Nature, the new Eldorado of finance

[Nibz]

Hello everybody

I land on this forum a little by chance after seeing this report I wanted to share my impressions and opinions.

I was disappointed by the report and I find it a shame to take a dramatic step and to break all (and the only) attempts (profitable or not) of the economic and financial world aiming to work on the environment.

As he quickly said in the report, the Earth Summit is 1992… the next international summit is COP 21 this year in Paris when the EU has just given up its ecological and environmental budget to focus on the economy and employment…

So it's been more than 20 years that states, "diplomacy" and a bunch of those who criticize finance are currently working on it without success.

As I read in the second post of this conversation: investments and attempts to make the environment profitable are the only quick and concrete actions that have a "positive" impact on the environment, that is to say that it preserves nature a little bit. Of course the goal is wrong, but it's good because no one else is dealing with the problem that they have arrived.

Regarding "carbon" permits:
it's very easy to go find the two service "bastards" (I mean the two companies they hit on) and criticize their actions and their use of "carbon" permits. But to put at the same level local problems of implementation of environmental policies (although distressing) and global problems of CO2 emissions, that does not seem super relevant to me. We constantly go from a "macro" problem to "micro" counter-arguments.

The worst part of this report is, in my opinion, by far the conclusion. The financial villain is covered, and Madame the Nobel Prize laureate tells us that the important thing is life, respect for others and respect for mother nature with a big smile.

It is therefore as usual a report which wants to preach the good word, which dismantles a system which seeks (I do not say that it is the good) and which offers nothing in conclusion. Besides, that is the problem, there is nothing else to propose in the current system of things.

[Ahmed]

In the background, Nibz, you embrace the current Shadock ideal: rather do something negative rather than doing nothing ...

Do not take my words in the wrong, I know that it is difficult to have a clear vision when so many people are working to deploy smoke screens.

It is a question of going back to simple tools, such as logic. This teaches us that means must be appropriate for the purpose, that is to say, in the present case, that the economy which is at the origin of the destruction of nature cannot in any way claim to save it, except in the form of a false appearance intended to to create an illusion and thus allow him to continue his destructive work.

You write:

So it's been more than 20 years that the States, "diplomacy" and a bunch of those who currently criticize finance, have been working on this without success.

Unfortunately, states and "diplomacy" are heavily dependent on economic forces, and so are NGOs who need the "sinews of war" to function.
This is by no means a defeatist statement, for any attempt to protect nature is in essence illusory and the most sincere and effective will always, objectively, be only the counterpart of destruction and its condition.
It must be understood that protecting nature is a nameless nonsense that results from our schizophrenic vision of reality: in essence nature is self-sufficient and the urgency is to stop attacking it; moreover, we would be incapable, even if we so wished, of being able to repair a lot of irreversible damage: for example, can we remedy the loss of biodiversity? Can we recover chemicals spread everywhere?
But the most serious damage is that inflicted on our psyches, which prevents us from understanding the extent and the reasons of these destructions and dissuades us from deploying something other than tricks intended to give us good conscience to better persevere in our collective wanderings .

Further:

Besides, that is the problem, there is nothing else to propose in the current system of things.

The system has an implacable internal logic which makes that whatever one does to "fix" it, it will benefit from it; this is why neither the laws, nor the good feelings * are of real utility, only a radical change of model (in the sense of "at the root") can reverse the trend, are we ready for it?

*Warning, Vandana Shiva does not just say big words, it implements them.

[dede2002]

Hello everybody,

We can see the subject from different angles, because the words "nature" and "finance" can be interpreted differently.
The system itself is part of nature, it would not exist without it, so it is a survival reflex to try to preserve it.
There is a difference between the value of nature, and the value of natural resources. The second easily converts to dollars, but not the first ...? (we say that life is priceless, in reality we managed to put a price on it, for example it costs more to crush an easy-going father than an homeless person ...)
Below is a link concerning the "value" of nature, only once the word dollar is written I let you find out where.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/V1430f/V1430F03.htm

Regarding the word "finance", I think that as often it is the excess which is harmful, whereas micro-finance often helps people who need, need little but need.

I really appreciate the explanations of Ahmed but I do not believe it, I understand that everything has an end, the system like humanity and even the sun, but I prefer to believe in a gradual awakening of consciousness, as we can see here, rather than 'accept the idea of ​​"collective suicide", since we can prove that whatever we do will accelerate the arrival of the end ...

A "one" of the day, surprising anyway: the association of oil tankers of Madagascar plants trees in a domainial area, it is not logical from the point of view "finance" since wood is an energy agent that can save oil (emerging awareness ...?)

http://matv.mg/reboisement-lassociation ... tanifotsy/

On the ground, in Madagascar, which is known as a nature sanctuary with endemic and emblematic species like lemurs, there are still a few small patches of tropical rainforest that are highly publicized, and other (large) areas of dry tropical forest. danger also or more, but ignored because unspectacular (and full of thorns).

In what are called nature reserves or national parks, we now see that when we consider the locals as first guardians, people live in the park and around it pleasantly, and offer trekking tours to tourists from 2 hours to days, which amha tends to what was said at the beginning that the best thing for nature is to watch it grow.

Far from there, another national park far from all roads, has become a "den of brigands" because of the exploitation of very precious wood.
The finance side does not happen in the country, but on the spot it is 100000 people who live, who survive rather because in Madagascar, we often hear it in the media, people are supposed to live on an dollar a day on average ...

See below the survey of "Le Monde" on this subject (bolabola le bois qui bleigne)

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... _3244.html

100 people who live on it is not nothing, but ecologically "it is less serious" than 000 people with bulldozers, the samples are taken by hand, 100 to 1 trees per hectare, and it is is soon over, we will have to wait until it grows back.
There too the real danger comes from the fact that the seekers of gold and precious stones use the paths created by the loggers!

In the region I know, there is strong pressure, a latent threat, because the sands are rich in titanium (keywords: ilmenite madagascar rio-tinto mainland mining demonstrations), and the operations are devastating.
At the same time, ecotourism is developing little by little, in the form of canoe trips in the mangrove mazes, it pays less from a direct finance point of view, but it preserves the environment and local jobs, as well as the local family farming.

I am very wary of "big investments" because it is they who corrupt the chiefs who, in front of the greed, manage to sell "their" lands without any consideration for those who live there, to go and build castles in Europe or simply open numbered accounts in Switzerland (keywords: swissleaks hsbc madagascar).

Below is the report of the association "tany" on land grabbing in Madagascar by multinationals, often on "sustainable development" ideas, far from being exhaustive but 99 pages nonetheless ... Shocking!

http://terresmalgaches.info/IMG/pdf/Rap ... r_2013.pdf

On the other hand I found this document very interesting for those who are interested in trees, which also shows that there are people on the spot who work, even without money.

http://www.recherches.gov.mg/IMG/pdf/Fl ... ptus-2.pdf

A +, between pessimism and optimism I would choose caution.

ps: an ad, by putting ecosia on the internet start page, not only do you avoid the google family of cookies but you help to plant a tree every 19 seconds!
Curiosity of the economy, a dollar allows to plant a tree in Brazil, or 3 trees in Burkina-Faso ...

[Ahmed]

Dédé2002, you write:

I really appreciate Ahmed's explanations but I don't believe it, I understand that everything has an end, the system like humanity and even the sun, but I prefer to believe in a progressive awakening of consciousness, as we can see it here, rather than accept the idea of ​​"collective suicide", since we can prove that whatever we do will accelerate the arrival of the end ...

I also really appreciate your interventions, which are always relevant!
You are giving me the opportunity to clarify certain things. Methodical pessimism, as it is called Bertrand Méheust, from which I borrow the following argument, is not an author's posture, but the only reasonable attitude if, in the final examination, it is decided that no argument is decisive in deciding the question of imminence of the end of humanity.
Indeed, faced with such a serious issue, betting on a resolution in whatever way it happens is deeply irresponsible; on the other hand, to postulate the probably inevitable character of the disaster is to give oneself the psychic means to face it and therefore to, perhaps and paradoxically, avoid it: this is the role of the prophylactic apocalyptician.

[Ahmed]

Here I would like to respond to a few points that you raised, Dede.

Regarding the word "finance", I think that as often it is the excess which is harmful, whereas micro-finance often helps people who need, need little but need.

Micro-finance has had great sympathy success with a large audience, however the perception of the phenomenon is largely distorted by questionable assumptions.
Indeed, it is quite pointless to hope from the market, even in a new form, a solution to what it condemns elsewhere and which results in the inevitable poverty of those (it is often women who are concerned) who get involved in marginal activities.
Very often, the very low profitability of these odd jobs leads at best to precarious survival, at worst to over-indebtedness.
Another criticism, more fundamental to me, would be that the extension by this institutional bias of monetarization to social strata hitherto little involved, is not a good service to render to populations among which there still remains a strong recourse to solidarity, the only really effective bulwark against poverty. Because this is indeed the heart of the microfinance project, to develop a plan to conquer those who have remained outside the financial system, to extend its grip.
An association of which I am a member and which works in Madagascar, was confronted with this problem and we exceptionally granted (because it is not part of the objectives of the NGO) small loans without interest for the purchase of sewing machines (€ 70, reimbursable in one year) to allow young seamstresses to practice their trade. I must clarify, even if it is obvious, that the absence of interest (often very high on these small sums) and the fact that there is no provision for the use of big arms in the event of default of repayment represents a clear difference compared to the standard model ...

On eucalyptus reforestation, there is also much to say. I noted that the instigators of this project are wondering about biodiversity, but it is only on the question of the too great genetic homogeneity of these introduced stands ...
I do not know, of course, what these industrialists have as an ulterior motive, the document is naturally silent on this subject, but if it is better to have a stand of these trees than nothing, it would be easy to achieve a stand much more rich and more favorable to the development of an associated flora and fauna. The ability to grow rapidly at the expense of all other considerations leaves little doubt about the real motives of the business.

[Janic]

Ahmed hello
Indeed, faced with such a serious issue, betting on a resolution in whatever way it happens is deeply irresponsible; on the other hand, to postulate the probably inevitable character of the disaster is to give oneself the psychic means to face it and therefore to, perhaps and paradoxically, avoid it: this is the role of the prophylactic apocalyptician .
I really like this apocalyptician formula prophylactic (in the sense of its root, not its medical use). However, this is the struggle between David and Goliath (who saw David win with few means), but our David are extremely rare, even non-existent.

[dede2002]

...
Another criticism, more fundamental to me, would be that the extension by this institutional bias of monetarization to social strata hitherto little involved, is not a good service to render to populations among which there still remains a strong recourse to solidarity, the only really effective bulwark against poverty. Because this is indeed the heart of the microfinance project, to develop a plan to conquer those who have remained outside the financial system, to extend its grip.
...

Thank you for raising the debate, it becomes complicated but interesting.

In the example of the sewing machine, we could ask the seamstress to sew some clothes for the community, instead of paying money?

In the case of Madagascar, "money", Ariary, predates the colonial system, it was replaced by the Franc, then it returned.
wikipedia quote: "The term ariary comes from al rial Arabic, in memory of the trade outside the island with the Arab-Muslims for several centuries, before the arrival of Europeans."
In the countryside, it has never stopped being used, the Franc has only been used in French, never in Malagasy!
(during the time of the franc, the francs were written in numbers on the banknotes, and the ariary in letters, in Malagasy, which caused some confusion)

In many regions, farmers live on credit!
It is a more or less balanced system which was set up, with in the center, in a village at the edge of the track, one or more traders, often Chinese, who buy rice and coffee, and sell products grocery.
In fact, they advance the goods to the farmers, and are reimbursed during the harvest. People never get that famous "$ 1 a day".
These people are often criticized by foreign observers for practicing excessive interest rates, but they are generally respected by the population.
it happens at the bottom of the countryside, these collectors are very powerful but amha it is not them who open accounts in switzerland, and they do not live in luxury, far from it.
The disasters that we could observe were created upstream, in the form of financial speculation, which ruined millions of peasants who relied on their harvest. (coffee, cloves, rice, etc.)

A+

[Ahmed]

@ Janic:

I quite like this prophylactic apocalyptician formula (in the sense of its root, not its medical use). However, this is the struggle between David and Goliath (who saw David win with few means), but our David are extremely rare, even non-existent.

Bertrand Méheust concludes his "Nostalgia for the occupation"by noting that there is everywhere what corresponds to your" David ", but that they are powerless in the face of the gigantic machinery of commercial totalitarianism and there is then the risk of an analogy with what were the first mammals under the reign of the dinosaurs and what happened next ...
Prophylactic apocalyptician is a very interesting concept and I am very disappointed not to be the author!
It is a positive oxymoron (which is not the norm, far from it!) In the sense that it does not seek to deceive in order to better manipulate: it invites both to measure the gravity of the situation and far from concluding resignation, it is on the contrary an urgent objurgation to face.

It seems to me that this concept restores a real sense of the tragic which is so absent from the psyche of our societies * and which is nevertheless an essential element of our humanity.

* Our societies no longer bear the risk and it is not surprising if after the events of "Charlie", so many people, to reassure themselves, found themselves marching behind their dominants and in the middle of the police ... Yet , the biggest risk is to refuse it, "the Munich Agreements" are the proof ...

[Ahmed]

Dede, you write:

In the example of the sewing machine, we could ask the seamstress to sew some clothes for the community, instead of paying money?

Yes, that would be a good solution, but the other seemed less difficult to set up, especially since it was a very punctual and exceptional operation, knowing that the NGO in question * revolves around '' a double structure: one locally and entirely Malagasy, the other in France.

Further:

In many regions, farmers live on credit!

Credit, which seems a novelty because it alone allows "modern" economies to continue to function by overcoming, temporarily, their contradictions, is in reality the oldest system of exchange, since it remedies the shortcomings of barter; it predates any form of monetization, which originally had more of a vocation for symbolic or religious exchange.

If people in impoverished countries can subsist on derisory income by our standards, it is also that unaccounted for mutual assistance manifests itself in multiple forms.

* Non-merchant exchanges.

[dede2002]

...
If people in impoverished countries can subsist on derisory income by our standards, it is also that unaccounted for mutual assistance manifests itself in multiple forms.

* Non-merchant exchanges.

I can cite an example: in "my" village, when it comes to repairing a house damaged by time (in both senses of the term ...), we set a favorable day with the elders, then the owner provides food and part of the equipment (part is made on site the same day, such as strings), everyone is active in a good mood and in the evening the house is new.
Same for the paths and other amenities of the village.