MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, June 19th 2019 - 03:30 UTC



Petrobras raises gasoline and diesel prices, but markets say it’s insufficient

Thursday, January 31st 2013 - 07:52 UTC
Full article 24 comments

Brazil's state-run oil company Petrobras said in a market filing that it would increase refinery prices for gasoline and diesel by 6.6% and 5.4%, respectively, starting on January 31. However the market’s reaction was negative with the Bovespa stock exchange falling to a seven-week low. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • ChrisR

    Done half the job: typical of Brasil when you look at financial ineptitude.

    There is a saying around the Potteries in the Stoke-on-Trent area of the UK among the business community about the local people:

    “Why pay a pound to do the job properly when 50 pence will f**k it up nicely”. And it is so true.

    Jan 31st, 2013 - 08:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia Thank you for informing us that there is a location in the UK actually called Stoke-on-Trent. Who knew? And, more importantly, who cares?

    Feb 01st, 2013 - 03:10 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    2 Hepatia

    I see you have missed the point AGAIN because of you embittered attitude.

    You really should seek medical help to overcome this nasty side that you have.

    Feb 01st, 2013 - 11:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • yankeeboy

    It is so dangerous for a country to use one of it's companies as a slush fund for social programs. They should be able to operate without gov't interference and under market rules.
    Chavez has destroyed PDVSA it may never recover. I would hate to see PetroBras destroyed too.

    Feb 01st, 2013 - 12:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia So, there was a point to your post? What can it possibly be?

    Can it be that the wisdom of the zenophobic peasants of Stoke-on-Trent is greater than that of management of Petrobras or of the democratically elected and properly constituted government of Brazil? Or is it that you believe that the current year is 1850, not 2013?

    The point that I took from your post is that a citizen of a country which colluded in the events that brought us the recent Great Recession should not dispense advice to anybody.

    Feb 04th, 2013 - 03:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    5 Hepatia

    Argentina brought the 'great depression' on itself by the actions of your stupid government.

    Every ten years you manage to destroy yourselves and you thing it was the Brits!

    Always the victims.

    Feb 04th, 2013 - 06:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia Now you are being obtuse, probably on purpose because you did not have any better reply.

    Argentina? The subject of the article and your comments is Brazil. Argentina has nothing to do with Argentina.

    The Great Recession side swiped countries such as Argentina and Brazil but crashed headlong into the US and the EU. In fact it hit so hard that there is a distinct possibility that the EU may not continue as a political union in the form that it presently exists.

    This is why countries such as Brazil should not, and will not, be accepting advice from any European peasants.

    Feb 05th, 2013 - 12:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @7 Hepatia

    Now I understand!

    You have NEVER been to Europe or Britain have you?

    Come on, answer truthfully without your usual prejudice contaminating your judgement.

    So you have not firsthand experience of what you are twittering on about, have you?

    Feb 05th, 2013 - 05:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia I have been to Europe very many times over the years, including a number of visits to the UK. I would venture that, due to the nature of my businesses , I have been to many places in the UK and Europe that you have not been.

    There was a time, many years ago, when it was unlawful to take more than a very small amount of currency (from memory it was about #100) upon exiting the UK. This was in the days that the UK was under the auspices of the IMF. At that time I had to operate a system for employees travelling to the UK on business where they could deposit their excess cash with me in the UK and I would pay them back in NYC, or some other place as needed. As a result I was constantly in the position of having to dispose of English #s.

    I can confirm to you that the UK is easily the dullest country in Europe.

    Feb 06th, 2013 - 12:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    9 Hepatia

    I doubt the claim of being to more places than me, but let’s ignore your petulant claim for now.

    Yes, there were currency restrictions to comply with the IMF conditions as a result of the usual Labour fuck up of the economy, much like TMBOA is doing now to AR.

    I personally can't argue with your final sentence.

    Feb 06th, 2013 - 12:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia I did not say that I had been to more places in the UK and Europe than you. I said, “I have been to many places in the UK and Europe that you have not been.” There is a difference.

    It is often claimed that the UK is a democracy. If this claim is at all true then the Labor administration was executing the will of the people of the UK prior to and during the IMF control of the UK.

    I assume that “TMBOA” is an acronym representing the president of Argentina. If so then there is nothing more pathetic than a failed imperialist scorned. You should keep in mind that the UK will be paying reparations to Argentina as it has done in the past to another American nation. You should show some respect!

    Feb 06th, 2013 - 05:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    11 Hepatia

    Labour get in for one simple reason: the scum who do not work, shag all day and produce further scum rely on them to keep the free money flowing.

    “You should keep in mind that the UK will be paying reparations to Argentina as it has done in the past to another American nation”. I think you will find that because AR invaded the Falklands (there are STILL no Malvinas you twat) it was only Mrs Thatcher listening to Reagan 'not to totally humiliate the argies' that she did not claim the GBP£6 Bn that the episode cost the UK.

    “You should show some respect!” Countries, like people, have to EARN respect. Your despotic government has failed miserably to show any respect to the people of the Falklands, so you reap what you sow.

    The Mad Bitch Of Argentina (TMBOA) suits your mad, Botoxed, Harridan, reported by the US State Department to dress like a prostitute, to a tee, don't you think?

    Feb 06th, 2013 - 07:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia When you talk of, “the scum who do not work, shag all day and produce further scum”, are you refering to the majority of UK voters? What a charming view you have of the UK.

    The UK will continue to claim that Las Malvinas does not exist right up to the time that it returns them to Argentina and pays reparations to that country.

    The government of Argentina is not my government. Neither am I British. However, it appears, you are. Given your position I think it wise that you show some respect to the officials of the government of Argentina - it is in your own self interest.

    Whether you think President Kirchner dresses like a prostitute or not depends on your taste in whores. Presumably you like your prostitutes to be well dressed.

    In any case the physical attributes of a county's president is not a basis for any country to invade the territory of the other.

    Feb 07th, 2013 - 01:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    13 Hepatia

    The scum are the people who took to Labours bribe for the dead-heads in UK society: they pay them more money than they can earn.

    They are so ill-fitted for work that anything involving reading is out for them.

    You know, like the 45% of argies who have to live in the slums of BsAs and Mendoza.

    Feb 07th, 2013 - 11:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia As I said above, the UK claims to be a democracy. So, presumably, for a Labor administration to exist, and since the voters that vote the Labor ticket are scum, it can only be that the plurality of UK voters are scum.

    Now returning to my original point I would say that any nation that has “scum” a plurality of its voters is in not position to offer advice (economic or otherwise) to anybody. Wouldn't you agree.

    Feb 07th, 2013 - 12:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    15 Hepatia

    There are about 15% that fallunder the 'no work, stay on the dole' label who I consider to be scum.

    AR has 45%. You tell me, but it looks like it's AR won that accolade.

    Feb 07th, 2013 - 04:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia I don't know where you are getting your figures from. (Possibly they are your invention.) In any case you do not explain how a minority of 15% is able to produce a majority administration in a democracy.

    Why you keep bringing up Argentina in the context of this article escapes me. I have only mentioned that country in relation to your lack of respect to the president of Argentina and the future payment of reparations by the UK to Argentina. Is it possible that you knowledge of the world is so poor that you are unable to speak of any other foreign country (e.g. in this case Brazil) with any sense of confidence?

    Feb 07th, 2013 - 09:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    17 Hepatia

    I am a little tired of trying to educate so I will say this and see if you can understand for yourself why 15% is a big number.

    Britain is a first past the post wins the election.

    15% translates to 30%. HOW?

    Bet you cannot answer that correctly.

    Feb 08th, 2013 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia If you election system is such that it doubles the “scuminess” (is that an English word - yes I think it is in your case) of your country then I suggest that you concentrate on repairing it and not wasting time giving inane to countries you know nothing about.

    Feb 08th, 2013 - 03:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    19 Hepatia

    There is nothing wrong with our electoral process.

    I cannot help it if you do not understand one of the basic arithmetical concepts regarding 'straight-run' elections.

    This really does show you up for what you are: a complete troll. You have failed to answer ANY of my questions except with another of your own or changed the topic.

    Now it is my time to close down and not allow you to earn money off me from the despotic La Camping it up and the Coke Head Maximo.

    Feb 08th, 2013 - 06:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia Given that you have previously stated that, “Labour get in for one simple reason: the scum who do not work, shag all day and produce further scum rely on them to keep the free money flowing.”, it would appear that the UK most definitely have a problem of democracy. In a democracy it is necessary for an administration to be in office as a result of, in the best case, a majority of the voters' votes or, in the worse case, a plurality of the voters' votes. Are you now claiming that at the time the plurality was 15%. If not you have, in effect, argued that the UK is not a democracy - a conclusion with which I would agree for this and other reasons.

    Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    21 Hepatia

    Just answer the question: HOW does 15% translate to 30% in a straight first past the post election?

    This is not a trick question and is the same for all nations who run first past the post wins.

    The trouble is you are uneducated in basic arithmetic and therefore unable to grasp the nuances of any such election.

    This is YOUR problem, not mine. Answer the question!

    Feb 09th, 2013 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Hepatia You have managed to miss the point. Competent countries do not allow 15% of the votes to translate to 30%. If they do they cannot call themselves democracies.

    You state that in the UK 15% of the votes translate to 30% and, so, the choice of the “scum” predominates. This is an intolerable situation for a competent democracy. And the citizens of such a country should be spending all their time towards changing that situation in their country. They certainly should not waste time offering inane advice to other countries.

    Your task is clear. You need to get off your lard ass English butt and get a move on!

    Feb 09th, 2013 - 03:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    23 Hepatia

    OK, as you have failed miserably to answer the question I will explain it to you in the manner of explaining to a child who has never hears of a first past the post election and only has basic arithmetic.

    Now I realise, given the fiasco that you have got yourself into that this might be over your head but here goes.

    1) first past the post means that if there are two candidates the one with 50.5% (A) wins over the one with 49.5% (B). Have you begun to see what comes next?

    2) at the next election the loser realises that 15% of the opponents vote can be bribed. So they promise the CHAV’s (Council Housed And Violent) that they will be paid to stay at home and have children who will get child allowance, their rent will be paid and of course on their income they will not be paying taxes: they also get free travel in their city / region. BUT only this candidate will do all this and to DO IT means they need to vote for him / her.

    3) the election result is (A) now gets 35% and (B) gets 65% totalling 100%.

    4) to win back his post (A) now needs GUESS WHAT? 30%!

    You really must be a complete and utter idiot not to be able to work this out for yourself. NEVER post me again, I detest MORONS who are making a living being paid by La Camping-It-Up by trolling.

    Feb 09th, 2013 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!