If I had a button that would burn that entire jungle down and replace it with a top tier national semiconductor industry, I'd press it twice.
Only university leftists care about the Amazon to the point they sacrifice national interests for it. Completely disconnected from reality.
> Europe is not worried about the trees in the Amazon, they want the subsoil.
Dr. Enéas Carneiro.
It's all about the rare earths.
You need to go for a walk in nature. There’s more to life than semi-conductors. Sad!
Wanna trade?
Transfer all your technology to us. We'll give you the Amazon.
You're cutting down your rainforest (one of your greatest assets) so middle/upper class people in Sao Paulo can do Churrasco 3X a week and have so much meat left over they have to throw it away. It has nothing to do with technological development, sorry.
Amazon region is rich in rare earths, which are of industrial and geopolitical importance. Should Brazil ever develop advanced semiconductor industries, we might need to exploit those natural resources.
I take it you won't object then?
You say that as though the Amazon is the only place on earth rich in rare earth minerals. It isn't - many places have them, a number have more than the Amazon.
Rare earths are not rare - the 'free minerals' are rare (non existent) to find "just laying about" as they bind to other elements and compounds in complex hard to unbind ways.
What the planet is rather short of is good, high quality, original condition rain forests.
Amazon also contains petroleum. Would you oppose Petrobrás if it decided it was worth it to get it out of the ground?
Sure, I won't object if you have a few mines for rare earths, if you stop deforestation for cattle feed (90%) and deforestation for cheap metals (iron etc - which is the other 10%). 1% for rare earths would be fine tbh. However this is not why the rainforest is being cut down. It's being cut down so that people can eat beef multiple times per week (with the resulting public health crisis that will come from that).
Brazil is literally the world's soy farm, and even that position is shaky since China continues to invest in Africa to cut us out and France continues to block European economic deals with Brazil.
Why on Earth would I want to stop deforestation? Sounds like something that will obviously harm the only major industry we still have.
Because deforestation will mean your farmers across the country won't get reliable rainfall. That sounds like something will obviously harm your entire agriculture industry and also put your food supply at risk.
And for what? Completely unnecessary decadent meat consumption (50% more meat consumption per capita than Germany)? Good luck with that.
> rainfall
Irrigation technology. Solved.
> And for what? Completely un-necessary decadent meat consumption?
Lula won his 2022 election by promising that the average Brazilian would once again be able to eat prime cuts of meat.
Not only did he not deliver, he actually made it even more unaffordable to eat meat. Instead of course correcting, he doubled down on it. He is literally quoted saying things like "if it's too expensive, don't buy it" and "if there's no meat, eat eggs or salad". Four years of this.
He is now hours away from losing the election to the first born son of Bolsonaro, the guy who he persecuted through his allies in the supreme court, who he smugly said would never leave jail and return to power.
Words can barely describe just how thoroughly his party was eviscerated in the 1st round of elections earlier this month. I've literally never seen Brazilians utterly wipe out so many left wing politicians in a single day in my entire life. Even Bolsonaro's ex-wife got elected. Bolsonaro's party alone has absolute majority in the senate now, and major chunk of congress. People are literally comparing it to Nazi Germany. Even the "untouchable" supreme court was intimidated to the point it started trying to make peace with everyone they were actively persecuting only days ago. It resulted in the release of political prisoners. Watching it live was such a treat. I literally saw the smugness and confidence get wiped off their faces in real time. They thought they were going to win straight up in the 1st round of the election, and by the end of it they looked like they were attending a funeral. It brings a smile to my face just thinking about it.
Are you absolutely sure you want to to disdain our "completely unnecessary decadent meat consumption" ?
> Irrigation technology. Solved.
And where do you think the water comes from for that 'irrigation technology'? Rainfall.
> Are you absolutely sure you want to to disdain our "completely unnecessary decadent meat consumption" ?
Brazil has one of the highest meat consumptions per capita in the world. 50% higher than Germany. 40% higher than France. More than twice the world average. So yes.
> Brazil has one of the highest meat consumptions per capita in the world.
So what?
> So yes.
Welp. Anyone who thinks like you do will get voted out with extreme prejudice. WEF's little 2030 agenda and meat consumption predictions can go to hell.
"i'm sorry you can't afford food, but have you thought about going on a hike?"
Meat consumption per capita (kg/person)
US 122.1
Brazil 104.6
France 80.3
Germany 70.7
World average 45.1
Rainforests are being cut down to feed cattle so people can eat beef multiple times per day. It has nothing to do with not being able to afford food.
liar, liar, pants on fire.
I'll link what you're referring to - https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/meat-supply-per-person
It's the meat supply not consumption :) Very disingenuous to include world average there too. The number is brought down but countries whose main diets are vegetable based.
That's meat supply inside the country, domestic, not including exports.
FAO figures: production + imports − exports (± stock changes) = meat available in the country
Or, if you prefer a Brazilian source, here is one confirming 105kg per person of 'internal availability' inside the country after exports: https://seucreditodigital.com.br/disponibilidade-carnes-bras...
Brazil's 104.6 is what is available after net exports. With exports it's more like 148(!)
And yes of course vegetable based diets are included. That's a perfectly reasonable and in many ways healthier diet, followed by individuals in countries across the world. It makes no sense to exclude it.
am I talking with an LLM?
you don't even acknowledge that you're wrong on your initial response and just pivot to the first thing you could anchor on (vegetarian diets).
There is effectively no practical difference between supply and consumption once you isolate domestic use?
What do you think happens to that supply if it isn't exported? Why do you think they supply that much if no one is eating it?
Maybe this is helpful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
Seems like a false dichotomy, don't see how sacrificing jungle would get Brazil a top-tier semiconductor industry.
And I guess the native peoples living in the Amazon are not university leftists.
I'm not into Brazilian politics, the little I know seems to indicate that it's a choice between a rock and a hard place (both seem to have corruption allegations). The objective aspect I can judge is whom Trump strongly supports. US influence in South America is a pretty bloody chapter in history.
> don't see how sacrificing jungle would get Brazil a top-tier semiconductor industry.
It wouldn't. It was just a rhetorical device to express the fact I care far more about national industrial and economic development than some jungle.
> US influence in South America is a pretty bloody chapter in history.
I agree, but Lula's no paragon here. He's had ~20 years to undo the neoliberal privatization policies enacted as of the Washington Consensus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Consensus
Instead of actually reindustrializing Brazil, he anesthetized the population with handouts and lined his pockets. Meanwhile, banks are literally raking in record profits.