11–20 of 106 posts
I was wondering what the trick is, as selling a place without holding its title may not command a very high price, even if you clear it and make it ready for business - for cattle ranching in the case of the rainforest. Turns out it's similar to the concept of adverse occupation: > Another factor driving the illegal land market is the expectation of amnesty. > Mr Alves revealed he was working with others to lobby pol…
Huh? If the ads were for firearms or child slaves, would Facebook's response also be that it was ready to work with local authorities, but would not take independent action?
So how can Facebook take this kind of flippant approach to this, but not on other items? The, not even hypocrisy, but just complete lack of fundamental human decency and respect is revolting.
> Facebook said it was "ready to work with local authorities", but indicated it would not take independent action of its own to halt the trade. Huh? If the ads were for firearms or child slaves, would Facebook's response also be that it was ready to work with local authorities, but would not take independent action? So how can Facebook take this kind of flippant approach to this, but not on other items? The, not even…
I don’t think they were in the rainforest though
That's illegal, can't claim ownership
> Facebook said it was "ready to work with local authorities", but indicated it would not take independent action of its own to halt the trade. Huh? If the ads were for firearms or child slaves, would Facebook's response also be that it was ready to work with local authorities, but would not take independent action? So how can Facebook take this kind of flippant approach to this, but not on other items? The, not even…
You don't need to figure out whether it is an illegal or legal child sale as all child selling is illegal. Selling land in itself is not illegal.
> Facebook said it was "ready to work with local authorities", but indicated it would not take independent action of its own to halt the trade. Huh? If the ads were for firearms or child slaves, would Facebook's response also be that it was ready to work with local authorities, but would not take independent action? So how can Facebook take this kind of flippant approach to this, but not on other items? The, not even…
This is one of those rare times I agree with facebook. Why is this Facebook's problem? Sounds like Brazil should be enforcing their laws better. Facebook hosts for-sale postings, how reasonable is it for them to vet every post against scams and illegality?
This seems obviously wrong.