MercoPress, en Español
Get our news on your inbox! Suscribe x
Montevideo, July 21st 2017 - 16:45 UTC
The former Brazilian president Lula da Silva responded defiantly to his conviction on corruption charges by formally launching his candidacy for next year’s presidential election. Read full article
Good political move!
In Argentina we have a popular leader in the Altiplano that has been preventively detained for some 600 days... under a avalanche of false accusations...
Until now..., she has been sentenced to 3,5 years imprisonment for NOT having thrown some eggs against the current Guvernor...
With that in mind..., one could argue that Lula is lucky by getting only 9,5 years jail for NOT owning that apartment in the cheapside of Guarujá...
A move totally expected from the nine-fingered toad.....as his cases are tried and he is convicted, his prison time will add up....at the moment, nine and a half years and counting..
Meanwhile, let him enjoy his last year of freedom, and kid himself that he is God.
How can we even think that Lula is guilty of any wrongdoing after all even MercoPress reported on his honesty.
Oh wait a moment they were only relying on the word of one man in that report. The word of a man who shifts all suspicion of any wrongdoing to his conveniently dead wife. Isn´t it funny that she died at such a convenient moment.
The ignorance of the Anglo Turnips in here continuez to flabergast me...
They don't even know how old Lula is...
And the subsequent derivative inherent implications of it... ;-)
The jokes are entertaining
BUT IF the Political Parties, their affiliates and the leaders just keep fooling around; it appears that not so unexpectedly, the 09.50 fingers will be back in power!
When will the appeal be heard? If it upholds the conviction, will Lula go to jail then? I assume he can't run for President from prison.
I like the grinning Temer in the background. He looks ridiculous when he smiles, have you seen his official photograph?
Seems pointless to run if he cannot be elected.
The wealthy class traditionally running one of the most socially unequal countries in Latin America will not give up its privileges that easy.
Even if their traditional system of using the armed forces to oust any progressive government has fallen out of favour, the country's owners still have the judiciary and the dominant media to get out of the way anybody pretending to change the status quo.
Nice to see the Torturer's Tango Duo are out and force and doing their usual cheek to cheek.
No pasarán... How droll! We all know how that little bit of guerrilla theater ended up, eh, Gauchito Drink?
...the judiciary and the dominant media to get out of the way anybody pretending to change the status quo. Why Kamerad/Komrade Rique, that sounds just like the Narcokleptic regime you have supported so assiduously over the years. Can you spell Nisman? Sure you can, chantapufi!
Now lest anyone walk away without a reminder what you two old dears really represent, there's this recent demonstration of what Populism à la Kamerad/Komrade Rique really means :
I'm sure Lula is trying to look as puffed up and scary as he can, threatening to ignore the law and unleash violence if he doesn't get his way. We shall see what happens...
FROM NY Times:
1º: @nytimesworld: Corruption runs so deep in Brazil that uprooting it risks taking democracy with it
According to the recent observations; a large number of the crooks:
- have escaped long-term imprisonments within just a few days after the sentences were passed
- are supposed to be in prison [with 5-Star luxury]
- at partial liberties [at their residences in comfort].
- and BEHIND BARS, they are enjoying the Fattest Possible Salaries, Fringe Benefits & Special Privileges
BUT The Maximum [+/- TWO Thousand] of them are just INDICATED - not even officially accused neither convicted nor condemned.
This being the Recent Past; the fate of The Godfather is easier to guess; considering:
A: Alternatives - popularity of the rest of the crooks
B: His past image - national/international
C: VERY Short Memory-Span of the masses
Aren't you just a little ray of light, :o)) ?
That sounds horribly plausible, you might be better off with another round of President Lula.
It's not as simple as that. Under the PT's rule the economy crashed and burned. The opposition parties had a legitimate complaint, and a fair amount of popular backing. They didn't carry out their 'coup' until Rousseff's approval level reached single figures.
Now, the economy is still in the toilet and the investigations are finding more corruption every day so Temer is even more unpopular than Rousseff was, but that wasn't the case at the time.
I also want to point out that Lula promised to reform the pension system and didn't do it. If he had kept his promise his progressive government would have been in control of the reforms, rather than leaving it in the hands of Temer.
See that Reekie continues to ignore any challenges to his expert opinion on Brazil...he's sounding more and more like you know who...
The appeal will problably be heard probably sometime 2nd quarter 2018.....and if the TRF-4 (2nd instance Federal Court in Porto Alegre) confirms the sentence, he goes straight to prison. Once there, he can always run for presidency of the crime sindicate.
Jack, why does it take sooooooo long for an appeal?
REF: THE Two Thousand & Odd Crooks: These are identified ONLY and are enjoying 100% freedom.
BUT what about those who'll NEVER be identified, accused, convicted or condemned?
The crimes of many of them are so grave that a few of these criminals deserve electric chairs instead of the Electronic Anklets [tornozeleira eletrônica]. These have become quite fashionable amongst the corrupt!
Somewhat encouraging GOOD news is that Brazil is not left ALONE!:
It's not as simple as that.
I agree I made a very general statement about the new strategies being applied in Latin America to keep the wealthy minorities in control of the state. No doubt there is more to it.
However, these general trends appear since several Latin American countries began electing progressive governments such as that of Lula in Brazil, followed by Argentina, Bolivia, Honduras, Ecuador and Paraguay in 2008.
Were those governments error-free? Of course not. Did they have agendas that included social inclusiveness? With some differences, they did.
Were those governments corruption-free? Surely not. Corruption has been endemic in Latin America.
Has the fight against corruption been the same against all types of Latin American governments? Of course not. Refer to current MP story: Temer manages a first victory to avoid trial over graft charges.
Why is corruption being used as a tool of choice against Latin American progressive governments? Because it's easier to focus on corruption, real or alleged, than criticizing their political projects. As an example, let's see how Lula did in very general terms:
The Lula Administration's economic policies also helped to significantly raise living standards, with the percentage of Brazilians belonging to the consumerist middle class rising from 37% to 50% of the population...
”Under Lula, Brazil became the world's eighth-largest economy, more than 20 million people rose out of acute poverty...
— The Washington Post, October 2010, (cited in Wikipedia).
Your posting, DT, appears justifies the ousting of democratically-elected governments as a result of their errors or omissions.
Under the PT's rule the economy crashed and burned
opposition parties...legitimate complaint
didn't carry out their 'coup' until Rousseff's approval level reached single digits
Lula promised...and didn't.
Are you sure this is your position?
Obviously Kamerad/Komrade Rique is still distraught over Nixon being forced to resign in order to avoid impeachment...get over it, chantapufi.
Sorry I do not answer many of your postings are they are largely irrelevant. Also, just in case you believe that including Kamerad/Komrade before my popular Rique (or Enrikee or Rickee or the like) nickname may be offensive and chase me away, you may keep doing it ad nauseam, but I am sorry to let you know it won't work.
Something NEW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Brazil
The Brazilian Corruption now has a page on Wikipedia. Next Step: Wikileaks!?!
I don't need answers from you Kamerad/Komrade Rique, as what you post in here is largely regurgitated walls of verbiage. As for your sobriquet it is spot on, you speak like a Peronist from both sides of extremism, but of course, which ever side, it always begin with a K. I will always have a good laugh at your expense, and if you quit posting, the board would be a lot less humorous. There really is nothing to discuss with an individual that lies and obfuscates as much as you do, s pray continue...
Hello Herr Imoyaro. Here's Camarada Enrique.
No doubt you're having tons of fun, laughing at my expense. I am almost nauseous with laughter too!
At least we need to thank technology for avoiding a waste of ink and paper. In any event, you now know why I don't respond to your incredibly humorous comments.
However, these general trends appear since several Latin American countries began electing progressive governments
I'm not convinced. The PT was in power in Brazil for over thirteen years, the Kirchners in Argentina for 12. The progressive governments are still in power in Bolivia and Ecuador.
What has changed in Brazil and Argentina? The recession. When things are going badly, it's natural to want to try a new government, with new policies, and see if they can improve things. That's the biggest reason Macri was elected in Argentina, and if he fails to turn the economy around, he won't be reelected no matter what stories Clarin prints.
In Brazil, the recession and resulting demonstrations against Rousseff gave the other parties the confidence to support her impeachment.
When I mentioned the economy and Rousseff's approval rating, what I meant was that it was not just the 'elite' who wanted her gone, but a fairly large part of the population, and that they might well have had other reasons than wanting to keep their privileges.
I don't know what I think about the 'coup' exactly. It's a strange situation. At most times impeaching the President would lead to someone else from the same party taking over. But both the PT and the voters already agreed to the risk of Temer becoming President, eg. if Rousseff had died or become too ill. And the senators who voted to remove her were all elected themselves, so it's not really accurate to say the current government is unelected. But the end result that the government has changed so drastically without an election certainly seems undemocratic.
Perhaps I have a different view because I am used to parliamentary systems, where if a leader becomes unpopular enough with the MPs they can and will be replaced. The PT needed support from other parties to govern, which made their administration vulnerable, and ultimately that was because they didn't have a big majority of people voting for them.
The reason why the appeal takes so long is the inadequate infrastructure in the Judiciary - until only recently, when information had to sent from one jurisdiction , or from one judge to another, the document was sat on the senders table for 6 months until someone bothered to pick it up and send it on....today, everything is being computerized, which should eliminate this ridiculous delay.....but there is still the problem of a chronic lack of judges...each one receives dozens of thousands of cases to rule on, every year....there is also the problem of the law itself, which allows endless appeals...so someone who is condemned in 1st instance, can stay out of jail for years while he presents one appeal after the other. Recently, the Supreme Court changed this : if convicted by the 2nd instance court, regardless of appeals, the prison sentence starts. That's why, if Lula conviction is confirmed by the 2nd instance in Porto Alegre, he goes to prison.
”“The Lula Administration's economic policies also helped to significantly raise living standards, with the percentage of Brazilians belonging to the consumerist middle class rising from 37% to 50% of the population...”
”Under Lula, Brazil became the world's eighth-largest economy, more than 20 million people rose out of acute poverty...
— The Washington Post, October 2010, (cited in Wikipedia).
Reekie, you have the bad habit of posting obsolete news...WP, Oct 2010 ????
The fact is, whether you like it or not, all those who were 'miraculously' raised from poverty to the middle class (middle class ??? LOL !) - with handouts - are back where they started....and might be good to remember, it was the end of 2010, when idiotic Dilma was elected....Lula had already established his crime gang in government, and sucked billions from State run companies....then, Dilma and the absurd populist policies did the rest....Check the figures beginning 2015....you'll get a surprise...
I am almost nauseous with laughter too!
Great! A guaranteed flow of regurgitated verbiage! :)
REF: The Former President: https://www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Lula-Da-Silva-Brasil-293x420.jpeg
AND VERY LIKELY; THE FUTURE PRESIDENT TOO - THANX TO THE REST OF THE CROOKS!
Just to add to what I wrote above, I mentioned the pension reform not to justify Dilma's ousting, but because it also doesn't really fit your narrative.
If Temer took over because the elite hate social inclusiveness, wouldn't his main priority be rolling back and eliminating Lula's social programs? But as I understand it, the big reforms he is trying to push through are mostly to things that long predate Lula's presidency, like the labour laws that were passed in the 40s. And for all Lula opposes the reforms now, he promised to reform the pension system himself, implying he agrees it needs changing.
In summary I don't think Dilma's ousting was justified, but I disagree with you about the motives. I think most of the people who supported it genuinely believed that reforms were needed to end the recession, and the main privilege the senators who voted for it were worried about losing was being able to steal from the state without prosecution.
Do we know who will judge Lula's appeal yet? I don't know if he's guilty or not but I do know that I haven't much faith in the Brazilian justice system to find out.
I appreciate your thoroughness and your approach to understanding rathe as opposed to being right no matter what.
You make several points with which I don't disagree. You mention recession as the biggest cause for Dilma being ousted and for CFK losing the 2015 election and I say yes. Of course, when the economy tanks, electors are more inclined to look at a different possibility. However, why only progressive Latin American governments are subject to be ousted when they perform badly? Conservative governments often do too, and still they keep their seats until the end of their terms.
Now, for those who lived through the succession of military coups in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, a newfound respect for constitutional order is a gift that must be kept above all. It is for that reason you won't hear calls in Argentina for president Macri's resignation, even if he is creating a huge liability for the country's future. Most citizens there understand electors will have their say at election time.
In regards to Temer's labour laws reform, you appear to believe it's something innocuous. It's not. See BBC's Brazil Senate passes controversial labour reform:
The main focus of the bill was on giving more leeway to collective bargaining and reducing the scope for legal action in labour disputes...union dues - currently mandatory - will become voluntary...gives more flexibility for part-time work and temporary contracts.
Again: to be able to understand Latin American events, you must take into account the deep divide between the extreme wealth of a few families and the extreme poverty of most, and this is particularly relevant in Brazil's case.
Reekie, you have the bad habit of posting obsolete news...WP, Oct 2010 ????
Obsolete news? For you, perhaps--or it's just because it does not fit into your narrative?
We have seen how Reekie makes broad statements, and when challenged, refuses to back them up...ex: he stated that the Labour reform was reducing worker's rights ....but he won't pinpoint one case in which this has happened.....he insists on referring to stale news as if it were current...ex: the WP article of Oct 2010, trying to pass it off as Brazil's present reality.....the only thing he is consistent in, is defending corrupt governments by claiming they lifted people out of poverty.....nothing could be further from the truth, given the miserable plight of those who believed the PT and supported them while money was being thrown at them...
Regarding Lula's first appeal against his conviction, this will be initially examined by Moro himself (1st instance federal court), and then be sent on, with recommendations, to the 2nd instance court (TRF4) in Porto Alegre, where the same 3 judges (of the 8th Section) who'll eventually have to rule on Lula's conviction by Moro, will give their decision. Based on the fact that all of Lula many appeals to the supreme court, over the past 6 months, to have his case thrown out, have been denied, his current appeal (and others he'll undoubtedly present) is just a strategy to try to delay the process. Anyway, the 2nd instance court has informed it will give its final decision (to aquit Lula or to confirm his sentence - with the possiblity of imposing an even harsher one) no later than August 2018. Contrary to sources which only exist to confuse public opinion, Lula's sentencing was based on hard, irrefutable proof , and Moro (1st instance) and the TRF4 (2nd instance) are known for their seriousness and for handing down tough sentences...about time too, considering that until recently, justice for politicians has always been a joke.
They aways believed they could get away with murder, which explains their desperate efforts to try to terminate the Lavajato.
However, why only progressive Latin American governments are subject to be ousted when they perform badly?
Have there been others apart from Brazil? I think I remember reading that something similar happened in Paraguay a few years ago? Or are you referring to the military coups during the cold war?
But wasn't at least one President forced to resign during the crisis in Argentina in 2001? I seem to remember something about escaping in a helicopter. ;) Were Fernando de la Rúa and Adolfo Rodríguez Saá progressives?
You are right though that the history of coups in Latin America makes the present situation much worse. Although they didn't break any laws, the other parties clearly abused the impeachment process for their own ends.
I have read a bit about the labour reforms, and most of them seem pretty reasonable to me. Greater leeway for collective bargaining sounds like a good thing, and why are mandatory union dues a good idea? Increasing temporary and part-time contracts could be bad for workers, but it has to be balanced against the potential to increase employment if hiring and firing are easier. Also in Brazil, there is another issue: that overly-strict labour laws could push people into the informal sector, where they have no rights at all.
I don't know what the laws are like in Canada, but in the UK they are much more 'business friendly' than anything Temer could dream of passing.
the only thing he is consistent in, is defending corrupt governments by claiming they lifted people out of poverty
Didn't you defend the unelected military government by saying it did a better job of running the country? How is that any different? Certainly Brazil is doing much worse after the crash, but I didn't think poverty had increased back to its previous levels.
There are no jury trials in Brazil then? It really does sound like a bad system that would be easy to abuse. Who appointed these judges in Porto Alegre? I'd like to know if they have any biases.
...something similar happened in Paraguay a few years ago?
Please check the link or google Paraguay Fernando Lugo impeachment.
Please google: Honduras Manuel Zelaya.
Please google: US Grenade invasion.
As for Clarin, see its relative power as public opinion former in Argentina, combined with that of La Nacion, in relation to more leftist newspapers such as Pagina 12. (From PressReference.com)
”The 10 largest national newspapers—which may vary depending upon the source referenced—are: Clarín (800,000 circulation; 1.2 million on Sundays); La Nación (500,000 circulation; 800,000 on Sundays); Ámbito Financiero (300,000 circulation); Crónica (300,000 circulation); Diario Popular (300,000 circulation); Página 12 (150,000 circulation); La Prensa (120,000 circulation); El Cronista (100,000 circulation); Buenos Aires Herald (100,000 circulation); and Olé (100,000 circulation).”
As for labour laws, you need to check them in Brazil's particular context. Thanks!
The impeachment of Lugo in Paraguay seems most similar to Brazil, I would say Zelaya's case was a real coup, and I'm not sure how the US invasion of Granada fits in.
Maybe there is a pattern? I guess only progressive governments are ousted because in most countries, the leftists don't have the power to do it.
One thing I don't understand is how the presidents of these countries ended up having so little support in congress. Are the elections gerrymandered or something?
About the labour laws, what part of Brazil's 'particular context' should I be considering? If you don't want to explain perhaps you could suggest something I can read.
I admit I don't know much about Brazil, but the laws have been in place since the 40s, and don't seem to have made the workers particularly well off during all that time. So why would you think they are especially good or necessary?
How is it different ? the circumstances in 1960 were very different, and I defended what I percieved as a better option than a possibly communist government. But was I was getting at, rgdng Reekie, is that he always harps on lifting people out of poverty which, even if one believes such a fallacy, cannot be used as an excuse to rob the country - and its people - of a better life.
On poverty : the handouts, of which the Bolsa Família is the most notorious, is about US$ 30 per family, but it can vary, depending on the number of family members, and the total family income...it's a mere pittance, but to people who live way below the poverty line, it obviously must make a difference...especially when it comes to voting time. Why I consider it, to a certain extent, counterproductive, is because it has caused many recipients, who see it as early retirement, to give up looking for work...while, if used as originally planned, to help someone get through a tough patch, but not give up, I think it's valid. But it's become an electoral tool, first harshly criticized by Lula (before he was elected), then praised, after elected...With the crisis, the bolsa família continued, but many of those who received it as a complement to their meager income, lost whatever work they had, driving them back to where they were years ago...Spending money on education makes more sense to me. The PT's claim that they lifted millions out of poverty, was just a gimmick, by lowering the bar to consider a certain income, middle class...so overnight the PT lifted 100 million out of poverty...bloody joke...they're all back where they started.
Trial by jury in Brazil only exists for heinous crimes, such as murder, rape etc...
All judges enter public service through tough examinations, then go working their way up the ladder, based on competence. The 3 P.A. judges (TRF4) are experienced and known for their seriousness. To rule, based on bias, would put their jobs at risk.
So would you rather have Lula as President again, or the military government back? Which do you think would be better for the country?
I don't believe Enrique would consider any government that didn't lift people out of poverty to be a successful one, at least in a country like Brazil where a large number of people are extremely poor. And I suppose you would at least agree it is a good thing, as long as it's sustainable? So the question is whether Lula's policies will make a difference long term.
You say many people receiving the bolsa familia have lost their jobs due to the crisis, does that mean they are now relying on it not to starve? That sounds pretty useful to me. The recession won't last forever, hopefully once the country returns to growth people will be better off again. I agree spending money on education is important, but that's not much use if the children are out working or begging instead of in school. The bolsa familia was supposed to help with that.
I wasn't thinking the judges would be biased exactly, but wondering if it was like the USA where judges are nominated by the President. They usually pick supreme court judges based on their political leanings, and often you can predict which way they will rule as a result. Is that not the case in Brazil?
Seems odd to have jury trials for some crimes and not others. Maybe if murderers could get the death penalty it would make sense, but as far as I know they just get a longer sentence than for other crimes.
Quite Right: http://www.otempo.com.br/polopoly_fs/1.1498875.1500427862!image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/main-charges-resize_620/image.jpg
Lula or the military ? cannot be answered simply by opting for one or the other. The reply needs to be a bit more elaborate : I don’t want Lula back, under any circumstances. AFAIC, he’s proved he’s a corrupt lowlife, who won’t stop his criminal project until he’s dead. To give him a second chance to further his evil deeds is tantamount to throwing the towel in with rgds to Brazil. I don’t want the military back either - not because I think they did a bad job the first time - but because of the social unrest that would follow, now that the population, most of which wasn’t around in the '60's, has been lead to believe the military in power again would be the worst thing that could happen. I would like a ‘relatively’ honest, truly democratic govt, that leaves business to the private sector, & sells off all State-run companies, to prevent their political use), that puts the people’s interests above their own, and completely rejects the so-called “Bolivarian” democracy…a lot to ask for, but it’s the option I’d like to see.
I’ve nothing against government policies aimed at reducing poverty, but just giving handouts to the poor, as if they were the means and the end to fix the problem, never works. Education and work, do.
In any crisis, the first to lose jobs are those in the lower social classes…factory workers, and those in jobs that don’t demand very special skills, the offer of which usually far exceeds demand. Don’t get me wrong, I think the concept of the bolsa familia is good, but it was perverted during the PT administrations.
Only the Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President ; However, once in public service, there is nothing to prevent governors from appointing judges to certain positions, usually within the State High Court…but their appointment (like those of the Supreme Court) needs approval from the State Assembly.
OK, the penal code IS obsolete, but I see nothing wrong with trial by jury for only heinous crimes.
As to the topic of the thread, looks like he won't be going anywhere soon...
Sounds like you would prefer the military to Lula, if not for the social unrest it would cause.
If you read the article :o)) linked below, the author doesn't think Lula was so bad. He had social programs which helped the poor but he kept Brazil as a capitalist country, unlike Venezuela. And sure giving handouts may not reduce poverty in the long term, but he did other things like providing doctors and subsidised housing to get people out of the favelas and grants for poor students so they can get a higher education. Those should all help people be more productive.
According to that article the major problem was he didn't address the corruption in government, but joined in with it instead. But who in Brazil is any better? If Temer is not impeached he will surely be put on trial once his term ends. I don't know whether any of the other presidential candidates have been accused of anything yet, but there's a decent chance they will be. What do you think of the last paragraph, where it implies Moro might go into politics? Also I wonder who the PT will find to be their candidate if Lula is unable to stand.
Trial by jury might improve trust in the judicial system as the jurors are chosen at random, but I suppose they could still be bribed or threatened and it would be more expensive. Are the judges for this 2nd instance court in PA chosen by the governor then?
If the choice comes down to a Bolivarian oriented govt or the military - again - you’re probably right.
The author of :o))’s link initially gives the impression he is sympathetic towards Lula, but in the end, he redeems himself . My thoughts on the article: Lula as federal deputy did absolutely nothing; While the PT was opposition it claimed to be the most honest party ever…when they took over, the mask fell ; their image before coming to power changed radically only 2 years after Lula got in : the “mensalão”…Lula avoided possible impeachment only by bringing the PMDB (Temer) into govt ; Re his attempts to reassure investors he favored capitalism, he realized it was a ‘must’ if he wanted their support - and once in power, he learned how to use it to his (personal) advantage ; Re the economy booming, the author must be referring to 2004, when the world economy boomed, and Brazil benefited, without having to make much effort ; As to his reference that Brazil was regarded as “serious” after being awarded the World Cup / Olypmic Games, we know how that turned out ; Lula will go down shouting his innocence…but it won’t change the fact he is guilty. The article concludes correctly that he joined the corruption…not saying the others are better, but considering the PT reached power claiming they’d combat corruption, and did the opposite, says it all. I don’t think Moro wants to go into politics…at least not now, but you never know what might happen if those who back the “lavajato” start to pressure him to consider it. If he did, I’d support for him.
If the “lavajato” cases were tried by a jury, you’d need jurors with extensive knowledge on how corruption works…not just any juror, picked at random. And bribery would always be a possibility. The 2nd instance judges are federal, and I believe their promotions are based on time in the service /competence. Why the 2nd instance federal court in P.Alegre was designated, and not elsewhere, I don't know.
That's what I thought, but then EM has a different idea of what makes a successful government, for him Lula helping get people out of poverty is worth the corruption, especially as all the other parties are just as bad.
Personally I think it was impossible for the PT to get elected without joining in the corruption, and this would have been the case for any party promising to clean it up, so we had better hope the judges can scare then enough to stop stealing. Maybe someone honest has a chance now?
Similarly yeah, I agree he had to reassure investors etc, and EM would say that is a problem since foreign investors get to determine the government's policy. However, you have to work with what you can get and no country has total freedom to do what they want. I just wish I could get the Brexiters around here to understand that...
Also, Brazil did benefit from the boom (and is now suffering from the bust), but there were booms before and still plenty of people living in poverty, so Lula did achieve one of his goals. It's true the World Cup and Olympic Games did not turn out so well, and hosting both was surely a bad idea even if not for the recession, but I doubt Brazil would have been able to host the Olympics in the past, so the country really has developed a lot.
AFAIK all cases are tried by a jury in the UK, I guess when it is complicated they get experts in to educate them and explain the evidence. I don't think bribery is a big problem here though. Is Moro's court based in the region covered by the P Alegre one or something?
REF: How Lula evolved: http://newsok.com/article/feed/1320334
EM’s notion of successful govt is slightly warped….and Lula’s “getting people out of poverty” was only a temporary, somewhat precarious phenomenon, which failed asa the crisis came along. Corruption has always been at the heart of Brazilian politics, but it never reached the level it did as with the PT. Once the current generation of corrupt politicians are behind bars, am sure another will take over…probably less corrupt, but nevertheless still contaminated by the dream of becoming rich overnight. Many carried on stealing, even after being indicted….just goes to show it’s going to be a difficult task to eliminate corruption from politics.
Many facts are interpreted differently, and EM’s belief that “foreign investors get to determine the government's policy” is evidence of that. I don’t know of any economy that became robust without foreign investment…and Reekie, living in Canada, should know that.
Regarding Brexit, don’t know enough about it to discuss in detail, but I believe that immigration control is a healthy measure. Note I said ‘control’, not block. If govts keep tabs on their own citizens, why not on those who aren’t citizens and want to come into the country ? An open-door policy sounds nice but can come back and bite you in the ass.
Sure there have been economic booms, but in 2004 it was so overwhelming that it literally dragged Brazil along…at the same time, Lula’s foreign trade policy became to ignore trade with G.Bush’s US, and favoured expanding commerce with countries governed by his dictator friends…not a good swap, as time proved. Again, as to his ‘lifting people out of poverty’, had be embarked on serious, self-sustaining social programs, he could have been “successful”…his policies in the long run, solved very little...
The first leaks that lead to the Lavajato surfaced in Curitiba, Moro's jurisdiction, reason why all cases concerning the Petrobras corruption are sent to him.
Please log in or register (it’s free!) to comment.
Login with Facebook