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

Why the Amazon Is on Fire

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#61

Post by esailija »

tempguy9999 wrote: post #54
esailija wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every "wallet voter" is in a kind of "prisoner's dilemma" with each other where it won't do anything if they stop unless everyone else stops too. But if everyone else stops then they can continue. Everoyne is aiming to be the one who can continue while everyone else stops thus nothing happens. Every collective downside of any consumption (and because of requirements for infinite growth there is always collective down…

Not everyone defects, and your conclusion that "regulatory capture" is inevitable, and that us little people can do nothing, is toxic. Both are wrong. I've spent years of my life trying to change things but it is defeatists like you that are part of the problem - spreading "we're fucked anyway" memes is corrosive because it induces the exact attitude and behaviour you say will happen. Let me be clear, if the world di…

[flagged]

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#62

Post by endorphone »

vfc1 wrote: post #56
kmonsen wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you really saying that because China is refusing to buy soy beans from the US, that makes the US to blame for China buying more soy beans from Brazil?

I'm saying that global demand for cheap meat (lead by both China and the west) is the actual cause for the ongoing deforestation, as the forest is being cleared to produce cattle feed. And this is something hardly mentioned in the news at all, by whatever reason. The trade wars with China have made things a bit worst recently, as there is more demand for brasilian soy. The main responsibility for me lies with the con…

It isn't the West at all beyond the most marginal of imports to a small number of EU countries. That you are trying to eek out some sort of completely convoluted way that your incorrect claim was right is becoming some serious mental gymnastics.

The West likes beef. The West overwhelmingly makes and feeds internally, having nothing to do with the Amazon rainforests. Will you now argue that the West is to blame because it doesn't make enough for itself and China?

If you argued that palm oil production was a factor you'd have some basis, but you are entirely and completely off base with these claims about beef.

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#63

Post by wsxcde »

esailija wrote: post #40
wsxcde wrote: post #9

If you are seriously concerned about climate change, pressure your government to impose a large tax on beef and pay the proceeds from that tax directly to the people living in the amazon basin. That will incentivize them against deforestation. Expecting poor people to voluntarily give up on the opportunity to make money because you are threatened about your children's future but can't even be arsed to reduce your own…

Every "wallet voter" is in a kind of "prisoner's dilemma" with each other where it won't do anything if they stop unless everyone else stops too. But if everyone else stops then they can continue. Everoyne is aiming to be the one who can continue while everyone else stops thus nothing happens. Every collective downside of any consumption (and because of requirements for infinite growth there is always collective down…

That's why I said you need to get laws passed making beef consumption extremely expensive. Individual acts of voting with your wallet are unlikely to succeed.

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#64

Post by wsxcde »

tanto wrote: post #18
wsxcde wrote: post #9

If you are seriously concerned about climate change, pressure your government to impose a large tax on beef and pay the proceeds from that tax directly to the people living in the amazon basin. That will incentivize them against deforestation. Expecting poor people to voluntarily give up on the opportunity to make money because you are threatened about your children's future but can't even be arsed to reduce your own…

Wouldn't that incentivize them to sell more cattle to create more tax income and in return more proceeds to them? Also you are saying > people living in the amazon basin are the ones producing all the beef or rather some big land lords? I concur with the taxation but not paying the money to some other country - rather invest in alternatives.

As the article says, the Amazon rain forest supplies 20% of the world's oxygen. We all need it. If we won't do what it takes to prevent the people there from killing it, we will all get exactly what we deserve.

It might helpful to introspect on why you'd rather have the money spent on one side of an imaginary line the ground rather than another.

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#65

Post by dgellow »

esailija wrote: post #61
tempguy9999 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone defects, and your conclusion that "regulatory capture" is inevitable, and that us little people can do nothing, is toxic. Both are wrong. I've spent years of my life trying to change things but it is defeatists like you that are part of the problem - spreading "we're fucked anyway" memes is corrosive because it induces the exact attitude and behaviour you say will happen. Let me be clear, if the world di…

[flagged]

> Well more specifically either capitalism ends or the world ends.

Let's say capitalism ends right now without destabilizing the entire world (so no post apocalyptic scenario where only a few million survive). What would be a system that doesn't result in the "world as we know it" ending in the coming centuries? You would still have to deal with the current state of the environment and the current population. People will still be the same persons they are now, who wants to eat meat, over-consume, close their eyes when an issue doesn't concern them directly. Or do you see it in a different way?

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#66

Post by jacknews »

esailija wrote: post #57
jacknews wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not, and I for one get fed up with this constant self-shaming, or "riich western country-shaming" attitude. The problem is the entire system. Of course there is demand, but there is also supply. Each side must maintain standards, rather than just choosing the cheapest options. And both sides must hold each other accountable. Consumers must verify that production is sustainable, etc, and suppliers must insist…

> Each side must maintain standards, rather than just choosing the cheapest options. People don't have infinite money. In fact 4.5 billion people don't make enough money not to be in qualitative extreme poverty[1] let alone enough money to be able to freely choose options that are not cheapest. Extremely small portion of total people have any actual freedom to choose options other than cheapest. > Consumers must veri…

By "consumers" I lean more toward "consuming countries". They should reject or penalize destructive products on behalf of individual consumers, just as they currently do for various product-safety standards.

Perhaps in the same way as CITES for banning trading in endangered species, or the various timber certifications, which are certainly imperfect and "full of holes" but at least a start. I think tech could vastly improve systems of provenance.

As I said, the system itself is at fault (as per your excellent link - thanks) - there will always be consumers wanting the cheapest price regardless, and suppliers willing to offer it, or even encouraging it (and certainly trying to hide the 'regardless' part of the equation).

They must be stopped.

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#68

Post by vfc1 »

endorphone wrote: post #62
vfc1 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying that global demand for cheap meat (lead by both China and the west) is the actual cause for the ongoing deforestation, as the forest is being cleared to produce cattle feed. And this is something hardly mentioned in the news at all, by whatever reason. The trade wars with China have made things a bit worst recently, as there is more demand for brasilian soy. The main responsibility for me lies with the con…

It isn't the West at all beyond the most marginal of imports to a small number of EU countries. That you are trying to eek out some sort of completely convoluted way that your incorrect claim was right is becoming some serious mental gymnastics. The West likes beef. The West overwhelmingly makes and feeds internally, having nothing to do with the Amazon rainforests. Will you now argue that the West is to blame becaus…

You know well that there are a lot more crops other than soy being planted, it's obviously much more complicated than that.

Do you have any doubt that a lot of the products produced directly or indirectly as a result of the deforestation are being sold mostly to the richest countries in the world that can afford it?

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#69

Post by esailija »

dgellow wrote: post #65
esailija wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Well more specifically either capitalism ends or the world ends. Let's say capitalism ends right now without destabilizing the entire world (so no post apocalyptic scenario where only a few million survive). What would be a system that doesn't result in the "world as we know it" ending in the coming centuries? You would still have to deal with the current state of the environment and the current population. People…

> What would be a system that doesn't result in the "world as we know it" ending in the coming centuries?

Well like I said in my OP you'd need to have economy entirely based on planning around needs and environment as opposed to private profits.

> People will still be the same persons they are now, who wants to eat meat, over-consume, close their eyes when an issue doesn't concern them directly. Or do you see it in a different way?

It's hard to tell what people are "naturally" when they are forced to live under a system that requires those traits in order to function and perpetuate itself. If you remove overconsumption and individualism a capitalist economy will collapse, then it is most likely not a coincidence that people are like that in a capitalist economy and not their "true" nature.

If the system is even going to be changed it's going to be because critical mass of people have recognized the need to change it (not suddenly overnight) which implies they are no longer indoctrinated to overconsume and see the world in individualistic way and have assumed other ideologies that are needed to support and perpetuate the new system.

Re: Why the Amazon Is on Fire

#70

Post by shinigami »

emiliobumachar wrote: post #51
uxcolumbo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think can be done to accelerate this? Is there anything we in the West can do? I've seen some petitions targeted at the Brazilian embassy here in my country - but not sure of its effectiveness, as it seems Bolsonaro doesn't really care what the West think.

Brazilian here. Meddling with politics could backfire hard, being wrapped around the flag with foreigners booing him could actually bounce back his popularity. As for something the west could do, I'm not an expert, but I think offering to foot the bill for police and inspectors in the area would go a long way. Most logging and burning in the Amazon is still illegal, but it's very hard to police a huge sparsely popula…

There already was a international fund for paying for inspections and so on, but it was canceled after Bolsonaro said they were using that money to compensate farmers.
Post reply on HN