sexta-feira, 6 de agosto de 2010

Hiroshima: a 65 anos da bomba atomica, memoria japonesa é seletiva

A bomba atomica sobre Hiroshima causou 66 mil mortes imediatas e algumas outras milhares depois.
Os japoneses parecem ter uma memória seletiva sobre a guerra. Eles esquecem o sofrimento causado para os povos que eles dominaram, desde antes da II Guerra Mundial Mundial.
Eles esquecem de mencionar, por exemplo, os massacres perpetrados em Nanjing, na invasão da China, entre dezembro de 1937 e fevereiro de 1938, quando eles devem ter trucidado, de maneira bestial, mais de 120 mil chineses, violando mulheres, esquartejando grávidas, cortando bebês ao meio, decapitando homens, simplesmente fuzilando, queimando vivos milhares de chineses.
Eles deveriam introduzir uma data de arrependimento pelos massacres cometidos nos países asiáticos invadidos...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

First Atomic Bomb Dropped on Japan; Missile Is Equal to 20,000 Tons of TNT; Truman Warns Foe of a 'Rain of Ruin'
By SIDNEY SHALETT
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES, August 6, 1945

NEW AGE USHERED Day of Atomic Energy Hailed by President, Revealing Weapon HIROSHIMA IS TARGET 'Impenetrable' Cloud of Dust Hides City After Single Bomb Strikes

Washington, Aug. 6 -- The White House and War Department announced today that an atomic bomb, possessing more power than 20,000 tons of TNT, a destructive force equal to the load of 2,000 B-29's and more than 2,000 times the blast power of what previously was the world's most devastating bomb, had been dropped on Japan.

The announcement, first given to the world in utmost solemnity by President Truman, made it plain that one of the scientific landmarks of the century had been passed, and that the "age of atomic energy," which can be a tremendous force for the advancement of civilization as well as for destruction, was at hand.

At 10:45 o'clock this morning, a statement by the President was issued at the White House that sixteen hours earlier- about the time that citizens on the Eastern seaboard were sitting down to their Sunday suppers- an American plane had dropped the single atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, an important army center.

Japanese Solemnly Warned
What happened at Hiroshima is not yet known. The War Department said it "as yet was unable to make an accurate report" because "an impenetrable cloud of dust and smoke" masked the target area from reconnaissance planes. The Secretary of War will release the story "as soon as accurate details of the results of the bombing become available."

But in a statement vividly describing the results of the first test of the atomic bomb in New Mexico, the War-Department told how an immense steel tower had been "vaporized" by the tremendous explosion, how a 40,000-foot cloud rushed into the sky, and two observers were knocked down at a point 10,000 yards away. And President Truman solemnly warned:

"It was to spare the Japanese people from utter destruction that the ultimatum of July 26, was issued at Potsdam. Their leaders promptly rejected that ultimatum. If they do not now accept our terms, they may expect a rain of ruin from the air the like of which has never been seen on this earth."

Most Closely Guarded Secret
The President referred to the joint statement issued by the heads of the American, British and Chinese Governments in which terms of surrender were outlined to the Japanese and warning given that rejection would mean complete destruction of Japan's power to make war.

[The atomic bomb weighs about 400 pounds and is capable of utterly destroying a town, a representative of the British Ministry of Aircraft Production said in London, the United Press reported.]

What is this terrible new weapon, which the War Department also calls the "Cosmic Bomb"? It is the harnessing of the energy of the atom, which is the basic power of the universe. As President Truman said, "The force from which the sun draws its power has been loosed against those who brought war to the Far East."

"Atomic fission" - in other words, the scientists' long-held dream of splitting the atom- is the secret of the atomic bomb. Uranium, a rare, heavy metallic element, which is radioactive and akin to radium, is the source essential to its production. Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, in a statement closely following that of the President, promised that "steps have been taken, to assure us of adequate supplies of this mineral."

The imagination-sweeping experiment in harnessing the power of the atom has been the most closely guarded secret of the war. America to date has spent nearly $2,000,000,000 in advancing its research. Since 1939, American, British and Canadian scientists have worked on it. The experiments have been conducted in the United States, both for reasons of achieving concentrated efficiency and for security; the consequences of having the material fall into the hands of the enemy, in case Great Britain should have been successfully invaded, were too awful for the Allies to risk.

All along, it has been a race with the enemy. Ironically enough, Germany started the experiments, but we finished them. Germany made the mistake of expelling, because she was a "non-Aryan," a woman scientist who held one of the keys to the mystery, and she made her knowledge available to those who brought it to the United States. Germany never quite mastered the riddle, and the United States, Secretary Stimson declared, is "convinced that Japan will not be in a position to use an atomic bomb in this war."

A Sobering Awareness of Power
Not the slightest spirit of braggadocio is discernible either in the wording of the official announcements or in the mien of the officials who gave out the news. There was an element of elation in the realization that we had perfected this devastating weapon for employment against an enemy who started the war and has told us she would rather be destroyed than surrender, but it was grim elation. There was sobering awareness of the tremendous responsibility involved.

Secretary Stimson said that this new weapon "should prove a tremendous aid in the shortening of the war against Japan," and there were other responsible officials who privately thought that this was an extreme understatement, and that Japan might find herself unable to stay in the war under the coming rain of atom bombs.

It was obvious that officials at the highest levels made the important decision to release news of the atomic bomb because of the psychological effect it may have in forcing Japan to surrender. However, there are some officials who feel privately it might have been well to keep this completely secret. Their opinion can be summed up in the comment by one spokesman: "Why bother with psychological warfare against an enemy that already is beaten and hasn't sense enough to quit and save herself from utter doom?"

The first news came from President Truman's office. Newsmen were summoned and the historic statement from the Chief Executive,who still is on the high seas, was given to them.

"That bomb," Mr. Truman said, "had more power than 20,000 tons of TNT. It had more than 2,000 times the blast power of the British 'Grand Slam,' which is the largest bomb (22,000 pounds) ever yet used in the history of warfare."

Explosive Charge Is Small
No details were given on the plane that carried the bomb. Nor was it stated whether the bomb was large or small. The President, however, said the explosive charge was "exceedingly small." It is known that tremendous force is packed into tiny quantities of the element that constitutes these bombs. Scientists, looking to the peacetime uses of atomic power, envisage submarines, ocean liners and planes traveling around the world on a few pounds of the element. Yet, for various reasons, the bomb used against Japan could have been extremely large.

Hiroshima, first city on earth to be the target of the "Cosmic Bomb," is a city of 318,000, which is- or was- a major quartermaster depot and port of embarkation for the Japanese. In addition to large military supply depots, it manufactured ordinance, mainly large guns and tanks, and machine tools, and aircraft-ordinance parts.

President Truman grimly told the Japanese that "the end is not yet."

"In their present form these bombs are now in production," he said, "and even more powerful forms are in development."

He sketched the story of how the late President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill agreed that it was wise to concentrate research in America, and how great secret cities sprang up in this country, where, at one time, 125,000 men and women labored to harness the atom. Even today more than 65,000 workers are employed.

"What has been done," he said, "is the greatest achievement of organized science in history.

"We are now prepared to obliterate more rapidly and completely every productive and enterprise the Japanese have above ground in any city. We shall destroy Japan's power to make war."

The President emphasized that the atomic discoveries were so important, both for the war and for the peace, that he would recommend to Congress that it consider promptly establishing "an appropriate commission to control the production and use of atomic power within the United States."

"I shall give further consideration and make further recommendations to the Congress as to how atomic power can become a powerful and forceful influence toward the maintenance of world peace," he said.

Secretary Stimson called the atomic bomb "the culmination of years of herculean effort on the part of science and industry, working in cooperation with the military authorities." He promised that "improvements will be forthcoming shortly which will increase by several fold the present effectiveness."

"But more important for the long-range implications of this new weapon," he said, "is the possibility that another scale of magnitude will be developed after considerable research and development. The scientists are confident that over a period of many years atomic bombs may well be developed which will be very much more powerful than the atomic bombs now at hand."

Investigation Started in 1939
It was late in 1939 that President Roosevelt appointed a commission to investigate use of atomic energy for military purposes. Until then only small-scale research with Navy funds had taken place. The program went into high gear.

By the end of 1941 the project was put under direction of a group of eminent American scientists in the Office of Scientific Research and Development, under Dr. Vanever Bush, who reported directly to Mr. Roosevelt. The President also appointed a General Policy Group, consisting of former Vice President Henry A. Wallace, Secretary Stimson, Gen. George C. Marshall, Dr. James B. Conant, president of Harvard, and Dr. Bush. In June 1942, this group recommended vast expansion of the work transfer of the major part of the program to the War Department.

Maj. Gen. Leslie R. Groves, a native of Albany, N. Y., and a 48-year-old graduate of the 1918 class at West Point, was appointed by Mr. Stimson to take complete executive charge of the program. General Groves, an engineer, holding the permanent Army rank of lieutenant colonel, received the highest praise from the War Department for the way he "fitted together the multifarious pieces of the vast, country-wide jigsaw," and, at the same time, organized the virtually air-tight security system that kept the project a secret.

A military policy committee also was appointed, consisting of Dr. Bush, chairman; Dr. Conant, Lieut. Gen. Wilhelm D. Styer and Rear Admiral William R. Purnell.

In December, 1942, the decision was made to proceed with construction of large-scale plants. Two are situated at the Clinton Engineer Works in Tennessee and a third at the Hanaford Engineer Works in the State of Washington.

These plants were amazing phenomena in themselves. They grew into large, self-sustaining cities, employing thousands upon thousands of workers. Yet, so close was the secrecy that not only were the citizens of the area kept in darkness about the nature of the project, but the workers themselves had only the sketchiest ideas- if any- as to what they were doing. This was accomplished Mr. Stimson said, by "compartmentalizing" the work so "that no one has been given more information than was absolutely necessary to his particular job."

The Tennessee reservation consists of 59,000 acres, eighteen miles west of Knoxville, it is known as Oak Ridge and has become a modern small city of 78,000, fifth largest in Tennessee.

In the State of Washington the Government has 430,000 acres in an isolated area, fifteen miles northwest of Pasco. The settlement there, which now has a population of 17,000, consisting of plant operators and their immediate families, is known as Richmond.

A special laboratory also has been set up near Santa Fe, N. M., under direction of Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer of the University of California, Dr. Oppenheimer also supervised the first test of the atomic bomb on July 16, 1945. This took place in a remote section of the New Mexico desert lands, with a group of eminent scientists gathered, frankly fearful to witness the results of the invention, which might turn out to be either the salvation or the Frankenstein's monster of the world.

Mr. Stimson also gave full credit to the many industrial corporations and educational institutions which worked with the War Department in bringing this titanic undertaking to fruition.

In August, 1943, a combined policy committee was appointed, consisting of Secretary Stimson, Drs. Bush and Conant for the United States; the late Field Marshall Sir John Dill (now replaced by Field Marshal Sir Henry Maitland Wilson) and Col. J. J. Llewellin (since replaced by Sir Ronald Campbell), for the United Kingdom, and C. D. Howe for Canada.

"Atomic fission holds great promise for sweeping developments by which our civilization may be enriched when peace comes, but the overriding necessities of war have precluded the full exploration of peacetime applications of this new knowledge," Mr. Stimson said. "However, it appears inevitable that many useful contributions to the well-being of mankind will ultimately flow from these discoveries when the world situation makes it possible for science and industry to concentrate on these aspects."

Although warning that many economic factors will have to be considered "before we can say to what extent atomic energy will supplement coal; oil and water as fundamental sources of power," Mr. Stimson acknowledged that "we are at the threshold of a new industrial art which will take many years and much expenditures of money to develop."

The Secretary of War disclosed that he had appointed an interim committee to study post-war control and development of atomic energy. Mr. Stimson is serving as chairman, and other members include James F. Byrnes, Secretary of State; Ralph A. Bard, former Under-Secretary of the Navy; William L. Clayton, Assistant Secretary of State; Dr. Bush, Dr. Conant, Dr. Carl T. Compton, chief of the Office of Field Service in OSRD and president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and George L. Harrison, special consultant to the Secretary of War and president of the New York Life Insurance Company. Mr. Harrison is alternate chairman of the committee.

The committee also has the assistance of an advisory group of some of the country's leading physicists including Dr. Oppenheimer, Dr. E. O. Lawrence, Dr. A. H. Compton and Dr. Enrico Fermi.

The War Department gave this supplementary background on the development of the atomic bomb.

"The series of discoveries which led to development of the atomic bomb started at the turn of the century when radioactivity became known to science. Prior to 1939 the scientific work in this field was world-wide, but more particularly so in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy and Denmark. One of Denmark's great scientists, Dr. Neils Bohr, a Nobel Prize winner, was whisked from the grasp of the Nazis in his occupied homeland and later assisted in developing the atomic bomb.

"It is known that Germany worked desperately to solve the problem of controlling atomic energy."

RELATED HEADLINES
Report by Britain: 'By God's Mercy' We Beat Nazis to Bomb, Churchill Says: Roosevelt Aid Cited: Raiders Wrecked Norse Laboratory in Race for Key to Victory
Steel Tower 'Vaporized' in Trial of Mighty Bomb: Scientists Awe-Struck as Blinding Flash Lighted New Mexico Desert and Great Cloud Bore 40,000 Feet Into Sky
Trains Canceled in Stricken Area: Traffic Around Hiroshima Is Disrupted -- Japanese Still Sift Havoc by Split Atoms
Atom Bombs Made in 3 Hidden 'Cities': Secrecy on Weapon So Great That Not Even Workers Knew of Their Product
Reich Exile Emerges as Heroine in Denial to Nazis of Atom's Secret

OTHER HEADLINES
Hiram W. Johnson, Republican Dean in the Senate, Dies: Isolationist Helped Prevent U.S. Entry Into League -- Opposed World Charter: California Ex-Governor Ran for Vice President With Theodore Roosevelt in '12 -- In Washington Since '17
Jet Plane Explosion Kills Major Bong, Top U.S. Ace: Flier Who Downed 40 Japanese Craft, Sent Home to Be 'Safe,' Was Flying New 'Shooting Star' as a Test Pilot
Kyushu City Razed: Kenney's Planes Blast Tarumizu in Reord Blow From Okinawa, Rocket Site Is Seen, 125 B-29's Hit Japan's Toyokawa Naval Arsenal in Demolition Strike
Morris Is Accused of 'Taking a Walk': Fusion Official 'Sad to Part Company' -- McGoldrick Sees Only Tammany Aided
Chinese Win More of 'Invasion Coast': Smash Into Port 121 Miles Southwest of Canton -- Big Area Open for Landing
Turks Talk War if Russia Presses; Prefer Vain Battle to Surrender

quinta-feira, 5 de agosto de 2010

Uniao Aduaneira Surrealista (tem quem goste...)

Um editorial do Estadão, como sempre realista.
Não compreendo o que o embargo a Cuba tem a ver com os assuntos do Mercosul. A menos que seus membros pretendam convidar Cuba para tornar-se o próximo membro, claro. Mas ela pode entrar mesmo com embargo. Tem muita gente que gosta de Cuba no Mercosul, exatamente como ela é, e isso não tem nada a ver com o embargo, dó de Cuba, etc; não, tem a ver com a atitude complacente com ditaduras...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Uma plástica no Mercosul
Editorial O Estado de S.Paulo
05/08/2010

O Mercosul é uma caricatura de união aduaneira, com barreiras comerciais entre os países-membros e uma Tarifa Externa Comum (TEC) cheia de exceções, mas sua imagem está um pouco mais apresentável depois da reunião de ministros e presidentes em San Juan, na Argentina. Depois de seis anos de impasses, o bloco terá finalmente o seu Código Aduaneiro, com normas, papéis e procedimentos comuns aos quatro sócios - Brasil, Argentina, Paraguai e Uruguai. Além disso, os governos concordaram em eliminar uma velha aberração - a dupla cobrança do imposto alfandegário. Quando um produto entra no Mercosul por um país e é reexportado para outro, os dois cobram o tributo. Essa distorção tem sido um dos obstáculos a um acordo de livre comércio com a União Europeia.

Durante anos o assunto esteve na pauta. Resolvê-lo tornou-se quase uma questão de honra para cada chefe de governo ao assumir a presidência temporária do bloco. A presidente Cristina Kirchner pode inscrever esse feito em seu currículo. A maior dificuldade foi certamente convencer o presidente paraguaio, Fernando Lugo. Como o Paraguai não tem litoral, produtos importados por mar só chegam ao país depois de passar por um porto brasileiro ou argentino.

Esse imposto é importante para o Paraguai, mas o acordo inclui uma repartição do tributo cobrado na primeira operação. Além disso, a mudança será gradual, entre 2012 e 2014.

A eliminação de problemas como esse poderá ajudar, mas não garantirá o acordo com a União Europeia. A negociação ficou emperrada durante anos e foi retomada recentemente. Divergências entre Brasil e Argentina sobre a abertura do mercado para bens industriais dificultaram o entendimento com os europeus. Segundo o chanceler Celso Amorim, o Mercosul está preparado para ofertas mais ousadas e o avanço depende agora da União Europeia. É melhor ver as cartas sobre a mesa antes de formar um juízo sobre o assunto

Sem um acordo sequer com países do mundo rico, o Mercosul continua dando prioridade à chamada agenda Sul-Sul. A reunião em San Juan serviu para a assinatura de um acordo de livre comércio com o Egito, o segundo com um parceiro de fora da América do Sul. O primeiro foi com Israel. As duas iniciativas podem ter algum aspecto positivo, mas nenhuma acrescenta grandes benefícios ao comércio exterior do Brasil e de seus sócios sul-americanos. Mais provavelmente o novo acordo abrirá oportunidades no sentido oposto - para exportadores egípcios e indústrias turcas eventualmente instaladas no Egito.

O resto da conferência pouco ou nada se desviou da rotina de um bloco atolado em problemas internos, movido mais pela retórica do que por ações efetivas de cooperação. Foram aprovados investimentos com recursos do fundo comum de integração, destinados principalmente a obras de infraestrutura. Os documentos assinados por ministros e presidentes tratam de alguns assuntos costumeiros, como o direito da Argentina sobre as Ilhas Malvinas, Geórgia e Sandwich. Condenou-se como ilegítima a pretensão do Reino Unido de explorar petróleo na região.

O comunicado principal, com 42 itens, trata de assuntos tão variados quanto o G-20, a ação da Corte Penal Internacional, as políticas migratórias do mundo rico, o bloqueio comercial a Cuba e as mudanças climáticas.

O presidente venezuelano, Hugo Chávez, não apareceu para mostrar seu desagrado diante da omissão do velho amigo Néstor Kirchner, secretário-geral da Unasur. Kirchner faltou a uma reunião em Quito e deixou, portanto, de mostrar seu apoio a Chávez em sua nova briga com o governo colombiano.

O presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva mostrou mais uma vez seu estranho senso de oportunidade, falando a favor do Irã na frente do chanceler Héctor Timmerman, primeiro judeu a chefiar o Ministério de Relações Exteriores da Argentina. O governo argentino continua cobrando explicações do governo iraniano, suspeito de participação no atentado - com 85 mortes - à Associação Mutual Israelita Argentina. Além do constrangimento, a presidente Cristina Kirchner ainda teve de enfrentar perguntas incômodas da imprensa.

Como serão as conferências do Mercosul sem Lula?

Justica brasileira conivente com o crime: é o minimo que se pode dizer

Sempre apoiando-se em regras formais de procedimento, juizes em geral, e juizes da Suprema Corte em particular, frustram o desejo da cidadania de se ter aquilo que se espera da Justiça: justiça.
Registre-se que os bandidos em questão, todos juízes bem postos, estavam apenas sendo aposentados compulsoriamente, ou seja, passariam a ganhar os mesmos altos salários sem trabalhar, e não se leu, ou ouviu, que teriam de devolver o dinheiro desviado.
O Brasil é um país em que a Justiça protege os seus próprios criminosos...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

STF suspende punição de juízes acusados de desviar R$ 1 milhão
Mário Coelho
Congresso em Foco, 04/08/2010

CNJ condenou magistrados do Mato Grosso acusados de desviar dinheiro de tribunal para a maçonaria

O ministro do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) Celso de Mello suspendeu na segunda-feira (2) a aposentadoria compulsória de três juízes acusados de desviar dinheiro do Tribunal de Justiça do Mato Grosso (TJMT) para a maçonaria. Os magistrados Graciema Ribeiro das Caravellas, Antonio Horácio da Silva Neto e Juanita Cruz da Silva Clait Duarte foram aposentados compulsoriamente pelo Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ) após investigação em processo disciplinar concluir sobre a existência do esquema beneficiando a Grande Oriente do Mato Grosso.

Por unanimidade, o CNJ condenou em fevereiro sete juízes e três desembargadores do Tribunal de Justiça de Mato Grosso. Todos eram acusados de uso irregular de verbas com distribuição privilegiada de pagamentos atrasados. Parte da verba foi usada para sanear o rombo financeiro de loja maçônica integrada por alguns dos magistrados. Por conduta antiética, corrupção ativa e passiva, todos foram condenados à aposentadoria compulsória proporcional. Os dez eram acusados de arquitetar e executar um esquema que desviou mais de R$ 1 milhão do tribunal para a entidade maçônica.

Ao analisar os mandados de segurança, Celso de Mello entendeu que, neste momento, não era função do CNJ abrir o processo disciplinar e investigar o caso. Para ele, quem deveria fazer isso era o Tribunal de Justiça do Mato Grosso. Na decisão, ele enfatizou que a atuação do Conselho deve observar o princípio da subsidiariedade. Ou seja, o CNJ deve ter um papel subsidiário e complementar em relação aos tribunais, atuando somente quando constatada a ineficácia dos mecanismos ordinários de administração e repressão do poder Judiciário local.

"O desempenho da atividade fiscalizadora (e eventualmente punitiva) do CNJ deveria ocorrer somente nos casos em que os Tribunais – havendo tido a possibilidade de exercerem, eles próprios, a competência disciplinar e correicional de que se acham ordinariamente investidos – deixassem de fazê-lo (inércia) ou pretextassem fazê-lo (simulação) ou demonstrassem incapacidade de fazê-lo (falta de independência) ou, ainda, dentre outros comportamentos evasivos, protelassem, sem justa causa, o seu exercício (procrastinação indevida)", afirmou o ministro na decisão.

Celso de Mello, no entanto, ressaltou que sua decisão pode ser revista pelos pares do Supremo. Mas ele disse que a remessa da denúncia ao CNJ pelo corregedor-geral de Justiça do Mato Grosso frustou a possibilidade de a corte local analisar o caso. "Ao precipitar a atuação do CNJ, sem sequer haver ensejado ao TJMT o exercício de sua competência correicional em sede disciplinar, o corregedor teria, aparentemente, inviabilizado a prática, pelo Judiciário local, de uma prerrogativa que não lhe poderia ter sido subtraída, o que teria implicado, por efeito da inobservância do postulado da subsidiariedade, transgressão à autonomia institucional do Tribunal de Justiça daquela unidade da federação”, enfatizou o ministro do STF.

Viva o Big Brother? - o fim do anonimato na Internet, preve CEO da Google

Um cenário preocupante, de fato: os Estados vão prevalecer sobre os indevíduos, o que é um passo a mais no sentido do controle das vidas privadas por burocratas cinzentos, quando não vilões declarados.
Bem, de certa forma isso já ocorre no Brasil, como qualquer observador mais atento sabe muito bem...

Le PDG de Google prédit la fin de l'anonymat sur Internet
Le Monde, 05.08.2010

Eric Schmidt estime que le passage à un système d'identification des internautes, à la demande des Etats, est inévitable.

"Si je regarde suffisamment vos messages et votre localisation, et que j'utilise une intelligence artificielle, je peux prévoir où vous allez vous rendre. Montrez-nous 14 photos de vous et nous pourrons vous identifier. Vous pensez qu'il n'y a pas quatorze photos différentes de vous sur Internet ? Il y en a plein sur Facebook !" Coutumier des déclarations fracassantes sur la vie privée, le PDG de Google, Eric Schmidt, a estimé, mercredi 4 août, lors de la conférence Techonomy, que l'anonymat sur Internet était voué à disparaître et serait remplacé par une "transparence totale".

Pour M. Schmidt, le monde "n'est pas prêt pour la révolution technologique qui s'annonce". Avec l'explosion des données rendues publiques par les internautes, les épidémies ou les crises deviennent prévisibles ; le monde produisant aujourd'hui, selon lui, autant de données en deux jours qu'entre "l'aube de la civilisation et 2003". Le moteur de recherche a par exemple lancé un outil de suivi de la progression de la grippe A, basé sur les recherches effectuées par les internautes.

Mais cette explosion du volume de données peut également être mise à profit à des fins moins bénéfiques, juge M. Schmidt. "La seule manière de gérer ce problème est une vraie transparence, et la fin de l'anonymat. Dans un monde où les menaces sont asynchrones, il est trop dangereux qu'on ne puisse pas vous identifier d'une manière ou d'une autre. Nous avons besoin d'un service d'identification personnel. Les gouvernements le demanderont", assure-t-il.

Divida Publica e Crescimento - um estudo do FMI

Já se sabia, empiricamente, que o aumento da dívida pública reduz o crescimento econômico, por diversas razões, todas muito conhecidas. Um estudo dotado do necessário rigor científico vem corroborar essa "impressão". Não se sabe por que, no Brasil, tantos economistas acham que o Estado vai "impulsionar" o crescimento atuando de forma desequilibrada em relação às contas públicas...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Public Debt and Growth
MANMOHAN KUMAR, International Monetary Fund (IMF) - Research Department
JAEJOON WOO, DePaul University - Department of Economics
IMF Working Paper No. 10/174

This paper explores the impact of high public debt on long-run economic growth. The analysis, based on a panel of advanced and emerging economies over almost four decades, takes into account a broad range of determinants of growth as well as various estimation issues including reverse causality and endogeneity. In addition, threshold effects, nonlinearities, and differences between advanced and emerging market economies are examined. The empirical results suggest an inverse relationship between initial debt and subsequent growth, controlling for other determinants of growth: on average, a 10 percentage point increase in the initial debt-to-GDP ratio is associated with a slowdown in annual real per capita GDP growth of around 0.2 percentage points per year, with the impact being somewhat smaller in advanced economies. There is some evidence of nonlinearity with higher levels of initial debt having a proportionately larger negative effect on subsequent growth. Analysis of the components of growth suggests that the adverse effect largely reflects a slowdown in labor productivity growth mainly due to reduced investment and slower growth of capital stock.

Mudanca climatica e politica comercial - Patrick Messerlin

Climate Change and Trade Policy: From Mutual Destruction to Mutual Support
PATRICK A. MESSERLIN, Groupe d'Economie Mondiale at Sciences Po (GEM Paris)
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5378

Abstract:
Contrary to what is still often believed, the climate and trade communities have a lot in common: a common problem (a global "public good"), common foes (vested interests using protection for slowing down climate change policies), and common friends (firms delivering goods, services, and equipment that are both cleaner and cheaper). They have thus many reasons to buttress each other. The climate community would enormously benefit from adopting the principle of "national treatment," which would legitimize and discipline the use of carbon border tax adjustment and the principle of "most-favored nation," which would ban carbon tariffs. The main effect of this would be to fuel a dual world economy of clean countries trading between themselves and dirty countries trading between themselves at a great cost for climate change. And the trade community would enormously benefit from a climate community capable of designing instruments that would support the adjustment efforts to be made by carbon-intensive firms much better than instruments such as antidumping or safeguards, which have proved to be ineffective and perverse. That said, implementing these principles will be difficult. The paper focuses on two key problems. First, the way carbon border taxes are defined has a huge impact on the joint outcome from climate change, trade, and development perspectives. Second, the multilateral climate change regime could easily become too complex to be manageable. Focusing on carbon-intensive sectors and building "clusters" of production processes considered as having "like carbon-intensity" are the two main ways for keeping the regime manageable. Developing them in a multilateral framework would make them more transparent and unbiased.

Proibicao de exportacoes: nao se pode impedir politicos de adotarem medidas estupidas (ou pode?)

A Russia já foi um enorme exportador de grãos, mais de um século atrás, fornecendo, junto com os Estados Unidos (então em fase de se converter também na maior potência industrial do planeta), o essencial dos grãos alimentícios e forrageiros de que a Europa e outras regiões do mundo necessitavam para o seu pão diário e para a ração de seus animais de criação. As enormes planícies da Ucrânia e da Bielorussia, como da própria Russia, eram uma espécie de celeiro do mundo, como se dizia antigamente (posição que o Brasil pode vir a ocupar, se já não ocupa, atualmente).
Bem, depois "aconteceu" o socialismo, que, como todos sabem, diminuiu tremendamente a capacidade da União Soviética de não só abastecer o mundo -- o que ele deixou de fazer já na primeira guerra mundial e logo em seguida à revolução de 1917, com a guerra civil subsequente e a construção do "socialismo num só país" -- como também de alimentar o seu próprio povo. Entre fomes acontecidas e fomes fabricadas, o socialismo matou muita gente, e simplesmente retirou a URSS da economia mundial durante sete décadas (eu disse sete décadas, o que é o equivalente a três gerações), salvo por uma ou outra commodity valorizada (petróleo, gás, alguns minérios e metais não ferrosos, como ouro, que a URSS contrabandeava via empresas de fachada e países off-shore para reabastecer de divisas suas caixas esquálidas).
Curiosamente estou lendo agora mesmo mais um desses livros de história virtual, What If?, que tem um capítulo explorando a possibilidade de que Lênin não tivesse chegado à Estação Finlândia -- numa operação patrocinada pela então inimiga da Rússia, a Alemanha, para espalhar o caos em sua contendora na frente oriental -- ou que de alguma forma ele não teria sido capaz de liderar o putsch (sim, foi um putsch, não uma revolução) de Outubro (ou novembro, segundo o calendário gregoriano) de 1917, e que a Rússia, portanto, tivesse continuado em sua trajetória de desenvolvimento capitalista e tendencialmente democrático. Bem, isso são histórias que depois eu conto. Voltemos ao nosso grão.

Como se depreende da matéria abaixo, o primeiro-ministro russo Vladimir Putin pensa banir as exportações de grãos, à raiz da seca e das queimadas que se abateram sobre o país neste verão europeu. Com o perdão da palavra, que pode ofender os mais sensíveis, trata-se da medida mais estúpida que se possa tomar do ponto de vista econômico. Supostamente feita para evitar mais inflação e desabastecimento, ela vai distorcer os mercados, diminuir a oferta de grãos na próxima safra, enviar o sinal errado aos mercados mundiais de grãos e gerar mais confusão e efeitos negativos do que o pretendido como "solução" para o problema.
A mesma medida tinha sido adotada, como se sabe, nos recentes problemas de inflação e desabastecimento nos mercados argentinos de grãos e de carnes -- já afetados por controles de preços, impostos às exportações e outras medidas restritivas -- que converteram a Argentina numa IMPORTADORA DE CARNE (para honrar contratos, o que é extremamente grave).
Não se pode impedir -- talvez se devesse tentar -- políticos de adotarem medidas estúpidas como essa, mas pelo menos ninguém me impede de expressar minha opinião de leigo. Nem o Brasil está isento desses ataques de estupidez de políticos. Dois anos atrás, no auge do pico dos preços dos minérios nos mercados internacionais, o então ministro das Minas e Energia, um pau mandado de outro político amigo do poder, também cogitou de introduzir um imposto à exportação, supostamente para evitar inflação e desabastecimento do mercado interno (sempre as razões invocadas por esses cérebros diminutos).
Pergunto-me o que a cidadania e os agentes econômicos podem fazer contra medidas estúpidas adotadas por responsáveis políticos nesse tipo de situação? Talvez nada no plano nacional ou internacional, em nome da soberania nacional, mas talvez economistas sensatos pudessem estabelecer um "Alto Tribunal das Estupidezes Econômicas", uma espécie de comitê virtual encarregado de analisar as medidas econômicas desse calado e caracterizá-las pelo que efetivamente são: estupidezes econômicas...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Russia grain export ban sparks price fears
By Catherine Belton in Moscow and Jack Farchy and Javier Blas in London
Financial Times, August 5 2010

The prices of everyday staples such as bread, flour and beer are set to rise sharply after Russia imposed a ban on grain exports, triggering panic in commodities markets and sending wheat prices to their highest since the 2007-08 global food crisisfood crisis.

Vladimir Putin, Russian prime minister, announced the ban on all the country’s grain exports, effective within 10 days, after a severe drought devastated crops and wildfires spread across the country.

The move, which caught traders and food producers by surprise, pushed the price of wheat to its highest in two years and evoked memories of the last time the then Soviet Union suffered a catastrophic crop failure in 1972. And Moscow introduced export restrictions during the 2007-08 global food crisis, triggering a wave of panic buying from North Africa and Middle East importers.

“There is full blown panic in the European grain market,” a senior trader said.

European wheat prices rose more than 12 per cent to hit a peak of €236 a tonne on record trading volumes. US wheat futures also jumped and are up more than 80 per cent since mid-June, the fastest rally in nearly 40 years. There were fears that food price inflation could take off and that the world could even suffer a repeat of the 2008 food crisis should the big shortfall in wheat output persist. “Soaring grain prices have brought food inflation back to centre stage,” said Joachim Fels of Morgan Stanley in London.

Prices of other crops including barley, corn and rapeseed, also jumped sharply.

Shares in some of the world’s largest food companies tumbled on fears they would struggle to pass on all the increased costs of buying wheat to millions of households already suffering the effects of the financial crisis. However, several companies have already said they plan immediate price hikes on goods, such as bread and biscuits.

Unilever, the British consumer goods group, dropped 5.2 per cent, while General Mills, one of the world’s largest food companies, was 2.5 per cent lower. Nestlé fell 2.1 per cent.

“I think it would be expedient to introduce a temporary ban on export grains and other agricultural goods,” Mr Putin told a cabinet meeting. “We cannot allow an increase in domestic prices and we need to maintain the number of cattle.”

The ban would take effect from August 15 and last until December 31, a spokesman for Mr Putin said.

The worst drought in more than a century in the Black Sea region has led to widespread alarm. Forecasts for the Russian grain crop have been falling daily, with the agriculture ministry’s most recent projection at 70m-75m tonnes, down from 85m tonnes a fortnight ago. Last year, the harvest was 100m tonnes.

Traders at Glencore, the world’s largest commodity trading company, on Tuesday warned the crop could fall to about 65m tonnes.

Cargill, the world’s biggest trader of agricultural commodities, criticised Moscow’s move. “Such trade barriers further distort wheat markets by making it harder for supplies to move from areas of surplus to areas of deficit, and by preventing price signals from reaching wheat farmers,” it said.

Arkady Zlochevsky, president of the Grain Union lobby group, said that the swift imposition of the ban risked undermining Russia’s reputation as a reliable supplier.

The UN on Wednesday attempted to quell growing panic in the markets, saying that fears of a repetition of the 2007-08 food crisis were unjustified.

But it also cut its forecast for global wheat production by 25m tonnes to 651m tonnes, the biggest revision in 20 years, and warned that a continuation of the current weather conditions could affect planting of the next Russian crop, with “potentially serious implications” for global wheat supplies in the 2011-12 season.

Arkady Zlochevsky, president of the Grain Union lobby group, said the government needed to warn exporters ahead of such a decision and give them time to meet existing contracts, according to Interfax. “What are we to do with the grain that has already reached port?” he asked. “We have no mechanisms for returning it.”

The Russian lobbyist also said the Egyptian tenders that Russian traders had fought hard to win could now be under threat. “Russia’s reputation as a reliable supplier of grain could be under threat from such a sharp decision.”

Mr Zlochevsky said it would make more sense to impose a ban later, by September 1 for example, so as to give exporters time to unload contracted supplies.

Mr Putin said the government would disburse Rbs35bn ($1.17bn) in subsidies to agricultural producers. He also added that Russia would use its grain stores for distribution without auction to regions in need.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010.

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...