NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes, I did it. Fuck environmental protection. I mowed down the rainforest on two continents for the sake of my own pocket book. At least on my civ 4 game, anyway. However, in the real world, there are nations that are sacrificing their own development. Right now, I namely mean Guyana. Guyana has a rainforest larger than England and, according to this bbc article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7603695.stm), are going to extraordinary lengths to protect it. While the prime minister of the country said he wouldn't stop legal deforestation, he would attempt to significantly curb deforestation. Given that Guyana's GDP per capita is less than $4,000, their industrial growth rate is in the negatives and their unemployment rate is nearing the 10% mark, this seems like a noble, but not so wise move. An impoversed country purposely restricting its growth for environmentalism? Is it right for a country to overlook humanitarian concerns and its duty to its citizens in the name of environmentalism? Thoughts?

Here's Guyana's factbook:https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gy.html

To hell with the rain forest. If it gets in the way of humanity, burn it down and farm it.

I just got Civ 4 and I'm still pissed that you can't terraform anymore.

To the actual thread topic, maybe there's a secret fortune in selling carbon-neutral credits.

To hell with the rain forest. If it gets in the way of humanity, burn it down and farm it.
Err no.

To hell with the rain forest. If it gets in the way of humanity, burn it down and farm it.

Who needs oxygen anyway. Carbon dioxide has O2, too, so it's just as good amirite?

Who needs oxygen anyway. Carbon dioxide has O2, too, so it's just as good amirite?

Exotic fauna and flora with potential biomedical applications? Don't need those either.

Eh my main issue with burning down the rainforests is more the very long-term soil degradation it causes. The whole oxygen thing - so many more factors tbqh.

They can probably get money for not burning down the rain forest. And whereas you can only sell out once, you can receive money for not selling out until the end of days.
It also stands to provide jobs long term, because someone will have to protect the forest from illegal deforestation.

Waffles with gravy?

To hell with the rain forest. If it gets in the way of humanity, burn it down and farm it.

Not in the long-term interests of the country or the people.

If people don't start taking enviroment seriously - rich country or poor country - GDP will turn out to be meaningless.

They can probably get money for not burning down the rain forest. And whereas you can only sell out once, you can receive money for not selling out until the end of days.
It also stands to provide jobs long term, because someone will have to protect the forest from illegal deforestation.

And how? Not heavily industrialized countries indeed should be paid by the most industrialized ones to preserve their rainforest or others ecosystems, indeed, for the sake of the planet. Yet, industrialized countries do not pay anything. If we start to receive money for those resources as we do receive them for oil, then we can speak against "selling out". Right now, the people of Guyana are sacrificing their own development for nothing, giving others the chance to ride in their Hummers to Las Vegas without even wondering where Guyana is, and why Guyana is amongst other countries essential for them to breath.

Is it right for a country to overlook humanitarian concerns and its duty to its citizens in the name of environmentalism?

Considering there are too many people, too many factories and too few pieces of nature on this planet, that is a no-brainer ;) Even for people that prefer humans over nature - the rainforest has after all shown to be a remarkable resource for medical supplies. Throwing that away for some short-term benefits like more jobs is moronic.

Yes, I did it. Fuck environmental protection. I mowed down the rainforest on two continents for the sake of my own pocket book. At least on my civ 4 game, anyway. However, in the real world, there are nations that are sacrificing their own development. Right now, I namely mean Guyana. Guyana has a rainforest larger than England and, according to this bbc article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7603695.stm), are going to extraordinary lengths to protect it. While the prime minister of the country said he wouldn't stop legal deforestation, he would attempt to significantly curb deforestation. Given that Guyana's GDP per capita is less than $4,000, their industrial growth rate is in the negatives and their unemployment rate is nearing the 10% mark, this seems like a noble, but not so wise move. An impoversed country purposely restricting its growth for environmentalism? Is it right for a country to overlook humanitarian concerns and its duty to its citizens in the name of environmentalism? Thoughts?

Here's Guyana's factbook:https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gy.html

Well, we could always abandon the concept of the nation-state and all work together in a shining beacon of humanity for the future...that way Guyana wouldn't have to do any deforestation...