Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Sandi_T t1_j811of3 wrote

Excellent news indeed!

948

smurb15 t1_j82u3c9 wrote

I remember hearing growing up that we could never cut all them down and I always told them that they were full of shit

281

Koppensneller t1_j836sc9 wrote

Remember kids: we can do anything we set our minds to, including cutting down the Amazon.

140

shaneh445 t1_j8487ee wrote

Full stop though on police reform any mentions of UBI or holding the wealthy/elite accountable

​

But anything else? why yes. ANYTHING we imagine we can do--we can do

25

Austoman t1_j85buak wrote

Hey, now you forgot about controlling what happens to our own bodies (especially women and those who seek to transition). That's a hardline of not possible. Actually ya know what, anything religious leaders tell us cant be done cannot be done.

Everything else is possible, though!

9

shitposts_over_9000 t1_j83zppb wrote

It is assuming he isn't playing funny games with the measurements to get more foreign aid like the last time.

4

kadupse t1_j84z193 wrote

You're clearly completely unaware of what you're talking about.

There's nothing the president could do to fake these measurements. The only reports he could influence would be irrelevant to the international public and media, and wouldn't even be trusted by Brazilians.

I'm a Brazilian biologist, we are serious about this. We just couldn't do much during Bolsonaro's government.

19

shitposts_over_9000 t1_j85axy2 wrote

it is satellite imagery so in addition to the weather issue mentioned in the article itself this time of year there is also the issue of calibrating for ground conditions. it doesn't mention which satellite survey methods are at play here but nearly all of them require some degree of human intervention for reclassification which can always be optimistic or pessimistic if you have sway over those doing the reclassification or you can just feed them bad survey data if you don't

3

FlaLawDog t1_j84a072 wrote

What, exactly, is your basis for this allegation?

−3

shitposts_over_9000 t1_j84d5hg wrote

Two things:

Under several leaders they have made press on satellite foliage coverage changes being positive without adjusting for a baseline or ground conditions.

The last time this guy was in power the first numbers from the next guy indicated a pretty unrealistic rate of change as soon as he was gone. The two most simple explanations are the either the books were cooked or the deforestation was well under way the last time he was in power, he was looking the other way and the work wasn't visible to satellites yet.

0

FlaLawDog t1_j84a1ll wrote

What, exactly, is your basis for this allegation?

−9

FlaLawDog t1_j84a963 wrote

What, exactly, is your basis for this allegation?

−10

Lejd_Lakej t1_j812gc8 wrote

Best news I've heard all year.

371

mostardman t1_j83c400 wrote

I work with data analysis in Brazil and actually Lula changed the way they collected data to deforestation.

Idk if this article didn’t know that or they are spreading fake news on purpose because they didn’t mention it.

unfortunately deforestation still happening

−73

MrMundungus t1_j83co15 wrote

Source? Or are you just making stuff up?

52

kjmnbvc t1_j83fn7i wrote

He posts on the brazilian version of r/conservative so there's your answer

99

Asterose t1_j85pgso wrote

Is that the brasilivre reddit a deleted comment was linking to?

1

pie_ofthe_cream t1_j83dobd wrote

Seriously I want a source or what company he works for that he is saying that

29

[deleted] t1_j83epl7 wrote

[removed]

2

weirdowerdo t1_j83ji27 wrote

So what exactly did he change and do you have any tangible proof whatsoever beside "Trust me bro"?

33

thejoker882 t1_j83t0x2 wrote

still happening... but 60% less. Like the title states?

15

PepeHacker t1_j81b4n7 wrote

I hate to be this person but reducing beef consumption is needed to stop deforestation in Brazil. Most of the deforestation is being done to allow for cattle grazing. Current US regulations allow for beef processed in the US to be labeled as US beef.

359

BZenMojo t1_j823bmh wrote

While this is true, it's always important to be reminded the role fascism has in the destruction of natural resources and indigenous cultures.

161

djstocks t1_j830n3f wrote

Or this is just a puff piece.

−63

Wareve t1_j82u1yd wrote

If the environmental regulations are strong enough and enforced, the beef supply will be limited and the price will go up, resulting in less consumption.

This is a difficult ask from governments obviously, but consider that the alternative is trying to convince vast numbers of people to willingly stop eating tasty meat. Humans have issues doing that when it's literally killing them and they've been told so by doctors. Expecting them to do it when told to by environmentalists seems a little less likely to me than the governmental regulation option.

61

handsomehares t1_j84vcjn wrote

We can get people to protect the rainforest without asking them to eat less beef.

Just… don’t tell them about the beef part.

8

reedef t1_j82mx0q wrote

Or develop artificial meat

21

WhatuuupKrisp t1_j838g20 wrote

Yes, but this will take some more time. People shouldn't wait for that before they drastically reduce their meat consumption.

14

BoJaNYK t1_j83g5j3 wrote

There are alternatives at the ready, and if more people switch they will be getting better and better.

9

searchforstix t1_j83lrmh wrote

An example for your statement - I’m not quite vegan (I’ll get there as I go), but learning that lentil tofu, and other beans, exists. I’m not a big soy person, so it was an awesome thing to discover the process!

5

theGurry t1_j848dqj wrote

The problem with the alternatives is the sodium content.

−3

JoyfulExmo t1_j82gje0 wrote

100% this. Deforestation is YOUR hamburger, people. One of many reasons I’m glad I don’t eat it.

17

KaimeiJay t1_j82u7e8 wrote

You’re not the one responsible for that. Saddling the consumer with the ethics of climate change is a corporate grift.

37

J_Tarrou t1_j838alx wrote

Arguing that only consumers should worry, not companies - yep, corporate grift.

Arguing that you have no personal responsibility, even when you consciously choose things that are bad for the environment - nope, you're just making excuses.

This isn't like when people have to drive because of where they live, and can't afford an electric car. I'm not aware of anyone who has to eat beef.

23

waffle_socks t1_j8441lq wrote

Thank you for saying this. Too often I see people parroting that line, ignoring that its a two sided problem. Supply and demand would have to decrease together. Consumers need alternative options, but companies wouldn't make money on unethical products if consumers force the issue. The alternative would often be regulating what is produced and sold and you won't ever pass legislation that, for example, outlaws farming and sale of beef. Tinfoil hat time: I think that industries simultaneously push the idea that consumers shouldn't be responsible at the same time as pushing the idea that companies shouldn't be responsible for change. That way, no one has to feel responsible and nothing ever changes.

8

GD_Bats t1_j839jz7 wrote

I’m going to point out that US raised and butchered beef is a thing- granted still not the greatest thing for the ecosystem, but the deforestation of the US is mostly a done deal at this point.

3

handsomehares t1_j84vlma wrote

The forests in the USA are actually at some of their largest since the old growth was cut down.

For what it’s worth.

We destroy the grasslands for beef, not the forests, here in the USA.

4

GD_Bats t1_j84yrqz wrote

Fair point, though I’d also cite replacing grasslands with lawns in there as a big part of the issue. Yes lawns are better for the ecosystem than paving it all over, but just barely

2

handsomehares t1_j8503sa wrote

Once upon a time out lawns were filled with clover and other pollinators and were actually fairly “good” for the local eco system.

Not so much any more :(

3

dzigizord t1_j82z1je wrote

If it was legal for corporations to sell slaves, would you happily buy them and say it is corporation problem? People want changes, but only if change happens somewhere else and not in them

−6

KaimeiJay t1_j831ms3 wrote

Holy mother of strawman, Batman! 🤣

8

dzigizord t1_j842qy4 wrote

it is the same, if you think eating beef is unethical for whatever reason then stop it, don't wait for corporation to stop producing them.

only logical conclusion is that you think eating beef is fine.

1

handsomehares t1_j84vqdi wrote

If only there were some sort way to see nuance. Shame. If only.

0

SoupIsForWinners t1_j83qx7r wrote

Nah, I get my burger from a farm in the next town over. That's the real solution. If you have the option, buy local. It's a beautiful purple color, rather than the grayish red I see at the store.

6

Nerdymonkeyboy t1_j840llj wrote

Americans can't buy a Amazon burger if Lula never lets them build the ranch.

9

fiendishrabbit t1_j85llez wrote

Soy production is just as culpable. Soybean production is the second largest direct source of deforesttion in brazil and most likely the largest indirect source. For the last 20 years or so new soy farming methods (which allows soy to use previously unsuitable land) have taken over land that's previously been used for cattle grazing. After soy has been used to increase land fertility it's followed by other agricultural produce such as maize.

So targeting beef in particular when one of the big drivers is animal products in general (as soybeans are used as protein for animal feed)...

2

SemperMeTaedet t1_j886k3h wrote

>Current US regulations allow for beef processed in the US to be labeled as US beef.

Never heard of this loophole and I'm not even mildly surprised to hear about this bullshit. Just another day in the US of A

1

obinice_khenbli t1_j84g7tw wrote

Sounds like an internal USA problem, that's not how we do things in Europe. Why should we reduce our beef consumption because the USA has dodgy practices?

Not that reducing meat consumption is a bad idea in general of course, I just don't see why we should change our diet because of something the USA does to itself. We don't import USA beef.

0

theluckyfrog t1_j85kdey wrote

No, you import Brazilian beef. Which is better how exactly?

1

Trips89 t1_j81p82o wrote

Great, now if we can send Bolsonaro back to Brazil to face charges that would be some truly uplifting news.

303

mattz300 t1_j83xnj4 wrote

What abt Lula? He already went to jail for being corrupt. lol

−107

csimonson t1_j83y7m3 wrote

I'll take corrupt as long as it's not killing the rainforest. Plus why are you starting some whataboutism anyways?

49

mattz300 t1_j8428vj wrote

Bc it’s freaking true! Most people don’t even know who Lula is and they’re just happy it’s not the last guy. Just trying to fill in anyone who doesn’t know. Maybe they’ll actually go read abt the topic

−51

ekispece t1_j844o79 wrote

Maybe you yourself should read about the topic before parroting Lula was in jail without context.

Just the basic stuff you missed was, the trial was found to be partial, the evidence was not beyond unreasonable doubt. The Judge eventually got a ministry under Bolsonaro’s presidency and what’s interesting, even though it was not a fair trial, he accepted his judgement and faced the jail time, not fleeing to florida to avoid jail time.

So yea, some people in Brazil are sour, because fake news and bullshit corrupted their minds, it was a tight ass election with almost 50-50, so you’ll find people in all the places that are sour for losing the election. The truth? Brazil’s in a better place with Lula.

44

dramaking37 t1_j840sqp wrote

You've clearly read about the situation since you're up to date on what happened

24

mattz300 t1_j842226 wrote

I have read the situation and just spent a week there last week. I was shocked to hear people across 3 different cities tell me how disappointed they are to have Lula in office. The only thing that prompted this convo was saying “wow everything looks a lot nicer since last time I was here” (2019).

So ya first hand accts are usually pretty good sources

−51

Nemesysbr t1_j847sfr wrote

Three cities in a country of 210 million, lol.

The country voted him in. And the reason he isn't arrested is because operation car wash was proven to be biased and fraudulent in how they gathered evidence.

25

dramaking37 t1_j84e67m wrote

Don't worry though, they talked to everyone in each city and not just the type of people they're predisposed to meet.

22

mateustunes t1_j8563ns wrote

That's a lie. The car wash operation was never proven "fraudulent" or "biased".

Lula was sentenced to prison by 3 different instances, being released only later by the ministers of supreme federal court (who were appointed by Lula himself).

Anyone knows that he is corrupt, including a large part of his electorate. He even put a bunch of friends involved in corruption cases back in power.

It's disgusting to read people defending the biggest corrupt in the history of Brazil.

−4

viniciusbfonseca t1_j85c3ii wrote

Brazilian lawyer here:

Judge Moro was quite literally ruled biased by the Supreme Court as he and the prosecutor would literally text each other with ideas on how to best proceed to condem Lula, and Moro would give the prosecutor tips on what to file. If Lula was so corrupt and if there were so much proof against him, why would it be necessary for the judge and the prosecutor to do that?

The Court of Appeals and the Superior Court of Justice both used the cases and evidence gathered in the first degree to base their rulings, sonit really doesn't count.

Lula did indeed apoint many judges to the Supreme Court, but unlike Bolsonaro and Temer, Lula (and Dilma) always selected a candidated from a list of three that was compiled by other jurists, exactly so that whoever reaches the seat doesn't owe anything to the president and can be unbiased towards them. The whole reason that Car Wash wasn't archived the moment that it reached the Attorney General's desk is precisely because, just like Supreme Court justices, the Attorney General was always picked from such a list (that stopped with Temer and Bolsonaro, who picked people that would have their backs).

As for most corrupt: have you seen Bolsonaro's card expenses? Have you seen all of the corrupt practices that he was involved in? The guy literally delayed the purchase of COVID vaccines because he wanted to get a few dollars for each one. Hell, his whole family is involved in hundreds of corruption scandals, just a few weeks ago we learned that the former first lady had the fish from the Planalto Palace killed so that she could collect the coins that were thrown in its pond.

But even so, I'd rather have a corrupt in office than a genocidaire (especially a corrupt genocidaire)

14

Nemesysbr t1_j856tgp wrote

Judge was legally deemed biased and all further attempts to implicate lula were thrown out due to lack of proof.

Evidence being considered inadmissible is quite literally due to operation car wash being criminal in their approach and hurting defendants' right to a fair trial.

Right-wingers can cope in whichever way they want.

Edit: for those in doubt, just read the intercept's coverage on operation car wash. They're the ones who first broke leaks on some of the more concerning actions.

7

pm_me_your_uwus t1_j8535gg wrote

Depending on the places you went to, that could be like saying you've been in 3 different cities in Texas and got shocked when you heard how much people would rather have Trump instead of Biden.

7

mattz300 t1_j857836 wrote

Sure nice subjective thought if you don’t like the info being told to you. Are you able to divide out which towns like Bols vs Lula?

It really doesn’t matter to me. My only point was to add a tad of perspective to some readers. Obviously people in upliftingnews are extremely up to date on Brazilian politics and know more.

−8

pm_me_your_uwus t1_j85aosx wrote

I'm Brazilian so I know what I'm talking about when I tell you how divided the country is about this, it's not a matter of " nice subjective thoughts" or finding excuses to push a narrative, it's just how things are. The close election results reflect that, it was 51% vs. 49% for Lula.

Generally speaking, the southern states are predominantly pro Bolsonaro and the northeastern states are predominantly pro Lula. Everything else in between is a toss up, it really depends on the people you talked to, which by no means can represent the overall opinion of the Brazilian population.

Edit: also the richer and whiter the brazilians, the bigger the chances of them being a Bolsonaro supporter.

3

viniciusbfonseca t1_j85e12r wrote

First hand account from someone that is actually from and lives in Brazil:

A lot of people don't like Lula because he is more left-wing and has many government policies that favors the poor, so the middle class sees that and clutches their (fake) pearls. What matters is that the majority of the population chose Lula over Bolsonaro (even of it was a tight election).

Brazil was at its peak during Lula and Dilma's administrations and at its lowest in decades during Bolsonaro's (Brazil is actually the first and only country to leave the UN' world hunger map - which happened during Dilma's administration - and return to it - which happened during Bolsonaro's).

You really shouldn't use the opinion you received from a few people from - at most - three states (of 27) in a country with over 210 million people and an area that is larger than the contiguous United States, as a measure of what Brazilians think about Lula returning. He has been back for a little more than a month and he won the elections, hence it would seem that over 50% of voter's are - at least - happier that he has returned over Bolsonaro continuing to rule.

3

mattz300 t1_j86nemg wrote

Thanks for your insight. That’s what I’m trying to do here is provide prospective to people who are usually void of thought. Wasted now and will return to discuss ur 2nd paragraph. Again thanks for weighing in

1

mattz300 t1_j8ecz1i wrote

For clarity I was in the group that believed Bolsonaro sucked.

But when I was down there as soon as I landed at GRU, something I couldn’t pinpoint made me think the quality of living had improved since I was last there in 19. Went to Sorocaba then over to Sao Jose dos campos. Sjk was noticeably cleaned up, old store fronts painted, cleaned, vacant areas very clean, new stores, bars and restaurants.

From that experience i was told it was done by the ministry of interior under Bols. That made sense to me since almost all of my trips were under prev admins going back to 2011.

1

obinice_khenbli t1_j84fq3s wrote

>He already went to jail for being corrupt. lol

So, he served his time for his crime and rendered society. What's the problem?

Do you think that people who have been to prison should remain there forever? Does your nation not have a judicial system that understands rehabilitory incarceration is the most beneficial to society, limiting reoffending and lowering many other crime rates, improving GDP through a larger workforce and a smaller judicial footprint, and has a positive effect on the well-being and happiness of citizenry, as well as aiding in reduction of class divides?

If your point is that a person that was convicted of corruption may reoffend, I understand your concern. But, he was released, if he reoffends then the blame is on the system that didn't positively work to reform him, the system that also incorrectly judged that he was no longer at notable risk of reoffending.

It's easy to blame the criminal, and they aren't exactly innocent, but it's not so easy to realise that a lot of criminal activity, especially that of ex-convicts, is caused by a deeply flawed criminal justice system. Usually one that seeks to heavily punish and degrade prisoners, rather than reform and reintegrate.

If we can't accept a person back into society after they have served their time in prison and been released, why not just execute all prisoners instead of incarcerating them in the first place? If you've already decided they will never be allowed to re-enter society, why torture them with hope, and waste national time and money? Why not just execute criminals on the spot, and save time?

This is a dangerous way to look at things. We must not dehumanise our fellow citizens, even those who have committed crimes.

9

misteryous302 t1_j85s3o9 wrote

>Does your nation

​

Not sure if this guy is Brazilian...he said he spent a few weeks and talked to some people in some(3) cities. As another guy said, it's like going to Conservatives states and declaring "america has spoken: They don't want Biden in power"

1

mattz300 t1_j84hy4m wrote

I agree w your sentiment on regular citizens, rehab and 2nd chances. However this is leadership of a country, a hard position to prove wrongdoing and one where, like most Corp jobs, one would not be afforded a second chance.

−1

octopoots t1_j84zttc wrote

That would be a relevant point if the trial that he underwent was actually impartial, and the charges brought against him were actually legitimate. For the former--it wasn't, and the judge who ruled against him was later given a cabinet position by Bolsonaro. As a result, the latter hasn't been proven to be true.

2

MemeLord0009 t1_j84hvr0 wrote

His charges were all waived because the judge who charged him was corrupt. Lula was never corrupt

5

Traumfahrer t1_j81jspg wrote

But Lula is a socialist, how can he bring any good change?! ^/s

70

EbonBehelit t1_j825vd6 wrote

Trust me, the people who use socialist as a pejorative will view this development as a bad change. Expect articles about Lula "destroying Brazil's economy and impoverishing farmers" within the month.

69

Ulizeus t1_j82gavv wrote

The same happened here in Mexico, and keeps happening, elitists doesn't want any other model to be successful as all their lies will fall apart.

19

GD_Bats t1_j839ug4 wrote

If you’ve ever looked at iOS Chrome’s suggested links feed after viewing anything labor market related, you’ll see this in action for English speaking markets. lol Bloomberg, Fortune, and Business Insider are all about stories of that one Millenial who regrets getting a better paying job after getting burnt out during the Pandemic and how bosses are winning the Return to the Office wars (despite hybrid still being a thing) etc etc

4

LightVelox t1_j82856i wrote

That's pretty much the only good thing he's done until now, literally everything else in the country got considerably worse, hoping it gets better in the next few months

−42

vitorgrs t1_j82bf1s wrote

No, it did not. What are you talking lol

19

BoxHelmet t1_j82jf0u wrote

Your words are meaningless without actual examples.

17

LightVelox t1_j82m6ea wrote

Higher taxes to cover the tax loophole instead of investments or cutting costs; firing the central bank's president; putting Dilma, the worst president of Brazil in economics, as president of BRICS; releasing Sergio Cabral, who had a 400 year sentence; high inflation with high interest rate, what is the president's plan for that? nothing, just insult investors and try to virtually reduce the interest rate; every single politician got a raise, while the minimun revenue necessary for paying income taxes has been reduced; Offering billionaire loans to latin-american countries that haven't even paid their previous loan yet, meanwhile no budget for education; banning all guns, even for sports; planning to end military police, in a country with 60k deaths/year; passing retroactive taxes to businesses, causing billions of losses and raising product prices; wants to end Uber in Brazil; Censorship through the Truth Ministry; Made it so ties in federal disputes are now in the state's favor rather than the population's, meaning improperly charged taxes must be paid now anyway;

All of that in a single month, this post was literally the first good news i've seen from the current government.

Edit: Leftist echochamber downvoting into oblivion as always, bunch of retards that don't even live here saying it's a perfect country because of god Lula

−15

holymurphy t1_j832c99 wrote

Let's just all be lucky, that most of us don't live in a country where you have the right to vote.

Absolutely awful take on 80% of your points.

9

LightVelox t1_j83m2vy wrote

Lucky you don't live in a country where politicians earn 50x the average salary while people are starving

−6

ChainmailleAddict t1_j86hg5a wrote

I mean I do hate Lula for being pro-Putin so it wouldn't surprise me if he was screwing things up in his own way, but most of those things don't even sound objectively bad.

1

LightVelox t1_j86ifjl wrote

By themselves maybe not, but the result of them all combined is, it's no wonder Lula has the worst presidency ratings with just 1 month of government, surpassing even Bolsonaro and Dilma post-2015

0

ChainmailleAddict t1_j86jb9o wrote

Well, leave it to the left to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory. I say this as a leftist. Lula sounds like a watermelon - green (LibLeft) on the outside, red (AuthLeft) on the inside.

2

mundaniacal t1_j81rqoe wrote

My hot take:

So, this news is overhyped, possibly because it is politically expedient for the US to see Lula as a transformative leftist worth investing in.

From the article:

"It is positive to see such a relevant drop in January," WWF-Brasil conservation specialist Daniel Silva said. "However, it is still too early to talk about a trend reversal, as part of this drop may be related to January cloud cover."

He noted the January data represented the first drop from a year earlier in five months.

The fresh figures come after Reuters reported exclusively on Thursday that the United States was considering its first contribution to a multilateral fund aimed at fighting Amazon deforestation, with a possible announcement during President Joe Biden's meeting with Lula at the White House on Friday.

Edit: didn't realize this was r/upliftingnews , thought this was . . . a different news subreddit with an amusing name. Sorry for making a bummer comment.

37

akeean t1_j82mbi7 wrote

Well, there have been quite a few reports in the past weeks the police and military was finally being activated in Brazil and send out against illegal mining barges and equipment being destroyed & ~20.000 "garimperos" -- illegal prospectors (that tend to set fires and murder indigeous people, activists, reporters, local politicians against mining or goverment officials in conservation jobs) being arrested or driven out of the region.

Those guys had grown to milita forces in the past years, going so far to assaulting whole villages and police outpost. Lots of activists were assasinated in the past years.

The previous government basically turned a blind eye to all of it and some people in there had been previously investigated for illegal trade and export of protected wood.

The Amazon is really far out from most of the population centers and some regions take several days to reach, so it was quite a mobilization effort.

20

garlicroastedpotato t1_j820ebo wrote

Yes it's this subreddit, so your post will probably be deleted. The fact is the measure he announced hasn't been put in place yet. Deforestation could have slowed because illegal foresting operations might not be willing to risk coming into conflict with the Brazilian government. It could be that legal forest clearing is worried that their operations might become illegal and have been doing layoffs. It could be that there's a labor shortage and so it has become harder to hire people for logging.

But it's certainly not anything Lula did. It's kind of like how Donald Trump had a roaring stock market in his first month in office. It's politically useful to claim it as a win. But it's a win for the nation... not an individual.

8

SyntheticSlime t1_j825feb wrote

It can also be people reading the winds. The argument for crediting Trump with the stock market is that it’s based on expectations. Similarly, maybe knowing there’s a new boss in charge caused some illegal forest clearing to stop. Loggers might have been more confident under Bolsonaro because they thought they’d be less likely to be prosecuted. It’s all pretty nebulous. There are so many factors at play at any given time it’s really hard to know how import any one thing is.

9

Nemesysbr t1_j848svd wrote

Encampments of illegal miners and loggers are being dismounted right this moment. You can find videos on brazilian media of them escaping by the hundreds on boat, as well as news of the government putting more state presence on the amazon.

These news are perfectly compatible of what is happening on the ground since Lula took office the very same month.

6

Rotfled7 t1_j82n2k7 wrote

For how important the Amazon is to the world’s atmosphere quality, I wouldn’t mind being charged an “Amazon tax” that goes to preserving it if there’s only some organization that would actually use that money for that purpose

24

Ben716 t1_j833lcm wrote

Best news I've heard all year. Amazing.

5

saltmarsh63 t1_j83qafu wrote

A million upvotes deserved!

5

opus602 t1_j8377ir wrote

So getting a Brazilian doesn’t mean the same thing anymore?

4

p00p_of_sc00p t1_j84a76t wrote

“Politicians are all the same” mfers:

3

Embryw t1_j84n868 wrote

I'm so happy Lula is in charge

3

hotshot117 t1_j827kj7 wrote

So far so good

Keep it up

2

manwithcellphone t1_j829r2p wrote

What can be done to not only slow it down, but reverse the trend toward reforestation

2

King-Brisingr t1_j82nci5 wrote

Thankful for this news. And hoping progress is continual

2

JaymeMalice t1_j84g79n wrote

Now this is some good news indeed!

2

JohnyyBanana t1_j84oqo0 wrote

Dont be fooled. It dropped 60% but its still 1000% more than what is sustainable.

Disclaimer: im not an expert but i’ve learned to not trust these articles

2

AutoModerator t1_j810v1e wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

33mondo88 t1_j82k5w8 wrote

If this is completely destroyed the planet will unleash even more climate change that will end human lives around the planet

1

danceswithsteers t1_j830jgk wrote

There's a documentary called "The Territory" that came out last year about a tiny part of the deforestation of the Amazon under Bolsonaro. Give it a look.

1

drimvo t1_j83wq8e wrote

Do the L

1

kaqqao t1_j84y35p wrote

Ok, but can we get deforestation down to like... -300%?

1

petawmakria t1_j84y6c1 wrote

Great, but it's still happening then?

1

DigMeTX t1_j850aw6 wrote

Wow! That is amazing.

1

at_least_its_unique t1_j850yws wrote

That number sounds all too good to be true, but if it is it is awesome that this was possible with all the organized crime going on.

1

AwfulChief78 t1_j851l69 wrote

Never, Ever allow the fascist scum back in power

1

blackomegatm t1_j85b83f wrote

What we need is someone "normal" a person politically centered. Lula is not a good option either.

0

SafeHaus t1_j855ned wrote

This is great news. But, Lula being a socialist this is either a lie or a deal to fill Lulas pockets has been made.

1

mindfulcorvus t1_j859vid wrote

This is the type of post that makes my heart sing :D

1

PURPLEPEE t1_j85apq6 wrote

Hell yeah!!

Great start to the year!

1

Quivver119 t1_j86lki1 wrote

Oh wonderful! Losing the Amazon would be a huge blow to our climate.

1

cenkozan t1_j83mx1e wrote

I've chuckled loudly! Hats off to our Brazilian master race friends!

0

p00p_of_sc00p t1_j84a662 wrote

“Politicians are all the same” mfers:

0

erinmonday t1_j84qoyb wrote

People are too busy starving and rioting to burn trees. Bro is corrupt AF

0

zain_zia7x t1_j83myu0 wrote

So why in the ever loving fuck were there protests against Lula?

−2

jyhnnox t1_j83seoi wrote

Not all Brazilians. Only the MAGA people or rather MBGA. Those people that hate gays, black people and every other person beside their own group.

5

zain_zia7x t1_j83trqd wrote

Ahh okay that makes sense. I’ve only ever seen the headlines and the pics of the huge crowds which made me assume the whole country was against him. But it’s good to hear that it’s only the rejects of society crying about it.

0

ambienmmambien t1_j824hfi wrote

I hope this is true, I did not read the article.

−4

mostardman t1_j83bzic wrote

I work with data analysis in Brazil and actually Lula changed the way they collected data to deforestation.

Idk if this article didn’t know that or they are spreading fake news on purpose because they didn’t mention it.

−4

mattz300 t1_j83xl4j wrote

Lula is a piece of shit but this IS great news

−4

yangchow t1_j83294w wrote

Bolsonaro will be back and I hope Brazilians successfully defend their victories

Edit: What I mean to say is, I hope Lula and his party win more elections to come so good thing keep coming to Brazil

−5

Keitoteki t1_j83ryc6 wrote

Funniest meme sub on reddit, for real

−6

BigKingDingDong t1_j834bmb wrote

Need more beef and less rainforest!

−10

ivanbin t1_j83uarn wrote

>Need more beef and less rainforest!

No we dont

8

GigaUltraTomato t1_j81gz09 wrote

He's gonna get couped SO HARD

−17

SilverNicktail t1_j821s8f wrote

They already tried that shit. Went as well as Trump's.

10

akeean t1_j82nwmn wrote

That's likely why a lot of the circle from the previous government are hanging out in Florida right now.

Some of them suspiciously abandonning their jobs days before their scheduled holiday or relief, likely just to be out before shit went down and avoid getting arrested if it failed.

Each week they arresting new groups (prolly over well over 2000 by now) of involved that they identified from social media, phone network activity or via financial contributions. They'll hopefully work their way up soon enough by the time certain US visas expire.

4