3 ms·

Bulshit. Deforestation was at record levels during Lula’s first terms. Please don’t normalize the election of a criminal.

cassianoleal 4y ago
Yes, it was. For half of his first term. That said, this is hardly an argument against Lula's effectiveness at cutting down deforestation, and even less an argument for Bolsonaro. It took Lula the first half of his first term to effectively cut the trend that had started between 1997 and 1998. For the rest of his time in office, there was a sharp and sustained drop. Numbers put it at roughly a 70% drop. That trend continued if slowed down a little during Dilma's first term. After that we had Dilma's second term in very tough circumstances, the unlawful imprisonment of Lula, an impeachment that was deemed a coup by many, followed by 2 years with what was an interim President at best and a tyrant at worst, and Bolsonaro's ascension afterwards. During Bolsonaro's term there was a sustained increase in deforestation. [0] In 2018, it was just short of 8000km2. During Bolsonaros's first 3 years, it went up to ~10500km2, ~11000km2 and finally ~13000km2. By early June this year, it had already surpassed last year's numbers [1]. For reference, Lula was in office from 2003 to 2010. [0] https://www.bbc.com/ws/includes/idt2/5630ed76-05f4-457f-b6a1-05ef1739aff4/image/816 https://www.bbc.com/ws/includes/idt2/5630ed76-05f4-457f-b6a1... [1] https://amazonia.org.br/desmatamento-acumulado-em-2022-na-amazonia-e-o-maior-em-sete-anos/ https://amazonia.org.br/desmatamento-acumulado-em-2022-na-am... Edit: originally I had written that by early July this year's figures had already surpassed last year's. That's not technically wrong, but it actually happened a month earlier than that, in early June.
- andrenth 4y ago
  > After that we had Dilma's second term in very tough circumstances, the unlawful imprisonment of Lula, an impeachment that was deemed a coup by many, followed by 2 years with what was an interim President at best and a tyrant at worst, and Bolsonaro's ascension afterwards. This whole paragraph is partisan bullshit. I’m not interested in further interactions. Enjoy the win of your pet criminal and have a good night.
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    Thanks for helping make my argument by focusing yours on 2-4 out of 16 years, or 20 if we add in the last 4 where there was a clear and sustained increase in deforestation. I don't have any pets (unfortunately - I love dogs but I live in a carpeted flat), but if I did I'm pretty certain they wouldn't be criminals.
- matheusmoreira 4y ago
  > the unlawful imprisonment of Lula Are you joking?
  - cassianoleal 4y ago
    Of course not, but I think you know that.
    - matheusmoreira 4y ago
      How is it unlawful to arrest a criminal with multiple convictions of corruption, bribery and money laundering?
      - cassianoleal 4y ago
        Please see this post in a sibling thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33407619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33407619
        matheusmoreira 4y ago
        > He was unlawfully investigated and judged by Sérgio Moro The jurisdiction issue? A minor technicality that got him off the hook. He was supposed to undergo a new trial but I guess that's never gonna happen now. We all saw the evidence. For years we watched news about this. Other politicians ratted him out. It's like every few months they'd discover a new thing this guy stole. I remember watching such a news report less than a year ago. Are you seriously claiming he's not a criminal in spite of everything he's done because they let him go free on a technicality? I just don't know what to say anymore. I'm done. There's no point, he won.
        cassianoleal 4y ago
        Are you really summarising all of that post as "The jurisdiction issue? A minor technicality that got him off the hook."? He had his basic human right to a fair trial robbed of him. If you think that's "a minor technicality", then we really have no common ground to argue on.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

cassianoleal 4y ago

Yes, it was. For half of his first term. That said, this is hardly an argument against Lula's effectiveness at cutting down deforestation, and even less an argument for Bolsonaro. It took Lula the first half of his first term to effectively cut the trend that had started between 1997 and 1998. For the rest of his time in office, there was a sharp and sustained drop. Numbers put it at roughly a 70% drop. That trend continued if slowed down a little during Dilma's first term. After that we had Dilma's second term in very tough circumstances, the unlawful imprisonment of Lula, an impeachment that was deemed a coup by many, followed by 2 years with what was an interim President at best and a tyrant at worst, and Bolsonaro's ascension afterwards. During Bolsonaro's term there was a sustained increase in deforestation. [0] In 2018, it was just short of 8000km2. During Bolsonaros's first 3 years, it went up to ~10500km2, ~11000km2 and finally ~13000km2. By early June this year, it had already surpassed last year's numbers [1]. For reference, Lula was in office from 2003 to 2010. [0] https://www.bbc.com/ws/includes/idt2/5630ed76-05f4-457f-b6a1-05ef1739aff4/image/816 https://www.bbc.com/ws/includes/idt2/5630ed76-05f4-457f-b6a1... [1] https://amazonia.org.br/desmatamento-acumulado-em-2022-na-amazonia-e-o-maior-em-sete-anos/ https://amazonia.org.br/desmatamento-acumulado-em-2022-na-am... Edit: originally I had written that by early July this year's figures had already surpassed last year's. That's not technically wrong, but it actually happened a month earlier than that, in early June.

andrenth 4y ago
> After that we had Dilma's second term in very tough circumstances, the unlawful imprisonment of Lula, an impeachment that was deemed a coup by many, followed by 2 years with what was an interim President at best and a tyrant at worst, and Bolsonaro's ascension afterwards. This whole paragraph is partisan bullshit. I’m not interested in further interactions. Enjoy the win of your pet criminal and have a good night.
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  Thanks for helping make my argument by focusing yours on 2-4 out of 16 years, or 20 if we add in the last 4 where there was a clear and sustained increase in deforestation. I don't have any pets (unfortunately - I love dogs but I live in a carpeted flat), but if I did I'm pretty certain they wouldn't be criminals.
matheusmoreira 4y ago
> the unlawful imprisonment of Lula Are you joking?
- cassianoleal 4y ago
  Of course not, but I think you know that.
  - matheusmoreira 4y ago
    How is it unlawful to arrest a criminal with multiple convictions of corruption, bribery and money laundering?
    - cassianoleal 4y ago
      Please see this post in a sibling thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33407619 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33407619
      - matheusmoreira 4y ago
        > He was unlawfully investigated and judged by Sérgio Moro The jurisdiction issue? A minor technicality that got him off the hook. He was supposed to undergo a new trial but I guess that's never gonna happen now. We all saw the evidence. For years we watched news about this. Other politicians ratted him out. It's like every few months they'd discover a new thing this guy stole. I remember watching such a news report less than a year ago. Are you seriously claiming he's not a criminal in spite of everything he's done because they let him go free on a technicality? I just don't know what to say anymore. I'm done. There's no point, he won.
        cassianoleal 4y ago
        Are you really summarising all of that post as "The jurisdiction issue? A minor technicality that got him off the hook."? He had his basic human right to a fair trial robbed of him. If you think that's "a minor technicality", then we really have no common ground to argue on.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]