Dilma roussef x aécio neves in the 2 nd round of presidential elections
3
1 DILMA ROUSSEF X AÉCIO NEVES IN THE 2ND ROUND OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS Fernando Alcoforado * The 2nd round of presidential elections put forward ahead PT represented by the candidate Dilma Rousseff and anti PT represented by candidate Aécio Neves. There are few differences between the two candidates and their parties with respect to the neoliberal economic policy that clearly follows that established the Washington Consensus in the 1990s (fiscal discipline, market interest rates, floating exchange rate, trade liberalization, liberalization of foreign direct investment, privatization of state enterprises, deregulation of economic and labor laws). Two factors differed, however, the PT and PSDB: the rejection of privatization policy and the defense of the reduction of social inequalities by first. However, the policy of privatization of state enterprises countered by the PT in its infancy is being taken by the government Dilma Rousseff who arrived at the absurdity of delivering 60% of the oil field Libra subsalt layer to foreign capital onwards. The so- called public private partnership (PPP) implemented by the current government is nothing more nor less than the new name given to the privatization of ports, airports, highways process, etc. In turn, the reduction of social inequalities defended by the government Dilma Rousseff took place with the granting of "alms" to 50 million poor Brazilians through the Bolsa Familia program with funds from the Treasury that did not promote true social inclusion of the poor that only occur with inclusion into the labor market as a result of GDP growth, ie, the increase in national wealth. However, the average growth rate of GDP from 2011 to 2013 was only 2% per year well below the rate of 5% per year needed to generate employment and income in Brazil. The reasons for the low economic growth in Brazil are: excessive government deficit, growing deficit in the transactions of goods and services with the rest of the world, the difficulty of investing in infrastructure, above-target inflation requiring increase in the interest rate to curb consumption and high public debt. The government spends more than it collects accumulating debts that are among the highest in the emerging world. The gross debt of Brazil closed the year 2013 at 67% of GDP. The failure of the government Dilma Rousseff of the PT in the social plan is also embodied in the fact that the real unemployment rate corresponds to 20.8% of the economically active population as opposed to the official rate of 5.3% from IBGE and 10, 5% DIEESE recorded in October 2012. The official jobless rate is low because many unemployed were left out of the calculation of the index such as the beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família program. A striking proof that the unemployment rate is high is the fact that public spending on unemployment benefits climb without stopping in Brazil. The logical thing would be public spending on unemployment insurance be the minimum possible occurrence of low unemployment rates. This contradiction exists only because the official unemployment rate is wrong, underestimation of the amount of people effectively jobless in Brazil. The federal government is cheating the official data of formal employment.
-
Upload
fernando-alcoforado -
Category
News & Politics
-
view
267 -
download
0
description
The 2nd round of presidential elections put forward ahead PT represented by the candidate Dilma Rousseff and anti PT represented by candidate Aécio Neves. There are few differences between the two candidates and their parties with respect to the neoliberal economic policy that clearly follows that established the Washington Consensus in the 1990s (fiscal discipline, market interest rates, floating exchange rate, trade liberalization, liberalization of foreign direct investment, privatization of state enterprises, deregulation of economic and labor laws). Two factors differed, however, the PT and PSDB: the rejection of privatization policy and the defense of the reduction of social inequalities by first. However, the policy of privatization of state enterprises countered by the PT in its infancy is being taken by the government Dilma Rousseff who arrived at the absurdity of delivering 60% of the oil field Libra subsalt layer to foreign capital onwards. The so-called public private partnership (PPP) implemented by the current government is nothing more nor less than the new name given to the privatization of ports, airports, highways process, etc. In turn, the reduction of social inequalities defended by the government Dilma Rousseff took place with the granting of "alms" to 50 million poor Brazilians through the Bolsa Familia program with funds from the Treasury that did not promote true social inclusion of the poor that only occur with inclusion into the labor market as a result of GDP growth, ie, the increase in national wealth. However, the average growth rate of GDP from 2011 to 2013 was only 2% per year well below the rate of 5% per year needed to generate employment and income in Brazil.
Transcript of Dilma roussef x aécio neves in the 2 nd round of presidential elections
1
DILMA ROUSSEF X AÉCIO NEVES IN THE 2ND ROUND OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
Fernando Alcoforado *
The 2nd round of presidential elections put forward ahead PT represented by the candidate Dilma Rousseff and anti PT represented by candidate Aécio Neves. There are few differences between the two candidates and their parties with respect to the neoliberal economic policy that clearly follows that established the Washington Consensus in the 1990s (fiscal discipline, market interest rates, floating exchange rate, trade liberalization, liberalization of foreign direct investment, privatization of state enterprises, deregulation of economic and labor laws). Two factors differed, however, the PT and PSDB: the rejection of privatization policy and the defense of the reduction of social inequalities by first.
However, the policy of privatization of state enterprises countered by the PT in its infancy is being taken by the government Dilma Rousseff who arrived at the absurdity of delivering 60% of the oil field Libra subsalt layer to foreign capital onwards. The so-called public private partnership (PPP) implemented by the current government is nothing more nor less than the new name given to the privatization of ports, airports, highways process, etc.
In turn, the reduction of social inequalities defended by the government Dilma Rousseff took place with the granting of "alms" to 50 million poor Brazilians through the Bolsa Familia program with funds from the Treasury that did not promote true social inclusion of the poor that only occur with inclusion into the labor market as a result of GDP growth, ie, the increase in national wealth. However, the average growth rate of GDP from 2011 to 2013 was only 2% per year well below the rate of 5% per year needed to generate employment and income in Brazil.
The reasons for the low economic growth in Brazil are: excessive government deficit, growing deficit in the transactions of goods and services with the rest of the world, the difficulty of investing in infrastructure, above-target inflation requiring increase in the interest rate to curb consumption and high public debt. The government spends more than it collects accumulating debts that are among the highest in the emerging world. The gross debt of Brazil closed the year 2013 at 67% of GDP. The failure of the government Dilma Rousseff of the PT in the social plan is also embodied in the fact that the real unemployment rate corresponds to 20.8% of the economically active population as opposed to the official rate of 5.3% from IBGE and 10, 5% DIEESE recorded in October 2012.
The official jobless rate is low because many unemployed were left out of the calculation of the index such as the beneficiaries of the Bolsa Família program. A striking proof that the unemployment rate is high is the fact that public spending on unemployment benefits climb without stopping in Brazil. The logical thing would be public spending on unemployment insurance be the minimum possible occurrence of low unemployment rates. This contradiction exists only because the official unemployment rate is wrong, underestimation of the amount of people effectively jobless in Brazil. The federal government is cheating the official data of formal employment.
2
Adding the growing unemployment with the increasing expense of the Bolsa Familia program, it can be concluded that there are many Brazilians increasingly depending on state handouts to keep. Can this be a sign of a healthy economy? Of course not. Can a government on such data celebrate the economic, social and employment framework in Brazil? Clearly not. Just as the neoliberal governments of Fernando Collor, Itamar Franco and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, the neoliberal governments of Lula and Rousseff also failed with the neoliberal economic policies which resulted in lackluster economic growth in the last 24 years (1.45% per year ).
Therefore, the government Dilma Rousseff, besides continuing the neoliberal model with the subordination of government to national and international financial system, the adoption of a policy of privatization of public services and oil in the auctions, proved to be incompetent in the conduct of destiny of the country manifested in lackluster economic growth, runaway inflation, the excessive public spending, in deindustrialization, the denationalization of the Brazilian economy and the predictable high tariff of electric power and increase in fuel prices in 2015. Endemic corruption, rigging of administrative machinery of the federal government for the benefit of the PT and allied parties and buying of vote through the Bolsa Familia program morally commit the government Dilma Rousseff. Another brand of Rousseff government is the lack of commitment to sustainable development.
As for the candidate Aécio Neves, if he wins the 2nd round of presidential elections will continue the neoliberal and anti-national economic policy of Fernando Collor, Itamar Franco, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments. The policy of privatization will resume, and the opening of the Brazilian economy that does not differ from the government Dilma Rousseff. The differential between Aécio Neves and Dilma Rousseff lies, however, in fact the first to be proven as a competent manager ahead of the government of Minas Gerais. To win elections, Aécio Neves will have to get the support of PSB and Marina Silva (Network for Sustainability).
Most likely, Aécio Neves will have to make two concessions: one, social, adopting a policy of social inclusion with the maintenance of the Bolsa Família Program for the support of the PSB that will become state policy as he has proposed, and other, environmental, adopting a policy of sustainable development for the support of Marina Silva. Aécio Neves proposes to unite all social sectors of Brazil who oppose debacle represented the government of Dilma Rousseff. This is, without doubt, the last opportunity for the Brazilian people avoid the conquest of the state by PT that already controls the Judiciary and would control the Executive and Legislative powers. With the victory of Dilma Rousseff, PT thus pave the way to become a PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) in Mexico who exercised his dictatorial rule from 1929 to 2000. The Brazilian people has to prevent this scenario from happening in Brazil.
* Fernando Alcoforado , member of the Bahia Academy of Education, engineer and doctor of Territorial Planning and Regional Development from the University of Barcelona, a university professor and consultant in strategic planning, business planning, regional planning and planning of energy systems, is the author of Globalização (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova (Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado. Universidade de Barcelona, http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globalização e Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era Contemporânea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of the Economic and Social Development-The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe
3
Planetária (P&A Gráfica e Editora, Salvador, 2010), Amazônia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e combate ao aquecimento global (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2011) and Os Fatores Condicionantes do Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012), among others.
