FHC sees the country as suffering from amnesia, which is why he accuses the PT of "not knowing how to govern."

Brazilian broadcast television is airing a PSDB advertisement that is an affront to the Brazilian people. In the video, Aécio Neves and José Serra take advantage of the economic situation, which even some anti-PT media outlets are now attributing to the opposition's behavior.

However, there is a participation in this video that is unacceptable. The speaker is Fernando Henrique Cardoso, former president of the Republic (1995-2002) from the PSDB party. Here is the narration:

"They don't know how to govern. We are witnessing, with our own eyes, the demoralization of the current political system's functioning."

Watch below for proof that what is reported above is not made up.

 

At the end of this unparalleled display of brazenness and disrespect for the Brazilian people, the PSDB still has the audacity to utter a phrase that contradicts everything the party has done in the context of a crisis that is not only economic, but also political.

Is the opposition that the PSDB is mounting really "in favor of Brazil"? Those who say otherwise are not this blog, but a major media outlet that, throughout the PT governments, became known for its staunch opposition to them.

Read below what Folha de São Paulo says about how the PSDB and other opposition parties exercise their constitutional roles.

FOLHA DE SÃO PAULO

29 July 2015

EDITORIALS

ppgad@pucrs.br

The worse it gets, the worse it gets.

The shift in the country's credit rating outlook increases the importance of a political consensus capable of reviving the national economy.

Scheduled for this Thursday (30), President Dilma Rousseff (PT)'s meeting with the governors of all states acquired even greater importance with the decision taken on Tuesday (28) by the Standard & Poor's risk rating agency.

The American company changed the outlook for Brazil's credit rating to negative, increasing the chances of the country losing its investment grade. Just one notch below is the speculative category, where, in the eyes of creditors, the possibility of default is high.

Not even the most ardent opposition should want this rotten cherry on top of the spoiled cake that the economy has become under Dilma's government. Agencies like S&P lost credibility after 2008 because they failed to foresee the crisis unfolding in the US, but their assessments remain of interest to those seeking safe havens for their money.

The growing expectation that Brazil will lose its investment-grade credit rating is already having an effect: investors are demanding ever-higher interest rates to compensate for the risks, and the dollar is hitting record highs.

Even worse, it is already considered that two other companies, Moody's and Fitch, may conduct a similar analysis to that of S&P, downgrading Brazil's rating by the end of the year.

Combating this bleak scenario should be a goal for everyone who cares about the nation's future, even if they couldn't care less about Dilma's fate.

In explaining its reasons, S&P acknowledges changes in the Workers' Party president's second term, but states that uncertainties in politics and the economy have increased. Reducing them, therefore, is imperative.

It all boils down, at its core, to the instability of the relationship between the Executive and Legislative branches, aggravated by the unfolding events of Operation Lava Jato and reflected in the pernicious behavior of Congress.

Notoriously unable to mobilize deputies and senators around a positive agenda, President Dilma Rousseff has decided to ask the governors for help. She hopes they will convince their respective delegations to reject projects that would make the necessary adjustment of public accounts even more arduous.

If kept strictly within these terms, the meeting could yield something beneficial. Many of the measures that increase spending have a direct impact on state coffers.

Let's be clear: demanding accountability from members of Congress does not mean accepting backroom deals or sharing the blame for the current debacle. That responsibility lies solely with the Dilma government, and the opposition would certainly have much to lose if it were seen as a partner in the crisis.

The country, however, will have even more to lose if there are no renewed efforts to find solutions. It is already known how poisonous an opposition that bets on the motto "the worse, the better" can be. As the credit rating agencies attest, the worse, the worse.

This blog has been saying for months that the economic crisis could have already been overcome if the opposition, the media, and even Operation Lava Jato hadn't behaved like saboteurs of the economy.

In this respect, the Folha article simply exposes the position of the market, of capital, which is already beginning to worry about the irresponsibility of people like those three who star in the video I posted above.

FHC saying that the PT doesn't know how to govern is an affront to the Brazilian people because doing so reveals that the former president thinks Brazil is a country of amnesiac idiots, incapable of remembering what his disastrous administration was like, with blackouts, the external debt crisis, IMF monitoring, record unemployment and inflation, and successive cover-ups of scandals and investigations...

To refresh the memory of the former president and those who believe him, I provide below official data comparing his government with those of his successors.

Gross Domestic Product:
2002 – R$ 1,48 trillion

2013 – R$ 4,84 trillion

GDP per capita:
2002 – R$ 7,6

2013 – R$ 24,1

Net public sector debt:
2002 – 60% of GDP

2013 – 34% of GDP

BNDES Profit:
2002 – R$ 550 million

2013 – R$ 8,15 billion

Profit of Banco do Brasil:
2002 – R$ 2 billion

2013 – R$ 15,8 billion

Profit of Caixa Econômica Federal:
2002 – R$ 1,1 billion

2013 – R$ 6,7 billion

Vehicle production:
2002 – 1,8 million

2013 – 3,7 million

Agricultural Harvest:
2002 – 97 million tons

2013 – 188 million tons

Foreign Direct Investment:
2002 – 16,6 billion dollars

2013 – 64 billion dollars

International Reserves:
2002 – 37 billion dollars

2013 – 375,8 billion dollars

Bovespa Index:
2002 – 11.268 points

2013 – 51.507 points

Jobs Created:
FHC Government – ​​627 thousand/year

Lula and Dilma governments – 1,79 million/year

Unemployment rate:
2002 - 12,2%

2013 - 5,4%

Petrobras' Market Value:
2002 – R$ 15,5 billion

2014 – R$ 104,9 billion

Petrobras' average profit:
FHC Government – ​​R$ 4,2 billion/year

Lula and Dilma governments – R$ 25,6 billion/year

Average number of bankruptcy filings per year:
FHC Government – ​​25.587

Lula and Dilma governments – 5.795

Minimum wage:
2002 – R$ 200 (1,42 basic food baskets)

2014 – R$ 724 (2,24 basic food baskets)

External Debt in Relation to Reserves:
2002 - 557%

2014 - 81%

Position among the World's Economies:
2002 – 13th

2014 – 7th

PROUNI – 1,2 million scholarships

Minimum Wage Converted to Dollars:
2002-86,21

2014-305,00

Airline Tickets Sold:
2002 – 33 million

2013 – 100 million

Exports:
2002 – 60,3 billion dollars

2013 – 242 billion dollars

Average Annual Inflation:
FHC government – ​​9,1%

Lula and Dilma governments – 5,8%

PRONATEC – 6 Million people

Selic Rate:
2002 - 18,9%

2012 - 8,5%

FIES – 1,3 million people with university financing

My Home My Life – 1,5 million families benefited

Light for All – 9,5 million people benefited

Energy Capacity:
2001 – 74.800 MW

2013 – 122.900 MW

Creation of 6.427 daycare centers

Science Without Borders – 100 beneficiaries

More Doctors (Approximately 14 new professionals): 50 million beneficiaries

Brazil Without Poverty – Lifted 22 million out of extreme poverty.

Creation of Federal Universities:
Lula and Dilma governments – 18

FHC government – ​​zero

Creation of Technical Schools:
Lula and Dilma governments – 214

FHC Government – ​​11

From 1500 to 1994 – 140

Social inequality:
FHC Government – ​​2,2% drop

PT Government – ​​11,4% Drop

Productivity:
FHC Government – ​​Increase of 0,3%

Lula and Dilma governments – 13,2% increase

Poverty rate:
2002 - 34%

2012 - 15%

Extreme Poverty Rate:
2003 - 15%

2012 - 5,2%

Human Development Index:
2000-0,669

2005-0,699

2012-0,730

Infant mortality:
2002 – 25,3 per 1000 live births

2012 – 12,9 per 1000 live births

Public Spending on Health:
2002 – R$ 28 billion

2013 – R$ 106 billion

Public Spending on Education:
2002 – R$ 17 billion

2013 – R$ 94 billion

Students in Higher Education:
2003-583.800

2012-1.087.400

Brazil Risk (IPEA):
2002-1.446

2013-224

Federal Police Operations:
FHC Government – ​​48

PT Government – ​​1.273 (15 prisoners)

Federal Court Branches:
2003-100

2010-513

38 million people have moved up to the New Middle Class (Class C).

42 million people were lifted out of poverty.

SOURCES:

47/48 – http://www.dpf.gov.br/agencia/estatisticas

39/40 – http://www.washingtonpost.com

42 – WHO, UNICEF, World Bank and UN

37 – GINI index: www.ipeadata.gov.br

45 – Ministry of Education

13 – IBGE

26 – World Bank

Of course, at this point, the situation has stopped improving and has even worsened slightly, but if we take 12 years of the PT (2003-2014) and compare them with 8 years of the PSDB, we will see that the problems are occurring after more than a decade of prosperity, job growth, income growth, and improvement in social indicators.

A president who left the country with 12% inflation, 12% unemployment, no international reserves, and under the watchful eye of the IMF, among other misfortunes, cannot pretend that he didn't have problems even worse than Dilma's when she governed. And he should, therefore, have the composure not to say that "they don't know how to govern." Even out of respect for people's intelligence.

The three stooges in the video above, however, forget that more than half of Brazilians voted against them last year. Despite the problems in the economy, the majority showed that they haven't forgotten what the government of these three was like in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Folha was unfair to Dilma, despite having rightly criticized the opposition. The crisis was absolutely manageable. The fiscal adjustment of 1,1% of GDP could have been implemented quickly, and by now we would be resuming growth.

During a meeting with ministers and Vice President Michel Temer on Monday afternoon, however, Dilma further clarified this "opposition in favor of Brazil"; she blamed Operation Lava Jato for part of the drop in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) this year.

When discussing the economic difficulties the country is facing, the president cited the Federal Police operation, saying it caused a one percentage point drop in GDP: "To give you an idea, Lava Jato caused a one percentage point drop in Brazilian GDP."

In light of all this, this blog believes that the opportunism and irresponsibility of the PSDB (Brazilian Social Democracy Party) are not only beginning to revolt those who have even a minimum of affection for their country, but also that the PSDB's support for the upcoming coup-mongering demonstration could even undermine it.

Many people who hate the PT don't want to see the PSDB even if it were painted gold.

What the PSDB (Brazilian Social Democracy Party) fails to realize, therefore, is that the overwhelming majority of Brazilians may be dissatisfied with the beginning of Dilma's second term, but they are not foolish enough to forget how much they suffered when FHC (Fernando Henrique Cardoso) and his associates were in power.