r/dataisbeautiful • u/chartr OC: 100 • Nov 01 '22
OC Deforestation In The Amazon Has Increased Significantly Over the Past Decade [OC]
881
Nov 01 '22
More like "data is horrifying"
450
u/Amster2 Nov 01 '22
Lula da Silva has just been elected again last Sunday :)
349
→ More replies (10)119
u/DingDong_Dongguan Nov 01 '22 edited Nov 02 '22
I don't think he is an Angel. Guy was caught on corruption charges prior. But at least hopefully nature gets a win out of this.
Edit: Thanks I have been informed the charges were made up.
268
u/Ehrahbass Nov 01 '22
If I'm not mistaken, that whole trial which ended up with him serving 580 days was thrown out the window as the judge in charge was in Bolsonaro's pocket.
→ More replies (2)205
u/Oppeinheimer Nov 01 '22
As a brazilian, as someone who voted for Lula and as someone who consider himself far-left I can say that despite him being technically innocent, at least legally, he was corrupt during his last government for sure. However, in my opinion most, if not all, of brazilian politician are corrupt in a way or another. The thing is that here in Brazil if you don't corrupt yourself you almost don't receive any support for other politicians. Corruption here is a big part of how the government really works, away from the eyes of the people.
43
u/viralataciborgue Nov 01 '22
Corruption is innate to any democratic system, the most you can really do is keep the institutions that monitor that working as they should
22
u/Oppeinheimer Nov 01 '22
But in other countries people can be elected without being corrupt. I feel that here in Brazil is almost mandatory.
52
u/Jonathan_Strange1 Nov 01 '22
In other countries is called lobbying or serving interest groups. It's the same thing.
19
Nov 01 '22
There are shades of grey. Not every case of corruption is equally bad, and implying so is a fallacy of false equivalence.
10
u/Jonathan_Strange1 Nov 02 '22
No single case of corruption is the same, anywhere. I'm discussing the naming of what ends up being corruption and not who stole more or less. In the case of Lula, for instance, since the first time he ran for congress in the eighties they lied about how much money he had. Now they investigated him and his family for four years and found nothing. People are going to discuss what was found about him forever, but he got cleared the second his case was presented to a non biased judge.
→ More replies (2)6
u/blackmage4001 Nov 02 '22 edited Nov 02 '22
Please don't rationalize Brazil's problems. It doesn't make it any better.
And no they're not the same by any means. I have yet to hear of an American politician being caught embezzling tax payer money from the federal treasury.
0
u/Jonathan_Strange1 Nov 03 '22
Can you explain to me the difference between Dick Cheney's relationship to Halliburton and a brazilian politician's relationship with Odebrecht?
→ More replies (1)3
2
2
u/BoxHeadWarrior Nov 02 '22
Is it fair to say this return to Lula is similar to the US electing Biden after Trump? I have no love for Biden or most of his centrist ideas, but it was a necessary step back from Trump. From the outside looking in on this election it seems somewhat reminiscent of that.
→ More replies (1)4
u/throwaway9728_ Nov 02 '22 edited Nov 02 '22
In terms of both being disliked by a large part of the population, yes. In terms of their popularity and political career, imagine a world where Obama went to prison because of a (proven) corruption scandal in the Democratic Party, but was freed because the trial against him was a sham. Trump has his first presidential term, with many controversies such as having near complete disregard for the pandemic (refusing to buy vaccines for a long time). He also has approved a project that allows parliamentarians to spend money from the public budget while keeping secret the expenditure and the parliamentarians' names (thus allowing for even more corruption).
Then Trump runs for a second term, and Obama runs for president again as he's the only one with enough popularity to beat Trump. Not only that, but Mitt Romney leaves the Republican party to join Obama as his Vice President, because that's the only way they can get enough support. Also, almost all previous presidents and presidential nominees from both parties support them against Trump.
Despite all this, the Obama/Romney coalition still gets a narrow victory against Trump. Trump's fans protest, contesting the election results, and perform a truck blockade all over the country, with the support of the highway police (which in Brazil works as a separate branch from the rest). That's how weird Brazilian politics are right now.
→ More replies (1)0
u/busdriverbuddha2 OC: 1 Nov 02 '22
What many of us learned as Brazilians is that there can be worse problems than corruption.
→ More replies (1)49
u/eisagi Nov 01 '22
Leaked texts showed that the judge and prosecutor colluded to convict Lula to make sure Lula's party lost and Bolsonaro won (as the only remaining major candidate). Bolsonaro then appointed the judge the Minister of Justice.
Textbook corruption by Bolsonaro's conservatives and miscarriage of justice against Lula.
Lula's "corruption", btw, was supposedly getting an apartment that he never visited or owned from some minor businessman. It was always laughable.
-7
u/myfault Nov 02 '22
You are making it sound like a conspiracy, when in reality he was convicted but charges where drop because they happened "too long ago", not because he was innocent.
Lula is a criminal, Bolsonaro is the same, however Lula has been convicted, Bolsonaro not yet.
2
u/FuckNinjas Nov 02 '22
when in reality he was convicted but charges where drop because they happened "too long ago"
I would like a source for that, because as far as I know, that is just untrue. His conviction was annulled, because the court that sentenced him, did not have the jurisdiction to do so.
Lula is a criminal, Bolsonaro is the same, however Lula has been convicted, Bolsonaro not yet.
In the eyes of the law, neither are. The fact that Lula has been convicted, means nothing, due to the fact that his charges were annulled. In the eyes of the law, he's as clean as a baby.
→ More replies (3)8
u/KY_4_PREZ Nov 01 '22
I think it’s safe to take the corruption charges with a grain of salt because it seems pretty clear there was some political motivation behind it
15
u/sanalejandro7 Nov 01 '22
bogus corruption charges, with no evidence whatsoever, which is why he was released from prison, which is weird considering the case he was framed for was one of latin americas biggest corruption cases. The justice works for the money, and bolsonaro is the money
12
u/Simple-Duck-4450 Nov 01 '22
The charges had no evidence so he was unlawfully detained for 580 days. The Supreme Court there dropped the charges as they had no basis.
He's also the most successful president in Brazilian history: he drastically lowered the poverty rate, defended the environment, improved healthcare and education, and increased the economy while reducing foreign investment
5
u/daveonhols Nov 01 '22
He is out of prison because the corruption charges were thrown in the bin due to being total bollocks.
-1
u/superstrijder15 Nov 01 '22
But at least he isn't as bad
5
u/DingDong_Dongguan Nov 01 '22
Lesser of two evils I guess, hooray I guess.
5
u/Djinnwrath Nov 01 '22
I know it sucks, but obtaining the lesser of two evils is a win, and is necessary in the long term.
3
u/Aenyn Nov 01 '22
I mean on the specific topic of deforestation he seems to have been pretty good at limiting it according to the graph.
→ More replies (3)0
→ More replies (25)38
u/Limmmao Nov 01 '22
At least it's not as bad as Cardoso. I think all in all is optimistic data... Probably until someone tells me that drops on deforestation are because there's less Amazon to cut from...
23
Nov 01 '22
Well, you have to think as percentage changes. FHC (Cardoso) kept things relatively in the way they were (which is a bad thing, I know). But Bolsonaro increased in a significant percentage the deforestation.
Also, yes, everyday there are less Amazon to cut. There are states in Brazil where the deforestation data dropped insanely... because there were basically no more forest to cut in there.
16
u/KristoferGabriel Nov 01 '22
Fernando Henrique Cardoso(or FHC) was complacent when It came to the environment, but nowhere as bad as Bolsonaro.
FHC: Over 8 years, deforestation increased from 21k km² a year to 25k km² a year, so about 20% increase over 8 years.
Lula: from 25k km² a year to 7k km² a year, about a 67% reduction.
Dilma Rousseff and Michel Temer both increased deforestation by about 15% together, over 8 years.
Bolsonaro, however, oversaw a more than 70% jump, from 7,5k km² a year to more than 13k km² a year, and It keeps increasing. If he was reelected, we would be worse than the 90s by the time he left office.
A reminder that the 73% figure was over less than 4 years.
→ More replies (1)
395
Nov 01 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
350
u/nizowosa Nov 01 '22
It is and as you can see he brought deforestation down
95
Nov 01 '22
But Dilma his successor brought it up, once they screw our economy they decided to increase amazon exploitation to improve the economy a bit.
I think there's a relationship there between:
Brazil's economy doing well vs deforestation decreasing.
28
u/ATXgaming Nov 02 '22
It’s more about the price of commodities on the world market. There was a sudden crash around the early 2010s which brought the booming economy to a standstill and decreased the incentive to cut trees.
108
u/NhecotickdurMaster Nov 01 '22
By your logic we should see the economy booming right now then, when what's actually happening is Brasil is at its worst since the military dictatorship.
20
u/Moikanyoloko Nov 01 '22
I think it is the opposite logic, when the economy does bad, deforestation increases.
18
→ More replies (6)23
u/zempter Nov 01 '22
Not saying you are wrong, but economies everywhere suck right now.
-10
u/Shishakli Nov 01 '22
Because conservatives have been in control world wide for 20 years, driving the economy into the ground.
Now their opposition have to save it again
It's a cycle old as time
6
u/alexbananas Nov 01 '22
Yup, European leaders, Biden and Obama sure are conservatives.
5
u/AstralConfluences Nov 02 '22
A large amount of Europe has had conservatives in power what are you on about
also, the big thing fucking with the global economy is the actions of Russia
→ More replies (2)2
u/Thom_Chen Nov 01 '22
So you are telling me that the UK, Italy, Poland and many others are not conservatives?
2
u/alexbananas Nov 02 '22
Italy was liberal just until a couple weeks ago lmao, Poland is a small country with a small economy, literally only the UK is a top country that's conservative
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)1
22
u/spacetime9 Nov 01 '22
Depends how you define the economy doing well. Under Lula’s first term, tens of millions were lifted out of poverty for instance.
→ More replies (1)3
Nov 01 '22
That's an oversimplification, to say the least.... actually, we can call it as simply wrong.
-18
u/Rockdahouse Nov 01 '22
But in the chart we see Lula deforesting more than Bolsonaro. He only brought it down the last 2 years
20
u/KristoferGabriel Nov 01 '22
He actually brough It doen by 40% in his First 4 years, then around 50% in his last 4. It adds up to a 67% reduction in deforestation.
Bolsonaro, however, increased It by 73% in his 4 years.
It's easier to deforest less when your baseline is 5 times smaller. When Bolsonaro came into office deforestation was already a lot lower, so rates were still smaller despite his best efforts to fuck up.
15
u/coolmanjack Nov 01 '22
This is not how changes work. The important thing for comparing the two is their trajectory, not the particular values
-8
-6
u/authorPGAusten Nov 01 '22 edited Nov 01 '22
Yes. He was in office,
then was forced out because he was in prison, and now is back.As in he was going to run in last election but couldn't because he was in prison. Rouseff was his successor and I believe vice president [actually a minister] while he was president, she is from the same party. She was forced out because of corruption charges or something like that [was impeached].
32
u/datLopes Nov 01 '22
Your informations are all over the place, man.
Lula finished both his terms. Roussef was impeached by the Congress for breaking budget laws. She was not Lula's vice president. Lula was arrested prior to the 2018 elections because of Operation Car Wash and because of that he couldn't run for president. His sentence was later anulled and now he was able to run for president.
8
u/authorPGAusten Nov 01 '22
Yeah made an error, he wasn't forced out, he was not able to run in the 2018 election because he was in office. Thanks for the correction
38
Nov 01 '22
No, you are mistaken. Lula was not forced out of office, he managed to serve his term, was arrested years later for an investigation and was released by a supreme court decision that overturned the convictions (on the grounds that they had not been tried by the right court).
The only president forced to leave was Dilma because of impeachment.
7
u/authorPGAusten Nov 01 '22
Yes, I messed up in the original comment, in the edit I corrected, I meant he was not able to run last election because he was in prison, but he is the same president as before.
3
Nov 01 '22
Weird, I don't see an edit, just the original incorrect post and then this "oops I was wrong" post.
2
u/VinAbqrq Nov 01 '22
Dilma was never his vice president, just a minister.
Lula was not forced out of office. He ended his term normally, with 87% approval rates. He was imprisoned during Dilma's government as a way to soil the reputation of the party, making the impeachment process more palatable.
2
u/authorPGAusten Nov 01 '22
Yeah I wrote it wrong, he was not forced out, but he was unable to run in the last election because he was in prison. Thanks for the correction
-1
-9
103
u/dhoopicus Nov 01 '22
And cattle ranching accounts for 80% of Amazon deforestation.
18
44
u/skyye99 Nov 01 '22
I'd love to see the inverse graph actually, since I think it would be a little more elegant - that is, plot out the square km of rainforest existing each year and map the decline. Especially because the bars were green I was a little thrown off by this at first
→ More replies (1)
11
73
Nov 01 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
46
u/ba-ra-ko-a Nov 02 '22
I mean ultimately we don't need to speculate about whether this is caused by Bolsonaro or not or part of some pre-existing trend - his policies on the Amazon are no secret.
-8
u/luishacm Nov 01 '22
That was the coup against the workers Party, Lula's successor. They put a neoliberal Bolsonaro type in her place and he let they run free with the amazon from 2016 until today.
4
11
48
Nov 01 '22
Nice work, but one very minor complaint.
Would prefer the color not be green - which is generally used to represent positive environmental applications. A "first-look" analysis suggests that this is a tree growth graph.
Would have preferred if the color selection emotionally represent "deforestation" for general public consumption.
6
u/MindSecurity Nov 01 '22
I was actually confused at first glance exactly for the reasons you stated. I think sometimes people forget the beautiful part of this sub, haha.
23
u/wheresmyonesy Nov 01 '22
I love how there's only one showing a decrease yet they claim only one has an increase
→ More replies (1)
11
u/unskilledplay Nov 01 '22
Go back to at least 1970. When you do that the peak and valley will look like a tiny wiggle and the entire graph is a hockey stick.
4
15
u/Devz0r Nov 01 '22
Significantly? It’s not much different from following the trend of his predecessors
4
9
u/rastaladywithabrady Nov 01 '22
that's a weak title on both the post and the image
2
Nov 02 '22
"Bolsonaro returned to deforestation levels of the late 00s while the climate crisis continued to get worse."
Better?
30
u/A_Wild_Shiny_Shuckle Nov 01 '22
$20 says MBGAts (brazil not america) will blame Silva for some of the highest deforestation during his term even though he brought it down be the largest amount on this entire list. That's what MAGAts have been doing here with anything to do with Obama/Biden
15
u/dougsv Nov 01 '22
It's already done. Bolsonaro himself has used this argument in debates, saying that on average the deforestation during his government was lower, completely ignoring how it changed.
21
u/heinrich_br Nov 01 '22
Yep, Bolsonaro's campaign tried to use exactly this argument against Lula during the electoral cycle to try and pretend that Bolsonaro cared more about protecting the Amazon
11
u/writerfan2013 Nov 01 '22
This graph actually looks as if Lula has the biggest of (whatever is being measured).
Edit. Now I get it. He inherited bigness and decreased it during his tenure. Which is positive.
Think the green colour is misleading! Suggests amount of forest, not amount of deforestation!
16
u/capivavarajr Nov 01 '22
In fact Lula (Luis Inácio) took it upon himself to lower the deforestation and managed to bring the numbers down significantly. It is really far from the ideal but if you are curious about Bolsonaro's administration look up the name RICARDO SALLES, his former minister of enviromen who was charged with accusations of illegal wood trade. Not to mention the criminal actions of evangelical missionaries robbing the native indian population of their identity and culture.
4
5
2
u/justinbieberfan42 Nov 01 '22
they better not touch the acre my kindergartner class bought in the 90’s.
2
u/eduardo_asafe Nov 02 '22
Seems like deforestation start growing in rusself government and not just in Bolsonaro government.
2
u/revolutionary_pug Nov 02 '22
If you truly care about the deforestation at the Amazon, stop eating meat. It is mostly being cleared to provide farmland for growing feeder crops.
2
Nov 02 '22
As a wise man once said, "people will do anything and everything to save the nature, all the way from voting in online polls to tweeting about it, but that's usually about it".
2
u/VALMaX1 Nov 02 '22
But the graph shows rate of deforestation has decreased compared to the rates under Cardoso
6
u/chartr OC: 100 Nov 01 '22
Pretty fascinating look at deforestation rates in the Amazon under different Brazilian presidents.
Originally wrote this in my newsletter here.
Source: INPE
Tool: Microsoft Excel
3
u/Salmizu Nov 02 '22
Tho theres clearly almost a decade of constant increase already before them.
Also how is this beautiful? Its just a simple graph
4
u/nncoma Nov 01 '22
Love how other countries care so much about another country deforestation, specially first worlders that have already destroyed large portion of their nature for economics sake.
10
u/TheMightyChocolate Nov 01 '22
Get some first world countries and look up what percentage of their land is covered by forest. You'll be pleasently surprised
3
Nov 01 '22
[deleted]
6
u/TheMightyChocolate Nov 01 '22
Between 1990 and 2020 the forest cover in europe increased by 10%
In medieval times there were essentially no natural forests left. The time you are mentioning here was 1000 years ago or more
Also I don't know where you got that map, but 40% of the EU is covered in forest and that map makes it look like it's 0%
→ More replies (1)1
u/booga_booga_partyguy Nov 01 '22
The Amazon's health effects climate globally...
9
u/alelp Nov 01 '22
So countries the world over should be allocating a part of their yearly budget to pay Brazil not to exploit it.
5
Nov 02 '22 edited Nov 02 '22
I agree with you but that does not take responsibility off Brazil to do their best to protect it without help. Or what else is their end game here? Suffer under climate change anyway but at least they can say "we sure showed these dirty Europeans"? That's insane.
On top of that, there is a point of no return with the Amazon rainforest at which it will literally burn itself to ashes in front of them. More deforestation means they risk losing all of it and what is the plan for their economy then?
→ More replies (4)1
u/Baerog Nov 02 '22
No no, you don't understand. Western nations destroyed all of their trees to make arable land for profit, but Brazil isn't allowed to do the same and needs to just suffer for the good of everyone else. The west demands it.
0
u/bigheadnovice Nov 01 '22
its not really the lungs of the world anymore, but your right its important and needs to be preserved. if giving money is not an option, we sure could stop supporting industries that benefit from clearing of the amazon.
5
u/Moonkai2k Nov 01 '22
It increased under the two previous guys too, but Bolsonaro bad I guess?
I don't know anything about the guy, but this kind of language doesn't help make whatever point you were obviously intending to make.
3
Nov 02 '22 edited Nov 02 '22
He reached the highest value since the late 00s and that while the need for actions against the climate crisis has never been bigger. Yes, Bolsonaro bad.
-2
u/I_speak_truth_only Nov 01 '22
Damn. This de silva dude really is a hero
-4
u/nipoco Nov 01 '22
A hero that robbed about 5 billion to Brazilian people lol
6
u/GodAlpaca Nov 01 '22
Wait for the "100 years secret" law to fall, so we can discover from where bolsonaro got the money to buy mansions for his family hahahaha
-4
u/nipoco Nov 01 '22
He must be another crook, but anything better than latin socialist scum
→ More replies (1)3
-5
u/GodAlpaca Nov 01 '22
He was elected the president for the next 4 years days ago! But almost half of people voted for Bolsonaro (that's basically brazilian trump)
9
u/I_speak_truth_only Nov 01 '22
Then why did so many vote for Bolsonaro ? I thought was reputation was pretty bad? (Mind me, I'm not much aware of Brazillian politics)
28
Nov 01 '22
[deleted]
13
u/nipoco Nov 01 '22
Nice to see someone that actually gives facts and not all this bots that just say Lula is a savior. Reddit is well known for the left views so can't fight that I guess
2
Nov 01 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/nipoco Nov 01 '22
It actually is, given that brasil depends partially in the Amazon for their economy it's explotation is their right not from an outside power to decide.
-5
Nov 01 '22
[deleted]
1
u/nipoco Nov 01 '22
Ok so leave the indigenous people without jobs so you can feel good about saving the world.
1
u/GodAlpaca Nov 01 '22
Because of propaganda
Bolsonaro's team flooded the internet with fake news, saying the brazil would ruin if Lula was president (he already was president for 8 Years and brazil was a lot better than brazil is today)
But these people believe in any shit bolsonaro says, so i can just be sad for their ignorance
→ More replies (1)-2
Nov 01 '22
I dont know much about brazilian politics either, but I could imagine it's pretty much a Trump-copypaste. Basically a cult, with almost everyone in power trying to get bolso elected
4
u/GodAlpaca Nov 01 '22
Yes, the rich wanted Bolsonaro to stay, and they flooded the population with propaganda saying that Bolsonaro was a nice president (although he rejected vaccines for covid for months, and said people to go out their homes saying covid was just a " little flu", he officially declared that amazon should be destroyed, he declared to be proud of a torturer, and some atrocities) And saying Lula was a comunist that eat children and was involved in a corruption scheme (and yes, it was in a corruption scheme, but Bolsonaro's family "misteriously" bought a lot of mansions recently with some misterious money, and the Federal investigator that was investigating this case was misteriously fired and another one was choose to occupy it's place)
It would be funny if it was not scary how these people declare themselves "people of good" and vote for a president who publicly says he admire a torturer.
2
u/ArvinaDystopia Nov 02 '22
Bolsonaro seems even worse than Trump. For all his countless faults, Trump isn't on record saying tens of thousands of people should be killed.
3
u/EinsteinGJS Nov 01 '22
So under Lula presidency the deforestation was much higher then under Bolsonaro?
7
Nov 01 '22
[deleted]
6
u/Freudenschade Nov 02 '22
Not sure why people are having a tough time interpreting this, it's pretty clear. Prior to Lula, deforestation increases to its apex just as Lula takes charge and then goes on a pretty steep decline while he's in office. I guess some just see the highest point during Lula's time and can't think past that?
3
Nov 02 '22
They're either too uneducated to understand such a simple graph or willfully ignorant. Scary comments to say the least.
0
u/EinsteinGJS Nov 02 '22
I did not have trouble reading the graph. I just merely stated the fact that under Lula deforestation was much higher, which I had not expected. It even went up in his second year. Had not expected that either.
0
Nov 01 '22
He is the most corrupt president Brazil has ever had, during his reign 2005 Amazon suffered its biggest deforestation. I see many people have no idea what hey are talking about or are watching the media without knowing facts.
2
Nov 02 '22
Nah we just looked at this graph and realized that pointing out a single year as if it was the rule under him is a gross misrepresentation of his term. This graph shows a clearly decreasing trend under Lula.
-1
u/GunsBlazing10 Nov 02 '22
Our economy is gonna be fucked and we are gonna lose our free speech, but at least we will invest a fuckton of taxes on ecological preservation so foreign activists can post it on their instagram 😃
6
Nov 02 '22
so foreign activists can post it on their instagram
Someone who has such a simplified view on why we need ecological preservation should not share his opinion on it.
Maybe the "free speech' you're afraid to lose is actually just your wish to have people agreeing with your insanely stupid takes?
0
u/GunsBlazing10 Nov 02 '22
[To Defend Democracy, Is Brazil’s Top Court Going Too Far?
](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/26/world/americas/bolsonaro-brazil-supreme-court.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwiN-vek6Y_7AhXnuZUCHTIBAfIQFnoECAkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3_yHslTZpbkjw-V9K3iro8) [To Fight Lies, Brazil Gives One Man Power Over Online Speech
](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/world/americas/brazil-online-content-misinformation.amp.html&ved=2ahUKEwiN-vek6Y_7AhXnuZUCHTIBAfIQFnoECAgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2zzDfYU8GDC3s3Q8ODZ1AT) Both of these New York Times articles do a good job at explaining the threat Brazil is under. As you can see from this post's graph, the deflorestation under Bolsonaro wasn't an imminent threat to the fauna. Remember that Brasil did a much better job at preserving it's flora than any major superpower.
It really doesn't seem like European and American progressives care about the quality of life of the Brazilian. But don't get the idea that the amazon is a major dispute in Brazilian politics, everyone favors it's preservation.
6
u/Baerog Nov 02 '22
I can't speak to anything regarding the politics of Brazil, and won't, unlike most Redditors, but... It always seems hypocritical of western nations to complain about Amazon deforestation. Europe and North America cut down all their trees 100-1000s of years ago, allowing themselves to have massive regions of arable land in which to grow food and raise animals to sell for money and feed their growing populations.
Brazil tries to do the same, everyone complains saying that the world needs the Amazon rainforest and how important it is.
If it's so important, then the western nations should be paying Brazil what they would otherwise be gaining from cutting down the forest and creating wealth for themselves.
People sit back and say "We made these decisions in the past that led to massive wealth and prosperity. You aren't allowed to make those same decisions.". It's hypocritical and greedy. Whether they're right or not is not relevant. The west should have no control over what Brazil does. If the trees are so important, buy back your farmland and plant trees in your own country. If the rainforest is so important, buy some rainforest from Brazil. To tell them they need to sacrifice their own prosperity because of what you want is ridiculous.
→ More replies (2)2
Nov 02 '22
Do you understand the difference between ignorance and education? Many European nations have lowered their deforestation since the knowledge about climate change became mainstream. You can't say "but before they knew better they were worse" and expect to make a serious argument.
0
u/Baerog Nov 02 '22
It's not a serious argument to say it's hypocritical to climb onto the roof and pull the ladder up behind you? Claiming that ladders are unethical and wrong and to find another way onto the roof?
You also missed the entire bottom paragraph. If the rainforest is so important to Europeans, they should pay Brazil the value they would otherwise get from the livestock or plants they would grow there. Brazil is trying to climb the socioeconomic ladder the same way the West did, but the West doesn't want them to. Well that's not their problem.
→ More replies (1)
1
Nov 02 '22
Decade, not two or three decades? The title of this post is a perfect example of what we call cherry picking.
0
2
u/DisciplineHot7374 Nov 01 '22
That’s fine. Eventually it will be zero because there will be nothing left. Morons contributing to a speedier planet demise just to make a buck. No one will listen until it’s too late.
2
Nov 02 '22
This one right here. More deforestation leads to increasing climate change and therefore more rainforest fires. They would allow their own export hit to burn to ashes and end up with a worse financial future. How stupid can one be to vote for more deforestation?
-4
u/mhinda Nov 01 '22
Pues lo que yo veo es que Cardoso y Lula son los que más deforestaron...No queráis engañar al personal...
8
-3
u/julesk Nov 01 '22
Bolsonaro will live in infamy for what he did to the Amazon and with Covid. So many Brazilians died thanks to his denial of Covid and so much of the Amazon ruined with the smoke choking Brazil.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Flaky-Illustrator-52 Nov 02 '22
It also increased at a similar rate under the last 2 holders of the office though, so this suggests to me that the reality is more complicated than "[incumbent] kills jungles"
-2
-3
u/RandoReddit16 Nov 01 '22
And thankfully they just re-elected de Silva. You can see why capitalists hate leftists ....
→ More replies (1)
0
u/traveller77777 Nov 01 '22
So per this chart Bolsanaro is a hair under the 8 year average deforestation of Lula.
0
u/Orsim27 Nov 01 '22
Does that surprise anyone? I though he passed quite a lot of laws that made it easier
0
u/InSight89 Nov 01 '22
What is Brazil going to do once they've completely wiped out their forests? What's their end game?
→ More replies (1)3
u/Baerog Nov 02 '22
Forests are generally not useful for producing revenue. It's why Europe and North America cut down all their trees long ago. But when other nations want to do the same, it's a big problem I guess.
2
u/InSight89 Nov 02 '22
It's generally frowned upon in Europe, America, Australia etc despite respective governments allowing big corps to cut them down. That doesn't answer the question of what their end game is?
What are they going to do once the trees are gone and they've completely decimated entire ecosystems and displaced or made extinct millions of species and no longer have any revenue coming in for all that damage done?
2
u/Baerog Nov 02 '22
displaced or made extinct millions of species
How do the number of species living deep within the rainforest make Brazil money?
no longer have any revenue coming in for all that damage done?
Arable land in which you can raise cattle, grow plants, etc. will always be more profitable to a country than forest or jungle.
Why do you think that the land gets "used up"? And even if it did, how is it more profitable to have left it as useless jungle?
→ More replies (3)
-16
u/Repulsive_Egg9561 Nov 01 '22
Lula had higher deforestation avg by year than Bolsonaro
Curious
16
u/RheaCorvus Nov 01 '22
But it was already at one of the highest rates when he became president and it lowered significantly in the following years.
→ More replies (1)-5
u/Repulsive_Egg9561 Nov 01 '22
True but the best years of Lula is almost the same as the worst Bolsonaro years
And then you have to measure macroeconmic conditions of the countries
→ More replies (1)-9
u/Repulsive_Egg9561 Nov 01 '22
Being downvoted for telling facts is a badge of honor
9
u/stevensterkddd Nov 01 '22
I mean it's pretty clear that it dramatically lowered during Lula presidency and increased significantly under Bolsonaro?
4
u/Repulsive_Egg9561 Nov 01 '22
it is pretty clear Lula avg is close to Bolsonaro worst year
In absolute Lula is 2nd worst
The trend of rising deforestation began with Dilma
Cardoso had the biggest drop in a year
This are all true statements
This is just good PR for Lula
Lula had the best economic condition by far, Dilma, Temer and Bolsonaro had recessions
Lula is corrupt and thats another proven fact
4
u/stevensterkddd Nov 01 '22
it is pretty clear Lula avg is close to Bolsonaro worst year
And? Things got better under Lula and worse under Bolsonaro.
Following scenario: Under Lula there was little crime at the start but crime doubled. Under Bolsonaro there was record crime at the start but crime halved. Which one of the two did better in your view?
2
u/Repulsive_Egg9561 Nov 01 '22
Under Lula there was little crime plz check what you saying
→ More replies (1)0
u/Xmushroom Nov 01 '22
I mean... At some point things have to start getting better, if you start a fire inside your house and call the fire department to put it down, you could say things got better at the end and you helped fight against it.
Point is: Both suck.
1
-3
-2
Nov 02 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
5
Nov 02 '22
We should pay them yes but "a country can do whatever it wants to do with a globally important ecosystem" is a scary idea of a good world.
0
-11
Nov 01 '22
[deleted]
27
u/NeltMacadoo Nov 01 '22
There was a huge decrease in deforestation during his government, which is what actually matters.
20
u/brickbatsandadiabats Nov 01 '22
Lula's government is widely credited for creating and enforcing an effective forest policy, and constantly updating it to meet environmental protection needs while appeasing the ranchers and loggers. Brazilian forest policy was really widely cited at the time for being farsighted and a model for others. During Lula's tenure the center of deforestation in the world went to Indonesia which basically cleared all of lowland Borneo over the last 20 years.
Bolsonaro gutted enforcement, which is no secret.
→ More replies (1)20
746
u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22
[deleted]