I agree, and don't think those who actually carry out cutting should be blamed.


送交者: mangolasi 于 2005-5-19, 19:53:03:

回答: The number must be wrong. 由 Latino2 于 2005-5-19, 19:10:01:

But we can question why they are made so desperate? There is something wrong with the system. Just check worldbank and Brazil has GDP per capita of $2720 in 2003, and $7510 if calculated in PPP, around 60% more than China. Yet, in 2001, there are 22.2% people living below $2/day (using PPP, thus PPP income per capita is less than $750/year, something 10% of the average level, while for China, 16% living under $1/day PPP, i.e. $365/year PPP, 9% of the average). Not very decent (China is already very indecent).

Granted, pretending proverty non-existent and blaming others for destroying the environment is sanctimonious. But saying "environment must be destroyed since they are poor" are lazy, to say the least. There is way to lessen proverty (but people in power just don't want to do it). Sometimes I have sympathy with fagus to think that's capitalism's fault. And many developing countries are in obsession of catching up the life style of America, like owning a car etc once they got their stomach filled. Owning more material is one indicator of life improvement, while getting better service is another, and the latter consume less resource. A nice education, a nice public service etc can compensate some extra computer/TV etc yet waste less resource. And those don't need too much "foreign exchange" since they are service by the people.

Never mind, we can not save the world anyway.



笔名: 密码(可选项): 注册笔名请按这里