• danielbln@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    To be fair, if the US can’t make the guarantee that some wannabe dictator will slip into power after the next election cycle, who can?

    • neuromancer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think that is comparing apples and orange men, the US isn’t asking for money.

      There is no point in given them the money with the only guarantee being a promise that they will not burn the rainforest, until the next election.

      Given them both the money and the power to manage it probably isn’t going to work, the risk of this backfiring is pretty high.

      • VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        If we want them to stop developing the rainforest for economic reasons, then we need to give them an alternative. The fact is, the whole world needs the Amazon as a carbon sink. It seems like a worthy trade to me. They’re helping all of us, and if they ever stop, the rest of the world can just cut the funding.