Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iuj6tvx wrote

Reply to comment by Lord-of-war-Ares in Brazil election: Bolsonaro defeated as Lula makes comeback by checkmak01

He isn’t in direct control over those companies. He isn’t a king.

Aren’t you sick of getting annihilated? Every argument you make gets crushed.

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujcdhu wrote

By that logic , how do you hold Bolsonaro responsible of deforestation as a president but not Lula as a president?

People can down-vote me as much as they want , doesn't mean anything , I will continue standing by the truth. The ones don't have any argument are being crushed by the facts , not by emotionally driven fanatics

−1

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujevnq wrote

>By that logic , how do you hold Bolsonaro responsible of deforestation as a president but not Lula as a president?

Now you’re conflating two different ideas. I didn’t say Lula could not change the logging industry. I said he couldn’t totally turn it around in one year.

On that note, removing restrictions and letting the logging companies do whatever they want is A LOT easier than reining them in.

>The ones don't have any argument are being crushed by the facts

I’ve been through your comment history. You haven’t crushed one person with facts. YOU have gotten crushed left and right by irrefutable evidence that you’re wrong.

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujofn5 wrote

When Lula walked into the office deforestation increased first year in comparison to the previous president , in his second year deforestation increased in comparison to his first year , so we are talking about two years consistently increasing. Numbers don't lie !

So your argument he couldn't in one year is not true

In fact first 4 years of deforestation of Lula's term is more than double of 4 years of Bolsonaro deforestation

You are a fanatic , can't be argued even with facts

0

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujqmat wrote

>in his second year deforestation increased in comparison to his first year

This is an inane and pedantic point. I did not literally mean that deforestation started to drop on 1 January 2004. This distinction you’re trying to make changes absolutely nothing about my point.

>Numbers don't lie !

The numbers show that deforestation fell by 75% while he was president. Why on earth are you only focusing on when he was initially in office and totally ignoring his entire tenure?

>In fact first 4 years of deforestation of Lula's term is more than double of 4 years of Bolsonaro deforestation

Only because bolsenaro had such a low staring point to start from…thanks to his predecessors.

If mayor A managed to reduce the murder rate from 1000 per year to 100 per year, and then mayor B comes in and changes things to where the rate goes up to 500 per year, it would be unequivocally asinine to try to argue that mayor B did a better job at dealing with murder because “more murders happened under mayor A.”

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iujvp4g wrote

Fernando Henrique Cardoso (president of Brazil before Lula)

1999 total loss 17,259
2000 total loss 18,226
2001 total loss 18,165
2002 total loss 21,651

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula)

2003 total loss 25,396
2004 total loss 27,772
2005 total loss 19,014
2006 total loss 14,285

Does that look like 75% less to you?

−1

CheesecakeMedium8500 t1_iujxeag wrote

This is so pedantic.

Lula —> significant net reduction in deforestation.

Bolsenaro —> significant net increase in deforestation.

If mayor A managed to reduce the murder rate from 1000 per year to 100 per year, and then mayor B comes in and changes things to where the rate goes up to 500 per year, it would be unequivocally asinine to try to argue that mayor B did a better job at dealing with murder because “more murders happened under mayor A” even if murders initially jumped to 110 per year for the first two years of mayor A’s tenure.

2

Lord-of-war-Ares t1_iuk79so wrote

what happened to "deforestation rate plummeted the second he walked in" argument? it became 2 years now?
Bolsonaro did a better job protecting the forest than Lula did according to the numbers
Lula tripled in deforestation , besides the guy is a thief , you don't even know what he is selling from his country
You are such a mindless champagne socialists lot

−1