3 ms·
> There was a common headline at the time in newspapers: "apesar da crise", meaning "even though in a crisis", followed by the report of a new market/business s
by geezerjay 10y ago
> There was a common headline at the time in newspapers: "apesar da crise", meaning "even though in a crisis", followed by the report of a new market/business sector record in profits.
A couple of months ago in a conversation with a Brazilian colleague of mine, who has been living in europe for some years now, the subject of Brazil's crisis popped up. He told me that, at least when compared with the economic crisis experienced in europe, Brazil's crisis was a crisis in name only, which barely had any impact on the economy in general and disposable income of the average brazilian in particular.
Now, having read your comment, I have to say that it fits precisely with the observations made by my brazilian colleague.
- olh 10y agoToo bad you got downvoted for exposing this anecdote. Not everyone views it like that (sadly).
- woliveirajr 10y agoYour colleague is wrong. Deeply wrong. Crisis happens when unemployment is high (but government hides it, saying that anyone who is getting some governmental support isn't unemployed. And when prices rise. And when controlled prices are low against all the world market just to pump popularity... There are so many wrong and deceptive comments here, at news.y, that it really makes me sad about how much illusion was sold in those 12 years of PT government, and how many years and generations it'll take to fix this up.
- geezerjay 10y agoThe thing is, Brazil's supposedly high unemployment rate peaks around 12%, which is quite close to structural unemployment. Meanwhile in Spain the unemployment rate is around 22%. You're unintentionally proved my point: Brazil's supposed crisis isn't a crisis at all when compared to what happened all across europe. A slight economic downturn doesn't make it a crisis.
- woliveirajr 10y agoMy point is that this "12%" isn't real. It comes from the definition of "persons looking for a job and not finding one". A very precise definition that hides: - all persons that had a job, lost it and now are just receiving help from the government (but aren't looking for a job) - all those who are receiving benefits from the government to receive a minimum wage, and prefer to live in that situation than tho seek for a job - the almost 50% (I think) that have informal jobs, so aren't looking for one but don't contribute to the government providence (the gov. account that provides money to the benefits) Yes, I agree with you that it isn't like Spain. But it's because the govn. spent much money giving social benefits without some "financial exit" ahead. Exactly like some people calling the changes a "coup" have their reasons, but it doesn't compare with what happened (or almost happened) in Turkey. (And sorry if I can't express myself in a better way in English)
- woliveirajr 10y agoYour colleague is wrong. Deeply wrong. Crisis happens when unemployment is high (but government hides it, saying that anyone who is getting some governmental support isn't unemployed. And when prices rise. And when controlled prices are low against all the world market just to pump popularity... There are so many wrong and deceptive comments here, at news.y, that it really makes me sad about how much illusion was sold in those 12 years of PT government, and how many years and generations it'll take to fix this up.