sábado, 4 de agosto de 2012

O Estado deve possuir cassinos? Na Grecia ou alhures?

Aliás, a mesma questão se coloca em Portugal: por que o Estado deveria possuir, controlar e administrar uma companhia aérea?
Eu, sinceramente, não vejo NENHUMA razão: por isso mesmo, mas tardiamente, talvez ao mesmo tempo em que o governo grego tenta privatizar um cassino -- que, aliás, NUNCA deveria ter sido estatal --, o governo de Portugal vai privatizar a TAP, os Tamancos Aéreos Portugueses, que neste caso merecem plenamente a gozação, já que, não só não deveria haver o monopólio estatal nos transportes aéreos (o que não é o caso, diga-se de passagem), como tampouco deveria existir QUALQUER companhia estatal no setor. Transportes aéreos, comunicações, cassinos, ou quaisquer atividades que representem aspectos de mercado -- ou seja, clientes e consumidores que poderiam estar disputando a melhor qualidade e os melhores preços entre DIVERSOS ofertantes dos bens e serviços --  JAMAIS deveriam estar submetidas ao jugo estatal, que além de estúpido, em matéria de mercado, costuma ser ineficiente, caro, irracional, mal administrado, sujeito a interferências políticas e, não raro, corrupção.
E já que estamos falando nisso, alguém poderia me explicar por que, diabos, uma companhia que extrai e vende minério de ferro teria de ser estatal?  Eu vejo estas demandas -- de militares e de militantes anacrônicos -- de reestatização da Vale como ABSOLUTAMENTE IRRACIONAIS e jamais justificadas no âmbito das atividades normais de um Estado minimamente dedicado a suas funções básicas.
E isso se aplica igualmente a outras dezenas de atividades que JAMAIS deveriam ter sido cogitadas como atividades estatais.
E durma-se com o barulho desse cassino grego estatal.
Idiotice consumada...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

Greece faces difficult odds with privatization

Angelos Tzortzinis/Bloomberg - A man looks out over the illuminated city skyline of Athens, Greece, on Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2011. Greece's budget deficit will also narrow thanks to measures already approved by lawmakers in October.
The gods lived at Mount Olympus, but the gamblers live at a casino on Mount Parnitha, and, lately, Greek leaders have been praying to strike it big here.
The Greek government owns an unusual half-stake in this mountaintop casino, the second-largest in the country, and Prime Minister Antonis Samaras has vowed that selling it — along with dozens of other properties, buildings and companies across the country — will be a top priority in last-ditch efforts to save the Greek economy.
But with time ticking on Greece’s bailout, and the country’s future on the shared euro currency ever more in question, the odds are stacked against him.
Greece owns large swaths of sectors like gambling that in other countries are in private hands. The arrangement helped derail Greece’s finances in the first place, with powerful unions bidding up workers’ salaries to unsustainable levels and money leaking to politically connected contractors. Now, few investors want to bet their money on these properties in the middle of what Samaras has called “our version of the Great Depression.” And it is not politically attractive to sell off Greece’s crown jewels at fire-sale prices.
If Greek leaders don’t hit it lucky, though, international officials are more ready than ever to pull the plug on the bailout that is keeping Greece from collapse. The consequences would be even worse than the recession that by year’s end is likely to shrink the economy by more than a fifth of its 2008 heights.
“We do all we can to bring the country back on its feet, and they do all they can so we can fail,” Samaras recently said, railing against unnamed foreign leaders who he said were jeopardizing Greece’s economy.
Without the bailout, Greece would probably be forced out of the 17-nation euro zone. European leaders would then themselves be gambling that they could contain the subsequent panic that would strike far larger economies such as Spain and Italy. If they lost, a global recession might return. If they won, they would have a smaller but potentially stronger currency union.
Shortly after his inauguration as prime minister in June, Samaras swore to speedily privatize some big targets: the country’s money-losing train network, the power company and a prime seaside stretch of land. But even some of his allies worry that he is setting himself up for public failure.
“There’s just no market,” said Konstantinos Kollias, who was the head of a previous privatization effort during the boom years under a government led by Samaras’s center-right New Democracy Party.
“Many of these companies have many problems,” he said. “They’ve had poor management for many years.”
That poor management helped stretch open Greece’s budget deficit to 13.6 percent of the size of its economy in 2009, setting off
the crisis, and it continues to hamper the country’s recovery. Some state-owned companies are profitable, but many are money-losers. Taking them off public balance sheets would help stabilize Greece’s finances, its creditors say, and encouraging private investment would help its economy grow in the long run. International officials have said that speedy privatization would be one of the biggest steps Greece could take.
A daunting task
From the Regency Casino Mount Parnes, whose views sweep across Athens down to the glowing-blue Mediterranean, the scale of Greece’s tasks remains daunting. Some state-owned companies, such as the national train company, are billions of dollars in debt and have bled money for years. Others, such as the state lottery and betting company, are profitable but are trading on the stock market for rock-bottom prices and would not raise much money. Still others, such as the casino, make money but may face millions of dollars in fines from the European Union on charges that the government illegally gave them aid.
And they all have robust public workers unions that aren’t afraid to strike when they feel threatened. The casino was shut down for 32 days this spring while its union fought for better terms in its contract.
“The situation now is almost out of control,” said Costas Mitropoulos, who resigned last month from his post heading Greece’s privatization efforts, saying that the new government had undermined his work by making unrealistic promises. “Right now, there’s no market. It’s not a question of price.”
Proceeds from privatization have been wildly below targets. The country was initially supposed to reap $61.5 billion by 2015, a goal picked by Greece’s creditors not because it was an estimate but because it was the number needed to bring down Greece’s debt to politically acceptable levels. Privatization was expected to bring in $4.4 billion this year alone. Instead, it has made only $369 million, and Mitropoulos says that delays from the long election season mean that nothing else will be sold this year. Pushing back, the prime minister’s office has sworn to pull off a string of privatizations within months.
Predictions wrong
The privatization office, on the top floor of a tired building in central Athens, is filled with reminders of the obstacles facing Greece’s leaders. In the waiting room, a flat-screen television plays a marketing video on an endless loop showing “Reputation says: Investing in Greece? Disaster” and “Reputation says: ‘Who will work?’ Greeks are ‘expensive’ and ‘lazy’ ” before trying to persuade viewers that those assertions are false.
“Right now, all predictions have proven wrong. And in such an environment, you can’t privatize everything,” Mitropoulos said.
He thought it would take 30 years to develop the land that has been flagged for sale, not eight years as foreseen by the internationally agreed privatization plans. That land is 4 percent of Greek territory.
And some companies are politically sensitive. Some Greeks say the Public Power Corp., which supplies the bulk of electricity to the country and owns the entire grid, should be kept in public control to ensure low prices for consumers. Its union of 21,000 workers has been militant about refusing to implement tax increases and has threatened to strike — leading to power outages — if the government moves ahead with plans to sell its 51 percent stake.
Whether a sale would actually raise money is another question. Some analysts say the company has almost a quarter more employees than it needs. Their median pay is a third more than that of Greece’s private sector by some estimates, and the company loses money most quarters. Its stock price is down 93 percent from 2007 highs.
“For us, people and their needs are more important than the needs of the market,” said Nikos Fotopoulos, the head of the power company employees union.
For now, Samaras is trying desperately to implement enough measures to persuade Greece’s troika of international creditors — the International Monetary Fund, the European Union and theEuropean Central Bank — that they should give his country an extra two years to meet its marks. Whether he will get it — and whether his ministers are committed to making the full level of cuts that the troika has demanded — is uncertain.
The decision about whether to issue another installment of the bailout money will likely come in September, and Germany, the biggest contributor to the program, is already signaling its reluctance to give the green light.
From the casino atop Mount Parnitha, where whirring roulette tables and chirping slot machines bring a Vegas touch to the Athens panorama, Greek leaders are betting they’ll hit the jackpot.
Elinda Labropoulou contributed to this report.


Gore Vidal: um frasista desbocado...

Um leitor habitual deste blog, nos remete uma coleção de frases do mais iconoclasta dos escritores americanos no último meio século...



...Gore Vidal...o Millôr "yankee"...!

"Democracy is supposed to give you the feeling of choice, like Painkiller X and Painkiller Y. But they're both just aspirin."

"Never have children, only grand children."

"Laughing at someone else is an excellent way of learning how to laugh at oneself; and questioning what seem to be the absurd beliefs of another group is a good way of recognizing the potential absurdity of many of one's own cherished beliefs."

"Whenever a friend succeeds, a little something in me dies."

"The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return."

"Never miss a chance to have sex or appear on television."

"The theater needs continual reminders that there is nothing more debasing than the work of those who do well what is not worth doing at all."

"A narcissist is someone better looking than you are."

"Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never voted for President. One hopes it is the same half."

sexta-feira, 3 de agosto de 2012

"Uma sofisticada organizacao criminosa" - PGR sobre o mensalao

Todos sabemos o que foi o Mensalão. Ainda assim não podemos deixar de ficar impressionados com a extensão, 'riqueza' e desfaçatez dos gangsteres que operaram o sistema, tendo à frente o chefe da quadrilha, tal como descrito pelo PGR.
Impressionante o detalhamento das operações.
Poderíamos esperar que eles fosse condenados a 150 anos de cadeia, como o fraudador mor dos EUA, Madoff, mas aposto como vão escapar parcialmente das penas.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

03/ 08/ 2012 as 4:49 pm

Procurador diz ter certeza que Dirceu foi mentor do mensalão

Para Gurgel, José Dirceu (foto) foi protagonista no escândaloBrasília – “Dirceu exerceu papel fundamental, sem risco de cometer injustiça, foi a principal figura, mentor e grande protagonista. Foi ele quem idealizou o sistema ilícito de mobilização da base e comandou os demais acusados para os demais objetivos”.
Foi assim que o procurador-geral da República, Roberto Gurgel, classificou a participação do ex-ministro-chefe da Casa Civil, José Dirceu no mensalão. No segundo dia de julgamento do caso, foi a vez de Gurgel ler a acusação contra os mensaleiros.
Segundo ele, o núcleo político do esquema – formado por José Dirceu e José Genoíno, ex-presidente do PT, começou a ter dificuldade para “administrar a bolada”. O valor total, segundo Gurgel, apenas só uns poucos conheciam.  Para Roberto Gurgel, o “conjunto probatório não deixa dúvidas” sobre a certeza dos crimes os quais os réus são acusados.
Ao analisar os constantes encontros entre o ex-tesoureiro do PT Delúbio Soares e o empresário Marcos Valério em vários locais diferentes, como hotéis e shoppings em Brasília, no auge das atividades criminosas do mensalão, o procurador-geral  Roberto Gurgel descartou a possibilidade do estreito relacionamento como razão para debater a conjuntura política do país ou como relação entre amigos.
Para Gurgel, a união, assim como os constantes contatos com José Dirceu, “tinha como único objetivo o de viabilizar um profissional esquema para a associação criminosa”. Segundo consta no relatório do procurador, “Delúbio era o elo do núcleo político e núcleos operacional e financeiro”.
O esquema petista, ainda de acordo com o procurador, desviou R$ 73 milhões do Banco do Brasil e o núcleo financeiro da organização criminosa incluía dirigentes do Banco Rural.
“Os empréstimos do Banco Rural não tinham garantia. Foram doação. O banco não esperava receber, nem os tomadores pagar.” Segundo o procurador, somente após o estouro do escândalo os representantes do banco simularam iniciativas para cobrar os empréstimos.

Brasil: um pais rico? - Foreign Policy En Espanol

LA RIQUEZA DE LAS NACIONES
Foreign Policy, 27 de junio de 2012

Ya es hora de dejar de denominar a Estados como Brasil o China "países en desarrollo". Deberíamos llamarlos de otra manera: ricos.

AFP/Getty Images
Equipo chino de rescate se prepara para partir hacia Haití tras el terremoto que sacudió la isla en 2009.

¿Qué es un país rico? Esta podría parecer una pregunta inofensivamente simple. Pero no lo es. ¿Lo suficientemente rico para hacer qué? Si definimos rico como la capacidad de permitirse misiles de largo alcance y armas nucleares, entonces incluso la empobrecida Corea del Norte entra en esa categoría (siempre y cuando a uno no le preocupe mucho que los misiles de verdad funcionen). ¿Y qué pasa con ser lo suficientemente rico para garantizar una vida decente a todos los ciudadanos? Muchos en Estados Unidos y Europa alegarían que incluso sus países desarrollados, con los niveles de vida más altos del mundo, no son ricos según esa forma de medir. ¿O qué sucede con ser lo suficientemente rico para ser un buen ciudadano global, proporcionando ayuda a aquellos que la necesitan más desesperadamente?...


Este artículo está disponible sólo para suscriptores a FP. Aquí tiene un resumen, para su referencia.
Suscríbase para acceder a todos los artículos y disfrutar al completo de Foreign Policy en español.

Racismo no Brasil: cotas devem subir para 53% (ou mais)

Os alunos abaixo são modestos: eles pedem apenas aumento de 30 para 40% das cotas para negros e afrodescendentes:

Estudantes protestam na UFRGS pelo aumento da cota para alunos de escolas públicas e negros

Em manifestação no saguão da reitoria da universidade, eles cobram um aumento de 30% para 40% na reserva de cotas
Pois eu acho que eles pedem pouco: segundo o último PNAD, que pesquisou as "raças" na sociedade brasileira, 53% dos consultados, por autodeclaração, afirmaram ser afrodescendentes.
Pois este deveria ser o percentual aplicado nas cotas, não é verdade?
Mas eu aposto como no próximo PNAD, esse percentual vai aumentar para, pelo menos, 57% da população; até "moreninhos claros" vão se declarar afrodescendentes, o que é absolutamente lógico.
Afinal de contas, o Brasil é um país afrodescendente, não é mesmo.
Nada mais lógico, assim, que cotas para todos eles...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Gore Vidal: uma especie em extincao - The Economist


Remembering Gore Vidal

A dying breed

The Economist, Aug 3rd 2012, 13:44 by M.B. | NEW YORK
“SHUT up a minute,” Gore Vidal told William F. Buckley, junior, during a famously heated exchange on ABC television. The news programme was covering the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago, where police violently clashed against anti-war protestors. But Buckley continued comparing the war's opponents, who included Vidal, to Nazi appeasers. Vidal retaliated with "the only pro- or crypto-Nazi I can think of is yourself." Furious, Buckley called Vidal “queer” and threatened to “sock [him] in the goddamn face.”
Seen in isolation, this exchange can seem depressingly familiar: two political adversaries shouting past each other (albeit with some unusually harsh language) as they play to their respective ideological bases. But step back a bit and it becomes clear just how alien their testy debate is.
It is hard to imagine men like Vidal and Buckley, two snobbish East Coast intellectuals with lockjaw patrician accents, being invited onto prime-time television now to opine on the hot-button issues of the day. Vidal’s death earlier this week, at age 86, marks not only the loss of a provocative novelist and political thinker, but also the demise of a brand of public discourse. It seems there is no longer a place for the erudite and witty public intellectual in America. Instead of learned allusions to classical literature, public figures, including the president of the United States, are now expected to drop their g’s and speak knowledgeably about the cast of “The Jersey Shore.”
In part, this is a product of progress. The club of elite public intellectuals we have lost in the last decade—Vidal, Buckley, Christopher Hitchens and Norman Mailer, to name a few—was decidedly male, largely white and upper-class, drawing its members from a few old-line private colleges and prep schools. As higher education extends beyond a narrow, moneyed elite, mass audiences increasingly want experts who look and sound like idealised versions of themselves. So we get “Joe the Plumber” lecturing Barack Obama on socialism, and Irish pop stars lecturing heads of state on humanitarian relief in Africa. Even card-carrying members of the elite, such as former President George W. Bush, are keen to play down their Ivy League educations and play up their love of clearing brush on the ranch. Punditry reflects the diversity of every other sphere of public life, and few need fear being called “queer” on national television.
But although we hear from a far broader spectrum of voices, the end of the era of unabashedly elite public intellectuals coincides with a loss of a certain unironic seriousness in popular culture. The 1968 confrontation between Vidal and Buckley is famous today because of the way the two men sniped at each other, but before they descended into personal insults, the two men were engaged in a nuanced debate of constitutional principles. Buckley argued that Chicago's police could be forgiven for trying to silence protesters whose complaints might comfort America’s enemies in Vietnam; Vidal countered that political dissent, no matter how provocative, is protected under the First Amendment.
The angry confrontation between these two men is remembered today largely because such outbursts were so rare, so embarrassing. But now, when much political debate is designed to be entertainingly diverting, the name-calling would have been the whole point.  With Gore Vidal's death, the world of letters has lost a valuable voice. And we have all lost yet another member of a generation of public figures that was willing, without apology or ironic deflection, to take serious matters seriously.

venezuela en el Mercosur - La Nacion


 Una decisión con lógica más política que económica
Por Martín Kanenguiser | LA NACION. 1 Agosto 2012



La incorporación de Venezuela al Mercosur parece tener un significado más político que económico o comercial, porque no se traducirá en una mayor integración entre los socios del bloque regional.
Según los expertos en comercio internacional consultados por LA NACION, esta decisión complicará aún más el de por sí frondoso proceso de toma de decisiones entre los socios del área vigente desde 1995.
Las ventajas que podían tomar la Argentina y Brasil en materia de inserción en el mercado venezolano, al parecer, ya fueron aprovechadas y difícilmente avancen si sigue paralizada la convergencia de ese país con el arancel externo común (AEC) del bloque, agregaron.
"El dato más importante es que esta incorporación diluye al Mercosur como un proyecto de unión aduanera. Y no creo que se pueda avanzar mucho en materia de integración porque hay muchas palabras sobre complementación industrial, pero no pasa de los discursos", señaló el director de la maestría en relaciones internacionales de Flacso-San Andrés, Roberto Bouzas.
Según Bouzas, la decisión "confirma la falta de horizonte de ese proyecto de integración en la forma en que había sido concebido".
En esa sintonía, el ex presidente de la Fundación Export-Ar Marcelo Elizondo sostuvo que el acople de Venezuela "no tiene mucho significado desde el punto de vista comercial, porque en realidad la Argentina y Brasil ya lograron fuertes superávits con Venezuela y la firma del acuerdo no va a cambiar demasiado".
Elizondo, líder de la consultora Desarrollo de Negocios Internacionales (DNI), también advirtió que, dada la desconfianza internacional que existe en torno del gobierno de Hugo Chávez, posiblemente tampoco haya demasiados progresos en materia de inversiones en Venezuela.
"Es positivo que haya un nuevo socio pleno, pero el costo ha sido muy alto: Uruguay está enojado y no hay que descartar que Paraguay pueda objetar que Venezuela ingresó cuando estaba suspendido como miembro del bloque", indicó.
La gravedad de estas discusiones no tiene precedente, según Elizondo. "La arquitectura institucional del Mercosur cruje porque hasta ahora hubo diferencias internas pero el bloque nunca se había dividido como ocurrió frente al ingreso de Venezuela", afirmó.
A mitad de camino, la consultora Abeceb resaltó las posibles ventajas y pérdidas de tener a Venezuela dentro del Mercosur:
·       El Mercosur podría tener una mayor dimensión económica y comercial. Los posibles beneficios también tienen una dimensión geopolítica, en el sentido de que amplifica un bloque económico comercial con una estrategia de inserción mundial definida y opuesta en esencia a la realizada por los países del eje del Pacífico.
·       Por el contrario, la mayor desventaja es que "se trata de un acuerdo eminentemente político, por lo que si se pierde la buena sintonía entre los gobiernos se puede diluir la integración y desprestigiar aún más al Mercosur; también hay que considerar que la incorporación puede hacer más difícil avanzar en negociaciones comerciales de relevancia, tales como las de Mercosur-Unión Europea".
Mauricio Claverí, de Abeceb, detalló que "la tasa de crecimiento de las exportaciones a Venezuela fue casi nula porque estuvo muy supeditada a todos los negocios dependientes del entendimiento político entre la Argentina y Venezuela; una vez que terminaba la vigencia de un acuerdo específico, las ventas se frenaban".
En cuanto al arancel externo, agregó, "ya tiene muchas excepciones por las diferencias entre los socios fundadores y eso obligará a ser más flexibles con Venezuela cuando se negocie la baja de sus aranceles.

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...