Or if you're a programmer, submit patches that provide the energy-conserving features or improve efficiency generally. Use free software.
Experiences like that are worth remembering. :)
That is awesome. That's like North America's version of durian. One more reason to save the forest.
Never heard of those dogwood fruits, but sounds like something that I would eat if I ever found it growing. Cool that you were able to educate those folks!
...You have seen some things that I'd never even heard of.
That's the way. Grow so much fruit that the neighbours can have as much as they want. Were the avocados any good on their own?
That's some good old-fashioned fun! I once saw a LOADED engkala tree with a bullet ant nest at the base of it, and I just walked away.
Buy electric
Or if possible, don't buy at all.
This will probably be less destructive than a road or a mining project, but if this increases trade with China, then it increases the profit incentive for production of all of those deforestation-linked commodities that are produced in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes, and possibly in the Atlantic Forest as well. The main problem is therefore not the destruction caused by the railway itself but by the production of the things that it transports.
Another (potential) problem with this railway is that it creates a new profit incentive for deforestation. If speculators buy land in key locations along the railway and deforest it in anticipation of the demand for a settlement or trading hub, the damage is done, even if nothing is ever built there. Better than the semi-permanent destruction of having a town or road or mining project or cow pasture there, and maybe it won't happen at all, but it still isn't exactly good news. If the railway were replacing a road network which would be closed off and allowed to reforest itself, then that would be progress.
Anyone know if Sarawak is still relatively LGBTQ-friendly?
A) As the previous commenter said, if you buy ETF shares from someone who is selling them, you are not financially supporting the corporation. Only buying their IPO would do that. These corporations will succeed or fail, do evil shit or do not-so-evil shit, based on supply and demand (and subsidies, and lobbying...), not based on whether you personally own shares in them.
B) You can't predict the future. Common sense says that equities' historical growth cannot continue forever. It's up to you to decide whether the risk of equity investing makes sense for your personal situation and investment time horizon. Diversifying your investments across asset classes (equities, bonds, precious metals, CDs, fruit trees, real estate...) is probably the most assured way to reduce volatility, and it may or may not result in higher risk-adjusted returns, but this probably won't translate to higher gross returns compared to investing in equities alone (unless the stock market crashes while you are still invested and never recovers).
Probably the strongest case for investing in equities would be: If you expect the next stock market crash to be accompanied by the end of the monetary system as we know it, then any cash that you currently have lying around will become worthless at that point whether you invest it in equities or not. (So you might as well invest it and make some money while you can.)
Probably the strongest case for NOT investing in equities would be the facts that the growth in equities cannot continue indefinitely and that investing any extra money in tangible assets (e.g. land to grow your own food, solar panels and batteries, or other infrastructure that contributes to your independence from the system while reducing your ongoing expenses) is of real benefit to you regardless of what the stock market does.
Source: I grow fruit trees. You'd be surprised at how many parallels there are to financial investments. (Pro tip: the risk-free rate of return is the banana yield that a given area of land could produce.)
If you have to cook it, I would question whether it is food, but at least you got some use out of all of that fruit.