3 Responses

  1. Robert Brothers November 20, 2010 at 9:16 pm |

    It seems that the good side of the REDD proposals is that they prohibit rainforests from being cut, and the bad side is that those who pay a fee to support this are then allowed to continue to add CO2 pollution to the air.
    Evo doesn’t like rainforests being turned into commodities, and neither do I. However, they are already commodities, that is why they are being cut down. The advantage of the REDD proposals seems to be that they allow the rainforest to remain standing because their value as another kind of commodity is being recognized, a commodity that has more value for climate stability if it is left standing than if it is cut.
    Do I understand this correctly?

  2. Ben-Perrusi Martins November 20, 2010 at 4:52 am |

    A revolutionary proposal related to the above content:

    Latin American Left + Liberation Theology + Islam = new non-imperialist global order


  3. Anonymos November 17, 2010 at 3:36 pm |

    Where is Evo getting the numbers for the current rates of deforestation?

Comments are closed.