1. FAILED GOVERNMENTS OF PT (WORKERS PARTY) IN BRAZIL
Fernando Alcoforado *
The balance of Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments indicates a lack of commitment
from both and the PT with the great struggles of the Brazilian people carried forward
the last 50 years, a traitor historical inconsistency. This inconsistency arises in the
economic, social, political and moral planes. The inconsistency in the economic sphere
is manifested in the fact that both governments have given continuity to the neoliberal
and anti-national policy of governments Fernando Collor, Itamar Franco and Fernando
Henrique Cardoso following what the Washington Consensus established in the 1990s.
Even the policy of privatization of state enterprises countered by the PT in its infancy is
being taken by the government Dilma Rousseff who arrived at the absurdity of
delivering 60 % of the oil of Libra field subsalt layer to foreign capital along. The so-
called public private partnership (PPP) implemented by the current government is
nothing more nor less than the new name given to the privatization of ports, airports,
highways, etc. process.
One of the great expectations that were created with the victory of PT governments was
that it would initiate the process of national emancipation with overcoming dependence
of Brazil to foreign capital and strengthening productive sectors belonging to Brazilians.
Instead, what we see is the increased financial and technological dependence of Brazil
in relation to the outside and the denationalization of the Brazilian economy. The
financial dependence on overseas results from the fact that the neoliberal economic
model imposed the need to attract foreign capital to cover the chronic and growing
deficit of the balance of payments on current account and technological dependence
results from the fact that most of the industries located in Brazil especially in cutting
edge sectors, being multinational.
The opening of the Brazilian economy from 1990 and maintained by governments Lula
and Dilma Rousseff worsened the situation of Brazilian industry that lost
competitiveness due to obstacles represented by the overvaluation of the exchange rate
and the “Brazil Cost” (high real interest rates, the highest tax burden, high labor costs,
high costs of the pension system, complex and inefficient tax laws, high cost of
electricity, poor infrastructure and lack of skilled labor).
The pity is that Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments failed to reverse the
deindustrialization process started in Brazil in 1985 that showed in 2011 participation
equivalent to that recorded in 1956 when the government Juscelino Kubitschek
launched his Plan Goals (14.6 % of GDP) after a period of great expansion of the
Brazilian industry from 1947 to 1985. Weakening of the Brazilian industry was decisive
for half of foreign direct investment in Brazil in recent years was aimed at the
acquisition of many domestic industries.
Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments were not able to promote sustainably economic
growth in Brazil at rates above 5 % per year required for generation of employment and
income in Brazil. The average growth rate from 2002 to 2012 was 3.45 % per year. For
the IMF itself, the reason to low economic growth in Brazil are growing deficit in the
transactions of goods and services with the rest of the world, the difficulty of investing
in infrastructure, inflation above-target requiring increase in the interest rate to curb
consumption and unlike that preaches the Brazilian government, high public debt.

2. According to the IMF, the expenses of the Union, states and municipalities account for
something close to 40 % of Gross Domestic Product. The IMF questions the fact that
the government spend more than it collects accumulating debts that are among the
highest in the developing world. The gross debt of Brazil closed the year 2013 at 67 %
of GDP.
The largest expenditures of the Brazilian government in 2013 were used to pay interest
and repay principal debt corresponding to 43.98 % of the Brazilian government budget.
Addition to the high expenditure on the servicing of public debt, high interest rates Selic
adopted Central Bank of the Brazilian government, the fifth largest in the entire world
economy, and the growing public sector deficit decisively contribute to the continued
increase in public debt in Brazil. Maintained the trend to allocate more resources for the
payment of interest and amortization of debt, there will be fewer resources available
(federal, state and local) government to invest in economic and social infrastructure of
Brazil. This explains the fact that the federal government does not have resources to
invest in economic and social infrastructure that requires investments of R$ 2.5 trillion,
adopt the policy of privatization of state enterprises and make auctions for oil
exploration in the pre - salt.
The failure of Lula and Dilma Rousseff in the social arena translates into the fact of not
having promoted the true social inclusion of the poor in their integration to the labor
market as a result of GDP growth, ie the increase of national wealth. There was a false
social inclusion because it took place with the granting of "alms" to 50 million poor
Brazilians through the “Bolsa Família” program with funds from the Treasury. The
failure of PT governments in the social sphere is also embodied in the fact that the real
unemployment rate corresponds to 20.8 % of the economically active population as
opposed to the official rate of 5.3% and 10.5 % IBGE DIEESE recorded in October
2012 .
The official unemployment rate is low because many unemployed were left out of the
calculation of the index such as the “Bolsa Família” beneficiaries. A striking proof that
the unemployment rate is high is the fact that public spending on unemployment
benefits grows without stopping in Brazil. The logical thing would be public spending
on unemployment insurance be the minimum possible occurrence of low unemployment
rates. This contradiction exists only because the official unemployment rate is wrong,
under sizing the number of people without jobs effectively in Brazil. The federal
government is cheating the official data of formal employment.
Adding the growing unemployment with the increasing expense of “Bolsa Familia”, one
can conclude that there are many Brazilians increasingly depending on state handouts to
keep. Can this be a sign of a healthy economy? Of course not. Can a government on
such data celebrate the economic, social and employment framework in Brazil?
Obviously not. Just as the neoliberal governments of Fernando Collor, Itamar Franco
and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, the neoliberal governments of Lula and Rousseff also
failed with the neoliberal economic policy that resulted in dismal economic growth in
the last 24 years (1.45 % per year). Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments also failed
with its social policy to not promote social inclusion based on the insertion of the poor
to the labor market and not reduce unemployment rates in Brazil.
The failure of PT governments of Lula and Rousseff in the political and moral planes
resulted from the fact promote alliances with José Sarney, Fernando Collor, Renan
Calheiros and other nefarious figures of the Republic and physiological parties such as

3. the PMDB, have contributed to the existence proven in the case of " mensalão" and the
rampant corruption in many instances the state apparatus as allegations of corruption
press. The lacking ethics and morals of former President Lula and President Dilma
Rousseff behavior also calls into question all serious members of the PT, allied parties
and personalities who support it should react against this state of affairs. The
respectability of the PT and allied leftist parties is being destroyed by former President
Lula and for president Rousseff.
*
Alcoforado, Fernando, engineer and doctor of Territorial Planning and Regional Development from the
University of Barcelona, a university professor and consultant in strategic planning, business planning,
regional planning and planning of energy systems, is the author of Globalização (Editora Nobel, São
Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova (Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, São Paulo,
1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do
desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado. Universidade de Barcelona,
http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globalização e Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel,
São Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era
Contemporânea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of the Economic and Social
Development-The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG,
Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe Planetária (P&A Gráfica e Editora,
Salvador, 2010), Amazônia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e combate ao aquecimento global
(Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2011) and Os Fatores Condicionantes do
Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012), among others.