8 ms·

> We must save the Amazon... In other words: pressure Brazilian poor people to pay more taxes to "save Amazon", while rich countries will continue to exploit e

> We must save the Amazon... In other words: pressure Brazilian poor people to pay more taxes to "save Amazon", while rich countries will continue to exploit everywhere to keep their standards.

justicezyx 5y ago
+1 Everything comes at a cost, if people cannot profit from it. In this case, looks like protecting Amazon is not making a profit. Then someone must pay the cost.
meiraleal 5y ago
Exactly this. If the Amazon was American or European it would be a desert long time ago.
Jeff_Brown 5y ago
Please correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that the primary economic interest driving the Amazon's deforestation is (wealthy) cattle ranchers and to a lesser extent loggers. The loggers make money off a tract of land once, the ranchers make money off it for years. Neither of those groups employ a particularly large share of Brazil's poor, nor do they exert a price effect that particularly benefits the poor.
- meiraleal 5y ago
  No, it is not for cattle ranchers but for soy farming which is mostly exported to US and China.
  - Jeff_Brown 5y ago
    Ah, it looks like you're largely right. Brazil export 83 million tons of soy in 2020[1] and produced 137 million tons in the 2020-2021 "marketing year"[2]. Can I assume most of what it didn't export went to feed Brazillian livestock? [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/721215/soybeans-export-volume-brazil/#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20exports%20of%20soybean,billion%20U.S.%20dollars%20that%20year https://www.statista.com/statistics/721215/soybeans-export-v.... [2] https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/pecad_stories.aspx?regionid=br&ftype=prodbriefs#:~:text=Brazil's%202019%2F20%20soybean%20production,8%20percent)%20from%20last%20year.&text=Soybean%20area%20continues%20to%20increase,the%20world's%20leading%20soybean%20producer https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/pecad_stories.aspx?re....
    - meiraleal 5y ago
      > Can I assume most of what it didn't export went to feed Brazillian livestock? Not really, what is used to feed cattle is the byproduct of soy processing, the rest after taking the oil for cooking and biodiesel.
    - jgilias 5y ago
      This 2004 World Bank report on the issue outlines cattle ranching as the main driver of deforestation: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/758171468768828889/pdf/277150PAPER0wbwp0no1022.pdf https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/7581714687688288...
stuaxo 5y ago
And how will the Amazon being mostly desert effect Brazilian people ?
- Server6 5y ago
  Resource depletion followed by mass migration.
  - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    If people think immigration is a problem now they are in for a shock when Africa and South America start to feel the full effects of climate change.
- psychlops 5y ago
  Eventually House Atreides will arrive for the spice harvesting.
  - justicezyx 5y ago
    There were Harkonnen before them, based on the slavery oppression excerciesd, they are more relevant for this discussion...
bamboozled 5y ago
wealthy countries could just donate some of their money to these people too ?
- numair 5y ago
  We tried that. Unfortunately, the “Facebook President” Bolsonaro[1] didn’t care too much.[2] 1: https://olhardigital.com.br/en/2019/04/10/news/bolsonaro-surpasses-trump-and-the-most-active-world-leader-on-facebook/ https://olhardigital.com.br/en/2019/04/10/news/bolsonaro-sur... 2: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-a...
jgilias 5y ago
From what I gather there were programs in place to finance sustainable development in the Amazon by donor governments abroad. And I'm sure this could be expanded given how the climate disaster becomes more and more apparent. But only if the recipient government is willing to cooperate. Which seems to be the main problem now. With the current 'whatever-denialist' at the helm it's impossible to find constructive solutions that can benefit all involved parties.
- meiraleal 5y ago
  The "donation" doesn't cover 1% of what Brazil expends every year on the region, it is not worth the interference.
  - jgilias 5y ago
    Well then, if that's the case, Brazil should stroll in on a white horse into some climate summit, raise this question, and see if a solution can be found to preserve Amazon as a carbon sink in a way that is beneficial to Brazilians also economically. And I mean Brazilians in general, not only a narrow cabal of cattle ranchers. Sawing off your legs to spite the doctor doesn't seem to be a very good long-term strategy.
    - meiraleal 5y ago
      The US had Trump, we have Bolsonaro. Is not that "Brazil" doesn't do it, Bolsonaro doesn't. Should the US have supported him, he wouldn't be in charge, so hopefully he will not get re-endorsed by the US administration.
- hanniabu 5y ago
  Yup, the programs pay farmers to rehabilitate the land

> We must save the Amazon... In other words: pressure Brazilian poor people to pay more taxes to "save Amazon", while rich countries will continue to exploit everywhere to keep their standards.

justicezyx 5y ago

+1 Everything comes at a cost, if people cannot profit from it. In this case, looks like protecting Amazon is not making a profit. Then someone must pay the cost.

meiraleal 5y ago

Exactly this. If the Amazon was American or European it would be a desert long time ago.

Jeff_Brown 5y ago

Please correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that the primary economic interest driving the Amazon's deforestation is (wealthy) cattle ranchers and to a lesser extent loggers. The loggers make money off a tract of land once, the ranchers make money off it for years. Neither of those groups employ a particularly large share of Brazil's poor, nor do they exert a price effect that particularly benefits the poor.

meiraleal 5y ago
No, it is not for cattle ranchers but for soy farming which is mostly exported to US and China.
- Jeff_Brown 5y ago
  Ah, it looks like you're largely right. Brazil export 83 million tons of soy in 2020[1] and produced 137 million tons in the 2020-2021 "marketing year"[2]. Can I assume most of what it didn't export went to feed Brazillian livestock? [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/721215/soybeans-export-volume-brazil/#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20exports%20of%20soybean,billion%20U.S.%20dollars%20that%20year https://www.statista.com/statistics/721215/soybeans-export-v.... [2] https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/pecad_stories.aspx?regionid=br&ftype=prodbriefs#:~:text=Brazil's%202019%2F20%20soybean%20production,8%20percent)%20from%20last%20year.&text=Soybean%20area%20continues%20to%20increase,the%20world's%20leading%20soybean%20producer https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/pecad_stories.aspx?re....
  - meiraleal 5y ago
    > Can I assume most of what it didn't export went to feed Brazillian livestock? Not really, what is used to feed cattle is the byproduct of soy processing, the rest after taking the oil for cooking and biodiesel.
  - jgilias 5y ago
    This 2004 World Bank report on the issue outlines cattle ranching as the main driver of deforestation: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/758171468768828889/pdf/277150PAPER0wbwp0no1022.pdf https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/7581714687688288...

stuaxo 5y ago

And how will the Amazon being mostly desert effect Brazilian people ?

Server6 5y ago
Resource depletion followed by mass migration.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  If people think immigration is a problem now they are in for a shock when Africa and South America start to feel the full effects of climate change.
psychlops 5y ago
Eventually House Atreides will arrive for the spice harvesting.
- justicezyx 5y ago
  There were Harkonnen before them, based on the slavery oppression excerciesd, they are more relevant for this discussion...

bamboozled 5y ago

wealthy countries could just donate some of their money to these people too ?

numair 5y ago
We tried that. Unfortunately, the “Facebook President” Bolsonaro[1] didn’t care too much.[2] 1: https://olhardigital.com.br/en/2019/04/10/news/bolsonaro-surpasses-trump-and-the-most-active-world-leader-on-facebook/ https://olhardigital.com.br/en/2019/04/10/news/bolsonaro-sur... 2: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-amazon-fund-donation-dispute-brazil-deforestation-jair-bolsonaro https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/16/norway-halts-a...

jgilias 5y ago

From what I gather there were programs in place to finance sustainable development in the Amazon by donor governments abroad. And I'm sure this could be expanded given how the climate disaster becomes more and more apparent. But only if the recipient government is willing to cooperate. Which seems to be the main problem now. With the current 'whatever-denialist' at the helm it's impossible to find constructive solutions that can benefit all involved parties.

meiraleal 5y ago
The "donation" doesn't cover 1% of what Brazil expends every year on the region, it is not worth the interference.
- jgilias 5y ago
  Well then, if that's the case, Brazil should stroll in on a white horse into some climate summit, raise this question, and see if a solution can be found to preserve Amazon as a carbon sink in a way that is beneficial to Brazilians also economically. And I mean Brazilians in general, not only a narrow cabal of cattle ranchers. Sawing off your legs to spite the doctor doesn't seem to be a very good long-term strategy.
  - meiraleal 5y ago
    The US had Trump, we have Bolsonaro. Is not that "Brazil" doesn't do it, Bolsonaro doesn't. Should the US have supported him, he wouldn't be in charge, so hopefully he will not get re-endorsed by the US administration.
hanniabu 5y ago
Yup, the programs pay farmers to rehabilitate the land