Chris, thank you for unpacking the troubling layers beneath the shiny veneer of the Tropical Forests Forever Facility. Your critique underscores how easily conservation initiatives can drift toward financial engineering rather than genuine ecological care.
It's unsettling, though hardly surprising, how quickly meaningful environmental efforts become speculative games dominated by market interests. You've laid bare a stark contradiction: conservation funding dependent on the very economic systems accelerating deforestation.
The penalties outlined feel less like accountability and more like a cruel trap, leveraging the desperation of countries that can least afford risk, all in the name of protecting forests. A financial gamble shouldn't determine the fate of our world's biodiversity.
Your insight serves as a necessary warning: conservation can’t be sustainably achieved through financial sleight-of-hand. Without confronting the deeper issues fueling ecological harm, we're merely treating symptoms - never causes.
This is the type of conversation needed urgently, and I appreciate your sharp lens on these flawed solutions.
It is a very involved ponzi scheme and what is the security for these loans from the "rich" countries? There are so many possible layers of fraud and corruption, and the possibility to bankrupt the supposedly beneficiary countries. Like in Leonard Cohen's song about the cracks that let the light in, these schemes are set up to be so complex in order to allow cracks that let the money slip out.
A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud under which existing investors are paid using money from new investors (https://www.investor.gov/protect-your-investments/fraud/types-fraud/ponzi-scheme). The Tropical Forests Forever Facility is not a Ponzi scheme. I also don't see how it can bankrupt tropical countries (not least because they won't be putting any money into the investment scheme). The TFFF is neocolonialist. It's heavily skewed towards rich countries and rich investors continuing to profit while giving the impression that they are "doing good". Meanwhile, in order to profit, the TFFF relies on continued growth, continued extractivism, and continued destruction. But that doesn't make it a Ponzi scheme.
Chris, thank you for unpacking the troubling layers beneath the shiny veneer of the Tropical Forests Forever Facility. Your critique underscores how easily conservation initiatives can drift toward financial engineering rather than genuine ecological care.
It's unsettling, though hardly surprising, how quickly meaningful environmental efforts become speculative games dominated by market interests. You've laid bare a stark contradiction: conservation funding dependent on the very economic systems accelerating deforestation.
The penalties outlined feel less like accountability and more like a cruel trap, leveraging the desperation of countries that can least afford risk, all in the name of protecting forests. A financial gamble shouldn't determine the fate of our world's biodiversity.
Your insight serves as a necessary warning: conservation can’t be sustainably achieved through financial sleight-of-hand. Without confronting the deeper issues fueling ecological harm, we're merely treating symptoms - never causes.
This is the type of conversation needed urgently, and I appreciate your sharp lens on these flawed solutions.
It is a very involved ponzi scheme and what is the security for these loans from the "rich" countries? There are so many possible layers of fraud and corruption, and the possibility to bankrupt the supposedly beneficiary countries. Like in Leonard Cohen's song about the cracks that let the light in, these schemes are set up to be so complex in order to allow cracks that let the money slip out.
A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud under which existing investors are paid using money from new investors (https://www.investor.gov/protect-your-investments/fraud/types-fraud/ponzi-scheme). The Tropical Forests Forever Facility is not a Ponzi scheme. I also don't see how it can bankrupt tropical countries (not least because they won't be putting any money into the investment scheme). The TFFF is neocolonialist. It's heavily skewed towards rich countries and rich investors continuing to profit while giving the impression that they are "doing good". Meanwhile, in order to profit, the TFFF relies on continued growth, continued extractivism, and continued destruction. But that doesn't make it a Ponzi scheme.