If you’re Brazilian then you’ve made your own bed. I won’t criticise, because why would I.
E sim meus pais e minha família são brasileiros. Portanto, boa sorte meu compadre. Se o Bolsonaro resolver algum problema no Brasil, que Deus abençoe o Fdp. Agora não acredito que o fará, particularmente na corrupção.
E não estou dizendo que Haddad devia ter ganho. O Brasil é o que é e pouco me serve explicar o nosso país para gringo. Mas eu tento. Eu tento.
Bolsonaro has already done good things for Brazil. Violent crime is down more than 20% in 6 months. Particularly, murders are down 25%. Foreign criminals who were protected by the previous administrations are now being extradited.
The economy is back on the growth track. A trade agreement with the EU was announced. The US have recognized Brazil as a major non-NATO ally. We’re about to join the OECD. Our interest rate is the lowest in history. The stock market is at historical highs. The government will sell many of its 400+ state-owned companies, reducing opportunity for corruption and saving billions of taxpayer money. Bureaucracy is being reduced by the Economic Freedom act. Unemployment is down. Minimum wage was raised on his first day in government. A decree that forbids confidential status in credit given by state banks, allowing them to be overseen by regulators, was signed in his first days.
Bolsonaro was the first President in our history elected without money from big corporations or a slush fund. He’s also the first president to avoid nominating his cabinet in exchange for support in Congress. Even without buying Congress support, vital reforms are being passed. Government propaganda costs have been slashed by billions.
Cuban doctors who were brought here under slave-like conditions have been replaced by Brazilian doctors. Eleven billion BRL that were supporting the Cuban dictatorship are now spent here.
I could go on, but you get the point. A lot is being done, and it’s still his first year. You may call him an SOB but there’s no way to deny things are getting better by the day.
> 15 seconds of Google and you can see how your first statement has little support
It’s great that you researched 15 seconds about Brazil. I live here, so what do I know... Your link is basically saying things are getting better, but who knows, they can get worse in the future, because god forbid the press admitting this president has done anything good.
> Privatizations to covert deficit?
First, what I said was that the economy was on the way to start growing again.
And yes, absolutely. Did you know Brazil has more than 400 state-owned companies? We absolutely must cut the deficit caused by the reckless spending that broke the country in the past.
> I could go on
Apparently you can’t, because you just dismissed all the other points with some scare quotes and no substance.
By the way, I think this administration is far from perfect. But it's strong in at least three areas, the Economy, Infrastructure and Justice cabinets, which are three areas where Brazil is severely lacking, and which have been abandoned by previous administrations, to say the least.
I wrote them in Portuguese because I don’t feel like explaining my opinions too much in English. I don’t find it productive and it might just bring other people into the discussion, which I didn’t want. I hope that was clear.
I hope you’re right and things get better. There would be no greater joy in my life than seeing Brasil succeed.
And how do you know I don't? Are you going to tell me you didn't notice my username?
> Your link is basically saying things are getting better, but who knows, they can get worse in the future, [...]
It uses apropriate language regarding future events. Do you have a crystal ball?
A complex system is hard to predict, but you can have an idea of how turning some knobs is going to affect things in the long run.
Also: using caution when talking about the future is what resonable people do; the ones full of certainty about the future are usually polititians of some particular kind.
> Did you know Brazil has more than 400 state-owned companies?
And do you know Canada has 250+?
The USA also has tons of state-owned companies, it just happen that they are owned by states not by the federal government. Most of them are called "public-benefit corporations", which are very similar in the way they operate (often treated as a synonym), see:
Now getting a proper number is not an easy task though, as each state keeps them independently. I have some numbers for New York if you want to have a look:
If every state has at least half of these (~25), you get around a thousand (1000). Yes, three zeroes. And I'm not counting local authorities.
Considering half again (~250), that would push the number to twelve thousand (12000)!
Say what you want about the specifics, but that looks like a very big number for me.
> Like 15s of google?
If 15s of Google is already more factually correct than your sources, maybe you can start there.
Last, but not least, not really into responding all your comment. I've spent some time talking to people defending Bolsonaro. They end up the same way as the guys defending Lula: ridiculed.
Take this as a word of advice: polititians do not deserve your loyalty, specially the ones full of certainty and bringing the "I'll fix everything" motto. I've seen the same thing at least since voting in Brazil became a thing again (hint: Collor). You are not the first and not the last, but you can be one less gullible person to buy into the propaganda. Think about it.
A "corrupt" party that could, but didn't, interfere with the largest corruption probe in Brazilian history was removed in a coup, replaced by a vice president from the party most involved in corruption scandals, allowing a farcical, inquisitorial investigation to jail a former president on thin "evidence" so that a neonazi (with a long history of low-level corruption and close ties with organized crime) could win an election...
It also has to be mentioned that the defendant has been convicted by three independent instances of the Brazilian justice system (local, regional and superior courts), each time unanimously.
> Those were not separate trials, but rubber stamping the first one.
This is what you’d probably like to be true, due to political alignment or something; however, there isn’t any evidence whatsoever that that was the case. Do you really think multiple judges in the country’s higher courts would all, unanimously, simply rubber stamp the decision of a local judge?
> Don't you think the judge privately advising the accusation without communicating the defense undermines the right to a fair trial?
No, because the messages do not reveal anything remotely illegal. The Brazilian justice model admits communication between the judge and the accusation and defense, and none of the leaks have shown anything that can be described as harmful to the defense.
And that is all assuming the messages have been faithfully reproduced; there’s strong indication they’ve been modified, for example when The Intercept published edited timelines and cited people who were not even part of the taskforce at the time.
