MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Ex president Lula admits he might have to step down as candidate in 2018
Former Brazilian president Lula da Silva told Reuters on Wednesday that his recent conviction for corruption might mean that his Workers Party will have to field a candidate other than him in next year's election. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesDespite trying to downplay his crimes, and claim he is the eternal victim of political persecution, the toad is “already” promoting his candidacy for the presidential elections, to be held October 2018....which is totally illegal. He should be obeying the Law, and shut up until the TSE opens the registration - around mid-2018 - but that that never been one of his strong points, as he believes his political history puts him above the Law.
Aug 24th, 2017 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “he believes his political history puts him above the Law.”: The BIGGER problem is that his brainwashed followers think so too! Watch him getting elected! ;(
Aug 25th, 2017 - 10:24 am - Link - Report abuse 0“ Lula said the Brazilian government should spend its way out of its worst recession on record and even use some of its international reserves.”
Aug 25th, 2017 - 02:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What Lula has forgotten is that he and his PT cronies have transferred Brazil's international reserves to their own private accounts. Under PT the government tried to follow Lula's advice and “spend their way out”. This did not work in fact it just deepened the hole that Brazil was rapidly falling into. The other factor was the majority of the money was going into private political bank accounts instead of the projects it was earmarked for.
This is my sumation of the situation and may not be to y
If they could get back all the money the politicians have stolen, maybe they would be able to spend their way out of the crisis. But what are the chances of that?
Aug 25th, 2017 - 04:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@DT (cont. of 'Temer & Meirelles..”)
Aug 25th, 2017 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0In business, bribery will never be a transparent cost built into the price…but it reduces final profit, and is considered the cost of doing business, Anyway, a consumer has the option of not buying from a Co. he believes engages in illegal practices…not so with taxes. A change in culture ?…that's exactly what's needed, but remember we’re dealing with humans, a perverse creature.
Each region is Brazil has its own peculiarities (which filtered down from the culture of those who occupied them), not to mention the inequality between them, which explains the ‘why’ of so many different interests, used by unscrupulous politicians to their advantage. While I don’t doubt EM’s sincerity in that he would like to see the ‘poor’ not so poor - which is really no different to my way of seeing things, after all, a more equal society lives in greater harmony – it is the way he wants to get there that I can’t agree with….he believes that rulers who engage in populism and uncontrolled handouts, will get the desired results…I don’t. Education, austerity, transparency and not always doing what’s most popular, are essential…At condo meetings, with 15 participants, you hear such absurd proposals coming from people who are supposed to be educated / have common sense, so imagine trying to get millions to see things the same way...
In all recently formed parties, wanting to be the top dog is the most evident reason behind it. That’s why we have 33 of them.
Carriers all want the best cargo – weight/volume and freight wise - so they’ll fight for it…either by reducing the rate (fixed/controlled by the now extinct conferences, and after, by voluntary agreements to try to avoid predatory practices which affect all), or by paying kickbacks…it’s all about offer & demand at its best, 'n breaking the rules when you feel you can get away with it. Another ex. of attractive cargo : tyres, in 40' contrs...reasonable freight, light, enormous volumes.
@JB
Aug 26th, 2017 - 11:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0True, no one can avoid taxes, but customers don't know which companies are involved in bribery, and anyway it sounds like the majority of them are. But the effect on the individual wasn't really what I was thinking about, more the cumulative cost to society.
EM did once explain the things the Kirchner's did that impressed him, like paying off the loans from the IMF and reducing poverty, and removing immunity from the people who tortured and murdered during the dictatorship in Argentina. I think people like him have a point, because all the growth in Brazil in the past did not do much to reduce inequality, and there were still people who did not even have enough to eat. Or take the UK, it used to be rich and powerful, with a worldwide empire, yet during the first world war 40% of volunteers to the army had to be rejected because they were unfit for service, and malnutrition was widespread in society. Just making a country richer does not automatically help everyone.
I doubt EM or many people would object to the transparency and education, but IME austerity is often a cure that is worse than the disease. Just look at Greece, where austerity has caused the economy to contract so drastically their debt is now a larger percentage of GDP than before, and therefore even more unpayable. The UK inflicted a lesser version on itself and the economy is not exactly booming. The problem with economics is all the positive feedback loops that lead to boom and bust, and that make it hard to save money without losing even more.
What stupid ideas do condo residents suggest? I used to live in a flat but we never had any kind of meetings, thankfully.
@DT
Aug 27th, 2017 - 09:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ok, but after a company’s illegal practices have been exposed ? ex : JBS, their sales have fallen; another big problem in Brazil - contraband - people who buy it, know they’re supporting organized crime, but don’t care.
Don’t know much about CFK’s paying off the IMF, but if she did what Lula did, don’t think it would’ve had a happy ending ; Lula “paid off” the foreign debt by buying it and ‘transferring’ it to the Federal government’s internal debt…in reality, just transferring it from one account another, a move that took the internal debt to unprecedented levels, and which resulted in huge interest payments, of over R$ 450 billion per year. These payments had a crippling effect on the government’s ability to pay its bills and to invest. Had he left it alone, Brazil could have paid the loans off over far longer periods, with much lower interest rates…but no, he had show how 'smart' he was...pure populism, which as expected, eventually took its toll – i.e., the crisis which exploded in 2014.
Regarding EM’s claim of reducing poverty, not so sure about that …if not mistaken, when Macri took over, wasn't poverty in the region of 25% ? Not going to try to justify the torturing that occurred during the military dictatorships, but don’t forget they were fighting an armed leftist urban-guerilla organization - the ‘Montoneros’ – whose objective was to establish a socialist state in Argentina…and to every action there’s a reaction.
Can’t disagree it's a good idea to spread the wealth around, but nothing wrong with becoming rich due to your own merit.
Talking of Greece, wasn’t austerity the answer to decades of irresponsible spending/ unrealistic policies, such as an obsolete social security system ? Exactly what’s happening in Brazil now…Of course the cure shouldn’t be worse than the disease, but no country has ever spent its way out of recession…
Re stupid ideas, how about cementing all the grassed area in order to save money on gardners ?
It was Nestor Kirchner who paid off the IMF loans, not Cristina. And he didn't do it to save money, but because IMF loans come with strings attached. Argentina was the poster child for the IMF in the nineties, and followed its advice right over the financial cliff in 2001. Most of the population supported getting rid of their interference and giving full control back to their own government, even if it wasn't the best use of the money from a financial perspective (he paid it from the country's reserves).
Aug 28th, 2017 - 09:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Personally I can sympathise; we paid off our mortgage early, even though it didn't make much sense given how low interest rates are here. It's just nice to know you don't have to worry about it if anything happens.
Anyway, CFK did made some pretty dubious financial decisions later, including letting the country default again because she refused to pay the vulture funds.
Poverty was 28.6% in CFK's final year according to the UCA, and it's risen to 32.9% under Macri. But it had reached 54% in 2003, so that's still a significant reduction. Personally, I think a lot of that was just the economy recovering from the extreme crisis, dunno what EM thinks.
As for the dictatorship, I don't believe stopping urban guerrillas required soldiers to kidnap pregnant women, steal their babies, and murder the mothers. Nor did they need to throw people out of helicopters into the River Plate.
The way I see it, what you want is a country where ordinary people can earn a decent amount of money if they work hard, and can live comfortably. Nothing wrong with geniuses getting rich, but we can't all be geniuses.
And yes, Greece for sure dug their own hole with borrowing and spending, not to mention letting large numbers of people evade paying tax. But unlike other countries in Europe that didn't adopt extreme austerity measures and came out of recession after a few quarters, Greece stayed in recession for 8 years, and is still not really growing. Do you want the same thing for Brazil?
The writing on the wall is that GRADUALLY, the corruption is on its way to get legalized under the noses of the Brazilians. A majority will accept it WILLINGLY and will vote for those responsible/corrupt politicians; without the batting of an eyelid! ANYONE WANTS TO BET?
Aug 29th, 2017 - 03:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@DT
Aug 29th, 2017 - 06:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ok, got the wrong K but I agree that IMF loans come with (some inconvenient) strings attached…on the other hand, they knew what they were getting into before taking them. And, using up the country’s foreign reserves, as you point out, was not a particularly good decision, financially speaking. (Lula's decision to pay the debt off, was probably to get rid of the IMF looking over his shoulder)....and for the government to get the population’s support against what the former conveniently used to blame for their misfortunes, is relatively easy….collectively, populations are not particularly smart, and the majority of people have little or no understanding of the implications, or what lead to the problem in the first place. The INDEC’s reporting of inflation and poverty levels during CFK’s terms were not known for their reliability, so it’s not easy to make a correct comparison.
Once again I’m not defending what the Argy military is accused of, but trying to draw a parallel between the Argy and Bzln military regimes, it is notorious how after the ‘dictatorships’, the civilian governments took unilateral decisions that only the crimes committed by the military could be investigated…so obviously, the guerrillas version became the official narrative of those times. Right, I believe people should have access to education and the chance to get a job (limited by their individual capacity) and geniuses should be rewarded for their great ideas. Right again, not everyone is born a genius, which implies some people are born to lead, others to follow.Temer’s austerity proposals aren’t even close to the draconian ones implemented in Greece…the Brazilian Congress, even if for the wrong reasons - in this case - might even be doing the right thing. Austerity should start at the top, with the government’s running expenses (salaries & benefits)…but the resistance against this, despite their ideological differences, seems to be the only thing they all agree on.
I don't think any country takes IMF loans unless they are desperate, and the IMF-recommended policies seemed to be good for Argentina - for a while. Do you disagree that those polices (in particular the dollar peg) were a major cause of the economic collapse in Argentina? I wouldn't want some external agency, even if well intentioned, to have such control over my country's policy. I imagine you are right about Lula's reasons, and right that most people have little understanding of such things, but they aren't always wrong.
Aug 29th, 2017 - 09:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I used poverty figures from the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina for the recent stats since the Indec ones weren't accurate. They do seem very high; I don't know if poverty is measured the same way in Argentina as in Brazil, and I'm sure it's not the same as in the UK.
My impression is that the military government in Argentina was a lot worse than the one in Brazil. Wikipedia gives the death toll in Brazil as 'hundreds' or 333, according to different sources, while in Argentina estimates range from 9,000 to 30,000, in a much smaller population. Probably this contributed to the different treatment afterwards in the two countries. Anyway, I thought the crimes on either side had NOT been investigated in Brazil, as the amnesty law is still in place?
Don't think success and wealth is always linked to leadership, but certainly people are born with different abilities. It's important for all people to be able to develop their talents and contribute to society (which education is the best way to ensure), but it's also important that those who aren't particularly talented can live comfortably, because that's most people. No one wants to live in a society like pre-revolution France where a few people live in luxury and the rest are peasants, even if the rich people made themselves rich rather than inheriting wealth.
I doubt any country would inflict Greece-level austerity on itself, but that doesn't mean a lesser level is good either.
REF: “I doubt any country would inflict Greece-level austerity on itself, but that doesn't mean a lesser level is good either”:
Aug 29th, 2017 - 10:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The “Brazilian Problem” can not be solved by ANY degree of austerity. Already, MANY Brazilians are unwillingly accepting some level of self-imposed austerity. The main problem is the LIMITLESS spending AND stealing:
https://www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/passofundo-2.jpg
@DT
Aug 30th, 2017 - 04:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0Agree, no country takes IMF loans unless desperate…but, does anyone stop to think why the situation became desperate, in the first place ? taking loans is usually the last resort after screwing things up, and on their own, solve nothing - except perhaps to cover up the mess for a while longer. It’s a kind of contradictory, in that those who take the loans, are exactly those that shouldn’t - countries with a screwed-up economy, low productivity and high inflation. It’s like bank loans to individuals…if you are flush, the bank is all over you, but if you don’t have penny to your name, try getting a loan… In Brazil’s case, and probably most others, the countries are loath to tighten their belts, and it’s common to see them use the money for the wrong things. Dollar-pegged loans, especially to countries like Argentina, and Brazil, are disastrous - productivity rarely increases sufficiently to compensate the weak currency, making it difficult to pay off anything other than the interest....as happened with Brazil, which over the years, ended up paying more in interest than the principal.
The death toll in Brazil did not exceed 400, which for 21 years of military “dictatorship”, is not particularly expressive…nothing to do with it, but just for comparison’s sake, since 1995 (just over 21 years), 3000 police officers have been killed in Rio, 101 in the first 7 months of this year (80 % while off-duty). .that’s why I maintain that during the military years, my life was largely unaffected, as was that of 99.9 % of the population. Street crime, which would affect the population, was far lower than today. Anyway, the sole objective of the one-sided “Truth-commission”, created by the PT, was to extract huge sums of money (billions) from the State, to “indemnify” the survivors of the guerrilla warfare (and/or their families), who were all founding members of the PT, and it’s no secret that a lot of it ended up in the PT coffers.
@JB
Aug 30th, 2017 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Countries usually end up taking IMF loans when they can no longer pay the interest on their existing debt. And yeah, getting more loans rarely helps. The control the IMF insists on is supposed to ensure countries can pay them back, but often it just makes things worse. When the loan interest gets too high it doesn't matter how much the government saves elsewhere, the economy simply collapses under the weight. Probably what is needed is some kind of bandruptcy laws for countries, so they can clear the bad debt and start again. Maybe they wouldn't be able to borrow afterwards, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
And yeah, dollar pegged loans are a bad idea, but it's obvious why lenders prefer them, and governments have to take what they can get, or do without. It does make you wonder what will happen, can national debts keep rising indefinitely?
The Junta in Argentina managed to kill over 20 times as many people in just 9 years, so yeah, they were much worse. Has anyone been killed by the Brazilian government since democracy was restored? And have the guerrillas resumed their attacks now they are not being violently repressed?
I guess street crime is a different problem, but it does affect more people, and it's hard to solve. Did it get better when the country was growing and is it worse now it's in recession?
@DT
Aug 30th, 2017 - 06:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lending in weak currencies offers no protection, but it's exactly that protection that screws the taker, trying to pay off loans with weak currency.
Best avoid reaching that point....which excludes populism, and investments that don't give satisfactory returns. I don't see national debts being reduced, unless something occurs in a country, that generates huge, unexpected revenue, say from the discovery of extensive oil reserves, close to the surface...but today, even oil isn't doing any miracles.
Since 1985, the government, as a political body, has not been accused of killing anyone, but that does not mean that hundreds of thousands haven't died because of the government...the lack of good public health, the lack of security and a shitty infrastructure, is responsible for many more deaths than those during the military regimes. The ex-guerrillas who all migrated to the PT and the communist party, are outspoken as usual, believing they identify with the population's interests... but they'd be surprised to learn how high their rejection is. Lula, who just returned from his northeast tour, openly campaigning for president, despite anticipated campaigning being illegal, is sobering up after realizing it was a complete fiasco. Very poor turnouts, and usually by the same crowd, following him around in buses and being paid to wave the red flag. Officially he insists he'll be a candidate in 2018, but unofficial leaks from within the PT, show a Lula resigned to the fact he'll probably be convicted and jailed before then, and that he is preparing his next puppet - Haddad. Some political analysts believe his official stance is to strengthen himself, in that after being convicted he could bargain to step down provided he's not imprisoned...“No way José !”...totally unacceptable ; If convicted, the only place for him is prison.
The economy has probably contributed to more (violent) street crime, but it's been on the rise, steadily, for years now...
For countries, lending in their own currency means they can always print money to pay off the loans, at the cost of causing massive inflation. Of course that is why lenders don't like to do this. And yes, reaching that point is best avoided, but all you need is one incompetent or corrupt government to send things spiralling downhill, and how rare are those in developing countries? For some, debt forgiveness may be the only way out because they just can't develop the economy under the burden of such high interest payments.
Aug 31st, 2017 - 08:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's a good point that the government's actions can result in deaths, even if they are not killing people directly (and my government has been killing people a lot more recently than 1985, though mostly not British citizens.) All those things cost money though. No doubt some could be saved by ending the corruption, but where would you get the rest?
How come Lula doesn't get in trouble for early campaigning if it's illegal? But it does seem like he is making alternative plans in case he can't stand. I think it would be better for the party to choose someone on their own, rather than follow Lula's recommendation, but I guess that's not going to happen.
I found a video of Lula's tour; all his fans wanted to take selfies and he just looked tired. He's the same age as Trump apparently, which is pretty old to be president, although Temer is even older. Do you want to see Temer in jail too, once he has finished his term? I'm guessing Temer would rather keep Lula out of jail if he thinks it'll help him do the same, and the other politicians would agree.
@DT
Sep 01st, 2017 - 05:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1“they can always print money to pay off the loans...” ...presumably you mean those who take the loans ; a good point, as neither will the lender want to be paid in a devalued currency.
The lack of government actions that harm people or cause their deaths, is seen all over Brazil....the poorer the county the worse things (usually) are....the mayors receive either State and/or Federal funds, let's say to build a much needed and “lobbied-for” hospital, and what happens 90% of the time, is either contruction is started but not finished, allegations being shortage of funds (I wonder why ?), so the skeleton of the building is abandoned, left to rot / or is completed, but there is no equipment, so it's never opened, left to rot / or never built, and the money disappears...and no one is held responsible...that is changing very slowly, but we've only scratched the surface of the corruption responsible. In these poorer counties, people seriouly ill, or badly injured, many times are left lying in the corridors..for hours, for days, .and when they die due to lack of attention, everyone tries to shift the blame to someone else...this even happens in big centres, such as SP (less) and Rio (more).
Why Lula is not punished for anticipated campaigning, I don't know, but the TSE is not doing it's job. Rumours of his stepping down just before the candidates have to register (believe end-July next year) are getting stronger...I think he does not want to embarasss himself, and will invent some excuse when the time comes, such as health reasons etc..
He no longer attracts the crowds he used to....and although he is loath to admit it, knows he is unlikely to win the election.
Once Temer has pushed all the reforms through Congress, if proven guilty I'd like to see him pay for his crimes...gotta break the tradition that the political elite is above the law. Well, in the unlikely case of Lula being convicted but not sent to prison, I think this would favour Temer.
“presumably you mean those who take the loans”
Sep 02nd, 2017 - 11:32 am - Link - Report abuse -1Exactly, and that's why lenders prefer to give loans in dollars, or will charge lower interest for them - which is only a bargain for the borrower if their currency does not devalue too much.
It's a shitty situation that hospitals are not being built, or used as they should be, and shows how much damage corruption does beyond just the money stolen, as the rest is then effectively wasted. In this case, it might be better for the government to pay for people to be treated at private hospitals, although I suppose they would just find another way to defraud the taxpayer in that case. The local government sounds like it is even more corrupt than the national one, is that the case?
If Lula being let off would favour Temer, that makes it more likely to happen. We'll have to wait and see what happens once Temer's term ends. It would be nice to see that no one is above the law, but the most important thing is to cut down corruption in the future. Laws requiring more transparency might help, and fewer big government-funded projects, but that goes against your desire to see more spending on infrastructure.
@DT
Sep 02nd, 2017 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse +1It is not uncommon for bills presented by some private hospitals/clinics that have agreements with the government, to be inflated - to cover pay offs. There are over 5,500 counties in Brazil, 90% being small and virtually unheard of by most....with a few exceptions, and these exceptions not necessarily including the larger counties, the mayors are usually of low moral calibre, using the public administration as if it were their family business. It's obvious they think that since they are relatively invisible, their stealing will go unnoticed. But (I presume) encouraged by the “lavajato”, and the need for money, the federal police have been investigating and uncovering hundreds of frauds perpetrated by these small-time criminals, which in the past were ignored.
Considering that Lula's current conviction will probably be reconfirmed by the TRF4 before next year's election, and that Temer will most likely manage to dodge prosecution until he leaves office, the timing will not be in Lula's favour.
Provided the funds actually end up in infrastructure projects and not in someone's bank account, of course I'm in favour of government spending.....one of the problems today, is the fact that the government currently has dozens of State-run companies, most producing large deficits - like Eletrobras, an accumulated total of R$ 228 billion in the last 15 years - so privatization is the way to go...only when national security is involved, then so should the government. While most of Congress has come to realize that money is being wasted, there are politicians, mainly the ultra-left ones, who are against privatization as it means the end of the political use of these companies, reducing corruption. The crisis has forced many to realize that the government cannot afford to keep on funding bad investments (bad, when administered by the government, and good while in the hands of the private sector.)
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!