The World Bank rates Brazil at 174th of
189 economies in ‘starting a business.’
Mary Anastasia O’Grady
![]() |
Brazilian President Dilma
Rousseff and former President Lula da Silva. Photo: Zuma Press
|
The 2016 Olympic Games kicked
off in Rio de Janeiro on the weekend without major incidents. That seemed a
near miracle after weeks of grim reports about shoddy construction, an
unprepared security detail and monstrous traffic jams. Whether the athletes,
visitors and Cariocas (as Rio residents are known) can get through the next two
weeks without a catastrophe remains an open question.
It wasn’t supposed to be like
this. Then again, when Rio won the competition in 2009 to host these games,
Brazil wasn’t forecast to look like it does today—with a budget deficit equal
to some 8% of gross domestic product, inflation near 10%, two years of economic
contraction and a cesspool of corruption scandals.
In 2009, President Lula da
Silva of the Workers’ Party (PT) had been at the helm for more than six years
and was somewhat of a world rock star. His hip rhetoric denigrated the economic
liberalism of the 1990s while hyping a new and improved brand of socialism with
a samba twist.
Much of the region bought
Lula’s 2.0 version of big government. Concerns about the return of left-wing
Latin populism and its potential damage to entrepreneurship and economic growth
were met with assurances that this time would be different.
Lula was a man of the left but
he wasn’t Hugo Chávez, conventional wisdom explained. A November 2009 Economist
magazine cover story was titled “Brazil takes off.” It cited a forecast by the
consulting firm PwC that by 2025 São Paulo would be the world’s
fifth-wealthiest city. Most of punditry agreed: Brazil was on course to take
its rightful place as a world economic superpower.
Lula stepped down after two
terms in 2011, handing power to his PT successor, President Dilma Rousseff. The
2016 Olympics were supposed to showcase the socialist paradise he had
cultivated: an urban utopia mixing affordable housing, national industrial
champions and orderly public-transportation networks to provide a tranquil—and
environmentally approved—living experience.
Instead, at the Olympic
Village, just weeks before the opening, sinks fell off the walls and there were
various other plumbing disasters. The Australian national team fled from its
quarters upon arrival because it found, among other things, exposed electrical
wires next to indoor puddles of water. Guanabara Bay, the venue for open-water
swimming and sailing races, is a giant petri dish of bacteria. A new metro line
that was supposed to take visitors to the games ends eight miles short of its
promised destination.
The Rio security company that
was hired to screen spectators was fired 10 days ago for noncompliance with its
contract. Organizers scrambled last week to hire and train a replacement team.
The world seems stunned. It
shouldn’t be. Rio is a microcosm of Lula’s Brazil, where bureaucracy runs
things from the top down and human beings are an afterthought. The only thing
missing in this Rio analogy—so far—is the corruption that flourished at the federal
level during 14 years of PT government.
Brazil’s politicians aspire to
first-world grandeur but insist on preserving third-world institutions. It’s
not because they don’t understand the effectiveness of independent institutions
and checks and balances. It’s because they do understand it.
President Fernando Henrique
Cardoso of the Brazilian Social Democracy Party was an exception to the rule.
During his eight-year tenure ahead of Lula, Brazil discovered macro-stability
using responsible central-bank policy, a floating exchange rate and the goal of
fiscal surpluses. The central bank adopted enhanced transparency,
predictability and inflation targeting, all of which generated market
confidence. The central bank also took an active role in supervising government-owned
banks to avoid excesses in financing either the state or its cronies.
Under Lula and later Ms.
Rousseff—who won elections in 2010 and 2014—the commitment to fiscal discipline
gradually eroded. The government-owned bank Caixa Econômica Federal and the
national development bank (BNDES) rapidly expanded credit. This was
inflationary and risky, but the central bank ignored the problem.
While Lula and later Dilma
were hawking Brazil as a world-class player, they did little to reduce the
burden of government on entrepreneurs. The 2016 World Bank “Doing Business”
survey, which studies the relative ease of entrepreneurship in 189 economies,
ranks Brazil 174th in “starting a business,” 169th in “dealing with
construction permits,” 130th in “registering property,” 178th in “paying taxes”
and 145th in “trading across borders.” That doesn’t sound like the stuff of an
economic superpower.
In late July, Lula was charged
by a Brazilian federal court with obstruction of justice in a corruption
investigation. Ms. Rousseff has been impeached for cooking government books and
is now being tried by the senate. If political fraud for leading a nation to
ruin were a crime, they both already would have been convicted.
Mary Anastasia O’Grady, The Wall Street Journal, August 7, 2016
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-