MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Bolsonaro effect on Brazilian markets and currency
A record high for Brazil shares and a more than 2% gain in the Real, spurred by positive policy moves by the country's new government, helped Latin American markets make a strong start to the New Year and buck gloom in global markets on Wednesday. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThe market will obviously start rising as expected. It's hard not to go back up again after being at the bottom for some time...
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Bolsonaro's administration took office on Tuesday and was quick to issue decrees affecting the economy, agriculture and society, while forging closer political ties with the United States”
It goes well with Bolsonaro's campaign slogan...
Achievements without a bridgehead are not achievements. They are the principle of being conquered.
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sun Tzu
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKEcPph1e28&index=135&list=FLmXPTu1f8AdGlizWNiASx2A
@Chicureo:
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 03:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “The market will obviously start rising as expected”:
Speculations, hopes & wild guesses are subject to overnight changes. The Minimum that's required by 2'019-End at least; is consistency - stability for a long period to prove the capacity of those who are in-charge [after all, they fought so bitterly to BECOME the Rulers]:
- Inflation below 5% [& in proportion to the income]
- Unemployment below 7%
- Exchange Rate US$ below R$ 3
As expected, Chicureo jumps up and down seeing the new Brazil president beginning to go about fulfilling his campaign promises.
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 05:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Jair Bolsonaro launches assault on Amazon rainforest protections,” notes a Guardian story.
Indeed. Too bad for the indigenous communities, too bad for Amazonia, too bad for the workers. Right, Chicureo?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/02/brazil-jair-bolsonaro-amazon-rainforest-protections
As expected, Reekie goes into 'sulk' mode after seeing the Guardian story....
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 06:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@EM
Reekie do you know how many indians there are in Brazil, and how much land they have ?
And are you sure that where you live in Canada was not once land which belonged to indigenous populations ? Too bad for them......right, Reekie ?
Jack
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 07:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Please speak respectfully to Enrique...
His Crown government legally mass murdered the native savages and the few that survived they condemned them to marginal land to starve to death. They today have a new term for the historical precident: “Ethnnic Cleansing”
@Chicureo
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 09:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Sorry Chicureo, but I was just pointing out that Reekie has usurped the piece of land where the Blackfoot chief had his teepee...I don't care whether the Crown gave it to him...
His faux concern for indigenous people is touching, but he knows very well he is an oppressor. Fact is, when Kamerad/Rique was “young” he lived on land usurped from Tupi speakers next to what remains of Paraguay. That alone puts him and everyone connected with him on my “to do list.” :)
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 09:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, ok...
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 10:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0...but who will arise in valiant indignation and defend all the transsexuals strolling along the main boulevards of Brasilia feeling abused and threatened by President Bolsonaro by his overt toxic masculinity.
______________________________
On a personal note: I am greatly appalled and shocked that one of our forum posters, Terrence Hill who has the outrageous timidity by accusing the former as “Dumpy Dilma” in an earlier post.
That went downhill fast. I was wondering when we're going to get a story on the dismal performance of stock markets in the rest of the world. This really doesn't seem like a good time to be blowing up our economy...
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 10:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for the native peoples, I suppose that apart from :o)) and myself, everyone in this thread is living on stolen land. Does that really make it okay to steal some of the little remaining, JB?
DemonTree
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 10:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Would you by perchance be of Norman or Viking heritage?
...Actually Romans seemed to have been even earlier guilty of taking land that didn't belong to them...
Geneticists tell us that anyone with any European descent has Viking ancestors, so yes. Since the Romans were even earlier it must be true of them as well.
Jan 03rd, 2019 - 11:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Help those who are below [or close to] the Poverty-Line:
Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0https://www.otempo.com.br/image/contentid/policy:1.2085422:1546034744/CHARGE%20O%20TEMPO.JPG?f=3x2&w=620&$p$f$w=ac4ac92
@DT
Jan 04th, 2019 - 07:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No one is 'stealing' land....the irrevocable fact is that 200, 300 years ago, indigenous populations were displaced in the name of progress. Giving the land back is kind of impossible. While that is sad, how does shoving what remains of these populations, into jungle reservations, compensate, or help them ? they are still left to their own luck, not entirely in neither one society, nor the other......that's why I think that perhaps giving them “REASONABLY”-sized plots of land, to work if that is what they desire, or any other well thought out solution that attends their CURRENT needs, might be better.... as we all know they are not going back into the jungle to hunt and fish for survival....
”Giving land to the MST didn't work, so why would that wonderful solution work for the indians....is that what they really need ? do THEY even know what they need ??
Just debating....
REF: indigenous populations
Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Those from other countries do not live isolated & away from the multitude. So why the Brazilian Indians are or need to be left far away from the modern civilization? Are they really “better off” the way they live these days?
“France24 – Brazil’s new President Jair Bolsonaro said on Thursday that he would be open to the possibility of the United States operating a military base on his country’s soil, a move that would form a sharp shift in direction for Brazilian foreign policy.”
Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Does Brazil need this? I don't know, but it will surely cause consternation with many.
@Chicureo
Jan 04th, 2019 - 08:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: Does Brazil need this?
Brazil needs the USA [+ also the Middle East, China, Etc] to improve upon the existing Trade-Balance:
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/brazil/2019-01-01/ghosts-brazils-military-dictatorship?cid=int-lea&pgtype=hpg
@JB
Jan 05th, 2019 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“200, 300 years ago, indigenous populations were displaced in the name of progress”
And this year, indigenous populations will again be displaced in the name of progress. There's gold, oil, and valuable timber on their land, and soya beans to grow once the jungle is cleared.
The Indians weren't 'shoved' into reservations, they were living in the Amazon and your government made the reservations so they could continue to do so. There are still uncontacted tribes there and they do indeed survive by hunting and fishing, and gardens they move every few years as the land becomes exhausted. So far as we know, that is what they desire.
I've seen liberals discuss this question before. There's definitely an argument that they should get to enjoy the benefits of civilisation. Life in the jungle can be nasty, brutish and short. And perhaps they lack the information needed to effectively make the decision for themselves? Children growing up in uncontacted tribes don't know what opportunities there are in the wider world. On the other hand, forcing contact in the past has usually not gone well; an 80% mortality rate due to introduced disease is common. And do we really want the government patronisingly deciding what is best for people, what they really need?
But the argument I found most convincing was asking what kind of life awaits them outside the jungle. Brazil is not Sweden, and hunter-gathers have no skills useful in a modern society. They are going to be at the bottom of the ladder, living in poverty and subject to violence. IMO, when the government can feed, educate and provide medical care to a high standard for everyone in Brazil, then they should reconsider forcing these tribes to join society.
As for the MST, wasn't their whole aim to provide reasonably sized plots of land to their members for them to work? They must have accomplished this at least a few times. If you think it will be good for the Indians, you should be showing me their success stories!
More taxes are on their way - in one disguise or another - under the slogans & preachings of patriotism, sacrifice, austerity-measures, discipline + a guarantee of heaven!
Jan 05th, 2019 - 07:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Inflation - well above the income - follows.
Brazilians, WATCHOUT!
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5mNop1QijFE/UBp8FtVUWwI/AAAAAAAABgI/c7w6hk4o4cE/s1600/charge_mn_01_08_2012.jpg
DemonTree
Jan 05th, 2019 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You should watch the incredible movie “The Mission” starring Robert De Niro, Jeremy Irons and Liam Neeson. The music soundtrack alone is spectacular, but the story is incredibly sad as it historically depicts the brutal slaughter of innocent natives by the despicable colonial Portuguese forces.
For over centuries, indigenous populations have been eliminated by disease and war with the diminishing few surviving in the isolation of the Amazon basin, governed by numerous countries I've earlier mentioned.
Criticize Bolsonaro for anticipated exploitation if you please, but you should be even more vociferous about what crimes Lula da Silva, Dilma, Temer, Evo Morales, Peru's Martín Vizcarra, Nicolás Maduro and others even including Emmanuel Macron are all actually guilty of today. (Yes, even the French, as une différence d’opinion, have been documented aggressively currently exploiting the French Guiana Amazon rain forest.)
So why all the heightened current media outrage against Bolsonaro and not against everyone else?
...It goes back again to because he frightens the progressive vox populi...
Sincerely, do you honestly really think Brazil is about to do anything massively different in exploiting the gold, petroleum, and valuable timber on their land if Fernando Haddad had won the election instead?
Do you even realize that the vast majority of the Amazon is completely unsuitable for soya production?
“Brasil acima de tudo, Deus acima de todos.”
“Sincerely, do you honestly really think Brazil is about to do anything massively different in exploiting the gold, petroleum, and valuable timber on their land if Fernando Haddad had won the election instead?”
Jan 05th, 2019 - 08:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes. I think under Haddad the Indians would have kept their reservations, although with continuing encroachment from gold miners etc.
Do you think your family would have kept their farm if Alessandri had won the election instead of Allende?
@DT
Jan 05th, 2019 - 09:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“..And this year, indigenous populations will again be displaced in the name of progress. There's gold, oil, valuable timber on their land, 'n soya beans to grow once jungle is cleared”....If the reserves - 1.1 M sq km of jungle - are tree-covered, how do we know there's gold 'n oil ? valuable timber for sure, but isn't the reason for the reserves to preserve the land - for the indians - or explore it in an economically sustainable fashion ? the fact, is that no one - international press, leftist activists - seems to have given a damn when previous govts, including the PTs, were allowing them to be chopped down, or opening up national parkland to mining.....why now, all of a sudden, just because a centre-right govt's been elected, has the reality or the importance of the AMZ changed ? people are rushing to condemn what might or might not happen, yet they are ok with what HAS happened.
“they were living in the Amazon and your govt made the reservations so they could continue to do so”...MY government ? no, neither Bolsonaro's.....the “original” right to the land was recognized by the leftist 1988 Constitution, 'n most of the land (as well as locations) was demarcated between 2005/15...under the PT. The land, 'n all its wealth (also under the ground) belongs to the indians...So, are the indians going to prospect for oil, dig for gold, or use it as their ancestors did (?), the very reason for their existence. Given that the indians are in no position to explore the land wrecklessly, nor would they be allowed to, looks like there's going to have to be some kind of trade-off, which translates into them relinquishing some of their “original” rights in exchange for something they want... they have something to negotiate, 'n it will happen, the question is how ? The integrated indians have no interest in going back into the jungle...do the others, in remaining there?
The MST has long abandoned its original cause - work the land - it's just a political movement now.
DemonTree
Jan 05th, 2019 - 10:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I think under Haddad the Indians would have kept their reservations, although with continuing encroachment from gold miners etc.”
Do you see the hypocritical contradiction of what you just posted? But, let's just assume President Haddad just left things just as the PT and other corrupt political leaders have historically allowed:
(From the Financial Times) “The arc of deforestation is a war zone. It has worsened in the past 10 years and it will continue to get worse,” says Áquilas Mascarenhas, chief ranger in the Jamari national forest in Rondônia, an Amazon state.
https://www.ft.com/content/971f03aa-f9e0-11e7-9b32-d7d59aace167
_____________________________
“Do you think your family would have kept their farm if Alessandri had won the election instead of Allende?”
The highly complex and controversial subject of land reform in Chile is far beyond my pay scale to explain the historical dynamics. The Alessandri family has always been a strong political force for several generations, but Jorge Alessandri was not about to embrace the destructive land reform ideas of Allende.
Alessandri, Allende and most of the contemporary politicians of the time wanted to insanely transition Chile towards industrialization as a solution of lifting our country out of poverty. ...Stupid, really stupid and completely asinine...
One conclusive fact that I know is Marxist farming policies alongside central market planning in Latin America always result in a complete catastrophe.
@JB
Jan 05th, 2019 - 11:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“why now, all of a sudden, just because a centre-right govt's been elected, has the reality or the importance of the AMZ changed ?”
Back in 2017 Temer had a similar plan, and the Guardian rushed to condemn it:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/24/brazil-abolishes-huge-amazon-reserve-in-biggest-attack-in-50-years
Nor were they the only ones. This is your reaction to the same story:
“Stupid idea, disgusting Law. Just the beginning of more destruction of essential rain forest.”
en.mercopress.com/2017/08/25/brazil-opens-vast-amazon-nature-reserve-to-mining
Thanks to the widespread opposition, Temer eventually changed his mind.
And here is a story about deforestation increasing during Dilma's presidency. The MP commenters were not exactly complimentary:
en.mercopress.com/2013/11/16/deforestation-in-brazilian-amazon-increased-by-a-third-over-the-past-year/comments
So I think I should be asking you: what changed? Why is it acceptable now to open the Amazon up to development if it wasn't before?
As for knowing about the gold, TV mentioned the illegal miners sneaking in (note that Venezuela has the most illegal mining, which is not too surprising.):
www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/10/illegal-mining-in-brazils-rainforests-has-become-an-epidemic
Dunno about the other minerals (think I mis-remembered the oil, it was stuff like tantalum, nickle and manganese) but probably illegal prospecting.
As for the Indians, what about the ones who don't want to be integrated in society, but just left alone to get on with their lives. Would you force them to integrate?
@Chicureo
So you actually disliked all the candidates in that election? That sucks. But like with the Amazon, there were better and worse options, right, even if no good option?
DemonTree
Jan 06th, 2019 - 03:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“So you actually disliked all the candidates in that election? That sucks. But like with the Amazon, there were better and worse options, right, even if no good option?”
Pondering the stupidity of Chile's former politicians as well as the inevitable mismanagement and destruction of the Amazon basin is sort of like debating premeditated “date rape”...
...what's worse? Someone who aggressively tells the damsel that he's going to violate her, or the other dodgy character who assures her he's completely virtuous while surreptitiously spiking her drink with flunitrazepam?
It's sort of questioning who was really the most immoral? Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby?
“inevitable”
Jan 06th, 2019 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Such a convenient view, that lets you out of any responsibility for the outcome. Would you say the same about security in Brazil, or corruption? It doesn't matter who was elected because the end result will be the same.
@DT
Jan 06th, 2019 - 07:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Fact is, the importance of the AMZ forest hasn't changed – what’s has, is the people’s perception, based on how the press reacts - but it's rate of destruction, or preservation - depends whether you are a pessimist or an optimist - will probably carry on at the same rate...as it did under the PMDB, PSDB, PT, MDB, and perhaps now, under Bolsonaro.
I don't know, but all of a sudden it seems to have become the focus of the MSM like never before, speculating without facts. The PT was not about disturbing the peace, or creating ripples by trying to pass unpopular but essential reforms, it would go about its 'duty' in an insidious form, trying to give the impression everything was fine, and the press “cooperated”, well rewarded for toeing the line.
Re yr link on the RENCA nat’l park, I know, and I think it was a mistake, but this is on Temer. He revoked his first Decree-Law (2017) due to public pressure, only to re-edit it in 2018, with subtle changes that didn’t change much….only copper came off the list.
The “current” policy on “developing” the AMZ is not all that clear yet, but looks like the left has already decided it will be completely and inevitably destroyed.
Objectively speaking, the AMZ is just as important as it always was, even more so now, but what has changed is the ‘sensitivity’ of the MSM…under the PT, the MSM wasn’t too critical, under Temer, they woke up, under B, it’s up in arms…some areas in the far north, where groups of illegal gold miners were working, Temer didn’t try very hard to stop it, and local police forces just looked the other way.
For the Indians who prefer to remain isolated in the forest, ok, wouldn’t force integration, but I’d downsize the reserves to areas compatible with their numbers/needs, 'n re-arrange them, away from strategic areas (along the western border) - 'n then forget about them.
One thing is clear though, the press is responsible for changes in perception, 'n at times I question its motives.
DemonTree
Jan 06th, 2019 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“inevitable” “lets you out of any responsibility for the outcome”
What on Earth do you suggest? Should I change my political ideology?
How will that change the destruction of the Amazon, Indonesian, African and Central American rain forests?
In most civilized countries, you are free to express your opinions, or at least it was until social justice warriors along with certain countries like China, where you can be sent to a reeducation camp or literally losing your head for insulting Islam...
There is serious legislation being discussed to criminalize global climate change deniers. Some angry French are wearing yellow vests because they're fed up with... ...well you know the French, we say they're “especial”
Growing up in Latin America has sadly taught me that idealism is nearly futile, and expecting meddling foreigners to enlighten us how to develop our countries.
“I don't know, but all of a sudden it seems to have become the focus of the MSM like never before”
Jan 07th, 2019 - 06:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That's because it has become a focus of the government like never before. (Or at least in recent times.) You said yourself the number of reserves was increased during Lula's presidency, and deforestation fell during those years, so why on earth would the press be complaining?
As for Dilma, weren't they being just as 'unfair' to her here?
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/slash-and-burn-brazil-shreds-laws-protecting-its-rainforests-2289107.html
It's not the sensitivity of the media that has changed, but the attitude of the government. Saying deforestation will continue at the same rate is good propaganda, but it's not true. In the past it has risen and fallen due to government policy: the article from 2011 was worrying that Dilma's amnesty would increase deforestation, and it did. But if for the agribusiness lobby can convince people it won't make a difference, they can get away with a lot more.
What's the difference between Temer's plan, which you opposed, and Bolsonaro's? Don't they both want to open up reserves to mining?
And as for security, B wants to increase gun ownership in Brazil. What would happen if he armed the Indians and gave them permission to shoot any trespassers?
@Chicureo
Yes, you should change your ideology. I don't know what's happened to the world that people now are determined to destroy it rather than save it. In the past countries signed the Antarctic treaty, banned commercial whaling and eliminated smallpox. When it was discovered CFCs were causing the ozone hole they were banned around the world within a few years. Everyone's so feeble nowadays, they tell each other nothing can be done just so they don't have to bother.
DemonTree
Jan 07th, 2019 - 09:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Whether it's legal or illegally done, the violation of the Amazon will continue. Bolsonaro or Haddad will/would have much effect. ...Is it wrong, yes...
It's sort of questioning who was really the most immoral? Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby?
Urging Latin Americans to act responsively about the Amazon is just about impractical as expecting Europeans to negotiate a fair and equitable Brexit. Sort of like herding cats.
No it's not, because we have seen Brazil reduce deforestation in the past. They were the example to the world at one point. Why so defeatist, Chicureo? You want them to fail?
Jan 07th, 2019 - 09:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@DemonTree:
Jan 08th, 2019 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “Urging Latin Americans to act responsively about the Amazon is just about impractical as expecting Europeans to negotiate a fair and equitable Brexit”
You certainly can depend upon the South Americans; as far as urging them to act responsively is concerned!
DemonTree
Jan 08th, 2019 - 07:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No, they did not reduce the deforestation, but they did successfully run a sham to fool world perception. Lula and Dilma were the darlings of the progressive media, but they were complicit in ignoring the problem.
And no, oI would not like the horrible environmental mismanagement of the world to continue, but the current global climate change and carbon trading scheme is bull manure.
@DT
Jan 08th, 2019 - 07:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Previous govts, especially the PT, wasted billions on propaganda – after all, isn’t advertising the soul of business ? easier to divulge fake propaganda than actually DO something
“…so why on earth would the press be complaining”…exactly, why would they, if they were receiving billions ? By going ‘easy’ on the government translated into hefty reward.
Now that B has decided to review these excesses, media is naturally upset, ‘n their response is to retaliate with exaggerated criticism.
The demarcation of most reserves occurred in the PT era, but am not sure if this has any link with regards to the reduction of deforestation (which wasn’t all that significant) – the official demarcation would’ve had little influence as the Indians already occupied the areas, and this never inhibited deforestation.….perhaps the crisis of 2008, which drastically reduced home construction (especially in the US) was partially responsible - less demand for timber - but it doesn’t change the fact that government efforts to protect the forest have never been very effective.
Regarding the Independent’s report, why would it be ‘unfair’ to Dilma ?…She sanctioned the law, so it’s on her. But why do YOU ‘suggest’ she be let off the hook (for signing it 'n conceding amnesty to farmers who broke the law) yet criticize B, based on speculation ?
I think the media’s sensitivity is proportional to how they percieve they are treated by govt…if well-treated they become thick-skinned, if treated badly, they become over-sensitive’.
With regards to mining, do you “know” what B has in mind ? I don't , so what's the point in comparing what Temer did, with pure speculation ?
Gun-ownership only for responsible citizens, which probably includes many Indians….you don’t need permission to shoot at trespassers....they can 'n should be shot at. But the fact is that many Indians are ‘already’ armed, with illegal weapons (smuggled from Miami 'n Paraguay ).....like the drug gangs, the MST..
FYI, deforestation is tracked by satellite, and not Brazilian satellites. Are you claiming NASA was colluding with the PT to make it look like their policies were working? And that the British media was receiving money from the Brazilian government to report more favourably on them?
Jan 08th, 2019 - 08:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Excuse me if I prefer to believe the facts.
“why would it be ‘unfair’ to Dilma”
It's not, that's why I put the word in quotes. But if you think the media are being unfair criticising Bolsonaro, why don't you think they were being unfair to Dilma? Only because you like one, and dislike the other. She hadn't sanctioned the law when the article was published. As for knowing what B has in mind, I know what he's promised and what he's done already. You told me once that Trump wouldn't really try to build his wall; care for a bet on whether B allows mining in a reservation?
“you don’t need permission to shoot at trespassers”
Seriously? If you tried that here you'd go to jail. But why can't the landowners keep the MST out, then?
“...If you tried that here you'd go to jail...”
Jan 08th, 2019 - 09:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yea, in London, Buenos Aires and in Recife ...IF you're caught, but in the middle of the Amazon wilderness with few to witness... It's documented that illegal loggers and miners have been killing natives at a far lesser per capita rate in Salvador or Rio. Crime is a major problem throughout the country.
The theme of the subject is Bolsonaro's effect on “markets and economy” which will vastly determine his popular domestic position. (I really don't think he cares much about what the rest of the world feels.)
“IF you're caught”
Jan 08th, 2019 - 10:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well sure, but the question wasn't whether you can get away with it, but if it's legal. That's what surprised me.
As for B, he obviously cares about what certain parts of the world feel: the US, Israel. He's not isolationist, just courting different allies. And besides that, his agribusiness supporters aren't going to let him disrupt their exports by pissing off big buyers like China. Unfortunately, none of that helps the rain forest.
@JB:
Jan 09th, 2019 - 01:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “you don’t need permission to shoot at trespassers....they can 'n should be shot at”:
I heard that the trespassers [+ crooks] have more rights [protections] than the commoners.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dHaPM-_oZQo/Tcr2VmDK8aI/AAAAAAAAAg0/LirSR-gCYaA/s1600/charge_policia_bandido1.gif
@JB
Jan 09th, 2019 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0If we can't even agree on the evidence and you don't believe ANY published information, there's not much point in debating.
@DT
Jan 11th, 2019 - 07:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm perfectly aware that deforestation in the Amazon is monitored by satellites - supplied by the US, and operated by the Brazilian govt. Why mention “NASA colluding with PT”? - I never even mentioned it, far less thought it.
And what 'facts' are you referring to ? that deforestation decreased during the PT era ? ok, it did…the rate of deforestation fell btwn 2004/12, and increased again in 2013….as I said, in 2008, the crisis was responsible for the enormous drop in demand for construction timber ...and 'now' I'll add the 2004 boom of 2004, as a possible reason in the reduction of illegal activity.
I think the media's being unfair to B becos 1) he's been in office only 10 days, 2) he hasn't signed any law (yet)...Dilma did….why criticize in anticipation of something which may or may not happen, why in such a rush to crap on his head ?
In this case, ideology has nothing to do with what I like...I don't see ideology behind 'every' decision…if a proposal is good, don't care who proposes it ..the left, centre, or right.
Well if you know what B has in mind, good for you....I'd rather wait 'n see what happens.
Why mix up Trump 'n Bolsonaro ? Can't remember what I said abt Trump 'n his wall...but anyway, was just an opinion..not stated as fact....but Trump 'n B are two different people, different countries, different realities.
Am not going to bet as I don't exclude the possibility of B opening up areas for mining either....but wait before crucifying him.
Re trespassers, surprise, surprise ! the UK and BZL are different ! If someone invades my home and threatens to hurt me, I can shoot them to defend myself.
To protect farmland fm the MST, not all farmers can, or want to resort to hiring thugs, but when the MST invades, it is always armed. Employees are held hostage while the MST goes about literally `destroying` everything in sight, including research labs...
Must say, nice bunch of people, who just want to work. DT, seems a lot surprises you.
@JB
Jan 12th, 2019 - 11:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0As long as we can agree on the facts of what happened, rather than dismissing everything as 'fake news'.
Given Lula passed policies to reduce deforestation, and it fell, and later Dilma passed a law that conservationists said would increase it, and it increased, I'm pretty sure that yes, government policy can have an effect. And the experts seem to have been doing a pretty good job at predicting the effects of policies, so I believe them when they say B's will harm the Amazon more. Although he hasn't passed a law he's been very busy with executive orders, which are all on him.
“Am not going to bet”
Okay. I reckon he will do exactly what he promised. And I think it's fine to criticise politicians for what they plan to do, since if the reaction is negative enough, they often change their minds.
In the UK you can shoot someone in self defence, but not simply for trespassing. If you catch someone taking a shortcut through your farm, not doing damage or anything threatening, can you legally shoot them?
PS. When I said it surprised me, what I meant was that I don't believe you. I forget you didn't actually grow up in Britain, would you prefer me to be more direct?
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!