Brazzil Forum
Message Board
» back to brazzil.com
Register | Profile | Log-in | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Search

» Welcome Brazzil: Log out | Messenger | Check New Posts | Mark all posts as read

    Brazzil Forum
    General
        Will the U.S. support a coupe to overthrow Lula
Mark all forum posts as read   [ help ]
» Your last visit to this forum was: Mar. 25, 2003 - 6:12pm «

Topic Jump
<< Back Next >>
Single Page for this topic
Forum moderated by: No One
 

 
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
It is my concern that in the coming years the U.S. will attempt to overthrow Lula as president.
It has overthrown similar governments in Latin America in the past.
In 1954 the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Jacobo Arbenez in Gutemala.
A State Department official stated in declassified files why in 54.  He said:

[Guatemala] has become an increasing threat to the stability of Honduras and El Salvador. Its agrarian reform is a powerful propaganda weapon; its broad social program of aiding the workers and peasants in a victorious struggle against the upper classes and large foreign enterprises has a strong appeal to the populations of Central American neighbors where similar conditions prevail.

After the Cuban revolution in 1959. The CIA led a force to overthrow Fidel Castro at the Bay of Pigs, it failed. The CIA would attempt to kill Castro over 9 times. The also supported biological attacks, and even supported a group who blew up a Cuban airliner.
In Brazil in 1964 Another democratically elected government overthrown by a U.S. supported coupe, another military dictatorship installed.  The previous president João Goulart had traded with communist nations, maintained diplomatic relations with Cuba, supported the labor movement, and limited the profits multinational companies could take out of the country.
In 1968 General Omar Torrijos leads a coup that displaces the oligarchic rule in place and supported by the U.S. since 1903.  Torrijos, a nationalist, initiated a social transformation of Panama bringing the poor into the government for the first time, and implementing a number of services available to the poor.  He also maintains friendly relations with Castro and the Cuba government.  
In the Watergate hearings in 1973, former White House Counsel John Dean testifies that the White House had contracted former CIA officer and White House burglary E. Howard Hunt to assassinate Torrijos due to his uncooperative stance on the Panama canal treaty negotiations.
On September 11, 1973 the CIA overthrew the social democrat Salvador Allende in Chile. 3000 Chileans would die, ironically the same number that died in the U.S. on September 11th, 2001.
After the Sandinistas came to power in Nicaragua in the early 80's. The Contra campaign began. The CIA/Contra collaboration had been a massive effort amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars and the murder of 3,346 Nicaraguan children and teenagers, and killed one or both parents of 6,236 children. The Sandinistas had improved the condition of Nicaragua's poor.
In El Salvador the U.S. financed, trained, and supported Salvadoran forces who killed and tortured 75,000 people.  This was to suppress a social revolution that attempted to uplift the poor and oppressed.
More recently the U.S. was involved with the coupe that overthrew the democratically elected president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. The lasted only a day. The U.S. is still supported the attempted ousting of Chavez as I am writing this.
All these governments have similar policies as Lula.
All the past attempts began with propaganda campaigns. This has already begun against Lula. I have read different press reports. One that linked Brazil to international terrorism (which has to be the most absurd thing I have every heard), one to drug trafficking, others have said that Brazil was a threat to U.S. national security. All of these have been used as justifications to overthrow governments in the past and in the present.
I would like to know what others think of this.


Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 10:29 pm on Feb. 11, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
haha...no way!
(and i hope i'm right here)

True, during the election campaign, some really stupid American journalists went as far as calling Brazil a part of the Axis of Evil. However, I think it was just some random ideas of some really stupid people, and as long as Lula doesn't do anything too extreme, he'll be left alone.
But then again...if he really screws US in the FTAA topic and then adds in a few more moves that are unfavorable to US or its corporations...anything can happen (also, isn't Brazil planning to buy some more weapons or increase its military budget or something?). History is full of examples.
But please don't compare him to Chavez. I don't really see much similarity between those two...
But alltogether - good question. I haven't heard anyone raising anything like that lately (i mean, now that elections are far behind..)

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 10:52 pm on Feb. 11, 2003 | IP
Macunaima


Member
   
Bottom line: the U.S. will support a coup if, as last time, a substantial portion of the Brazilian bourgeosie do.

-----
Brazil is the country of the future and always will be!

Total Posts: 147 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 2:18 am on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
To Macunaima
Do you think the Brazillian bourgeosie will support a coupe.

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 3:04 am on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
To Krista

When I say that Lula and Chavez are similar, as well as the other regimes I mention, I mean that they support the working class and the poor. They may all have different methods and different policies to accomplish this, but they are similar in this respect.
They all opposed being under the political and economic dominance of the United States. They are also all what the extreme right power elite in the U.S. would call left wing. And they all believe in some form of socialism. So I mean similar in that respect.


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 3:20 am on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
No way will the US support or attempt a coup against Lula.  The institutions of democracy are developing rapidly in Brazil and it does not matter what the US thinks.  If the US had its way in Brazil they could have tried to support Jose Serra in the election or something, but the Brazilian people spoke loud and clear.  

FTAA will be a fiece fight because both countries have special interest and I know that US especially in this time cant have worsening relationships with friendly nations like Brazil.  

Lula and Chavez are similar in the respects of who support them, but dont forget Lula fought for democracy and went to jail unlike Chavez who attempted a failed coup.  Lula is a politician who is not seeking a radical "revolution" but meaninful social changes to Brazil unlike Chavez, who changed the constitution, changed the countries name, to the Bolivaridian Republic of Venezuela.  Chavez economic policy is totally against the forces of the market while Lula is making some meaningful fiscal reforms in attempt to lower inflation and bring interest rates lower to stimulate the economy.

-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 3:58 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Macunaima


Member
   
Jeromy:

They did in 1964. If they feel threatened enough, they'll do it again. Let's hope Lula realizes this. I think he does.

-----
Brazil is the country of the future and always will be!

Total Posts: 147 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 5:45 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
"[Chavez] changed the countries name, to the Bolivaridian Republic of Venezuela"
Really? He did? oh, I never knew... haha. Is it just me or does that name sound a bit ridiculous? (not trying to insult anybody here)
But honestly, erjbcdt, you said everything about Lula and Chavez that I meant in my first posting. But in terms of US and the coup, I think Macu has it right - I don't think any coup will happen; I really don't. But I wouldn't be too surprised if it did.

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 7:43 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Let's hope Lula screws the U.S. with the FTAA. It hurts both the common people of Brazil and the U.S.. It is nothing more than economic imperialism.

-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 8:33 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
I dont know if I can agree with you Jeromy, that Free trade hurts both US and Brazil.  I mean as far as I can tell Mexico has benefited from the free trade agreement with US and Canada.  Nafta has made Mexicans exports skyrocket making Mexico's economy in dollars terms bigger than that of Brazil's which hurts me to say considering I believe that Brazil is the greatest country on the face of this earth.  I am not a nationalist but my country has this human power that is unexplainable.  I get that feeling everytime I visit and leave Brazil.

But yes I did read that Chavez did change the name of the country, I am sure that it really helped considering that inflation has hurt the poor mainly and he will lose in an referendum in August, the constitution allows a referendum mid-way into a presidents terms.

-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 9:23 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   

Quote: from Jeromy on 8:33 pm on Feb. 12, 2003
Let's hope Lula screws the U.S. with the FTAA. It hurts both the common people of Brazil and the U.S.. It is nothing more than economic imperialism.


Jeromy-
Hey now, we don't want Lula to commit murder on Brasil like that either. If he actually manages to piss off USA so bad that he'd be "removed", we can be quite sure that the next one will be a carefully chosen puppet of the CIA.
I hope that Lula will succeed to be a good diplomat...I hope he'll do what's best for Brasil while keeping his relations good with all the important powers.

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 10:07 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Let's expound on the glories of the FTAA.
The FTAA is essentially an expansion of NAFTA. But NAFTA has proven to be a nightmare for working families and the environment.
In the US, more than 765,000 jobs have disappeared as a result of NAFTA. When these laid off workers find new jobs, they earn 23 percent less on average than at their previous employment. In Mexico, manufacturing wages fell 21 percent from 1995 to 1999, and have only started to recover. The percentage of Mexicans living in poverty has also grown since NAFTA went into effect.
The export-driven growth model promoted by "free trade" agreements and the policies of the World Bank and the IMF have destroyed ecosystems around the world. Under this unsustainable model, many countries in the Global South cut down their forests, overfish their waters and exploit other natural resources to pay off foreign debts.
NAFTA has been a disaster for small farmers in the US and Mexico. By favoring the interests of agribusiness corporations over the needs of family farmers, NAFTA's model of export-oriented agriculture has slashed farmers' income. At least half a million farmers have left their land. The FTAA threatens to make this crisis worse by encouraging even more overproduction.
The FTAA is expected to force countries to privatize services such as education, health care, energy and water. Such privatization would especially harm working class communities and communities of color.
The FTAA allows corporations to bypass democratically adopted environmental or worker protection laws, increasing corporate power while endangering the lives of millions of people, disproportionately affecting women and people of color.
The FTAA threatens to commodify our lives by turning over the control of our schools, electricity, water, and food to corporations whose only interest is more profit.
The FTAA is being negotiated in secret. Initiated in 1994 by the 34 countries of North and South America (excluding Cuba), governments have included the business sector in FTAA talks every step of the way, but have kept the text of the treaty secret from regular people and their elected representatives.
It is true that it increases exports and productivity. But who benefits from this. It certainly is not the common person. The rich oligarchy that rules will, and so will foreign corporations. The average person will suffer, and millions will suffer devastating consequences because of it
The is similar to what was called the Brazilian Miracle of the 1964 U.S. backed coup. This is what 18 Brazilian Catholic Bishops said about that then which applies the same to this topic:
The Brazilian miracle has resulted in privileges for the wealthy.   It has come as curse upon those who have not asked for it.  The rich become always richer and the poor always poorer in the process of economic concentration.  Far from being the inevitable result natural deficiencies, this tragedy is the consequence of international capitalism.  Development came to be defined not in the terms of the interests of Brazilian society but in terms of the profits made by foreign corporations and their associates in our country.  The absence of freedom, the violence of repression, the injustices, the impoverishment of the people-all in favor of foreign capital.

So as I said the FTAA hurts the common person of both Brazil and the U.S..


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 10:16 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Let's expound on the glories of the FTAA.
The FTAA is essentially an expansion of NAFTA. But NAFTA has proven to be a nightmare for working families and the environment.
In the US, more than 765,000 jobs have disappeared as a result of NAFTA. When these laid off workers find new jobs, they earn 23 percent less on average than at their previous employment. In Mexico, manufacturing wages fell 21 percent from 1995 to 1999, and have only started to recover. The percentage of Mexicans living in poverty has also grown since NAFTA went into effect.
The export-driven growth model promoted by "free trade" agreements and the policies of the World Bank and the IMF have destroyed ecosystems around the world. Under this unsustainable model, many countries in the Global South cut down their forests, overfish their waters and exploit other natural resources to pay off foreign debts.
NAFTA has been a disaster for small farmers in the US and Mexico. By favoring the interests of agribusiness corporations over the needs of family farmers, NAFTA's model of export-oriented agriculture has slashed farmers' income. At least half a million farmers have left their land. The FTAA threatens to make this crisis worse by encouraging even more overproduction.
The FTAA is expected to force countries to privatize services such as education, health care, energy and water. Such privatization would especially harm working class communities and communities of color.
The FTAA allows corporations to bypass democratically adopted environmental or worker protection laws, increasing corporate power while endangering the lives of millions of people, disproportionately affecting women and people of color.
The FTAA threatens to commodify our lives by turning over the control of our schools, electricity, water, and food to corporations whose only interest is more profit.
The FTAA is being negotiated in secret. Initiated in 1994 by the 34 countries of North and South America (excluding Cuba), governments have included the business sector in FTAA talks every step of the way, but have kept the text of the treaty secret from regular people and their elected representatives.
It is true that it increases exports and productivity. But who benefits from this. It certainly is not the common person. The rich oligarchy that rules will, and so will foreign corporations. The average person will suffer, and millions will suffer devastating consequences because of it
The is similar to what was called the Brazilian Miracle of the 1964 U.S. backed coup. This is what 18 Brazilian Catholic Bishops said about that then which applies the same to this topic:
The Brazilian miracle has resulted in privileges for the wealthy.   It has come as curse upon those who have not asked for it.  The rich become always richer and the poor always poorer in the process of economic concentration.  Far from being the inevitable result natural deficiencies, this tragedy is the consequence of international capitalism.  Development came to be defined not in the terms of the interests of Brazilian society but in terms of the profits made by foreign corporations and their associates in our country.  The absence of freedom, the violence of repression, the injustices, the impoverishment of the people-all in favor of foreign capital.

So as I said the FTAA hurts the common person of both Brazil and the U.S..


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 10:19 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
sorry didn't mean to put that post in twice


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 10:29 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
oh, i didn't disagree with you on the value of FTAA; no, not at all. I only think that Lula should perhaps not "screw" Bush and FTAA and all the other global wonders, but instead gently...mmm...gently, you know...so that he doesn't arrange his own end with the "screwing" activities. As I said earlier - if it ever happened that US mess with some coup kind of thing, the end result would be the worst possible for Brasil.

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 10:54 pm on Feb. 12, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Yeah it seems to be a situation of your damn if you do and your damn if you don't. That is why those who like me are fighting our corrupt imperialist government. To keep their blood soaked hands out of other countries, so that leaders are not put in that position.


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 8:54 am on Feb. 13, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
World Bank, so do you read what they have to say nowadays:  

I found this article you might like and I WILL respond later to you post! :

World Bank: Unions Can Improve Economies
Wed Feb 12,12:32 AM ET  Add Business - Reuters to My Yahoo!



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A country's economy may fare better if a large number of its workers belong to trade unions, the World Bank (news - web sites) said in a study that marked a departure from the institution's traditional frosty approach to organized labor.

Related Quotes  
DJIA
NASDAQ
^SPC
7663.82
1266.77
809.85
-94.35
-12.20
-8.82


 
delayed 20 mins - disclaimer
Quote Data provided by Reuters



Tax season to-do list:

1.  Sharpen pencils.
2.  Mark calendar.
3. Panic.


Tax Season Coverage
from Yahoo! News


 

The report, released on Wednesday, found that high unionization rates can lead to lower unemployment and inflation rates, higher productivity and faster adjustment to economic shocks.


"The bank in the past has perhaps been hostile to trade unions, and the thing with this book is that it wants to have a very open and nuanced approach, different from the past," Robert Holzmann, the bank's director of social protection, told Reuters. "So no blank check to trade unions but a major offer to work with them because they're crucial."


The report said union members in rich and poor countries alike get significantly higher average wages than workers who are not affiliated with a trade union.


In the United States, wages can be 15 percent higher for union members while in other industrialized countries, they are between 5 and 10 percent higher. The benefits of union membership can vary in middle-income and developing countries.


The study also found that union participation can reduce wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers and also between men and women.


UNIONS CAN STILL BE BAD


But unions can also create problems if they are not open and transparent.


"Trade unions can be important agents of change if it is done in a good manner," said Holzmann. "It does not mean they cannot have detrimental effects if the opposite takes place."


Holzmann commissioned the study on "Unions and Collective Bargaining: Economic Effects in a Global Environment" to provide policymakers, unions and employers in developing countries with data on the impact of unions on the economy.


The rapid growth of international trade has stimulated an interest in different labor standards around the world.


There is growing concern that countries that adopt lower labor standards will have unfair advantages in producing internationally traded goods than those with higher standards.


Also, new technology allows jobs to be directly subcontracted to workers in low-standard countries.



-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 9:23 am on Feb. 13, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
World Bank, so do you read what they have to say nowadays:  

I found this article you might like and I WILL respond later to you post! :

World Bank: Unions Can Improve Economies
Wed Feb 12,12:32 AM ET  Add Business - Reuters to My Yahoo!



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A country's economy may fare better if a large number of its workers belong to trade unions, the World Bank (news - web sites) said in a study that marked a departure from the institution's traditional frosty approach to organized labor.

Related Quotes  
DJIA
NASDAQ
^SPC
7663.82
1266.77
809.85
-94.35
-12.20
-8.82


 
delayed 20 mins - disclaimer
Quote Data provided by Reuters



Tax season to-do list:

1.  Sharpen pencils.
2.  Mark calendar.
3. Panic.


Tax Season Coverage
from Yahoo! News


 

The report, released on Wednesday, found that high unionization rates can lead to lower unemployment and inflation rates, higher productivity and faster adjustment to economic shocks.


"The bank in the past has perhaps been hostile to trade unions, and the thing with this book is that it wants to have a very open and nuanced approach, different from the past," Robert Holzmann, the bank's director of social protection, told Reuters. "So no blank check to trade unions but a major offer to work with them because they're crucial."


The report said union members in rich and poor countries alike get significantly higher average wages than workers who are not affiliated with a trade union.


In the United States, wages can be 15 percent higher for union members while in other industrialized countries, they are between 5 and 10 percent higher. The benefits of union membership can vary in middle-income and developing countries.


The study also found that union participation can reduce wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers and also between men and women.


UNIONS CAN STILL BE BAD


But unions can also create problems if they are not open and transparent.


"Trade unions can be important agents of change if it is done in a good manner," said Holzmann. "It does not mean they cannot have detrimental effects if the opposite takes place."


Holzmann commissioned the study on "Unions and Collective Bargaining: Economic Effects in a Global Environment" to provide policymakers, unions and employers in developing countries with data on the impact of unions on the economy.


The rapid growth of international trade has stimulated an interest in different labor standards around the world.


There is growing concern that countries that adopt lower labor standards will have unfair advantages in producing internationally traded goods than those with higher standards.


Also, new technology allows jobs to be directly subcontracted to workers in low-standard countries.



-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 9:24 am on Feb. 13, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Now let's expound on some of the glories of the World Bank.
12 years of following World Bank and IMF-imposed policies, Latin America is going through "its worst period of social and economic deprivation in half a century." Of the region's 460 million people, nearly half are poor-an increase of 60 million in ten years. The number of Latin American billionaires rose to 42 in 1994 from six in 1987. Populations, overall, are worse off than they were in 1980. According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), "the levels of [poverty] are still considerably higher than those observed in 1980 while income distribution seems to have worsened in virtually all cases.
Faced with tough choices, governments often must cut spending on health, education, and environmental protection, since these don't generate income for the federal budget. According to Friends of the Earth, Brazil was pressured to slash funding for environmental enforcement by over 50% after accepting an IMF bailout agreement in 1999.
Deregulating the economy: The World Bank and IMF continue to push for the elimination of trade and investment barriers, and for the export-orientation of poor countries' economies. Again, if poor countries increase their foreign currency earnings by boosting exports, they may be more able to repay international creditors. The people, however, will not necessarily benefit. The World Bank's own statistics show that, in many regions of the world, increased exports are not associated with increased personal consumption. For example, while export volume increased by 4.3% in Sub-Saharan Africa between 1989 and 1998, per capita consumption declined by 0.5%.
Their programs weaken labor. SAPs imposed on Peru by the World Bank and the IMF pushed 4 million people into extreme poverty, almost halved real wages, and cut those with "adequate employment" to 15 percent of the workforce. Consequently, there has been a forced migration of impoverished peasants and urban unemployed into coca growing as an alternative to starvation.
The U.S. dominates both the World Bank. The most notorious case of U.S. manipulation of Bank policy was the ending of loans to the elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile-the first step in a U. S . -planned destabilization. Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger used the Bank to (as the president stated) "make the Chilean economy scream." The subsequent economic crisis "paved the way for the bloody coup of 1973." The U.S. then poured aid on the military dictatorship of Pinochet. From 1973 to 1976, the World Bank gave Chile $350.5 million, almost 13 times the $27.7 million it gave during the 3-year Allende presidency. 120,000 Chileans would be killed, tortured, or disappeared under the Pinochet regime.
Recently the World Bank has got a face lift due to the opposition to it. It is like the U.S. got a face lift when Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton was president. Yeah....Nice Imperialism, that's like a friendly psychopath.  Yeah we will kill you with a smile.    



-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 2:53 pm on Feb. 13, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
To Erjbedt,
I would like to know what your response to the World Bank post is. I believe you wrote before that you were from Brasil. I would like to know why you think such an instrument of imperialism is of benefit to the Brazilian people.


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 8:31 pm on Feb. 14, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
mee too.
i'm quite curious...

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 9:46 pm on Feb. 14, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
Honestly I thinky you are completely wrong when it comes to economics, and I agree that privatization needs to be done in a gradual process but this talk of imperialism is just non sense.  Globalization is the end result I believe in, and I dont believe you idea the state can solve our problems.  The state dominated brazilian and latin american politics and economic for over 70 years and where did it get?  Latin America and Brazil had large rates of inflation, keeping the massive poor population from having the purchasing power that helps them today buy goods they could not do when inflation was 30% a month. When the state controlled the economy poverty never decreased, jobs were not created and no media agency would attack corruption because the country was a closed nation. I posted that World Bank posting after I went to Brazil and I will prove to you how wrong you are in fact;

Now why did the free markets work in Brazil?!?!?
Now my blame is not the World Bank or the IMF because poorer countries in Asia have benefitted from the IMF and World Bank policy.  China, South Korea, which has half the size of the economy  Now is it the IMF's fault that the brazilian govt runs a deficit of over 35 billion dollars per year in pensions?  Well this deficit eats away that savings rate of Brazilians because the govt has to borrow money to finance the debt.  Then as the govt takes savings in terms of borrowing Brazilans have less money to invest because savings turns into investments! Basic economics treaches anyone this!  Interest rates can come down when there exist large deficits that force Brazil's central banks to keep rates high because this attracts foreign investments that brazil needs to cover the deficit.  

No it is the IMF's and World Bank's fault that the Brazilian tax system is regressive and makes the poor pay most of the taxes while the rich pay even less taxes?  They are provinding a free market approach if you have another approach that is better than the free markets please tell?  Because there isn't any I know it and FHC knows it?


dO YOU KNOW WHY UNEMPLOYMENT RUNS HIGH IN BRAZIL?  BECAUSE THE LABOR LAWS WERE MADE IN THE 1930'S CAN YOU IMAGINE HOW DIFFERENT THE ECONOMY IS TODAY THAN IT WAS 73 YEARS AGO? FOR EVERY WORKER WHO EARNS 100 REAIS THE COMPANY MUST PAY 100 REAIS IN TAXES, WELL THIS PROVIDES AN INCENTIVE TO KEEP SALARIES LOW SINCE COMPANIES CANT AFFORD TO PAY HIGHER SALARIES! tHIS SYSSTEM IS OUT OF CONTROL BUT WHY HAS IT CHANGED? HOW COME EVERY TRIES TO BLAME CARDOSO? HE HAS 8 YEARS, FERNANDO COLLOR MELLOR BEGAN THIS OPENING THE ECONOMY UP AND ITAMAR FRANCO TRIED TO CONTINUE WITH PROGRESS AND CARDOSO COULD NOT COMPLETE THE NEEDED REFORMS.COME ON THE TAX LAWS HURT BRAZILIAN INDUSTRY AND HURT THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF BRAZILIAN ENTRENEURSHIP BECAUSE THEY PAY SO MANY TAXES THEY WOULD GO BROKE IF THEY HAD TO PAY ALL THE TAXES IN THE BOOK.  Most importantly the credit level given to industries is too small since taking out a loan is so expensive in Brazil it is something companies do not want to do because they need to keep cost low.

WHY DID BRAZIL PASS THESE REFORMS? WELL THE PT BLOCKED TOOTH AND NAIL EVERY TIME ESPECIALLY WHEN THE LAW TO FLEX THE LABOR LAWS THE PT CAUSED A FIGHT IN CONGRESS WHICH IS SCARY THAT A POLITICAL PARTY COULD ACT IN SUCH  A WAY AND NOW ASK THE PSDB AND PFL TO HELP PASS REFORMS!  

AND YOU KNOW WHAT LULA WHO IS NOW A SOCIAL LIBERAL BUT ECONOMIC CONSERVATIVE BEIEVES IN THE FREE MARKET, SO WHATS YOUR PROBLEM?  i AGREE WITH EVERYTHING LULA IS DOING SO FAR IN TERMS OF THE ECONOMY!

DID YOU HEAR THAT LULA WAS MEETING THE IMF DIRECTOR AND SHE CALLED HIM THE LEADER OF THE 21 CENTURY!  THE IMF I THOUGHT THEY WANTED TO STEAL BRAZIL'S MONEY BUT LULA SEEMS TO BE LIKING THEM I WONDER WHY?  WORLD BANK IS NOW FUNDING FOME ZERO!!! CAN YOU BELIEF THAT BOTH THE WORLD BANK AND THE IMF SUPPORT FOME ZERO? WOW WHY WOULD IMPERIALIST DO SUCH A THING?

THE BANK AND THE IMF HAVE SEVERAL PROBLEMATIC ISSUES BUT THESE NEXT 10 YEARS THESE INSTITUTIONS WILL BE REFORMED TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY AND PROVIDE HIGH LEVELS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH WHICH HELP RAISE THE LEVEL OF INCOMES OF EVERYONE INSIDE A COUNTRY!!!!

-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 11:51 pm on Feb. 14, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
"WORLD BANK IS NOW FUNDING FOME ZERO!!! "
ah, this is so cool!!!

However, I see a difference between opening up the economy for foreign companies to some in, and reforming the crappy laws of a country; those two don't have to go together.
Also, if you think that the government having control over Brasil's economy had such a bad effect...are you sure it had to do with the fact that the governemnt was in power and not that the government just implemented bad policies. Am I too naive to think that a government could be capable of running an economy well/successfully?

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 8:18 am on Feb. 15, 2003 | IP
Ze


Junior Member
   
Don't snap at someone just because he has a different opinion than you. I do believe that what Palocci is doing, is just so that we don't break like a twig. Our economy is so fragilized by FHC, that he must use economic conservative methods to deal with it.

It is a fact, that neoliberalism concentrates the power in the hands of a few, that globalization destroys small economys, so altough it does raise production, I do not consider it as an advance.

Total Posts: 93 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 8:36 am on Feb. 15, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   
"It is a fact, that neoliberalism concentrates the power in the hands of a few, that globalization destroys small economys, so altough it does raise production, I do not consider it as an advance"

yes, Yes, YES!!!

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 8:49 am on Feb. 15, 2003 | IP
erjbcdt


Junior Member
   
hey I did not snap at anyone because of a different opinion, I would never snap at Krista like that she is a cool girl and I respect her ideas.  I just dont agree with everything she has to say thats all.

If anyone felt like I hurt them with my words I am sorry I was out of it last night

-----
Viva Brazil

Total Posts: 54 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 9:15 am on Feb. 15, 2003 | IP
krista



Junior Member
   

Quote: from erjbcdt on 9:15 am on Feb. 15, 2003
hey I did not snap at anyone because of a different opinion, I would never snap at Krista like that she is a cool girl and I respect her ideas.  I just dont agree with everything she has to say thats all.


Haha..thatnks for that. You get all my respect for tolerationg a different opinion.

-----
Radio Do Mar: http://www.live365.com/stations/226288

Total Posts: 97 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 11:25 am on Feb. 15, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
Let first start out by pointing out the obvious. The problem that causes poverty in Brazil as well as in the rest of Latin America is what I call the imperial system.
Brazil is one of the richest countries in natural resources in the world, but it's population is one of the poorest.
It is pretty simple to understand why this is. The riches of the country are going out of the country and not to the benefit of the people of the country. Except to a very small percentage, the top 1 percent who control 53 percent of the wealth of the country.
These 1 percent get rich many times by selling the land, the labor, and the resources of the country off to foreign corporations.
This begun when the Portuguese came to Brazil. The riches of the country were sent out of Brazil to the empires of Portugal and Great Britain. Of course a small percentage of a European elite who took residence in Brazil got rich from this, and maintained power over the country. The European powers would give military support to these elites to maintain this system. This was the colonial system.
What we have today is a neo-colonial system. No one claims direct position of Brazil, but the imperialist system remains the same. The empires have changed, now it is the United States and it's European and Japan satellites.
The World Bank, IMF, NAFTA, FTAA, as well as the CIA, U.S. military, and since most of the Latin American military is trained and supplied by the U.S., it as well are instruments to maintain this system.
This system creates savage inequalities. Until that system is crushed, you will still have incredible poverty. This system can't be reformed. You can't reform imperialism. It is a system of injustice.          
I absolutely agree with Ze when he said: It is a fact, that neoliberalism concentrates the power in the hands of a few, that globalization destroys small economies. It should be understood that neoliberalism and neo-colonism are virtually the same. As Henry Kissinger said “globalization is really another name for the dominate role of the United States.”
Consider this quote by Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano, in his book We Say No (pg.278)

"For us capitalism is not a dream to be pursued, but a nightmare come true.  Our challenge lies not in privatizing the state but it deprivatizing it.  Our states have been brought up at bargain prices by the owners of the land, the banks, and everything else.  And for us, the market is nothing more than a pirate ship-the greatest it’s freedom, the worse it’s behavior.  The local market and the world market.  The world market robs us with both hands.  The commercial hands keeps buying from us ever cheaper  and selling to us every dearer.  The financial hand, which lends us our own money, keep paying us less and charging us more.
We live in a region of European prices and African wages, where capitalism acts like a the kind man who says ‘I’m so fond of poor people that I never think there are enough of them."
By the way this is great book on this subject, as well his book Open Veins of Latin America.
I will talk more about the negative results of privatization, the free markets role in poverty in Brazil as well as Latin America. This is an extremely interesting subject which I have much to say and much to learn.



-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 1:40 pm on Feb. 16, 2003 | IP
Ze


Junior Member
   
erjbcdt:

It is I who should apologize, I misunderstood your caps lock for shouting.

Jeromy:

There is another name to it, "Corruption", it is not theirs who hunger for resources, but ours who have no respect to us. I know that the idea of foreign control is scaring and make things easier to identify foe from friend, but I see foreign companies being far more solidary than our own companies.

Our economy should not be under foreign control, but our elite don't pose as good alternative.

Total Posts: 93 | Joined Jan. 2003 | Posted on: 4:37 pm on Feb. 16, 2003 | IP
Jeromy


Junior Member
   
I agree. It is a collaboration of both the corrupt Brazilian elite and foreign exploiters.
As far as the Brazilian bourgeoisie. You could hardly say they are victimized when the victim is so willing.


-----
Peace and Justice for all

Total Posts: 55 | Joined Feb. 2003 | Posted on: 11:00 pm on Feb. 16, 2003 | IP
 

Topic Jump
<< Back Next >>
Single Page for this topic

Topic Options: Lock topic | Edit topic | Unlock topic | Delete topic | Move topic

© 2003 Brazzil | Our Privacy Statement

Powered by Ikonboard 2.1.9 Beta
© 2001 Ikonboard.com