Photo: PerriAntonio Márcio Buainain He has a degree in Law (University of the State of Rio de Janeiro) and Economics (Faculty of Political and Economic Sciences of Rio de Janeiro), with a specialization in Political Economy (Birkbeck College, University of London), a master's degree in Economics and Sociology (Federal University de Pernambuco) and a PhD in Economics (Unicamp Institute of Economics). He is a professor at the Institute of Economics (IE) at Unicamp, senior researcher at the National Institute of Science and Technology in Public Policies, Strategies and Development (INCT/PPED), at the Study Group on Organization of Research and Innovation (GEOPI), linked to the Geosciences Institute (IG) at Unicamp, and the Center for Agricultural Economics and the Environment (NEA), linked to IE. Among the books he edited, “The rural world in Brazil in the 21st Century: the formation of a new agricultural and agrarian standard” stands out, released in 2014, and which has already become a reference work on the development of agriculture and of the Brazilian rural world. In 2015 he co-edited the book “Intellectual Property and Innovations in Agriculture”, winner of 2nd place in the 55th Jabuti Award in the Economy, Administration, Business, Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure category.

 

Replacement and increase: advice from Dom Pedro II to rulers

Photos
image editing

Photo: Reproduction It's important to say that an increase is not an increase. This is how your Excellencies, ministers of the Federal Supreme Court, patiently taught us in lessons transmitted by all the country's media outlets on November 7th, when the 16,38% increase in the salary of ministers and members of the Attorney General's Office (PGR). “It’s a replacement, not an increase”, said, almost in unison, the ministers consulted. Minister Lewandowski washed his hands: “It was the Senate that decided. We have a gap and the replacement covers part of this gap in judges’ salaries in relation to inflation.” In the same vein, minister Marco Aurélio Melo explained that his excellencies “have been experiencing losses in recent years”, and that the decision “is a replacement of purchasing power considering the period between 2009 and 2014.” And so everyone said, except ministers Edson Fachin, Rosa Weber, Celso de Mello and Cármen Lúcia, who were against the readjustment.

From a legal point of view, there seems to be no doubt that “one thing is one thing and another thing is another thing”, as they say in popular parlance. One thing – the review – refers to the mere recomposition of the value of the currency as a result of the inflation recorded in the period, and the other thing – the increase or readjustment – ​​refers to the increase in the initial value, discounting the corrosive effect of inflation. Having graduated primarily in Law, I had no difficulty understanding this logic. But as I attended classical high school and had an unsatisfactory training in mathematics (today I realize that at the time it was already absurd to train young people without mastery of mathematical language, and today it is practically a crime that 70% of our 15-year-old students are below basic proficiency in this area, as indicated by PISA), I cannot understand how it is possible to replace a salary loss without at the same time granting a raise: if I had 10 and lost 2, replacing the loss requires an increase equivalent to what was lost . It seems that without an increase the account will not close. Therefore, as a layman, I can conclude that it is not correct to say that the increase granted is not an increase, even if the objective of the adjustment/increase was just to replace the losses.

I don't need to remind you what we all know: that in the same period that your excellencies lost part of their purchasing power, the average Brazilian income - which in 2017 was R$1268,00, the equivalent of 1/26 of the ministers' basic salary - was also reduced, and the majority are unable to obtain the adjustment generously granted to ministers. It is also necessary to say that due to the same economic circumstances that affected the purchasing power of the ministers, who in any case have housing assistance, good daily rates when they are away from the Planalto, a special and high-quality health plan, an official car, among other benefits.” minors”, practically 13 million Brazilians lost all their income and, as a bonus, they also lost part of the “dignity” that in our society comes from having a job and an income. And even worse, almost 15 million Brazilians – the discouraged, according to IBGE – no longer even have the hope of getting a job.

But it must also be said that the ministers are not alone in this demand for salary adjustments and increases and in the search for reparation for the right damaged by inflation. We see, everywhere, public servants demanding that governments make up salary losses, as if they had a magic wand to produce the necessary resources to meet demands and we were not experiencing the most serious economic crisis in the history of the Republic. The fact is that, even if we throw away the rights of others, including access to health and education services and a minimum of public security, it would not be possible to grant the increases because there is no miracle of the multiplication of fish, and not even the good governments – rare these days – can resolve, in the short term, this set of demands. This undoubtedly poses a thorny decision for politicians: the State must serve the Nation or the Nation must work to maintain a State that primarily cares for the corporate demands of its employees, without separating the wheat from the chaff and capitulating to the groups that have greater power.

This situation reminded me of a letter from Dom Pedro II to Princess Isabel, which I mention from memory. Responding to the princess's complaints about the difficulties she faced in living with the official budget allocated to her, Dom Pedro reminded her, firstly, that she was not a princess of the British Empire, and that he himself had never requested a raise (and I suppose like replacement) because he knew that if he did so, everyone else, senators, deputies, ministers and advisors, would increase their salaries, and the Empire would not be able to bear so many expenses. Their excellencies, so well informed, failed to take into account the effects of the replacement on public accounts, and the impact it will have on the well-being of the Nation – if it is sanctioned by President Temer. Nor does it seem like they thought that in this case their right and that of the minority that will benefit from the replacement-increase is directly opposed to the right of the absolute majority, starting with the 70% of retirees who receive the minimum wage, the sick who do not have access to basic medicines, the... Better to stop the list, which is too long for the space of the article.

In another letter, this one available in the excellent collection Counsel to Rulers, published by the Federal Senate, Dom Pedro II gives his daughter a good lesson, which could well be used by ministers, when he writes to her: “With well-understood economics, and avoiding luxury as much as possible, there is always enough money for a lot, and I am sure that my daughter will not want any increase in what she receives from the State.” A clear example of public morality that is lacking these days.

Quite the opposite of what we see in Brazil today: “luxury” has become a right and a lot of money is never enough to satisfy the needs of a small caste of employees who feel above citizenship. And increases and readjustments are always demanded, and granted, in the name of the greater public interest, although those who serve the population most, health professionals, teachers and police officers, among others, always receive much less than those who have greater political power. .

It must be said that this book of Advice to Governments should be mandatory reading for all elected politicians and state officials. It is likely that some cannot even read, as they are functionally illiterate, even though they have been democratically elected and/or regularly appointed to a position paid as payment for favors that Dom Pedro II condemned, when he advised the Princess Regent to avoid appointments of “any authority” on account of “thanks and favors”, and recommend that the occupation of positions should depend, “especially the appointment of honest and capable employees for jobs", Remembering that "Electoral interests contradict, in the current state, directly or indirectly, the correctness of this appointment.” Another part of the compulsory readers would learn nothing, but in this case reading would be worth punishment. And certainly many – perhaps the majority of public servants – would start to take into account several of the good advice contained in the volume, and the Nation would benefit from the actions of these officials and government officials.

Speaking of the Treasury, it seems that Dom Pedro II wrote with today's situation in mind: “the state of this [the Treasury] requires a lot of economy, that is, spending with the greatest benefit.” In a second letter, he returns to the subject and says it is the emperor's duty to avoid “being burdensome to the public treasury, even for what may appear to be public or private expenses, and not accepting favors from them or from the Legislative Power in such a sense.” It seems that he was already condemning those present, the give and take and the spurious arrangements that took over Brazilian politics. The State should not be burdensome to society, which it must serve.

An undoubtedly neoliberal emperor, who sends his daughter a quote from Du Halde, found in the Compilation of Works Written under the Ming, which says: “The path of the dynasty of Tsin and Tiu comes from the city, which invece dilimiti as gli antichi ad un ispezione generale, the sole that the sovereign convenga, precesero governre ogni cosa immediately da sestessi." And he complements it with another statement, from Cantu (Universal History), which asks: “is it not a question of the general cause of rovina alle monarchie?" Not just the monarchy, as it clearly illustrates our current ruin, caused mainly by the actions of a State that for decades has intended to govern all things, and for that purpose has been distributing resources and favors, and has become burdensome for the Treasury and for society .

Dom Pedro II is also concerned with the formation of the cabinet, in a passage whose reading is very useful for the current moment. He says that "The State Council must be made up of people from both constitutional parties, that is, who respect our government system, and who are honest, with greater intellectual capacity and knowledge of public affairs. This principle must be well established, even so that the Ministry's opponents do not think that it is proposing them as State counselors in order to influence their political opinions.” And concludes: “Intolerance, which is not independence, which the parties are showing, demands all the acumen in the way they act.” Also recommends “choose the honest, the moderate, the one with the most intellectual capacity and services to the State".

His strategic vision as a statesman is impressive. In 1876, in a slave empire, Dom Pedro says that “without widespread education there will never be good elections; Therefore, it is necessary to take into account, as much as possible, this very important consideration.” Almost 150 years later, true education is still a privilege, and the proof is Brazil's position in international teaching proficiency tests. It is also concerned with the infrastructure for the development of the Empire: after recommending “that progress should be made on the bills for the Madeira railways, and [that] should connect the top of the S. Francisco basin along the encachoeirada part”, says that it gives “Such importance is attached to a railway to Mato Grosso, that I cannot help but insistently recommend that attention be paid to its best direction and construction, although slow, as Treasury resources allow.” You certainly never imagined that it would be so slow that it still hasn't been completed to this day. Agribusiness is grateful for the measures requested by Dom Pedro II in his letter to the princess.

I deviated from the main topic, and I apologize to the readers for the loss of focus, and I hope you understand that I was seduced by the set of advice given by an important character in our history, but completely unknown to the majority of young people, who may not even know that Brazil was once a true empire, and not just in samba school parades.  

It must be said that President Temer lost his last opportunity to behave like a statesman. Maybe he never read Dom Pedro's advice. And if he read them, he didn't learn. Like most Brazilian students 
 

Access the book:

https://idisabel.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/cartas-de-pedro-ii-a-princesa-imperial.pdf

 

 

twitter_icofacebook_ico