Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

cyberdude611 -> Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 7:11:20 PM)

Yet everyone thinks the US is the problem....


-----------------------------

Uganda approves destruction of protected rainforest

KAMPALA (AFP) - The Ugandan government has approved the clearance of thousands of hectares of protected rainforest for a sugar plantation, a state newspaper said on Wednesday.

The government is set to seek parliament's permission to clear around 7,000 of 30,000 hectares in Mabira Forest Reserve, east of Kampala, before handing it over to Uganda-based Mehta Group for sugar cane farming, according to state-owned New Vision newspaper.
Prime Minister Apollo Nsibambi directed Environment Minister Mary Mutagamba to seek permission from parliament to withdraw the identified portion of forestland from a list of government-protected rainforests, it said.

Officials said President Yoweri Museveni was keen on expanding the country's agricultural and industrial base in a bid to boost his donor-dependent economy.

"This is the proper way of utilising the resources. It is easier to relocate the forest by planting trees elsewhere than to relocate a factory," Museveni's spokesman Tamale Miriundi told AFP.

But furious conservationists have warned that further encroachment of the forest would threaten up to 312 tree species, 287 bird species and 199 butterfly species.

"This is going to be a disaster," warned a National Forestry Authority official who requested anonymity. "The ecosystem will be disturbed, the biodiversity will be destroyed and people's livelihoods will change for the worse."

In December, Norwegian environmentalist Olav Bjella quit as NFA chief after defying Museveni's order to approve the deforestation of a rainforest on Lake Victoria's Ssesse Island to create a palm plantation, saying it was against his conscience and the laws of Uganda.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070321/wl_africa_afp/ugandaenvironment_070321193442



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 7:16:35 PM)

It is not just a USA problem, it is a global problem, we eat up 25% of the global resources and comprise about 4% of the global population. We can and should do more.



MzMia -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 7:34:02 PM)

The changes going on in Africa really sadden me.
So many animals are being killed and now the rainforest?
When I was growing up, Africa always seemed like the last frontier.
The way it is going now, that will soon be lost also.[sm=noway.gif]
When Africa deteriorates the rest of the world will not be far behind.



UtopianRanger -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 7:36:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

We can and should do more.



I strongly suggest we start with a program the emphasizes voluntary population control /reduction with incentives [;)]



- R



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 7:48:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

We can and should do more.



I strongly suggest we start with a program the emphasizes voluntary population control /reduction with incentives [;)]



- R



Seeing as most Americans are at zero population growth, and some parts of Europe have negative population growth, I do not see how that will help. We need to work on our consumption. But perhaps you meant that Uganda and other nations in Africa need to limit population growth? AIDs is decimating their population, so they still have high births and high deaths at this point when looking at their demographics. On the other hand, places like China and India should be working on population reduction.



UtopianRanger -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 8:16:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

On the other hand, places like China and India should be working on population reduction.


Yes.... that's precisely what I am getting at.  I say we institute a ''zero'' immigration policy with any country /people, whose population growth /explosion vastly outweighs their means of subsistence.

Take for instance Bangladesh..... It has roughly the same landmass of Oregon yet it has nearly 140 million people. That's outrageous Julia....and I know you have a very soft heart for this stuff, but if were up to me, I'd force the people to wallow in the misery that employs such ignorance before I let them come over here.



JMO


- R



cyberdude611 -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 8:29:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

We can and should do more.



I strongly suggest we start with a program the emphasizes voluntary population control /reduction with incentives [;)]



- R



Seeing as most Americans are at zero population growth, and some parts of Europe have negative population growth, I do not see how that will help. We need to work on our consumption. But perhaps you meant that Uganda and other nations in Africa need to limit population growth? AIDs is decimating their population, so they still have high births and high deaths at this point when looking at their demographics. On the other hand, places like China and India should be working on population reduction.


World-wide as a whole the population is growing extremely fast. The UN estimates 14 billion humans in 2050.



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 8:55:56 PM)

If you look at where that population growth is occurring, it is South and Central America, China, Indonesia, parts of the Middle East, India. Africa has a huge problem right now with AIDs. Many of their most productive workers will become too ill to work while in their prime years unless AIDs is addressed... they may have a lot of births, but they have a lot of deaths too.

And UR, as far as being down on people for population growth. I wonder if you were born in Bangledesh what your opinion would be? This is one of the poorest countries in the world. In order to have children that survive to adulthood one must have several of them. These people are having kids to help them economically in many instances... go back in time to what occurred in this country when people needed children for labor and as a social security measure for when parents become to aged to work. The way to accomplish change is through education and hope. People have to see that their children will survive into adulthood, that they need not rely on having many children to feel secure in old age.

In Mexico demographics are starting to change, and a new generation that is using family planning to control family size is beginning to take root, why? Partially because people are not as rural as they once were, children survive infancy and childhood, and because economically people are better off having less, not more children.

Education, early medical and nutritional aid, and economic hope are what is needed for population control



popeye1250 -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 9:58:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

It is not just a USA problem, it is a global problem, we eat up 25% of the global resources and comprise about 4% of the global population. We can and should do more.


Julia, I agree!
Twenty five percent seems absolutely sophmoric, we can do much better than that!
Why aren't we up to 50%? Fuckin slackers!
Twenty five percent?  You call that "consuming?"
C'mon people!
Twenty billion people by 2050?
Man, those idiots in Washington had better start thinking about ending all immigration to this country or our children and grandchildren won't have any quality of life in the U.S.
And they need to get our borders under *total* control and increase the size of the U.S. Coast Guard immensely.
Every 1 million people that we let into this country causes our oil consumption to go up by probably 2-300,000 bbls per day, that's enough oil to fill a Suez-Max Tanker!



FangsNfeet -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/21/2007 10:37:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

World-wide as a whole the population is growing extremely fast. The UN estimates 14 billion humans in 2050.


Between having more wars and space travel, I don't see population growth as a problem. Having too many people is not a problem. It's having too many stupid and lazy people that bothers me.

As for the forest, it's all about the money. Greed and the need for jobs keeps many from thinking about long term effects.  



meatcleaver -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 3:48:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

World-wide as a whole the population is growing extremely fast. The UN estimates 14 billion humans in 2050.


Ironically, poverty increases population growth because people need large families because of the uncertainty of their environment which is why the biggest population growth is in poor countries and the least growth is in rich countries.

Development for the poor countries will slow down birth rate, this is observable in countries that increase their wealth. The best thing the west can do to slow down the birth rate in poor countries is to stop exploiting them.

The west has no moral high ground when it comes to telling a poor country it should not destroy its habitat so its people can survive after all the destroying the west has done to get rich. The west need to help poor countries develop and redistribute some wealth in a quid pro quo to their keeping intact their forests. Oh, and no strings attached to western help like there is now, which serves the donor nation more than the receiver nation.



MzMia -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 4:07:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

World-wide as a whole the population is growing extremely fast. The UN estimates 14 billion humans in 2050.


Ironically, poverty increases population growth because people need large families because of the uncertainty of their environment which is why the biggest population growth is in poor countries and the least growth is in rich countries.

Development for the poor countries will slow down birth rate, this is observable in countries that increase their wealth. The best thing the west can do to slow down the birth rate in poor countries is to stop exploiting them.

The west has no moral high ground when it comes to telling a poor country it should not destroy its habitat so its people can survive after all the destroying the west has done to get rich. The west need to help poor countries develop and redistribute some wealth in a quid pro quo to their keeping intact their forests. Oh, and no strings attached to western help like there is now, which serves the donor nation more than the receiver nation.


Bravo! We are sitting back and allowing Africa to self destruct THEMSELVES and their wonderful country.
Just sit back and watch the destruction of where civilization probably began.
Oh wait, we are too busy "saving" those people in Iraq, let the Africans eat cake. 



Rule -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 4:42:28 AM)



 
quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger
I strongly suggest we start with a program the emphasizes voluntary population control /reduction with incentives
Quite. Incentives are not necessary. Europe and the USA and Japan should reduce their population from the 300 million each that it now is to about fifty million each. That should be doable easily in about two hundred years. The weird thing is, that Europe is trying to stimulate the birth rate. Totally bonkers it is.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
Africa has a huge problem right now with AIDs.

This disease may in fact stimulate the birth rate. As people die resources become available and in those circumstances populations will grow.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
And UR, as far as being down on people for population growth. I wonder if you were born in Bangledesh what your opinion would be? This is one of the poorest countries in the world.
It is one of the richest countries. Bangladesh is one gigantic river flood plain that is fertilized by the rich sediments from the Himalayas. Very fertile land, hence the enormous population.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
Education, early medical and nutritional aid, and economic hope are what is needed for population control

Quite. Some judicious murder of decrepit older people may also help, though.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet
Between having more wars and space travel, I don't see population growth as a problem.
In this you are wrong. Wars increase populations. For example: before the second world war the population of The Netherlands was at ten million. After the war we got the Baby Boom, despite the introduction of the anticonceptive pill. Everybody wanted to make up for the lives that were lost in the war. Countless souls wanted to be reborn. As a result The Netherlands now has 16 million people.
 
Neither will space travel address the overpopulation: ot simply lacks the capacity.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet
Having too many people is not a problem. It's having too many stupid and lazy people that bothers me.
In this you are also wrong. Lazy people are the source of innovation and progress and wealth. Stupid people - i.e. the bulk of humanity - are the future of humanity. The people that are truly endangering humanity are the hardworking, highly intelligent people, as many of them are severely mentally deficient.
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
The best thing the west can do to slow down the birth rate in poor countries is to stop exploiting them.
Quite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
The west need to help poor countries develop and redistribute some wealth in a quid pro quo to their keeping intact their forests.
The west has no and never has had any intention to develop the poor countries. The strategy of the west has always been to destabilize those countries and to increase their economic debt to the west.



meatcleaver -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 4:59:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
The west need to help poor countries develop and redistribute some wealth in a quid pro quo to their keeping intact their forests.
The west has no and never has had any intention to develop the poor countries. The strategy of the west has always been to destabilize those countries and to increase their economic debt to the west.


Precisely, which is why the west needs to modify its behaviour towards their fellow man.



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 7:16:30 AM)

quote:

It is one of the richest countries. Bangladesh is one gigantic river flood plain that is fertilized by the rich sediments from the Himalayas. Very fertile land, hence the enormous population.

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/SOUTHASIAEXT/EXTSAREGTOPPOVRED/0,,contentMDK:20825156~pagePK:34004173~piPK:34003707~theSitePK:493441,00.html



Rule -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 7:54:02 AM)

Please refrain from linking to such incomprehensible texts.
 
If you have food, you are rich. If you do not have food you are poor. It is as simple as that.
Bangladesh can clearly support a high density population, just like Japan. So they have ample food. Hence they are rich.



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 8:21:46 AM)

Bangladesh has made strides in recent years but they still have hunger and poverty. My original point remains the same, education has helped Bangladesh solve some of their problems and the outlook is better than previously was. They still have high poverty rates, which means food insecurity based upon global poverty standards. I know someone that worked for the Ford Foundation that did a lot of work there before the Ford Foundation moved.

I did not find that article incomprehensible, It seemed fairly straightforward to me... let me condense the two paragraphs for the point I wanted to make

quote:


The main message of this report is that Bangladesh has made recent progress in reducing poverty, but still faces the reality that roughly half its citizens live in deprivation. This report examines the record of advances during the 1990s, major challenges still to be overcome and priority measures to accelerate poverty reduction. The report suggests that changes in practices an policies, to realize healthy economic growth designed to benefit the rural poor as well as more rapid, sustained movement toward greater social justice.



mixielicous -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 8:26:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

On the other hand, places like China and India should be working on population reduction.


Yes.... that's precisely what I am getting at. I say we institute a ''zero'' immigration policy with any country /people, whose population growth /explosion vastly outweighs their means of subsistence.

Take for instance Bangladesh..... It has roughly the same landmass of Oregon yet it has nearly 140 million people. That's outrageous Julia....and I know you have a very soft heart for this stuff, but if were up to me, I'd force the people to wallow in the misery that employs such ignorance before I let them come over here.



JMO


- R


i have very similar thoughts on that topic. oh the life of a misanthrope



mixielicous -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 8:32:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

Bangladesh has made strides in recent years but they still have hunger and poverty. My original point remains the same, education has helped Bangladesh solve some of their problems and the outlook is better than previously was. They still have high poverty rates, which means food insecurity based upon global poverty standards. I know someone that worked for the Ford Foundation that did a lot of work there before the Ford Foundation moved.

I did not find that article incomprehensible, It seemed fairly straightforward to me... let me condense the two paragraphs for the point I wanted to make

quote:


The main message of this report is that Bangladesh has made recent progress in reducing poverty, but still faces the reality that roughly half its citizens live in deprivation. This report examines the record of advances during the 1990s, major challenges still to be overcome and priority measures to accelerate poverty reduction. The report suggests that changes in practices an policies, to realize healthy economic growth designed to benefit the rural poor as well as more rapid, sustained movement toward greater social justice.


so then why cant you get these educated people to return to their homelands? people who manage to emigrate here from africa for school rarely return to help raise their country from its mud puddle.



juliaoceania -> RE: Uganda govnt approves rainforest destruction (3/22/2007 8:45:13 AM)

quote:

so then why cant you get these educated people to return to their homelands? people who manage to emigrate here from africa for school rarely return to help raise their country from its mud puddle.

 
Please educate yourself on the history of colonialism... perhaps taking a course in African history, and modern free markets will inform you. You seem like a smart young lady, I am not being petty nor insulting. It is just that this question goes way beyond the scope of a forum and entire books have been written on the topic... my first recommendation to catch you up to colonial times would be Gun, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond. This book looks at the basic animal and plant resources that every continent was naturally embued with to develop. Another aspect I would focus on is mineral wealth, nuts, and precious stones... these resources have been bought up and controlled by foriegn interests... another aspect I would look at is the AIDs epidemic.

Of course your question might be completely rhetorical, and you may not be interested in the literal answer to it...



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
2.734375E-02