybe a new government will be able to get that back, one can only hope.
[1] https://gizmodo.com/big-donors-are-pulling-out-of-brazils-am...
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone born in Brazil, I'm tired of this condescending bullshit. There are several economically viable solutions, but Brazilian government should be interested in pursuing them, rather than only pursuing things that only benefits the current friends of the government (such as deforestation). US/EU/etc forcing Brazil to get its shit together would be BETTER for the population. We don't need the deforestation to pr…
This is also "sins of the father" style reasoning. The fact that other people did a thing in the past doesn't mean I agree or support it. I have ancestors who fought with the confederacy; does this mean I shouldn't be opposed to human trafficking in 2022? I think that would be an unreasonable jump to make.
Exactly.
This is a very weak argument for something that is so damaging as letting the forest be destroyed for what is virtually zero economical gain to the population.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's a lot of people working in that automation. Sorry for the pun, but Brazil isn't really reaping the benefits of agricultural automation to compensate for the issues being an exclusively primary-sector exporter causes. Automation scales very well. Also notice that I'm not saying Brazil shouldn't keep doing what it is doing, I'm saying that other more developed-country-ish sectors should be expanded too. > Als…
They don't want more developed countries. Period. Also, I don't know where you are from, but brazil has a healthy agritech industry selling know-how and technology to other countries.
The only people who "don't want more developed countries" are the people that want Brazil to keep being a primary sector exporter that suffers from Resource curse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_curse).
I'm from Brazil but I have lived abroad for a while. And what I said before doesn't negate the fact that Brazil has a healthy agritech industry. This industry still doesn't make up for the problems caused by the current policies. And one thing doesn't really negate the other. We don't have to kill the primary sector for others to develop.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#196In the 2.7 million square miles of rain forest, 114 miles[1] were lost.
That's 0.004% - huge.
1. Assuming 1 tree per 100 square feet.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#197What about 2020, and 2019? I'm more interested in the trend than in the absolute number.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#198Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah perfect, then we're in agreement. A lot of people assume I'm being a radical and saying Brazil should stop exporting meat/soy/etc. I'm not. What I'm saying is that Brazil needs is a plan that's not simply "keep fucking the country even though it's not really working". I'm not a fan of people from richer countries saying "Brazil should keep doing what it seems to want to do", because this is also way too favourable…
I'm not a fan of richer (or poorer!) countries saying much of anything about what other countries should or should not do. :) Everyone is biased. Everyone is hypocritical to some degree. We should find common ground, not impose or be imposed on.
Agree.
I think it's kinda easy to find common ground, but everyone should be allowed a voice. With the "shut up, let Brazil destroy forests, we did it too", the only people that seem to be getting a voice are politically-correct privileged people from rich countries (who want to keep taking advantage of Brazil), criminals in Brazil destroying the forest and the corrupt current Brazilian government.
Re: Brazilian Amazon lost 18 trees per second in 2021
#200I live close and know people who livelihoods depends on that forest. Believe it or not, it's not the farmers or loggers fault. Their livelihoods depends on that forest. Farmers depend on the rain cycle. Loggers depend on the forest staying healthy, so new trees grow so they can keep their business going. Illegal logging does happen but it isn't their fault exclusively either. The root cause is illegal occupation and…
There are plenty of satellite picture showing deforestation without people living on it.
Any further sources?