[machine translation]
A few times I could agree with both Sardenberg (if it was not first), anchor of CBN,
Jornal da Globo columnist, blogger and journalist of the old guard in the inexorable tide
of right turn ever by Paul Francis, among others. The economics commentator of the evening
newspaper leader Dilma suggests to copy the Chinese model of behavior, because according
to himself: ---- "Chinese leaders have a special ability to adopt pro-market rhetoric to
please the left side of this party Turn right, take the left sign -.. Such is the
teaching" ---- Luiz Carlos Trabuco, Bradesco's executive chairman, as well as Henrique
Meirelles, was quoted by the Plateau to topple the government of Finance 2nd Dilma folder.
---- Soon, according to himself, this would be a positive teaching. I agree with the
characterization: China is a paradise for foreign investment space, where the retention
rate of capital worth gigantism of its domestic market. But at the same time can not be
beacon of political behavior for any government concerned with popular sovereignty. To
Sardenberg, Dilma does the opposite, and therefore, errs:
"For it seems that the president is Dilma with the same dilemma, reversed: how to follow
the left, but giving the right signal?"
Again the reference journalist for Millenium Institute hits the characterization,
disagreeing with me just criticism. This analyst (which writes here) stated on several
occasions that Rousseff, Lula's party and the government Lulism as a whole, have been
campaigning for the right to govern left. To do so, would like to have bankers in key
positions, this would be the case with Luiz Trabuco (Bradesco) and Henrique Meirelles
(Bank of Boston). In version Sardenberg, each of which would be a heroic self-made man,
entering the bottom of the hierarchy of these financial giants and end their careers at
the top of the corporate food chain. I can not disagree, these operators Brazilians won
thousands of obstacles to reach the top of their careers.
Is a contradiction. The individual merits of these does not change the nature of banking
in its speculative version and how the suction pump of the economy. There should be no
illusion, if we had not fed the State industrial policy and the consequent direct
employment, there would be no possibility of growth with stable job. Dilma nor reduced the
earnings of the financial market, because after a few successive falls in the notorious
Selic, it was back to climbing, as well as the "right signal" given by the increase soon
after reelection. Not so the "market" calmed down, because according Sardenberg (and he
knows what he speaks, because he writes as being the mirror of his sources), the trust
would truly be signaled if:
"This requires fiscal adjustment, ie, the budget savings, higher primary surplus, spending
contained. This austerity is a condition to hold down inflation. The higher the austerity
of public accounts, the lower the interest rate necessary to bring down inflation."
There goes my profound disagreement with the CBN commentator. Nobody in their right mind
can believe that inflation will be controlled by increasing the benchmark interest rate.
Article by Maria Lucia Fattorelli (Inflation and public debt) published in Le Monde
Diplomatique and reference to the subject demonstrates unequivocally the absurdity of this
argument. The professor at PUC-SP, Ladislaus Dowbor demonstrates the same rich detail.
The problem is that the animal is hungry, and his greed is endless. It seems that
executives ahead of economic groups operating here want to literally control over
collective resources, whether the rules of this indirect and incomplete democracy, where
the third turn affects the outcome of the second, or not respected.
Sardenberg ends by saying that if Trabuco or Meirelles (accept, this analyst does not
believe in these possibilities) would be a varnish before the president's speech on the
basis of their choices and in campaign ads. Unfortunately, we are light years ahead of
this panic, the true scaremongering that goes on (s) right (s) Brazilian. The
recommendation of the economic journalist's interesting, stating that:
"Now, one finance minister from the left, a new Mantega, smarter Mantega, could give the
signs right? Difficult dilemmas lead to paralysis. In the case of President Dilma, it
would just change the minister and keep everything as it is doubling investment in "new
mother", that today, as I said in the campaign. "
Ie Sardenberg bet that Dilma is positioned by the left, indicating that there was a choice
for the "young mother" and this could be materialized with the indication of some linked
to developmentalism economist, as those who signed the manifesto published in the week of
November 9 on the cover of Major Charter. I say that, despite having voted with the
organic discipline ever (in Zumbi and Sepe), I understand that this moment - if it occurs
(in whole or in part) - it would be interesting.
Because then we would have a chance to see the spokesmen of the more cornered right and
ability to mobilize social bases to defend their direct interests. Obvious that such
social bases are hegemonically linked to Lulism, and therefore, far from being reorganized
left. But still, as the governing party has long since ceased any popular position or
class, could be a chance to at least draw the trade union unity so long, at least ten
years to occur. The obviousness of agglutination indicates a heading to the left of the
CUT, amassing forces electoral and non-electoral currents.
Let us hope that the prophecy of Sardenberg be announced. Unfortunately, this analyst does
not believe in this possibility either. Is the current moment on.
