A mais prestigiosa revista de pesquisa científica do mundo, a inglesa Nature, publica duas matérias -- uma avaliação de conjuntura e uma entrevista com o ministro da área -- sobre os avanços da pesquisa científica no Brasil.
HIGH HOPES FOR BRAZILIAN SCIENCE
Anna Petherick
Nature, Vol 465, June 2010
As President Lula prepares to leave office, researchers expect that innovation will invigorate the economy.
It is rare that a head of state ends a second term with approval ratings of around 80%. But when Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva took to the stage last month at a science-policy conference, his popularity was clear: more than 3,000 scientists, administrators and industrialists stood to applaud him and to cheer his science minister of five years, Sérgio Rezende.
With a government convinced that science is an essential part of a growing economy, Brazilian researchers have never known better times, and the 4th National Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation in Brasilia on 26–28 May was brimming with optimism for an even sunnier future. At the conference, Lula signed a series of bills that will help to sustain his legacy of science investment after he and Rezende leave office on 1 January 2011. The bills, IF enacted by the National Congress, will increase funding for postdocs and establish three new biodiversity research centres, with the overall goal being to further reduce the country’s brain drain and perhaps even reverse it.
The conference will deliver a consensus statement from Brazil’s top scientific brass on where its research programme should focus over the next decade. The document is likely to be influential, says Luiz Davidovich, a director of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and a physicist at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. “The conference is the first time that those at the heart of science, and those tangentially involved, have all been brought together — and at a point when things are really taking off,” adds Carlos Henrique de Brito Cruz, the scientific director of FAPESP, São Paulo’s state research foundation. The consensus statement, due to be published in two months’ time, will be sent to all of the presidential candidates.
One prominent suggestion expected to be in the statement is the fostering of centres of excellence. “We need to look after our Pelés as well as build more football pitches,” says de Brito Cruz. “The current focus of funding is on new centres, but there is no specific programme to fund research stars.” Another proposal is to provide more incentives for multinational companies to conduct research and development in Brazil.
These policies would build on a well-funded foundation. The Brazilian Ministry of Science and Technology says that after Lula took Office in 2003, total public and commercial funding for science and technology soared from 21.4 billion reais (US$11.4 billion) to 43.1 billion reais in 2008 (or from 1.26% to 1.43% of Brazil’s growing gross domestic product; GDP) – due in part to Lula, and to policies implemented by former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso.
Publications by Brazilians in peer-reviewed science journals have leapt from 14,237 in 2003 to 30,415 in 2008, according to data analysts Thomson Reuters. This is impressive not only in the context of Latin America but also compared with Russia, India and China, for example. In 2000, Brazil generated 43% of Latin America’s peer-reviewed publications. Scientific output has since improved across the region, but in 2008, Brazilian publications made up 55% of the total. Brazil has particular strengths in agricultural science; for example, in 2000, a consortium based in São Paulo became the first in the world to sequence the genome of a plant pathogen, the bacterium Xylella fastidiosa, which destroys citrus crops.
Brazil spends significantly more per researcher than China or Russia, according to its science ministry. “I believe we have reached a point where the sector will grow organically,” says Rezende. “So the next person in charge will not have to do much.
“ Science is also doing well at the level of individual states, which provide a significant source of public funding, although efforts to boost science are patchy. Many states are looking to emulate wealthy São Paulo, which has the strongest scientific tradition. “There is an article from 1947 in the constitution of the state of São Paulo,” explains de Brito Cruz. “It says that 1% of all revenues of the state go towards research. No other science-funding agency in possibly the whole world has that kind of financial security and autonomy [from the federal government].”
The benefits of having significant funding separate from federal sources were felt most keenly in the 1990s, when Brazil’s government struggled with economic stresses such as hyperinflation. Science funding dried up elsewhere in the country, but researchers in São Paulo experienced much less disruption.
Recently, other states have copied this legislation. In addition, São Paulo’s three large state universities receive 9.57% of the state’s income from its lucrative sales tax, giving them a unique boost.
But even in São Paulo, the growth in published research has not been matched by growth in patented research, which is crucial if science is to invigorate the economy and provide a better quality of life for Brazil’s 193 million inhabitants. Most scientists at the May conference agreed that solving this problem is probably the biggest challenge facing Brazilian science.
Early in its tenure, Lula’s administration made it legal for the government to fund research by private companies, and afforded tax breaks to firms that invest in innovation. But the number of patented inventions coming out of Brazil has risen only slightly since these measures were passed. “The problem is that company directors have the option of putting money in the hands of their heads of finance to generate a return in the financial markets, or in those of their head of research and development, which is risky and expensive,” says Eduardo Viotti of Columbia University in New York, who advises the Brazilian senate on science policy. “In the past, at least, it has seemed less risky to them to bet on the financial markets.”
Commercial research and development is being boosted by the discovery in 2007 of large oil deposits off the coast of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. When oil does start flowing, Lula has promised that a proportion of the riches will be siphoned towards science. The exact percentage is still being debated, but it will be set before Lula and Rezende leave office.
The chances are good that scientists will get much of what they ask for on their consensus wishlist, even after Lula’s departure. The frontrunners in October’s presidential election are José Serra, a former governor of science friendly São Paulo, and Lula’s former chief of staff Dilma Rousseff, who is backed by Lula and is expected to continue his policies. These may include his plan to raise science spending to 2% of GDP by 2020.
INTERVIEW: EXCITING TIMES FOR BRAZILIAN SCIENCE
Fonte: Interview by Fabio Pulizzi, Nature Materials, VOL 69, July 2010
Sergio Machado Rezende has served for 5 years as the Minister for Science and Technology of Brazil. Nature Materials has asked him about the past and future of science in his country.
How did you become interested in physics?
When I attended my first physics course in high school I was immediately fascinated by the rigorous formulation of classical mechanics and its ability to describe common phenomena through simple equations. Solving physics problems was really enjoyable for me. However, in the 1950s fundamental science did not really offer career opportunities in Brazil, so I decided to study engineering instead. After graduating in electronic engineering in Rio de Janeiro I went to MIT in the USA for my PhD. It was during this period that my interests shifted back towards the more fundamental, rather than applications-based aspects of the materials used in electronics, and gradually I became a materials physicist.
What made you decide to become active in politics as well as in science?
It was not really a deliberate decision, rather the consequence of my involvement with administration and policy making during my scientific career. After my PhD I went back to Rio, where I was appointed associate professor of physics at the Catholic University. In the early 1970s I moved to Recife, capital of the state of Pernambuco in the northeast of Brazil. I was in fact sent there on a mission of the National Research Council to establish a physics department that would be active in research at the Pernambuco Federal University. As I was the first faculty member in physics with a PhD degree, it was natural for me to become head of department. I was young and I learned to carry out administrative activities in parallel to research. In the 1980s I became dean of the Centre for Exact Sciences and in the early 1990s I was invited to become scientific director of the newly created Pernambuco Science Foundation, the first state agency to support science and technology in the northeast region. I managed to do the job in those positions while still remaining active in teaching and research. In 1995 I was invited to be the State Secretary for Science and Technology by Miguel Arraes, the elected state governor, even if I had no previous involvement with politics, and in four years I gained considerable experience in policy making and running science and technology programmes.
In your view, how has science in Brazil evolved in past decades?
Over the second half of the last century, Brazil built up a complex system of science and technology that today ranks thirteenth in the world in terms of scientific publications, according to the Thomson Reuters database, ahead of countries such as Holland and Russia. There are more than 100,000 active researchers in Brazil today, and we have a considerable number of scientists and engineers doing scientific and technological research of international standing. Among the best known examples of success in Brazilian research are the biofuels programme; oil drilling and production in deep waters by Petrobras; and agribusiness, where high productivity levels were made possible by work conducted by Embrapa, the federal organization for research in livestock and agriculture.
What about the time in which you have been science minister?
We need to keep in mind that building such a complex system and keeping it working required a huge effort. The scientific community lacked experience and there was no innovation culture; there were no steady science and technology policies, or substantial investments and, last but not least, there was almost no connection between research and industry. There were very difficult moments in which shortage of funds was such as to withhold fellowship payments for Brazilian students abroad. Fortunately, because of the firm priority given by President Lula’s government to science, technology and innovation in the past decade the situation has improved dramatically.
In what way? Have investments increased?
Definitely. In 2000, expenses for science and technology were of the order of R$15.2 billion (R$ is the Brazilian unit of currency, the real), equating to 1.3% of Brazil’s gross domestic product (GDP) (at present US$1.00 = R$1.80). In 2008, investment surpassed R$43 billion, reaching 1.43% of GDP. These figures include the federal public sector, funding from single states and from public and private companies. The overall public-sector participation is 55%, versus 45% from companies. An important part of this funding is the National Fund for Scientific and Technological development (FNDCT), which nowadays is a prominent part of the budget of the Ministry of Science and Technology. It was first established in 1970, but for a long time it suffered from chronic shortage of funds. However, in 1999 the previous government created the so-called sectoral funds, which are based on taxation of specific sectors of economic activity. These sectors include the exploitation of natural resources, oil and specific industrial products, and they include fees on licenses for the acquisition of foreign technology. Such sectoral funds are now an integral part of the FNDCT, and have made possible its consistent growth. To give you an idea, the FNDCT disbursed R$350 million in 2002; in 2010 the amount will reach R$3.1 billion.
Which areas of research will develop more as a result these investments?
So far Brazilian scientists have mainly contributed to extending the frontiers of fundamental knowledge and I believe this process will intensify further. Researchers are becoming more experienced, young people are being exposed to science of higher quality and the infrastructure for research is improving. And in applied science and engineering there will be an effort in all the areas that represent a priority at the international level. To list a few: biotechnology and nanotechnology; information and communication technologies; health; energy; agribusiness; biodiversity and natural resources; Amazonian and semi-arid regions; meteorology and climate change; space and nuclear research.
Have research institutes of excellence in these areas been created?
Partly. Three years ago the government launched a programme for the National Institutes for Science and Technology with a call for US$330 million to provide established centres of excellence with the means to strengthen their resources. But we have also created new institutions. One of them is the National Center for Science and Technology of Bioethanol, in Campinas, in the state of São Paulo, with the aim of improving technology for producing ethanol from cellulose. We also created a new centre for microelectronics, the National Center for Advanced Electronics Technology, in Porto Alegre, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, and the Center for Earth Studies at the National Institute for Space Research in the state of São Paulo, for studies in global climate change. We extended a few centres that are under the direct responsibility of the Ministry of Science and Technology, for example the National Institute for Amazonian studies. But aside from creating new institutes and expanded existing ones, the real effort was to improve the general infrastructure for research, increase the number of researchers and provide them with appropriate conditions to produce good results. Part of this has been raising the salaries of scientists working in universities and in the research centres of the Ministry of Science and Technology.
Brazilian researchers used to go abroad to gain expertise. Is this changing now?
It has already changed. It is important to clarify that only in the 1950s, with the establishment of federal agencies to support science, the National Research Council and the Commission for the Improvement of Faculty Personnel, did Brazil begin to lay the foundations for a scientific community. This was done mainly by granting fellowships for graduate studies abroad, primarily in the USA and Europe. The first MSc degree was created in Rio de Janeiro only in 1963, and it took several years to set up MSc and PhD programmes throughout the country. It is only natural therefore that the first generations of Brazilian scientists studied abroad. Nowadays, universities and research institutions are well equipped, there are excellent graduate programmes in many universities and the funding agencies offer fewer fellowships for graduate studies abroad. On the other hand, research experience in other countries is still considered very formative and graduates can easily obtain support for post-doctoral programmes abroad. The government also stimulates participation of young scientists working in ‘big science’, which requires huge investments and facilities to engage in international collaborations. For instance, we support participation in the research programmes of large American and European laboratories such as Fermilab and CERN for studying elementary particle physics, and large astronomical observatories such as the Southern Observatory for Astronomical Research, and Gemini in Chile.
Is there an effort to raise the number of undergraduate students in science?
Absolutely. The government launched a few programmes to stimulate the interest of science in schools. A classic example was the establishment in 2005 of the mathematics olympics for state schools only. Previously, only about 200,000 pupils per year would take part in such events, and they were mainly from private schools. State-school pupils did not feel confident enough so the government decided to create a state-schools-only competition. Ten million pupils participated in the first year and the number rose to 19 million in 2009. Programmes of this type stimulate interest in mathematics, and the best pupils can obtain fellowships and can keep studying the subject at a higher level. Of course increasing interest in mathematics contributes to stimulating interest in science and engineering as well.
You mentioned climate change: how will Brazilian science contribute in this area?
We should bear in mind that climate change is not just a scientific but also a political issue, with global economic, social and environmental consequences. Brazil has made its position on this matter internationally known, as well as its successful endeavours at reducing emissions and strengthening its scientific research capacity in this field. At the recent conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Brazil announced a voluntary commitment to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 37% relative to the ‘business-as-usual values’ in 2020. All this keeping in mind that Brazil is a relatively low-carbon-level society. Brazilian industry has had a record of low greenhouse gas emissions, and there is still room to maintain or even enhance this trend by increasing the use of renewable sources. According to data from the 2008 National Energy Balance, such participation is 45%, which means a clean energy matrix in comparison with the rest of the world average, which is 13%. An important part of this contribution is played by biofuels in transport. With the invention of flex-fuel cars, made by laboratories in Brazil, the use of ethanol from sugar cane has been increasing steadily and has matched that of gasoline. One of the largest contributions to greenhouse gas emissions in the past has been deforestation, but impressive efforts have also been made at reducing such emissions — they fell by about 45% in 2009 compared with 2008. I am convinced that Brazil is on the right track, and it will contribute decisively to global endeavours to mitigate climate change. Regarding the scientific work in this area, we have established a large network of laboratories and research groups involved in all aspects of climate change science, such as climate modelling, emissions from land use and agriculture practices, biodiversity and natural resources, among others. This network is led by some of the most experienced scientists in Brazil, who have participated in international boards, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and have strong international collaboration.
You are obviously a very busy person. Are you still an active researcher as well?
I am in the sense that I keep thinking about physics; I follow the literature; try to give suggestions to colleagues and students; and I do some calculations, eventually publishing a few papers. But to be considered an active researcher at my age and with my experience I should be involved in many more topics of research that I am able to. I probably devote 10% of my energy and time to research, and this includes weekends, when I am most productive. It is not that much, but it allows me to keep in touch with the developments in the area that I am most involved, which is magnetic phenomena in nanostructured materials.
Will you remain active in politics, maybe still as a minister in the future?
I will definitely not stay a minister, regardless of who will be elected president next year. By 31 December 2010, I will have been heavily involved in science policy for 8 years as president of the Financing Agency for Studies and Projects for 2.5 years and as a minister afterwards. I think this is enough and I feel rewarded by the results achieved. I also have started to feel uncomfortable about spending most of the time away from home and family. Finally, I believe that a renewal of concepts, ideas and practices will be mostly beneficial for our scientific and technological system, to keep it healthy and make it progress further.
quinta-feira, 17 de junho de 2010
Os "sabios" do Banco Mundial e o Growth Report
Apenas indicação, por enquanto, depois de ler faço a crítica (ou uma apresentação bonita, se for o caso, embora desconfie desses tecnocratas de organismos multilaterais).
The Growth Report and New Structural Economics
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5336
JUSTIN Y. LIN, Peking University - China Center for Economic Research
CELESTIN MONGA, World Bank - Research Department
Despite its heavy human, financial, and economic cost, the recent global recession provides a unique opportunity to reflect on the knowledge from several decades of growth research, draw policy lessons from the experience of successful countries, and explore new approaches going forward. In an increasingly globalized world where fighting poverty is not only a moral responsibility but also a strategy for confronting some of the major problems (diseases, malnutrition, insecurity and violence) that ignore boundaries and contribute to global insecurity, thinking about new ways of generating and sustaining growth is a crucial task for economists. This paper reassesses the evolution of knowledge on growth and suggests a new structural approach to the analysis. It offers a brief, critical review of lessons learned from growth research and examines the remaining challenges -- especially from the policy standpoint. It highlights how the 2008 Growth Commission Report identifies the stylized facts associated with sustained and inclusive growth. And it explains how the new structural economics provides a consistent framework for understanding the key findings of the Report.
link to the study
The Growth Report and New Structural Economics
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5336
JUSTIN Y. LIN, Peking University - China Center for Economic Research
CELESTIN MONGA, World Bank - Research Department
Despite its heavy human, financial, and economic cost, the recent global recession provides a unique opportunity to reflect on the knowledge from several decades of growth research, draw policy lessons from the experience of successful countries, and explore new approaches going forward. In an increasingly globalized world where fighting poverty is not only a moral responsibility but also a strategy for confronting some of the major problems (diseases, malnutrition, insecurity and violence) that ignore boundaries and contribute to global insecurity, thinking about new ways of generating and sustaining growth is a crucial task for economists. This paper reassesses the evolution of knowledge on growth and suggests a new structural approach to the analysis. It offers a brief, critical review of lessons learned from growth research and examines the remaining challenges -- especially from the policy standpoint. It highlights how the 2008 Growth Commission Report identifies the stylized facts associated with sustained and inclusive growth. And it explains how the new structural economics provides a consistent framework for understanding the key findings of the Report.
link to the study
Franceses irresponsaveis: querem continuar gastando e trabalhando pouco
Os franceses, como é seu hábito semanal (ou a cada vez que o governo fala em reformas), fizeram greve contra o projeto do governo de elevar a idade mínima da aposentadoria de 60 anos a 62 em 2018 (!!!!). Claro, os que fizeram greve são em geral funcionários públicos, como também aconteceria no Brasil se a medida (mais do que necessária) fosse votada.
É inacreditável. Os franceses (mas os brasileiros também entram na mesma irracionalidade) estão fazendo greve contra si mesmos, não contra o governo. Eles protestam, de maneira particularmente estúpida, contra a aritmética e contra a demografia, dois fenômenos que passam longe da capacidade do governo de exercer qualquer influência.
A demografia diz que cada vez haverá mais velhos inativos, e menos jovens ativos, para sustentar os pagamentos das pensões e aposentadorias.
A aritmética diz que, nessas circunstâncias, ou você aumenta o volume de contribuições ou você diminui as prestações, pois as contas simplesmente não fecham.
Como as pessoas estão vivendo cada vez mais, e melhor -- inclusive causando novos gastos, terríveis de suportar, sobre os sistemas públicos de saúde -- a lógica diria que, sim, as pessoas têm de trabalhar mais e contribuir mais tempo, se quiserem desfrutar de aposentadorias e pensões razoáveis.
A menos, claro, que do alto de sua irresponsabilidade, elas queiram deixar a conta para seus filhos e netos, e quebrar o sistema antes do tempo.
Não entendo como pessoas racionais podem lutar contra a demografia e a aritmética.
A menos que elas não sejam racionais, claro.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
France's public finances
How buoyant is France?
The Economist, June 17th, 2010
The French government is slowly starting to tackle the country’s economic problems. But austerity remains a dirty word
Paris - ONE by one, euro-zone governments have been confecting austerity plans in a bid to reassure jumpy bond markets. After Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy, last week even creditworthy Germany unveiled a savings plan. Britain, although not in the euro zone, is braced for fiscal tightening in an emergency budget on June 22nd. The only big European economy yet to spell out an austerity plan is France—a country badly in need of one.
The government thinks it has a scheme to get the public finances under control. On June 16th it unveiled its long-awaited pension reform, which will raise the legal retirement age from 60 to 62 by 2018. Since this will meet less than half the €45 billion ($55 billion) state pension-fund shortfall by 2020, next year the top rate of income tax will be raised from 40% to 41%, and taxes on financial transactions will increase. By 2020 civil servants’ pension contributions will increase from 8.1% of pay to 10.5%.
The plan sends a reasonably serious message about France’s long-run resolve, although it will be resisted. Martine Aubry, the opposition Socialist leader, herself nearly 60, vowed to reverse the retirement-age rise if elected. The unions have called for protests on June 24th. In budgetary terms, however, the short-run impact of the measures will be limited. Even in the long run the reform will leave France with a younger retirement age than Greece.
The French have made other noises about spending cuts. Just days after Germany’s Angela Merkel announced her austerity plan, worth €80 billion by 2014, François Fillon, France’s prime minister, appeared to trump it by announcing €100 billion of savings by 2013. Yet there was nothing new here: he was merely quoting the saving needed to meet France’s promise, under euro-zone rules, to curb its deficit from 8% of GDP this year to 3% by 2013.
Moreover, Mr Fillon claimed cheerily that economic growth would do half the repair work. That leaves €50 billion to be found in cuts. He hopes to squeeze €5 billion by trimming tax exemptions, and says he will freeze the 2011 budget in real terms. Small savings will come from an old plan to replace only one in two retiring civil servants, and he says he will stop ministers claiming a salary and pension at the same time. But the rest is unspecified. “France for the moment stands out as the only country that has not spelled out how it will reduce its deficit,” notes Laurence Boone, an economist at Barclays Capital in Paris.
Why? A generous explanation is that France is doubtful about the wisdom of premature fiscal tightening. Before Mrs Merkel produced her cuts, Christine Lagarde, the finance minister, had accused Germany of not doing enough to stimulate demand. Another minister says an austerity plan would risk “killing off growth”. Mr Fillon himself has said that France is “far from an austerity plan”.
A more plausible reason is that the government is too nervous to tell voters about the need for deep spending cuts, let alone implement them two years before a presidential election. The French word for austerity, rigueur, remains taboo on both left and right. It is linked in the public mind to the painful austerity drive introduced by President François Mitterrand in 1983, after his “rupture with capitalism” had sunk the currency and built up a crushing deficit.
Politicians are haunted too by the fate of Alain Juppé, a prime minister on the right, who tried to reform France’s welfare and pensions in 1995. Strikes paralysed the country for weeks; Mr Juppé backed down and his government was booted out at the next election. With over 5m people, or nearly one in five of the labour force, working for the state, any squeeze on public-sector pay or benefits can draw crowds on to the streets. Although Nicolas Sarkozy was elected on a promise to shake things up, the recession has tempered his liberalising zeal. Pension reform aside, he appears more focused on keeping a lid on social discontent ahead of 2012.
The trouble is that economic reality demands tough measures. “We are closer to Greece than to Germany,” says Nicolas Baverez, a commentator who has long warned the government about its public finances. France’s budget deficit this year is forecast at 8% of GDP, next to 9% in Greece (see chart), and its deficit-cutting plans rely on optimistic growth forecasts. Its public debt, at 84%, is worryingly high. Moreover, Mr Sarkozy has a tendency to spend his way out of trouble. The French government spends 56% of GDP, more than any other euro-zone country. As the national auditor pointed out recently, a quarter of the increase in the deficit in 2009 was unrelated to the recession.
For the time being, the credit agencies continue to give French sovereign debt a top rating, enabling it to borrow cheaply. France has a big, diversified economy, and worries about debt in the euro-zone periphery have drawn investors to the perceived haven of French bonds. Yet the spread over German bonds has widened recently, and in February Moody’s, a rating agency, warned that in the absence of consolidation, rising debt could threaten France’s AAA rating. François Baroin, the budget minister, admitted that the objective of preserving France’s rating was tendu, which means “tight” or “stretched” (although he later insisted he intended it to mean “constant” or “unbending”).
The real difficulty is credibility. Mr Sarkozy says he wants to write a rule into the constitution to commit governments to reducing the deficit, something Germany has done. But this could take time, and it is unclear how binding it would be. The harsh truth is that no French government has balanced its budget since the early 1970s. As Jacques Delpla, an economist on the Council of Economic Analysis, points out, French governments have lived beyond their means even during the years of plenty—a failure he calls “scandalous”.
É inacreditável. Os franceses (mas os brasileiros também entram na mesma irracionalidade) estão fazendo greve contra si mesmos, não contra o governo. Eles protestam, de maneira particularmente estúpida, contra a aritmética e contra a demografia, dois fenômenos que passam longe da capacidade do governo de exercer qualquer influência.
A demografia diz que cada vez haverá mais velhos inativos, e menos jovens ativos, para sustentar os pagamentos das pensões e aposentadorias.
A aritmética diz que, nessas circunstâncias, ou você aumenta o volume de contribuições ou você diminui as prestações, pois as contas simplesmente não fecham.
Como as pessoas estão vivendo cada vez mais, e melhor -- inclusive causando novos gastos, terríveis de suportar, sobre os sistemas públicos de saúde -- a lógica diria que, sim, as pessoas têm de trabalhar mais e contribuir mais tempo, se quiserem desfrutar de aposentadorias e pensões razoáveis.
A menos, claro, que do alto de sua irresponsabilidade, elas queiram deixar a conta para seus filhos e netos, e quebrar o sistema antes do tempo.
Não entendo como pessoas racionais podem lutar contra a demografia e a aritmética.
A menos que elas não sejam racionais, claro.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
France's public finances
How buoyant is France?
The Economist, June 17th, 2010
The French government is slowly starting to tackle the country’s economic problems. But austerity remains a dirty word
Paris - ONE by one, euro-zone governments have been confecting austerity plans in a bid to reassure jumpy bond markets. After Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy, last week even creditworthy Germany unveiled a savings plan. Britain, although not in the euro zone, is braced for fiscal tightening in an emergency budget on June 22nd. The only big European economy yet to spell out an austerity plan is France—a country badly in need of one.
The government thinks it has a scheme to get the public finances under control. On June 16th it unveiled its long-awaited pension reform, which will raise the legal retirement age from 60 to 62 by 2018. Since this will meet less than half the €45 billion ($55 billion) state pension-fund shortfall by 2020, next year the top rate of income tax will be raised from 40% to 41%, and taxes on financial transactions will increase. By 2020 civil servants’ pension contributions will increase from 8.1% of pay to 10.5%.
The plan sends a reasonably serious message about France’s long-run resolve, although it will be resisted. Martine Aubry, the opposition Socialist leader, herself nearly 60, vowed to reverse the retirement-age rise if elected. The unions have called for protests on June 24th. In budgetary terms, however, the short-run impact of the measures will be limited. Even in the long run the reform will leave France with a younger retirement age than Greece.
The French have made other noises about spending cuts. Just days after Germany’s Angela Merkel announced her austerity plan, worth €80 billion by 2014, François Fillon, France’s prime minister, appeared to trump it by announcing €100 billion of savings by 2013. Yet there was nothing new here: he was merely quoting the saving needed to meet France’s promise, under euro-zone rules, to curb its deficit from 8% of GDP this year to 3% by 2013.
Moreover, Mr Fillon claimed cheerily that economic growth would do half the repair work. That leaves €50 billion to be found in cuts. He hopes to squeeze €5 billion by trimming tax exemptions, and says he will freeze the 2011 budget in real terms. Small savings will come from an old plan to replace only one in two retiring civil servants, and he says he will stop ministers claiming a salary and pension at the same time. But the rest is unspecified. “France for the moment stands out as the only country that has not spelled out how it will reduce its deficit,” notes Laurence Boone, an economist at Barclays Capital in Paris.
Why? A generous explanation is that France is doubtful about the wisdom of premature fiscal tightening. Before Mrs Merkel produced her cuts, Christine Lagarde, the finance minister, had accused Germany of not doing enough to stimulate demand. Another minister says an austerity plan would risk “killing off growth”. Mr Fillon himself has said that France is “far from an austerity plan”.
A more plausible reason is that the government is too nervous to tell voters about the need for deep spending cuts, let alone implement them two years before a presidential election. The French word for austerity, rigueur, remains taboo on both left and right. It is linked in the public mind to the painful austerity drive introduced by President François Mitterrand in 1983, after his “rupture with capitalism” had sunk the currency and built up a crushing deficit.
Politicians are haunted too by the fate of Alain Juppé, a prime minister on the right, who tried to reform France’s welfare and pensions in 1995. Strikes paralysed the country for weeks; Mr Juppé backed down and his government was booted out at the next election. With over 5m people, or nearly one in five of the labour force, working for the state, any squeeze on public-sector pay or benefits can draw crowds on to the streets. Although Nicolas Sarkozy was elected on a promise to shake things up, the recession has tempered his liberalising zeal. Pension reform aside, he appears more focused on keeping a lid on social discontent ahead of 2012.
The trouble is that economic reality demands tough measures. “We are closer to Greece than to Germany,” says Nicolas Baverez, a commentator who has long warned the government about its public finances. France’s budget deficit this year is forecast at 8% of GDP, next to 9% in Greece (see chart), and its deficit-cutting plans rely on optimistic growth forecasts. Its public debt, at 84%, is worryingly high. Moreover, Mr Sarkozy has a tendency to spend his way out of trouble. The French government spends 56% of GDP, more than any other euro-zone country. As the national auditor pointed out recently, a quarter of the increase in the deficit in 2009 was unrelated to the recession.
For the time being, the credit agencies continue to give French sovereign debt a top rating, enabling it to borrow cheaply. France has a big, diversified economy, and worries about debt in the euro-zone periphery have drawn investors to the perceived haven of French bonds. Yet the spread over German bonds has widened recently, and in February Moody’s, a rating agency, warned that in the absence of consolidation, rising debt could threaten France’s AAA rating. François Baroin, the budget minister, admitted that the objective of preserving France’s rating was tendu, which means “tight” or “stretched” (although he later insisted he intended it to mean “constant” or “unbending”).
The real difficulty is credibility. Mr Sarkozy says he wants to write a rule into the constitution to commit governments to reducing the deficit, something Germany has done. But this could take time, and it is unclear how binding it would be. The harsh truth is that no French government has balanced its budget since the early 1970s. As Jacques Delpla, an economist on the Council of Economic Analysis, points out, French governments have lived beyond their means even during the years of plenty—a failure he calls “scandalous”.
Brasil: inacreditavel desvio das financas publicas
O chamado Fundo Soberano do Brasil -- que não é bem fundo, sequer soberano -- representa uma forma especialmente deformada de contornar controles parlamentares e a boa administração das finanças públicas para capitalizar, sem passar pelo Congresso, uma empresa pública como o Banco do Brasil.
O Fundo Soberano do Brasil não foi constituído, como os outros exemplos do gênero, com superávits fiscais ou saldos excedentários de transações correntes -- duas coisas que o Brasil não tem -- mas com recursos orçamentários, num terrível desvio de uma administração correta das contas públicas, já que esse dinheiro transferido para o FSB passa a ser administrado exclusivamente pelo Executivo sem qualquer controle parlamentar.
Teoricamente destinado a operar no plano internacional, o FSB está sendo utilizado para prover de capital uma empresa pública, que poderia estar se abastecendo no mercado de capitais, ou se submeter aos controles parlamentares para o provimento de recursos.
Mais um exemplo de deterioração na qualidade das contas públicas no país.
Mas esse tipo de desvio de funções da boa administração das contas públicas e uso indevido de recursos da sociedade brasileira não existe apenas na configuração do Fundo Soberano -- uma piada de mau gosto -- mas sobretudo nas capitalizações que o Tesouro vem fazendo indevidamente e não contabilizando como dívida pública o que de fato é dívida pública.
O mesmo desvio ocorre, por exemplo, na recente lei que redefiniu o regime de exploração do petróleo do pré-sal, com um esquema malandro de capitalização da Petrobras (de fato, um financiamento antecipado pelo governo, e uma entrega futura, e aleatória, de petróleo ainda não extraído). O que de fato existe é que a sociedade brasileira está financiando a Petrobras, quando ela poderia, na verdade, usar o dinheiro do Tesouro para investimentos e ou despesas tipicamente estatais (saúde e educação, por ex.), quando a Petrobras ou empresas privadas que poderiam estar tranquilamente fazendo os investimentos necessários no regime anterior - teriam a faculdade de se abastecer no mercado de crédito privado (onde a Petrobras, aliás, já teve melhor rating do que o Brasil).
Esse tipo de absuso com o dinheiro público, para fins puramente demagógicos, é uma marca desse governo.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Brazil Sovereign Wealth Fund To Buy Banco Do Brasil Shares
Dow Jones, 17.06.2010
SAO PAULO - The Brazilian sovereign wealth fund will buy 66.5 million shares to be offered by state-run Banco do Brasil SA (BDORY, BBAS3.BR), Latin America's biggest bank by assets, through bank's primary and secondary offering of shares on the Sao Paulo Stock Exchange, BMFBovespa.
Banco do Brasil said, in a statement late Wednesday, that Brazil's sovereign wealth fund, Fundo Soberano do Brasil, will acquire its shares via a special fund known as FFIE.
Earlier this month, Banco do Brasil said it will offer a total of 356.85 million shares, with 286 million shares through a primary offering and 70.8 million shares via a
secondary offer.
The operation could raise about 9.77 billion reais ($5.46 billion) based on Banco do Brasil's closing price of BRL27.39 on Wednesday.
Investors can reserve shares from June 21 through June 29. Trading is expected to begin July 2.
With the acquisition of shares to be made by the sovereign wealth fund, the federal government will keep its control on Banco do Brasil.
Brazil created the sovereign wealth fund in late 2007 with the aim of reinforcing public sector savings and funding projects of strategic interest abroad.
O Fundo Soberano do Brasil não foi constituído, como os outros exemplos do gênero, com superávits fiscais ou saldos excedentários de transações correntes -- duas coisas que o Brasil não tem -- mas com recursos orçamentários, num terrível desvio de uma administração correta das contas públicas, já que esse dinheiro transferido para o FSB passa a ser administrado exclusivamente pelo Executivo sem qualquer controle parlamentar.
Teoricamente destinado a operar no plano internacional, o FSB está sendo utilizado para prover de capital uma empresa pública, que poderia estar se abastecendo no mercado de capitais, ou se submeter aos controles parlamentares para o provimento de recursos.
Mais um exemplo de deterioração na qualidade das contas públicas no país.
Mas esse tipo de desvio de funções da boa administração das contas públicas e uso indevido de recursos da sociedade brasileira não existe apenas na configuração do Fundo Soberano -- uma piada de mau gosto -- mas sobretudo nas capitalizações que o Tesouro vem fazendo indevidamente e não contabilizando como dívida pública o que de fato é dívida pública.
O mesmo desvio ocorre, por exemplo, na recente lei que redefiniu o regime de exploração do petróleo do pré-sal, com um esquema malandro de capitalização da Petrobras (de fato, um financiamento antecipado pelo governo, e uma entrega futura, e aleatória, de petróleo ainda não extraído). O que de fato existe é que a sociedade brasileira está financiando a Petrobras, quando ela poderia, na verdade, usar o dinheiro do Tesouro para investimentos e ou despesas tipicamente estatais (saúde e educação, por ex.), quando a Petrobras ou empresas privadas que poderiam estar tranquilamente fazendo os investimentos necessários no regime anterior - teriam a faculdade de se abastecer no mercado de crédito privado (onde a Petrobras, aliás, já teve melhor rating do que o Brasil).
Esse tipo de absuso com o dinheiro público, para fins puramente demagógicos, é uma marca desse governo.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Brazil Sovereign Wealth Fund To Buy Banco Do Brasil Shares
Dow Jones, 17.06.2010
SAO PAULO - The Brazilian sovereign wealth fund will buy 66.5 million shares to be offered by state-run Banco do Brasil SA (BDORY, BBAS3.BR), Latin America's biggest bank by assets, through bank's primary and secondary offering of shares on the Sao Paulo Stock Exchange, BMFBovespa.
Banco do Brasil said, in a statement late Wednesday, that Brazil's sovereign wealth fund, Fundo Soberano do Brasil, will acquire its shares via a special fund known as FFIE.
Earlier this month, Banco do Brasil said it will offer a total of 356.85 million shares, with 286 million shares through a primary offering and 70.8 million shares via a
secondary offer.
The operation could raise about 9.77 billion reais ($5.46 billion) based on Banco do Brasil's closing price of BRL27.39 on Wednesday.
Investors can reserve shares from June 21 through June 29. Trading is expected to begin July 2.
With the acquisition of shares to be made by the sovereign wealth fund, the federal government will keep its control on Banco do Brasil.
Brazil created the sovereign wealth fund in late 2007 with the aim of reinforcing public sector savings and funding projects of strategic interest abroad.
Nouriel Roubini, o economista que previu a crise financeira
Apenas a título de informação sobre um dos economistas mais famosos da atualidade
Nouriel Roubini, el economista que predijo el crack financiero
Gillian Tett
El Cronista.com, Mon, 14 June 2010
Nació en Turquía y vive en Estados Unidos. Fue uno de los pocos intelectuales que pronosticó el colapso bancario. Antes fue criticado por alarmista cuando lo llamaban Dr Funesto. Hoy es uno de los gurús más prestigiosos y toda una celebridad hollywoodense.
El hotel Soho Grand de la neoyorquina Tribeca parece un set de filmación. Dominan la espaciosa recepción las columnas de concreto, las esculturas de metal y amplios sofás de cuero, que la gente elegante, de belleza inalcanzable decora con su presencia.
No parece ser el lugar para encontrarse a desayunar con un académico en Economía. Pero Nouriel Roubini no es el intelectual promedio. Hasta que comenzó la crisis financiera hace tres años Roubini se había dedicado a analizar la economía y a escribir obras como “Ciclos políticos yMacroeconomía” (1997) o “La nueva arquitectura financiera internacional” (coedición, 2005). También dio una serie de discursos referidos a la fragilidad del mundo de los bancos que fue tan agria que le valió el mote de Dr Doom (el Dr. Funesto).
Pero en 2007 se produjo un cambio inesperado. La crisis financiera estalló y, casi de la noche a la mañana, el mundo se dio cuenta de que él era uno de los pocos economistas que había anticipado un colapso bancario de tal magnitud. En la actualidad los líderes del mundo se sujetan de sus palabras, los periodistas van en tropel a sus discursos para enterarse de los últimos anticipos y los clientes pagan sumas altísimas a cambio de los análisis de su consultora Roubini Global Economics.
Su influencia fue más allá del mundo de los negocios y llegó hasta Hollywood. Aparece, representándose a sí mismo, en “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps”, el próximo filme de Oliver Stone, que continúa la parábola de mercados enloquecidos de la década de los años ochenta, y también en “Inside Job”, un documental narrado por Matt Damon que se estrenará próximamente. Es algo así como un intelectual para enmarcar: su página de Facebook tiene muchas fotos de Roubini en fiestas llenas de estrellas, en general, acompañado de un grupo de mujeres de gran hermosura y juventud. Les encanta la belleza de mi mente... Soy feísimo, pero mi cerebro las atrae‘, le dijo a una sección de chismes el año pasado.
Pocos minutos antes de las ocho, el intelectual devenido en ídolo, de cincuenta y un años, llega a la recepción, vestido con un par de jeans de color negro y una camisa amarillo pálido con el cuello sin abotonar. Combina perfectamente con la decoración del hotel. La única nota disonante son sus zapatos de cuero marrón: sorprende cuán maltrechos están. ¿Es demasiado inteligente para preocuparse por la trivialidad de lustrarlos? O sencillamente, ¿confía demasiado en sí mismo como para que le importe? De cualquier modo, le da a este famoso economista un aire artístico un tanto raro.
Empiezo con: “¿Cómo se siente ser una celebridad?”. Él masculla: “La celebridad tan sólo es palabrería. La gente habla como si yo hubiera salido de la nada, como si todos estos años hubiera trabajado por cuenta en alguna oficina perdida antes de, repentinamente, volverme famoso. Pero eso no es cierto para nada. ¡Hace veinte años que trabajo de economista!”
Con indignación, repasa los detalles de su ejercicio profesional. Es inusitado. Nació en Estambul en 1959, de padres iraníes que profesaban la fe judía. Los primeros años de su vida los pasó en Irán; luego se mudaron a Italia, donde fue a la escuela y a la universidad. Más adelante, se mudó a los Estados Unidos y en Harvard se doctoró en Economía. Luego dio clases en Yale y en Nueva York. Roubini habla italiano, hebreo y persa, pero dice que sintió que en verdad había llegado a los Estados Unidos: “hace aproximadamente quince años, cuando comencé a soñar en inglés”. En este período también realizó trabajos para el Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI), la Reserva Federal, el Banco Mundial, el Consejo de Asesores Económicos de la Casa Blanca y el Departamento del Tesoro, antes de poner en marcha su propia consultora.
Difícilmente ese sea el currículum de un don nadie. Pero en el otoño de 2006, mientras la economía mundial y los mercados de crédito estaban en auge, Roubini aún estaba lejos de ser un nombre reconocido cuando le advirtió al FMI: “es probable que los Estados Unidos enfrenten, por única vez, el estallido de la burbuja inmobiliaria, la conmoción en la industria del petróleo, la abrupta caída en la confianza del consumidor y, finalmente, una profunda recesión”, además, que “los propietarios no cumplan los pagos de las hipotecas, y que billones de dólares en títulos garantizados con hipotecas fallen en todo el mundo y el sistema financiero global se detenga repentinamente”. Era una apuesta muy audaz; tanto, que muchos líderes y economistas creyeron que Roubini estaba un poco loco.
En realidad, cuando Roubini fue el Foro Económico Mundial que se reunió en Davos, en enero de 2007, e hizo estos anuncios, no se le prestó atención a sus advertencias. Lo conocí en este resort montañés de aire enrarecido, y recuerdo muy bien nuestro encuentro. Durante los meses anteriores, yo también había empezado a escribir sobre los peligros de las finanzas complejas (si bien de un modo mucho menos elocuente e impresionante que el de Roubini), y esos artículos desencadenaron las críticas de algunas de los luminares reunidos en Davos, que me tacharon de ser “alarmista”. Pese a que no nos habíamos conocido -y habíamos hablado poco desde que lo hicimos-, Roubini defendió vigorosamente mis artículos en un soleado almuerzo muy concurrido que se ofreció en un hotel suizo. Le expresé mi agradecimiento; los agoreros eran muy pocos en ese entonces.
Riendo, Roubini señala: “Lo recuerdo”. Luego evoca, no sin enojo, el artículo que Michael Lewis, autor del ensayo “Liar’s Poker” (1989) y de “The Big Short” (2009), que escribió en esa reunión de Davos, en la que se llamó debiluchos y sosos a los agoreros como Roubini. “Sorprende el modo como algunas personas cambiaron su forma de pensar”, afirma y añade con mordacidad, “Ahora todos son generales después de la batalla”.
Con el profesor de historia económica Stephen Mihm, Roubini es coautor de un libro que trata el colapso bancario, “Crisis Economics”, que aspira a responder a la pregunta de ¿por qué el mundo perdió el control en 2007? y sugiere qué es lo que puede hacerse para subsanarlo. A primera vista, parece dedicarse a la misma temática que los libros originados en el aprieto económico, que en la actualidad los economistas producen en serie. Sin embargo, lo que distingue a esta obra es que Roubini puede afirmar que entendió lo que sucedía antes de que sobreviniera el desastre, a diferencia de casi cualquier otro economista, con la excepción de William White y Claudio Borio del Banco de Pagos Internacionales (BPI). Le pregunto qué fue lo que le dio certeza de que estaba en lo correcto. Me explica: “Después de diez años de analizar los mercados emergentes, sé que Uds. tienen patrones que se repiten una y otra vez. Una burbuja es como el fuego, que precisa oxígeno para seguir ardiendo... cuando ya no hay oxígeno, las cosas cambian”. Más concretamente, en el verano de 2006, Roubini ya veía que el mercado inmobiliario había alcanzado su pico. Eso lo convenció de que el sistema estaba a punto de colapsar, porque había mucha deuda hipotecaria.
Siguió dando advertencias desde el colapso financiero. A principios de 2009, sostuvo que la crisis bancaria podría no haber llegado a su fin. También insinuó que había una probabilidad del 20% de una W (nueva caída en la recesión), a causa de que el crecimiento estadounidense sería muy débil. De hecho, la economía de los EE.UU. se recuperó más rápidamente que lo esperado y también subió el valor de las acciones de los bancos. Por todo ello, algunos rivales se regodean en decir que lo que Roubini tuvo en su mensaje de 2006 fue, simplemente, suerte. Pese a ello, Roubini replica con rapidez que aún es demasiado pronto para concluir que la economía mundial camina hacia la recuperación. Y al menos un mensaje de los que envió últimamente estuvo en lo cierto: durante el año pasado, advirtió repetidas veces sobre los peligros de acechar la deuda soberana. En especial, cree que las dificultades que hay en Grecia son reflejo del problema mayor que enfrenta el mundo occidental, pues parece que los gobiernos no tienen la voluntad de tratar de resolver la deuda gubernamental creciente.
“En la actualidad, lo que en verdad me preocupa sobre los EE.UU. es que tienen estancamiento político”, afirma Roubini y sostiene que esto evita que el gobierno tome las decisiones arduas que se necesitan. “El Reino Unido tiene el mismo problema. No hay una voluntad real de recortar gastos o aumentar los impuestos”. En consecuencia, “habrá tentación de seguir monetizando el déficit fiscal”, lo que finalmente produce inflación.
Para detener esos riesgos, Roubini quiere que los líderes cooperen con la línea de los partidos y que dejen atrás las antiguas etiquetas ideológicas de la “derecha” y la “izquierda”. “Crecí en la Italia de la década de los años sesenta y setenta, y fue un período de mucha agitación social, en la que hasta los adolescentes más jóvenes estaban en política. En ese momento, era un más de centroizquierda”, afirma. En la actualidad, es de centro por lo que respecta a las cuestiones económicas, pues cree que los gobiernos precisan gastar durante una crisis, de modo de respaldar el sistema, lo que está de acuerdo con el pensamiento económico keynesiano; sin embargo, cree que, cuando la crisis llega a su fin, deben cambiar por los enfoques de libremercado, y así refleja los principios de la denominada Escuela Austríaca de Economía. “Hay una gran discusión entre la escuela keynesiana y la austríaca. Pero soy pragmático y ecléctico. Se trata del momento oportuno”.
Entonces, en su opinión, la gente, ¿donde debería invertir en este momento? ¿Qué es lo que él hace? Evasivo, responde: “Jamás compré siquiera una acción, un bono o divisa. Tengo mi 401k (plan de ahorro y aporte jubilatorio) en un fondo de tipo pasivo, que tiene el 100% de inversiones en acciones, la mitad de Estados Unidos y la otra mitad de otras partes. El resto de los ingresos que percibí en los últimos años está en dinero. En algún momento, volveré a los activos que involucren un riesgo mayor, mas no ahora”. Insinúo que esta cautela parece propia del Dr. Doom. No está de acuerdo. “Como apodo, Dr. Doom era lindo y me gustó durante un tiempo, pero en lo que ahora insisto es que soy el Dr. Realist (Dr. Realista)”.
En otras palabras, Roubini ahora quiere que se lo conozca como el sabio que puede dar consejos provechosos y prácticos, en vez del que es capaz de anticipar el desastre. Ciertamente, el día que nos conocimos él había escrito un artículo para el FT, en el que acuciaba a Europa a permitir que Grecia reestructurase su deuda. Y recién regresó de Washington, donde se entrevistó con un grupo de ministros de finanzas y banqueros centrales de Occidente. “Lo que me importa es que, cuando escribo algo, la gente me escuche. Les doy mi sabiduría, con independencia de que coincidan con ella o no”.
Mientras le agrega cucharadas de yogur a la granola, voy directo al grano. ¿Cómo es posible que esta elevada “sabiduría” económica conviva con la fama que recientemente descubrió y lo catapultó a las noticias de chismes? Suspira: “La fama se volvió una carga; el horario es más exigido. La gente cree que viajar en avión a distintos lugares es glamoroso. Pero no lo es, pues aun cuando uno viaje en clase business y se hospede en hoteles fantásticos, uno está a 10.000 millas de su hogar”. Admite que está de viaje casi las tres cuartas partes de cada año; no sorprende saber que su nueva obra se escribió, en su mayor parte, a bordo de un avión.
Nouriel Roubini, el economista que predijo el crack financiero
Gillian Tett
El Cronista.com, Mon, 14 June 2010
Nació en Turquía y vive en Estados Unidos. Fue uno de los pocos intelectuales que pronosticó el colapso bancario. Antes fue criticado por alarmista cuando lo llamaban Dr Funesto. Hoy es uno de los gurús más prestigiosos y toda una celebridad hollywoodense.
El hotel Soho Grand de la neoyorquina Tribeca parece un set de filmación. Dominan la espaciosa recepción las columnas de concreto, las esculturas de metal y amplios sofás de cuero, que la gente elegante, de belleza inalcanzable decora con su presencia.
No parece ser el lugar para encontrarse a desayunar con un académico en Economía. Pero Nouriel Roubini no es el intelectual promedio. Hasta que comenzó la crisis financiera hace tres años Roubini se había dedicado a analizar la economía y a escribir obras como “Ciclos políticos yMacroeconomía” (1997) o “La nueva arquitectura financiera internacional” (coedición, 2005). También dio una serie de discursos referidos a la fragilidad del mundo de los bancos que fue tan agria que le valió el mote de Dr Doom (el Dr. Funesto).
Pero en 2007 se produjo un cambio inesperado. La crisis financiera estalló y, casi de la noche a la mañana, el mundo se dio cuenta de que él era uno de los pocos economistas que había anticipado un colapso bancario de tal magnitud. En la actualidad los líderes del mundo se sujetan de sus palabras, los periodistas van en tropel a sus discursos para enterarse de los últimos anticipos y los clientes pagan sumas altísimas a cambio de los análisis de su consultora Roubini Global Economics.
Su influencia fue más allá del mundo de los negocios y llegó hasta Hollywood. Aparece, representándose a sí mismo, en “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps”, el próximo filme de Oliver Stone, que continúa la parábola de mercados enloquecidos de la década de los años ochenta, y también en “Inside Job”, un documental narrado por Matt Damon que se estrenará próximamente. Es algo así como un intelectual para enmarcar: su página de Facebook tiene muchas fotos de Roubini en fiestas llenas de estrellas, en general, acompañado de un grupo de mujeres de gran hermosura y juventud. Les encanta la belleza de mi mente... Soy feísimo, pero mi cerebro las atrae‘, le dijo a una sección de chismes el año pasado.
Pocos minutos antes de las ocho, el intelectual devenido en ídolo, de cincuenta y un años, llega a la recepción, vestido con un par de jeans de color negro y una camisa amarillo pálido con el cuello sin abotonar. Combina perfectamente con la decoración del hotel. La única nota disonante son sus zapatos de cuero marrón: sorprende cuán maltrechos están. ¿Es demasiado inteligente para preocuparse por la trivialidad de lustrarlos? O sencillamente, ¿confía demasiado en sí mismo como para que le importe? De cualquier modo, le da a este famoso economista un aire artístico un tanto raro.
Empiezo con: “¿Cómo se siente ser una celebridad?”. Él masculla: “La celebridad tan sólo es palabrería. La gente habla como si yo hubiera salido de la nada, como si todos estos años hubiera trabajado por cuenta en alguna oficina perdida antes de, repentinamente, volverme famoso. Pero eso no es cierto para nada. ¡Hace veinte años que trabajo de economista!”
Con indignación, repasa los detalles de su ejercicio profesional. Es inusitado. Nació en Estambul en 1959, de padres iraníes que profesaban la fe judía. Los primeros años de su vida los pasó en Irán; luego se mudaron a Italia, donde fue a la escuela y a la universidad. Más adelante, se mudó a los Estados Unidos y en Harvard se doctoró en Economía. Luego dio clases en Yale y en Nueva York. Roubini habla italiano, hebreo y persa, pero dice que sintió que en verdad había llegado a los Estados Unidos: “hace aproximadamente quince años, cuando comencé a soñar en inglés”. En este período también realizó trabajos para el Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI), la Reserva Federal, el Banco Mundial, el Consejo de Asesores Económicos de la Casa Blanca y el Departamento del Tesoro, antes de poner en marcha su propia consultora.
Difícilmente ese sea el currículum de un don nadie. Pero en el otoño de 2006, mientras la economía mundial y los mercados de crédito estaban en auge, Roubini aún estaba lejos de ser un nombre reconocido cuando le advirtió al FMI: “es probable que los Estados Unidos enfrenten, por única vez, el estallido de la burbuja inmobiliaria, la conmoción en la industria del petróleo, la abrupta caída en la confianza del consumidor y, finalmente, una profunda recesión”, además, que “los propietarios no cumplan los pagos de las hipotecas, y que billones de dólares en títulos garantizados con hipotecas fallen en todo el mundo y el sistema financiero global se detenga repentinamente”. Era una apuesta muy audaz; tanto, que muchos líderes y economistas creyeron que Roubini estaba un poco loco.
En realidad, cuando Roubini fue el Foro Económico Mundial que se reunió en Davos, en enero de 2007, e hizo estos anuncios, no se le prestó atención a sus advertencias. Lo conocí en este resort montañés de aire enrarecido, y recuerdo muy bien nuestro encuentro. Durante los meses anteriores, yo también había empezado a escribir sobre los peligros de las finanzas complejas (si bien de un modo mucho menos elocuente e impresionante que el de Roubini), y esos artículos desencadenaron las críticas de algunas de los luminares reunidos en Davos, que me tacharon de ser “alarmista”. Pese a que no nos habíamos conocido -y habíamos hablado poco desde que lo hicimos-, Roubini defendió vigorosamente mis artículos en un soleado almuerzo muy concurrido que se ofreció en un hotel suizo. Le expresé mi agradecimiento; los agoreros eran muy pocos en ese entonces.
Riendo, Roubini señala: “Lo recuerdo”. Luego evoca, no sin enojo, el artículo que Michael Lewis, autor del ensayo “Liar’s Poker” (1989) y de “The Big Short” (2009), que escribió en esa reunión de Davos, en la que se llamó debiluchos y sosos a los agoreros como Roubini. “Sorprende el modo como algunas personas cambiaron su forma de pensar”, afirma y añade con mordacidad, “Ahora todos son generales después de la batalla”.
Con el profesor de historia económica Stephen Mihm, Roubini es coautor de un libro que trata el colapso bancario, “Crisis Economics”, que aspira a responder a la pregunta de ¿por qué el mundo perdió el control en 2007? y sugiere qué es lo que puede hacerse para subsanarlo. A primera vista, parece dedicarse a la misma temática que los libros originados en el aprieto económico, que en la actualidad los economistas producen en serie. Sin embargo, lo que distingue a esta obra es que Roubini puede afirmar que entendió lo que sucedía antes de que sobreviniera el desastre, a diferencia de casi cualquier otro economista, con la excepción de William White y Claudio Borio del Banco de Pagos Internacionales (BPI). Le pregunto qué fue lo que le dio certeza de que estaba en lo correcto. Me explica: “Después de diez años de analizar los mercados emergentes, sé que Uds. tienen patrones que se repiten una y otra vez. Una burbuja es como el fuego, que precisa oxígeno para seguir ardiendo... cuando ya no hay oxígeno, las cosas cambian”. Más concretamente, en el verano de 2006, Roubini ya veía que el mercado inmobiliario había alcanzado su pico. Eso lo convenció de que el sistema estaba a punto de colapsar, porque había mucha deuda hipotecaria.
Siguió dando advertencias desde el colapso financiero. A principios de 2009, sostuvo que la crisis bancaria podría no haber llegado a su fin. También insinuó que había una probabilidad del 20% de una W (nueva caída en la recesión), a causa de que el crecimiento estadounidense sería muy débil. De hecho, la economía de los EE.UU. se recuperó más rápidamente que lo esperado y también subió el valor de las acciones de los bancos. Por todo ello, algunos rivales se regodean en decir que lo que Roubini tuvo en su mensaje de 2006 fue, simplemente, suerte. Pese a ello, Roubini replica con rapidez que aún es demasiado pronto para concluir que la economía mundial camina hacia la recuperación. Y al menos un mensaje de los que envió últimamente estuvo en lo cierto: durante el año pasado, advirtió repetidas veces sobre los peligros de acechar la deuda soberana. En especial, cree que las dificultades que hay en Grecia son reflejo del problema mayor que enfrenta el mundo occidental, pues parece que los gobiernos no tienen la voluntad de tratar de resolver la deuda gubernamental creciente.
“En la actualidad, lo que en verdad me preocupa sobre los EE.UU. es que tienen estancamiento político”, afirma Roubini y sostiene que esto evita que el gobierno tome las decisiones arduas que se necesitan. “El Reino Unido tiene el mismo problema. No hay una voluntad real de recortar gastos o aumentar los impuestos”. En consecuencia, “habrá tentación de seguir monetizando el déficit fiscal”, lo que finalmente produce inflación.
Para detener esos riesgos, Roubini quiere que los líderes cooperen con la línea de los partidos y que dejen atrás las antiguas etiquetas ideológicas de la “derecha” y la “izquierda”. “Crecí en la Italia de la década de los años sesenta y setenta, y fue un período de mucha agitación social, en la que hasta los adolescentes más jóvenes estaban en política. En ese momento, era un más de centroizquierda”, afirma. En la actualidad, es de centro por lo que respecta a las cuestiones económicas, pues cree que los gobiernos precisan gastar durante una crisis, de modo de respaldar el sistema, lo que está de acuerdo con el pensamiento económico keynesiano; sin embargo, cree que, cuando la crisis llega a su fin, deben cambiar por los enfoques de libremercado, y así refleja los principios de la denominada Escuela Austríaca de Economía. “Hay una gran discusión entre la escuela keynesiana y la austríaca. Pero soy pragmático y ecléctico. Se trata del momento oportuno”.
Entonces, en su opinión, la gente, ¿donde debería invertir en este momento? ¿Qué es lo que él hace? Evasivo, responde: “Jamás compré siquiera una acción, un bono o divisa. Tengo mi 401k (plan de ahorro y aporte jubilatorio) en un fondo de tipo pasivo, que tiene el 100% de inversiones en acciones, la mitad de Estados Unidos y la otra mitad de otras partes. El resto de los ingresos que percibí en los últimos años está en dinero. En algún momento, volveré a los activos que involucren un riesgo mayor, mas no ahora”. Insinúo que esta cautela parece propia del Dr. Doom. No está de acuerdo. “Como apodo, Dr. Doom era lindo y me gustó durante un tiempo, pero en lo que ahora insisto es que soy el Dr. Realist (Dr. Realista)”.
En otras palabras, Roubini ahora quiere que se lo conozca como el sabio que puede dar consejos provechosos y prácticos, en vez del que es capaz de anticipar el desastre. Ciertamente, el día que nos conocimos él había escrito un artículo para el FT, en el que acuciaba a Europa a permitir que Grecia reestructurase su deuda. Y recién regresó de Washington, donde se entrevistó con un grupo de ministros de finanzas y banqueros centrales de Occidente. “Lo que me importa es que, cuando escribo algo, la gente me escuche. Les doy mi sabiduría, con independencia de que coincidan con ella o no”.
Mientras le agrega cucharadas de yogur a la granola, voy directo al grano. ¿Cómo es posible que esta elevada “sabiduría” económica conviva con la fama que recientemente descubrió y lo catapultó a las noticias de chismes? Suspira: “La fama se volvió una carga; el horario es más exigido. La gente cree que viajar en avión a distintos lugares es glamoroso. Pero no lo es, pues aun cuando uno viaje en clase business y se hospede en hoteles fantásticos, uno está a 10.000 millas de su hogar”. Admite que está de viaje casi las tres cuartas partes de cada año; no sorprende saber que su nueva obra se escribió, en su mayor parte, a bordo de un avión.
Conflito Argentina-Uruguai: desafios para algum candidato a lider regional
Inacreditável que manifestantes privados da Argentina mantenham, com o apoio da presidência desse país (desde a presidência precedente, aliás), um bloqueio perfeitamente ilegal contra o comércio, o turismo, a simples passagem de bens, serviços, pessoas, por uma ponte bilateral, e que depois de um laudo da Corte Internacional de Justiça considerando ilegal esse bloqueio, a situação ainda não esteja resolvida.
O Mercosul há muito tempo deveria ter sido acionado para tratar de um assunto que certamente desafia seus princípios de livre circulação de mercadorias. Países vizinhos, que pretendem exercer liderança regional (e até mundial), já deveriam ter agido para resolver uma situação que claramente compromete as chances de funcionamento normal do Mercosul.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Ponte entre Argentina e Uruguai reabrirá após 3 anos de bloqueio
Reuters, 17.06.2010
BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) - Uma das principais passagens fronteiriças entre Argentina e Uruguai será aberta por 60 dias a partir do próximo sábado depois de mais de três anos de bloqueio, disseram na quarta-feira manifestantes que a fecharam em protesto pela instalação de uma fábrica de celulose na fronteira.
Os manifestantes, reunidos do lado argentino da ponte binacional General San Martín, que cruza o rio Uruguai unindo a província de Entre Rios com o Uruguai, exigem que os governos de ambos os países negociem um sistema de monitoramento conjunto da fábrica, suspeita de contaminar o rio.
"No próximo sábado às 13 horas iniciamos o suspensão por 60 dias, no dia 19", disse um dos porta-vozes dos manifestantes, depois de uma assembleia na qual a maioria dos participantes votou para negociar com o governo.
Na votação, 402 manifestantes apoiaram o levantamento do bloqueio e 315 votaram contra.
"Quero dizer ao mundo que (a fábrica de celulose da) Botnia contamina, não com nossa voz, mas com a tecnologia mais avançada", disse Juan Veronesi, um dos manifestantes.
Há mais de 3 anos, os manifestantes mantêm bloqueada a comunicação terrestre com Uruguai devido à fábrica que segundo eles, contamina o rio Uruguai, limítrofe entre as duas nações. A instalação da fábrica provocou um desacordo bilateral entre as nações vizinhas na qual interveio o Tribunal Internacional de Haia.
A corte internacional determinou em abril que o Uruguai violou artigos de um tratado bilateral sobre o rio, mas permitiu que a fábrica continuasse funcionando por falta de elementos que provassem a contaminação.
O aviso dos manifestantes chega depois que um juiz argentino os ordenou a desistir de sua postura e depois de o governo da presidente Cristina Fernández Kirchner registrar demandas judiciais contra alguns deles, pois o protesto teria causado perdas e dificuldades ao comércio, impedimento também o livre trânsito.
O Mercosul há muito tempo deveria ter sido acionado para tratar de um assunto que certamente desafia seus princípios de livre circulação de mercadorias. Países vizinhos, que pretendem exercer liderança regional (e até mundial), já deveriam ter agido para resolver uma situação que claramente compromete as chances de funcionamento normal do Mercosul.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Ponte entre Argentina e Uruguai reabrirá após 3 anos de bloqueio
Reuters, 17.06.2010
BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) - Uma das principais passagens fronteiriças entre Argentina e Uruguai será aberta por 60 dias a partir do próximo sábado depois de mais de três anos de bloqueio, disseram na quarta-feira manifestantes que a fecharam em protesto pela instalação de uma fábrica de celulose na fronteira.
Os manifestantes, reunidos do lado argentino da ponte binacional General San Martín, que cruza o rio Uruguai unindo a província de Entre Rios com o Uruguai, exigem que os governos de ambos os países negociem um sistema de monitoramento conjunto da fábrica, suspeita de contaminar o rio.
"No próximo sábado às 13 horas iniciamos o suspensão por 60 dias, no dia 19", disse um dos porta-vozes dos manifestantes, depois de uma assembleia na qual a maioria dos participantes votou para negociar com o governo.
Na votação, 402 manifestantes apoiaram o levantamento do bloqueio e 315 votaram contra.
"Quero dizer ao mundo que (a fábrica de celulose da) Botnia contamina, não com nossa voz, mas com a tecnologia mais avançada", disse Juan Veronesi, um dos manifestantes.
Há mais de 3 anos, os manifestantes mantêm bloqueada a comunicação terrestre com Uruguai devido à fábrica que segundo eles, contamina o rio Uruguai, limítrofe entre as duas nações. A instalação da fábrica provocou um desacordo bilateral entre as nações vizinhas na qual interveio o Tribunal Internacional de Haia.
A corte internacional determinou em abril que o Uruguai violou artigos de um tratado bilateral sobre o rio, mas permitiu que a fábrica continuasse funcionando por falta de elementos que provassem a contaminação.
O aviso dos manifestantes chega depois que um juiz argentino os ordenou a desistir de sua postura e depois de o governo da presidente Cristina Fernández Kirchner registrar demandas judiciais contra alguns deles, pois o protesto teria causado perdas e dificuldades ao comércio, impedimento também o livre trânsito.
Parlamento do Mercosul: o Brasil cedeu na questao da proporcionalidade
Ingenuos esses parlamentares brasileiros: começaram cedendo na questão da proporcionalidade (deformada) que aceitaram para o funcionamento do Parlamento do Mercosul (uma instituição, aliás, muito mais decorativa do que verdadeiramente funcional) e agora reclamam que o que tinha sido "acertado" antes não venha sendo cumprido. Pressa e ingenuidade são duas características que parlamentares experimentados não deveriam ter. A menos que eles sejam movidos por ganhos políticos de curto prazo, obviamente. Tudo começou errado...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Secretaria de Relaciones Institucionales y Comunicacion Social
Nota do vicepresidente da delegação brasileira ante o Parlasul
Dr. Rosinha espera que la proporcionalidad sea aprobada aún este semestre
El acuerdo político, aprobado por el Parlamento del MERCOSUR en abril de 2009, que definió la proporcionalidad atenuada, se encuentra en la pauta de discusión del Consejo del Mercado Común (CMC) desde julio de 2009. Al final del año pasado, los Estados Partes casi llegaron a un acuerdo, sin embargo, la Cancillería Argentina solicitó la postergación del tema, para que el mismo sea aprobado en su Presidencia Pro témpore, en este primer semestre de 2010.
El Parlamentario brasileño Dr. Rosinha espera que la proporcionalidad sea aprobada por el CMC en la próxima Cumbre de Presidentes, a realizarse el mes de julio en San Juan, Argentina.
En las últimas reuniones del CMC, la delegación de Argentina viene imponiendo condiciones para aprobar la proporcionalidad atenuada, entre ellas, la reforma del reglamento interno del Parlamento del MERCOSUR, pretendiendo alterar las mayorías requeridas para aprobación de los actos parlamentarios.
Dr. Rosinha destaca que “al final del año pasado, ya estábamos prontos para un acuerdo, cuando la Cancillería Argentina solicitó posponer la aprobación de la proporcionalidad, sin imponer ningún tipo de condición. El reglamento interno es un texto interno del Parlamento y está construido por Parlamentarios.”
El Parlamentario brasileño resalta también que “en ningún Parlamento del mundo, a menos que sea dictadura, el Ejecutivo interviene en las decisiones del Parlamento. La reforma del reglamento interno como la Cancillería Argentina desea, significa aniquilar parte de las competencias del Parlamento del MERCOSUR”.
“No creo que ningún Estado, luego de una seria reflexión, quiera dictar como un Parlamento debe funcionar”, aseguró Dr. Rosinha.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Secretaria de Relaciones Institucionales y Comunicacion Social
Nota do vicepresidente da delegação brasileira ante o Parlasul
Dr. Rosinha espera que la proporcionalidad sea aprobada aún este semestre
El acuerdo político, aprobado por el Parlamento del MERCOSUR en abril de 2009, que definió la proporcionalidad atenuada, se encuentra en la pauta de discusión del Consejo del Mercado Común (CMC) desde julio de 2009. Al final del año pasado, los Estados Partes casi llegaron a un acuerdo, sin embargo, la Cancillería Argentina solicitó la postergación del tema, para que el mismo sea aprobado en su Presidencia Pro témpore, en este primer semestre de 2010.
El Parlamentario brasileño Dr. Rosinha espera que la proporcionalidad sea aprobada por el CMC en la próxima Cumbre de Presidentes, a realizarse el mes de julio en San Juan, Argentina.
En las últimas reuniones del CMC, la delegación de Argentina viene imponiendo condiciones para aprobar la proporcionalidad atenuada, entre ellas, la reforma del reglamento interno del Parlamento del MERCOSUR, pretendiendo alterar las mayorías requeridas para aprobación de los actos parlamentarios.
Dr. Rosinha destaca que “al final del año pasado, ya estábamos prontos para un acuerdo, cuando la Cancillería Argentina solicitó posponer la aprobación de la proporcionalidad, sin imponer ningún tipo de condición. El reglamento interno es un texto interno del Parlamento y está construido por Parlamentarios.”
El Parlamentario brasileño resalta también que “en ningún Parlamento del mundo, a menos que sea dictadura, el Ejecutivo interviene en las decisiones del Parlamento. La reforma del reglamento interno como la Cancillería Argentina desea, significa aniquilar parte de las competencias del Parlamento del MERCOSUR”.
“No creo que ningún Estado, luego de una seria reflexión, quiera dictar como un Parlamento debe funcionar”, aseguró Dr. Rosinha.
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)
Postagem em destaque
Livro Marxismo e Socialismo finalmente disponível - Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Meu mais recente livro – que não tem nada a ver com o governo atual ou com sua diplomacia esquizofrênica, já vou logo avisando – ficou final...
