Support NeoGAF

[Sethista]

I agree with you that PT government gave privileged treatment to the poor and the very rich and left the middle class to it's own devices. As the economy went down the middle class was hit the hardest.

But I disagree that income distribution programs shouldn't exist. They exist even in first world countries like Sweden, Germany, England and Belgium. Considering the inequality rates of our country income distribution is a necessity.

You do realize that everyone besides PT (including Temer now and Aécio during the campaign) said that such programs are going to be not only maintained but expanded right? They are really not going away.

Right, but I never said they shouldnt exist, did I? I only said they did ONLY that and expected to ride on that to stay in power.

They should exist, but not the way it is now. They exist in first world countries, but there they are maintained very differently. you have to prove to be in school or searching for a job to keep them, and the whole objective is for people to get out of them, not be in a permanent state where they keep relying on it to survive.

THey should be expanded, but the checks for it should be expanded as well. The main objective of projects like this is to one day not have the need for it to exist.

 

[Sinoox]

Way to go Brazil! I have faith in you to take control of your government. Those pictures are incredibly inspiring to look at, that's what we need in the US right now. Hope everyone stays safe.

Nothing is going to happen.

I really don't appreciate people like you. Do you realize how destructive that mentality is?

 

[JJD]

When you say that the voting was rigged, you're accusing the congressmen of acting in bad faith and frauding the voting. You're accusing them of fraud. And about Jovair, fuck, even the goverment at the time didn't think enough of that to call off the commission. They could have. And if you really want to go there, why ignore the governments effort to buy votes? Isn't that somehow even more fraudulent than the conspiracy you're implying?

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of rig

rigged rigging

transitive verb

1
: to manipulate or control usually by deceptive or dishonest means <rig an election>

2
: to fix in advance for a desired result <rig the contest>

The committee that evaluated the impeachment process was rigged IMO, but it's doesn't necessarily mean it was fraudulent. You're quick to throw out accusations about me being baseless eh? I don't want to be pedantic but I I think have showed you previously that I'm not as baseless as you think. You accused me of being reductive about other posters claims but you do exactly the same here.

The committee should have picked someone as unbiased as possible to make the report. They didn't. The side that benefited the most from the impeachment practically wrote the report themselves providing whatever conclusions they needed to justify it.

Not only that but Cunha tried to change the composition of the committee when he ruled that the actual parties should vote to pick the components of the committee instead of the party leader as the law says. There was a big commotion over this with Temer, PMDB and Picciani. Thankfully the STF intervened.

Both exemples perfectly fit the definition of rig. The first one, the report by Jovair fits like a glove the second definition. The Cunha's exemple fits the first, it was even deemed illegal.

Regardless of this, anyone is free to disagree, and I have no qualms about it. Just don't say I'm making this up out of my ass.

As far as I know it, the government couldn't legally call off the committee after the congress president installed it.

You're absolutely right that the government tried to buy support, I have acknowledged that in a previous post. It's undeniable.

But buying support through nominations and the liberation of parliamentary amendments isn't illegal. It's just governing 101 as far as Brazil is concerned.

You may argue that it's imoral, but it's not illegal, and again it's common practice. It's funny, did you know that Brazil is the only country in the whole world were parliament members have a budged and can freely spend money where they see fit? Another one of our innovations.

Do you at least concede that Temer, PMDB and PSDB were promising nominations and doing exactly the same things as well to gather support? They have been building a list of probable ministers for months, it's in the press, they have actually invited people. They have been mapping all the nominations the president can make and they were making offers to voters the same way as the government.

If you can't at least admit that, then I'm sorry but I have to call you out on your double standards.

Listen, the PSDB filed a suit asking that the government was prohibited from trying to gather support through nominations last week it and you know what happened? Nothing.

Nothing happened because it isn't illegal. Buying support is only illegal when you're paying money directly to the congressman, you know like FHC and PSDB did with the reelection amendment and when Lula copied then on the Mensalão.

 

[Maedhros]

Alot of disccussion here about what is or isnt crime, if DIlma should be held accountable, etc.

For me, I want the impeachment for another issue altogether.

For those of you who do not live in Brazil, you have to understand. PT is a party that only decided to govern for the very poor and the very rich. THey created things like giving away monthly payments for vey poor people to at least be able to feed themselves, and the bankers never got ritcher under her.

TO justify all this, they threw the middle class of Brazil under the bus, and in numerous commercials and talks and interviews, they said that the people against their populist projects hate blacks, minorities, poor people, they hate that por people are "getting better" under them (that is debateable) and that the middle class only want rights, are elitists, dont want anyone else to succeed, etc.

I am middle class in Brazil (so far, this crisis is hitting me hard). And this rhetoric does not represent me. I never heard of anyone in all my 32 years that has hate of poor people getting better,

and meawhile, they did next to nothing is 14 years of govt to fix education and health. Nothing for the middle class to increase consuption and help generate more jobs, none of that.

They ride on this magic idea that to give money to the very poor is noble, but they do nothing to fix the base of the problems for everyone.

WIth that rhetoric, they divided the people here in poor people and people that hate them. And now they are surprised that millions are against them, and dont feel represented.

PT needs to go, so we can finally unite again and take out the rest of the motherfuckers that are left in govt, including temer and cunha and calheiros, and without this wall PT created to keep us apart, I am certain we can move forward.

I think its funny also that PT supporters are asking people like me "I doubt you will march against cunha and temer after dilma is gone" First, I didnt vote Temer in, PT supporters did. And second, my response to them always is "with your help I think we can do it together"

Its time to unite. Not this separation black and white bullshit.

I'm failing to understand something: Who in the past has EVER governed for the middle class? Seriously, who? FHC? Collor? Sarney? Lula?

 

[forknknife]

Way to go Brazil! I have faith in you to take control of your government. Those pictures are incredibly inspiring to look at, that's what we need in the US right now. Hope everyone stays safe.



I really don't appreciate people like you. Do you realize how destructive that mentality is?

Don't stop at the first posts and read the thread. OP is really biased and misinformative of what's going on in Brazil, imo.

 

[kess]

Way to go Brazil! I have faith in you to take control of your government. Those pictures are incredibly inspiring to look at, that's what we need in the US right now. Hope everyone stays safe.



I really don't appreciate people like you. Do you realize how destructive that mentality is?

Didn't you say that you were voting for Sanders in the the other thread? The Brazilian opposition is pretty much the opposite of that, despite the misleading "social democracy" label.

 

[Metra]

Way to go Brazil! I have faith in you to take control of your government. Those pictures are incredibly inspiring to look at, that's what we need in the US right now. Hope everyone stays safe.

Thanks for your support. But, just to be fair (and as others have said), the information in the OP can be a little misleading, especially to people who are not familiar with Brazil's political context.

This video has been posted a few pages back, and I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to understand what's going on in Brazil.

Just as an update, congress voted in favor of Dilma's impeachment yesterday. 367 of the 513 deputies backed the impeachment, and now it'll advance to the upper house.

 

[Massa]

Didn't you say that you were voting for Sanders in the the other thread? The Brazilian opposition is pretty much the opposite of that, despite the misleading "social democracy" label.

No they're not, it's the current government that is the opposite of that, despite what their supporters say.

 

[Lionel Richie]

Nothing happened because it isn't illegal. Buying support is only illegal when you're paying money directly to the congressman, you know like FHC and PSDB did with the reelection amendment and when Lula copied then on the Mensalão.

I think it's sort of amusing you referring to buying votes as not being illegal after mentioning a bunch of non illegal facts and using them to "prove" how the voting was rigged.

If you do know with absolute certainty that it was rigged, do warn Cardozo about it. I'm sure he can't wait to go to STF again. And lose again.

 

[JJD]

I think it's sort of amusing you referring to buying votes as not being illegal after mentioning a bunch of non illegal facts and using them to "prove" how the voting was rigged.

If you do know with absolute certainty that it was rigged, do warn Cardozo about it. I'm sure he can't wait to go to STF again. And lose again.

You're a lousy debater. Or just a plain bad reader.

You went from trying to deny everything I said topic by topic, to needless accusations about me being baseless when you couldn't do it. Now you're just trying to be witty...and failing.

I gave you my honest opinion, and I corroborated it with respected sources such as Folha, Estadão and O Globo and you're just disregarding it without even giving a thought.

You're not even trying to argue anything anymore, you're just answering with barely coherent babble because you don't want to be wrong on the internet.

You said I had no proof or sources previously, and I showed you wrong when I gave you then.

I conceded to you the very few times you that I though you were right. But you're incapable of doing the same even when I showed you what you asked for. You just conveniently forget about it.

You even went grammar nazi on me when I called Dilma "presidenta" saying that it was "questionable", then backtracking to not 100% correct (LOL is it at least 70% correct? Where are you pulling these percentages from?) and I showed that you were wrong again. It's not only perfectly normal, but it's actually in the law.

It's obvious that you don't want to learn anything from anyone, and you have already made up your mind. And you clearly have nothing to teach considering your last posts so I have nothing to learn from engaging with you in this back and forth.

I'm going to ignore you from now on. Have a nice day.

No they're not, it's the current government that is the opposite of that, despite what their supporters say.

The least you could do is post the sources for those graphs for us to see then. As they are right now they prove nothing.

I'm tempted to post that famous GAF made drawing about graphs but I'm getting tired of this thread.

 

[Massa]

The least you could do is post the sources for those graphs for us to see then. As they are right now they prove nothing.

I'm tempted to post that famous GAF made drawing about graphs but I'm getting tired of this thread.

Graphs and links to sources are here.

Of course that's not even mentioning the billions of dollars funneled to big business via BNDES (look up JBS) and state contracts, or trying to influence the STF to save a billionaire from a conviction of 19 years in prison, and on and on. To suggest that Dilma's government in any way stands for what Bernie Sanders proposes in the US is absolutely preposterous.

 

[JJD]

Graphs and links to sources are here.

Of course that's not even mentioning the billions of dollars funneled to big business via BNDES (look up JBS) and state contracts, or trying to influence the STF to save a billionaire from a conviction of 19 years in prison, and on and on. To suggest that Dilma's government in any way stands for what Bernie Sanders proposes in the US is absolutely preposterous.

Thanks man, I going to read then later!

 

[Magni]

A friend of mine living in São Paulo posted his take on the situation yesterday: https://medium.com/@mlizoain/a-privileged-view-of-the-brazilian-crisis-2e828fb1c5c7#.cmv064pza

I'm curious as to what BrazilGAF thinks of it.

One excerpt:

In one article, “in light of this moment of political turbulence,” Folha asked twenty-three of their columnists to share their opinion on “the main challenges of the country, regardless of how the impeachment process ends.”

These twenty-three luminaries, these twenty-three experts, these twenty-three great journalists gave twenty-three different answers.

Not one of them used the word water.

Not one of them used the word Amazon, or deforestation.

Not one of them used the word police, violence, or human rights.

 

[Jotaka]

A friend of mine living in São Paulo posted his take on the situation yesterday: https://medium.com/@mlizoain/a-privileged-view-of-the-brazilian-crisis-2e828fb1c5c7#.cmv064pza

I'm curious as to what BrazilGAF thinks of it.

One excerpt:

The problem is Folha de São Paulo is really crap journal. Funny that people in city don't take it to serious but people from outside the city/states give too much credit "prestige like the New York Times" that piece of shit of paper. The brazilian press is very biased because is controlled by politician... yes politician family that "earned" the right to own TV channels /smh

 

[Lionel Richie]

You're a lousy debater. Or just a plain bad reader.

You went from trying to deny everything I said topic by topic, to needless accusations about me being baseless when you couldn't do it. Now you're just trying to be witty...and failing.

Excuse me? Let me try to be as witty as I can: the overbearing condescension in nearly everyone one of your posts is fucking annoying. I know you think you're stylin' on fools, but it doesn't work because you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

Also, you didn't back in any way shape or form your allegations that the voting was rigged, you presented anecdotal evidence, one that Cardozo tried on the STF and failed and will try again and will fail again. The rest was just bullshit posturing and every time I said something you couldn't argue with, you changed the subject and wrote a confusing wall of text.

Please do ignore me.

 

[JJD]

Graphs and links to sources are here.

Of course that's not even mentioning the billions of dollars funneled to big business via BNDES (look up JBS) and state contracts, or trying to influence the STF to save a billionaire from a conviction of 19 years in prison, and on and on. To suggest that Dilma's government in any way stands for what Bernie Sanders proposes in the US is absolutely preposterous.

Jesus man...is the source of your graphs really Facebook? A Facebook profile???

Look, I tried to give that profile credit and I wasted my time reading the post about the first two graphs you linked.

They said all their numbers are from official channels. They even mentioned FUNAI a government agency as a source.

But when I tried to click on the links from said sources, expecting it to be a .gov page, it directed me to an anonymous google drive account with excel spreadsheets as the source! Fucking excel spreadsheets!

How can anyone fact check their numbers to see if they are actually telling the truth?

I always see you around on gaming and off topic with good, well articulated posts.

But can't you see how disingenuous to the conversation those graphs are? There is no way to tell if they are true or a complete fabrication.

The second post on that profile after the one you linked is a graph comparing how many times Dilma and FHC received visits from congressman Eduardo Suplicy!!! What? I mean really???

Finally I found the post of that graph you linked comparing real minimum wage gains under FHC and Dilma, and they actually posted a source from Folha...but talking about a totally different thing!

The folha article they linked only said that Dilma was considering freezing the current minimum wage. It said nothing about a comparison between her minimum wage and FHC, it never even mentioned FHC at all. They then posted a link as another source for the graph...with another google doc spreadsheet!!!

I don't know what to say anymore man so instead I will back out of this thread before I say something I shouldn't and get my ass banned.

 

[Massa]

Jesus man...is the source of your graphs really Facebook? A Facebook profile???

Look, I tried to give that profile credit and I wasted my time reading the post about the first two graphs you linked.

They said all their numbers are from official channels. They even mentioned FUNAI a government agency as a source.

But when I tried to click on the links from said sources, expecting it to be a .gov page, it directed me to an anonymous google drive account with excel spreadsheets as the source! Fucking excel spreadsheets!

How can anyone fact check their numbers to see if they are actually telling the truth?

I always see you around on gaming and off topic with good, well articulated posts.

But can't you see how disingenuous to the conversation those graphs are? There is no way to tell if they are true or a complete fabrication.

The second post on that profile after the one you linked is a graph comparing how many times Dilma and FHC received visits from congressman Eduardo Suplicy!!! What? I mean really???

Finally I found the post of that graph you linked comparing real minimum wage gains under FHC and Dilma, and they actually posted a source from Folha...but talking about a totally different thing!

The folha article they linked only said that Dilma was considering freezing the current minimum wage. It said nothing about a comparison between her minimum wage and FHC, it never even mentioned FHC at all. They then posted a link as another source for the graph...with another google doc spreadsheet!!!

I don't know what to say anymore man so instead I will back out of this thread before I say something I shouldn't and get my ass banned.

The FUNAI data was obtained directly from FUNAI, they don't make it available on the internet but you can contact them directly and they will email it to you. Likewise with the other Google spreadsheets, they're directly from the government. I know this because I follow the person who got that data on twitter, if you want to get the data yourself to confirm ask @gustavokov about it.
The Suplicy thing was quite a deal when she refused to even meet with him the last time, I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it. It's very emblematic.

 

[Magni]

The problem is Folha de São Paulo is really crap journal. Funny that people in city don't take it to serious but people from outside the city/states give too much credit "prestige like the New York Times" that piece of shit of paper. The brazilian press is very biased because is controlled by politician... yes politician family that "earned" the right to own TV channels /smh

Is there a good alternative? I'm reminded of the situation in Chile, where all the prestigious newspapers were owned by a handful of families in bed with the political class there.

 

[Tiops]

Is there a good alternative? I'm reminded of the situation in Chile, where all the prestigious newspapers were owned by a handful of families in bed with the political class there.

I think Estadão is pretty good. It's the most impartial one I saw in the whole process. Folha lost their credibility with me recently with their increasing desire to protect the government in the last few month.

At least I didn't see anyone crying because of Estadão on Facebook.

 

[JJD]

The FUNAI data was obtained directly from FUNAI, they don't make it available on the internet but you can contact them directly and they will email it to you. Likewise with the other Google spreadsheets, they're directly from the government. I know this because I follow the person who got that data on twitter, if you want to get the data yourself to confirm ask @gustavokov about it.
The Suplicy thing was quite a deal when she refused to even meet with him the last time, I'm surprised you hadn't heard about it. It's very emblematic.

What about the minimum wage comparison? Where did he get those? Why did he link an article from Folha that has nothing to do with a comparison between both presidents? It's disingenuous at least.

Is he comparing FHC 2 terms to Dilma's first? How does that work? Is it a direct comparison? How did he work his math? 8 years against 4? Or is he pulling numbers from her stillborn second term as well?

If he really wanted to make a pertinent comparison why not make graphs about FHC 2 finished terms and Lula's 2 finished terms as well? I wonder how social numbers would look like, and I bet they wouldn't look favorable to FHC.

Did he correct the old FHC numbers? Did he take into consideration inflation, and monetary devalorization when he made the graph about minimum wage? You know you can't just compare old numbers and current ones like that right? That's not how statistics work.

If your friend really wants to have credibility tell him to post himself the docs he got from FUNAI and the government, so that anyone that sees his profile can fact check then and not just me. If anyone can ask for then via e-mail it means they are public and he won't get into trouble for posting then. There is no reason for him not to do it. Except if he never really had this numbers at all. Personally I'll give him the benefit of doubt since you're vouching for him, but I doubt others will.

As it is right now that profile is just trying to spread misinformation. And he isn't even being successful considering how many people are following his page.

He is the one making those claims, making those graphs. The burden of proof falls into his hands not mine or anyone else.

He may correct those posts and actually provide real documents corroborating his graphs, but as they are right now, no one in their right mind would give then credence.

Unfortunately, there's not a lot of people operating at their right mind on our country at the present times, on both sides.

 

[Massa]

I just checked the minimum wage comparison, and the source is linked right there in the spreadsheet. It uses DIEESE data on "required" and actual minimum wage. The Folha link is only about their comment on future projections, it's a minor point.

What misinformation is there?

 

[JJD]

I just checked the minimum wage comparison, and the source is linked right there in the spreadsheet. It uses DIEESE data on "required" and actual minimum wage. The Folha link is only about their comment on future projections, it's a minor point.

What misinformation is there?

If you really have to ask...

Here is your friends graph:

And here is the source you're linking to:

Período Salário mínimo nominal Salário mínimo necessário
2016
Março R$ 880,00 R$ 3.736,26
Fevereiro R$ 880,00 R$ 3.725,01
Janeiro R$ 880,00 R$ 3.795,24
2015
Dezembro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.518,51
Novembro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.399,22
Outubro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.210,28
Setembro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.240,27
Agosto R$ 788,00 R$ 3.258,16
Julho R$ 788,00 R$ 3.325,37
Junho R$ 788,00 R$ 3.299,66
Maio R$ 788,00 R$ 3.377,62
Abril R$ 788,00 R$ 3.251,61
Março R$ 788,00 R$ 3.186,92
Fevereiro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.182,81
Janeiro R$ 788,00 R$ 3.118,62
2014
Dezembro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.975,55
Novembro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.923,22
Outubro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.967,07
Setembro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.862,73
Agosto R$ 724,00 R$ 2.861,55
Julho R$ 724,00 R$ 2.915,07
Junho R$ 724,00 R$ 2.979,25
Maio R$ 724,00 R$ 3.079,31
Abril R$ 724,00 R$ 3.019,07
Março R$ 724,00 R$ 2.992,19
Fevereiro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.778,63
Janeiro R$ 724,00 R$ 2.748,22
2013
Dezembro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.765,44
Novembro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.761,58
Outubro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.729,24
Setembro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.621,70
Agosto R$ 678,00 R$ 2.685,47
Julho R$ 678,00 R$ 2.750,83
Junho R$ 678,00 R$ 2.860,21
Maio R$ 678,00 R$ 2.873,56
Abril R$ 678,00 R$ 2.892,47
Março R$ 678,00 R$ 2.824,92
Fevereiro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.743,69
Janeiro R$ 678,00 R$ 2.674,88
2012
Dezembro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.561,47
Novembro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.514,09
Outubro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.617,33
Setembro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.616,41
Agosto R$ 622,00 R$ 2.589,78
Julho R$ 622,00 R$ 2.519,97
Junho R$ 622,00 R$ 2.416,38
Maio R$ 622,00 R$ 2.383,28
Abril R$ 622,00 R$ 2.329,35
Março R$ 622,00 R$ 2.295,58
Fevereiro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.323,21
Janeiro R$ 622,00 R$ 2.398,82
2011
Dezembro R$ 545,00 R$ 2.329,35
Novembro R$ 545,00 R$ 2.349,26
Outubro R$ 545,00 R$ 2.329,94
Setembro R$ 545,00 R$ 2.285,83
Agosto R$ 545,00 R$ 2.278,77
Julho R$ 545,00 R$ 2.212,66
Junho R$ 545,00 R$ 2.297,51
Maio R$ 545,00 R$ 2.293,31
Abril R$ 545,00 R$ 2.255,84
Março R$ 545,00 R$ 2.247,94
Fevereiro R$ 540,00 R$ 2.194,18
Janeiro R$ 540,00 R$ 2.194,76
2010
Dezembro R$ 510,00 R$ 2.227,53
Novembro R$ 510,00 R$ 2.222,99
Outubro R$ 510,00 R$ 2.132,09
Setembro R$ 510,00 R$ 2.047,58
Agosto R$ 510,00 R$ 2.023,89
Julho R$ 510,00 R$ 2.011,03
Junho R$ 510,00 R$ 2.092,36
Maio R$ 510,00 R$ 2.157,88
Abril R$ 510,00 R$ 2.257,52
Março R$ 510,00 R$ 2.159,65
Fevereiro R$ 510,00 R$ 2.003,30
Janeiro R$ 510,00 R$ 1.987,26
2009
Dezembro R$ 465,00 R$ 1.995,91
Novembro R$ 465,00 R$ 2.139,06
Outubro R$ 465,00 R$ 2.085,89
Setembro R$ 465,00 R$ 2.065,47
Agosto R$ 465,00 R$ 2.005,07
Julho R$ 465,00 R$ 1.994,82
Junho R$ 465,00 R$ 2.046,99
Maio R$ 465,00 R$ 2.045,06
Abril R$ 465,00 R$ 1.972,64
Março R$ 465,00 R$ 2.005,57
Fevereiro R$ 465,00 R$ 2.075,55
Janeiro R$ 415,00 R$ 2.077,15
2008
Dezembro R$ 415,00 R$ 2.141,08
Novembro R$ 415,00 R$ 2.007,84
Outubro R$ 415,00 R$ 2.014,73
Setembro R$ 415,00 R$ 1.971,55
Agosto R$ 415,00 R$ 2.025,99
Julho R$ 415,00 R$ 2.178,30
Junho R$ 415,00 R$ 2.072,70
Maio R$ 415,00 R$ 1.987,51
Abril R$ 415,00 R$ 1.918,12
Março R$ 415,00 R$ 1.881,32
Fevereiro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.900,31
Janeiro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.924,59
2007
Dezembro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.803,11
Novembro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.726,24
Outubro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.797,56
Setembro R$ 380,00 R$ 1.737,16
Agosto R$ 380,00 R$ 1.733,88
Julho R$ 380,00 R$ 1.688,35
Junho R$ 380,00 R$ 1.628,96
Maio R$ 380,00 R$ 1.620,64
Abril R$ 380,00 R$ 1.672,56
Março R$ 350,00 R$ 1.620,89
Fevereiro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.562,25
Janeiro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.565,61
2006
Dezembro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.564,52
Novembro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.613,08
Outubro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.510,00
Setembro R$ 350,00 R$ 1.492,69
Agosto R$ 350,00 R$ 1.442,62
Julho R$ 350,00 R$ 1.436,74
Junho R$ 350,00 R$ 1.447,58
Maio R$ 350,00 R$ 1.503,70
Abril R$ 350,00 R$ 1.536,96
Março R$ 300,00 R$ 1.489,33
Fevereiro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.474,71
Janeiro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.496,56
2005
Dezembro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.607,11
Novembro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.551,41
Outubro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.468,24
Setembro R$ 300,00 R$ 1.458,42
Agosto R$ 300,00 R$ 1.471,18
Julho R$ 300,00 R$ 1.497,23
Junho R$ 300,00 R$ 1.538,56
Maio R$ 300,00 R$ 1.588,80
Abril R$ 260,00 R$ 1.538,64
Março R$ 260,00 R$ 1.477,49
Fevereiro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.474,96
Janeiro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.452,28
2004
Dezembro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.468,08
Novembro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.439,68
Outubro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.510,67
Setembro R$ 260,00 R$ 1.532,18
Agosto R$ 260,00 R$ 1.596,11
Julho R$ 260,00 R$ 1.527,56
Junho R$ 260,00 R$ 1.538,06
Maio R$ 260,00 R$ 1.522,01
Abril R$ 240,00 R$ 1.386,47
Março R$ 240,00 R$ 1.402,63
Fevereiro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.422,46
Janeiro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.445,39
2003
Dezembro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.420,61
Novembro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.408,76
Outubro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.391,37
Setembro R$ 240,00 R$ 1.366,76
Agosto R$ 240,00 R$ 1.359,03
Julho R$ 240,00 R$ 1.396,50
Junho R$ 240,00 R$ 1.421,62
Maio R$ 240,00 R$ 1.478,16
Abril R$ 240,00 R$ 1.557,55
Março R$ 200,00 R$ 1.466,73
Fevereiro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.399,10
Janeiro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.385,91
2002
Dezembro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.378,19
Novembro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.357,43
Outubro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.270,40
Setembro R$ 200,00 R$ 1.247,97
Agosto R$ 200,00 R$ 1.168,92
Julho R$ 200,00 R$ 1.154,63
Junho R$ 200,00 R$ 1.129,18
Maio R$ 200,00 R$ 1.121,53
Abril R$ 200,00 R$ 1.143,29
Março R$ 180,00 R$ 1.091,21
Fevereiro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.084,91
Janeiro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.116,66
2001
Dezembro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.101,54
Novembro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.091,04
Outubro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.081,04
Setembro R$ 180,00 R$ 1.076,84
Agosto R$ 180,00 R$ 1.070,46
Julho R$ 180,00 R$ 1.055,84
Junho R$ 180,00 R$ 1.072,14
Maio R$ 180,00 R$ 1.090,28
Abril R$ 180,00 R$ 1.092,97
Março R$ 151,00 R$ 1.066,68
Fevereiro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.037,02
Janeiro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.036,35
2000
Dezembro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.004,26
Novembro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.021,65
Outubro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.030,05
Setembro R$ 151,00 R$ 1.003,67
Agosto R$ 151,00 R$ 936,01
Julho R$ 151,00 R$ 936,12
Junho R$ 151,00 R$ 919,41
Maio R$ 151,00 R$ 939,06
Abril R$ 151,00 R$ 973,84
Março R$ 136,00 R$ 967,21
Fevereiro R$ 136,00 R$ 930,83
Janeiro R$ 136,00 R$ 942,76
1999
Dezembro R$ 136,00 R$ 940,58
Novembro R$ 136,00 R$ 940,16
Outubro R$ 136,00 R$ 933,44
Setembro R$ 136,00 R$ 908,74
Agosto R$ 136,00 R$ 892,44
Julho R$ 136,00 R$ 870,76
Junho R$ 136,00 R$ 896,22
Maio R$ 136,00 R$ 882,53
Abril R$ 130,00 R$ 878,24
Março R$ 130,00 R$ 892,86
Fevereiro R$ 130,00 R$ 896,81
Janeiro R$ 130,00 R$ 880,93
1998
Dezembro R$ 130,00 R$ 857,66
Novembro R$ 130,00 R$ 854,89
Outubro R$ 130,00 R$ 861,02
Setembro R$ 130,00 R$ 844,55
Agosto R$ 130,00 R$ 852,11
Julho R$ 130,00 R$ 882,78
Junho R$ 130,00 R$ 936,46
Maio R$ 130,00 R$ 942,09
Abril R$ 120,00 R$ 916,30
Março R$ 120,00 R$ 869,76
Fevereiro R$ 120,00 R$ 854,55
Janeiro R$ 120,00 R$ 864,88
1997
Dezembro R$ 120,00 R$ 837,16
Novembro R$ 120,00 R$ 802,13
Outubro R$ 120,00 R$ 789,69
Setembro R$ 120,00 R$ 776,42
Agosto R$ 120,00 R$ 768,36
Julho R$ 120,00 R$ 770,37
Junho R$ 120,00 R$ 790,11
Maio R$ 120,00 R$ 820,86
Abril R$ 112,00 R$ 863,71
Março R$ 112,00 R$ 849,51
Fevereiro R$ 112,00 R$ 787,93
Janeiro R$ 112,00 R$ 774,40
1996
Dezembro R$ 112,00 R$ 778,27
Novembro R$ 112,00 R$ 794,40
Outubro R$ 112,00 R$ 809,44
Setembro R$ 112,00 R$ 814,39
Agosto R$ 112,00 R$ 817,08
Julho R$ 112,00 R$ 823,21
Junho R$ 112,00 R$ 803,28
Maio R$ 112,00 R$ 801,95
Abril R$ 100,00 R$ 775,26
Março R$ 100,00 R$ 764,17
Fevereiro R$ 100,00 R$ 781,85
Janeiro R$ 100,00 R$ 781,35
1995
Dezembro R$ 100,00 R$ 763,09
Novembro R$ 100,00 R$ 742,41
Outubro R$ 100,00 R$ 729,57
Setembro R$ 100,00 R$ 710,89
Agosto R$ 100,00 R$ 723,65
Julho R$ 100,00 R$ 729,99
Junho R$ 100,00 R$ 735,49
Maio R$ 100,00 R$ 773,18
Abril R$ 70,00 R$ 812,78
Março R$ 70,00 R$ 739,24
Fevereiro R$ 70,00 R$ 701,14
Janeiro R$ 70,00 R$ 723,82
1994
Dezembro R$ 70,00 R$ 728,90
Novembro R$ 70,00 R$ 744,25
Outubro R$ 70,00 R$ 740,83
Setembro R$ 70,00 R$ 695,64
Agosto R$ 64,79 R$ 645,53
Julho R$ 64,79 R$ 590,33

I'm not arguing DIEESE numbers, they are real. I just want to know how he made that graph. How he arrived at that conclusion.

Because I'm looking at those numbers right now and I'm not seeing the same thing.

On 1994 according to your numbers the minimum wage was 10 times lower than it should be according to DIEESE.

It's written right there. Nominal minimum wage, Needed minimum wage.

On 2016 the minimum wage is now 4,24 times lower than it should be.

By the numbers you provided, workers are earning more now, than they were before. We have made progress from 1994 to 2016, including during the FHC years.

Edit: Here is what your friend said:

Mais de um ano se passou e é hora de revisitar a questão do poder de compra do salário mínimo. Quem conseguiu aumento maior: Dilma ou FHC? Da última vez que olhamos, FHC batia Dilma de 36 a 7.
Atualizando o gráfico com os dados de 2015, Dilma tem um desempenho muito ruim. É que a inflação, que disparou no ano passado, comeu muito rápido o valor do salário mínimo definido no começo do ano.
Tão rápido, que o poder de compra (medido em cestas básicas do DIEESE) teve queda real em relação ao valor pago em 2010!
A situação de Dilma frente a FHC no quesito aumento do salário mínimo já estava difícil. Com o possível congelamento anunciado por causa da crise, as chances de Dilma acabar seu segundo mandato melhor que FHC estão cada vez piores.

He compared Dilma...to Dilma!!! 2016 to 2010! Take a look at the subtitled part.

The only conclusion DIEESE numbers make is that on 2016 people needed to be paid 4 times more, and on 1994 they needed 10 times more.

How is that not misinformation?

Edit 2:

I found this gem on the minimum wage spreadsheet. Your friend actually tried to explain the graph:

Entenda o gráfico

O gráfico representa quanto o salário aumentou em termos de poder de compra desde o começo do mandato. Se a linha sobe é porque houve ganho no poder de compra, se cai é porque um pouco do ganho se perdeu ao longo do tempo.

Como referência de poder de compra, eu decidi usar a cesta básica do DIEESE, que é um órgão sindical de pesquisa e estatística.

O DIEESE calcula qual seria o salário necessário para comprar uma cesta básica, que para eles é bem mais completa do que a cesta básica comum, incluindo coisas como transporte e moradia.

Na aba 'Dados mensais FHC vs Dilma' há uma comparação mensal do salário mínimo de fato e o salário mínimo necessário. Quanto maior for o tamanho do salário mínimo perto do salário necessário do DIEESE, maior o crescimento do poder de compra do salário.

His own words.

Dilma on her last year of her first term - Nominal/Needed minimum wage difference = 4.10

FHC last year of his second term - Nominal/Needed minimum wage difference = 6.1

Tell me, is it better to make 4 times less than you should be making, or is it better to make 6 times less?

There is no science to his graphs, no statistics.

Your friend asks a question and comes to a different conclusion than the numbers.

I retract what I said about him. You shouldn't trust everything he says either.

I rest my case Massa.

 

[Massa]

It's a cumulative graph that shows the evolution of minimum wage over both governments. It's not about comparing 1994 and 2010, which wouldn't make sense at all. The quote you selected highlights how under Dilma's government minimum wage actually got worse, that never happened under FHC's years. And no doubt it will continue to get worse, our economy has been wrecked by Dilma's government.

Edit:

The graph uses a ratio, needed/nominal. The lower the ratio the better. So for example:

- before FHC (Dec 1994):
728/70 = 10.4
- end of FHC's first year (Dec 1995):
763/100 = 7.63
- end of FHC's fifth year (Dec 1999):
940/130 = 6.9

- before Dilma (Dec 2010):
2227/510 = 4.3
- end of Dilma's first year (Dec 2011):
2329/545 = 4.2
- end of Dilma's fifth year (Dec 2015):
3518/788 = 4.4

As you can see FHC managed to bring it down from 10.4 to 6.9, while on Dilma's term the ratio went from 4.3 to 4.4. Minimum wage is not closer to needed than before, the gap is actually increasing!

 

[Coreda]

Appreciate the OP's summaries and updates, makes for a fascinating read. Glad the tapes were deemed legal in the end.

Do you realize how destructive that mentality is?

Pessimism is the easiest first post to make, which is why it's so popular on GAF. White cops and black victim? Corrupt politicians? Chances of your favorite discontinued drink returning? 'Nothing will change.'

 

[hawk2025]

All data is on ipeadata.gov.br, it's a great resource.

 

[-Ryn]

Glad to hear it seems to be going in a good direction for you guys in Brazil. Thanks for organizing everything for a better read OP.

 

[Platy]

Glad to hear it seems to be going in a good direction for you guys in Brazil. Thanks for organizing everything for a better read OP.

The dude controlling internet laws say games take an "unecessary bandwith", ISIS is saying that will bomb the Olympics and our president's impeachment (one of the few big political persons that did not oficialy appear in any corruption scandal) may give amnesty for one of the country's most corrupt dude

Good direction

 

[forknknife]

The dude controlling internet laws say games take an "unecessary bandwith", ISIS is saying that will bomb the Olympics and our president's impeachment (one of the few big political persons that did not oficialy appear in any corruption scandal) may give amnesty for one of the country's most corrupt dude

Good direction

That's so fucking disgusting. Will all those that went to the streets against Dilma also come out to denounce this?

 

[Platy]

I will wait in my seat for those CBF shirt people to go to the streets

Also, Cunha's BFF want to limit the investigation that is already happening to him to decrease the chances of anything happening

 

[Metra]

That's so fucking disgusting. Will all those that went to the streets against Dilma also come out to denounce this?

Depends, I guess. If economy improves, protests will probably wane, regardless of who's in office. If it doesn't improve, there's a chance that the pissed off middle class will keep pushing.

In the first scenario, brazilian politics will probably stay as it is, maybe with some minor changes. In the second scenario, well... let's say politicians will stay at the spotlight; and that's not good, especially for those that have something to hide.

 

[forknknife]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/o...s-impeachment-isnt-a-coup-its-a-cover-up.html

 

[Massa]

The dude controlling internet laws say games take an "unecessary bandwith", ISIS is saying that will bomb the Olympics and our president's impeachment (one of the few big political persons that did not oficialy appear in any corruption scandal) may give amnesty for one of the country's most corrupt dude

Good direction

Oh, it's not all bad Platy.

For example, OAB-Rio is going against Bolsonaro for his ridiculous hate-speech. We also learned today that his son also spit on Willys so if we're lucky they're both losing their seats in Congress. OAB is also standing up to Anatel's president and puppet of the big internet providers.

On the corruption side, Cunha may save his mandate but he's not going to be cleared by the Supreme Court. And we have more good news on that today: the plea bargain made public today detailing how our "honest" president nominated a Supreme Court Justice and directly influenced him to try and save the billionaire who financed their campaigns. More on plea bargains, Renan Calheiros (an even more corrupt and powerful Congressman than Cunha, though he's on the side of the government so not as heavily demonized) had a double whammy today with two different plea bargains accusing him.

I actually think that, unlike Collor, Dilma will be convicted in the Supreme Court in a few years, after her impeachment. We'll see.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/o...s-impeachment-isnt-a-coup-its-a-cover-up.html

That's from a pro-government journalist and basically sums up how anyone sane can still defend this government. The argument is "yes we're corrupt, but the other guys are even worse! Don't take us out!". It's pathetic.

 

[Metra]

The "Antigovernment vs. pro-government" polarization is reaching worrisome levels and, right now, any kind of discussion on that matter is heavily hampered by confirmation bias...

 

[Lionel Richie]

That's so fucking disgusting. Will all those that went to the streets against Dilma also come out to denounce this?

Cunha is not saving himself, he's going to delay the inevitable as best he can but there's no way his career survives this. No political parties are saving themselves IMO, once Lava Jato begins throwing them into the wolves (and that's likely to happen once it nears its end), PMDB, PSDB, PP and PT are all FUBAR.

Dilma falling is likely just the first domino on what has been a long overdue political reform.

 

[Massa]

The "Antigovernment vs. pro-government" polarization is reaching worrisome levels and, right now, any kind of discussion on that matter is heavily hampered by confirmation bias...

Isn't this part of any democracy? What exactly are you worried about?

 

[Metra]

Isn't this part of any democracy? What exactly are you worried about?

I'm not sure if it's an inherent part of democracy, but I'm pretty sure it is part of fundamentalism, hatred, prejudice, conflict. Intransigence is usually a bad thing. In my opinion, at least.

 

[Platy]

Here is a weird link I found that while it has a glorious smell of conspiracy theory, it is a fun read specialy because how it talks about what the USA has in relation to this

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/4/20/is_the_us_backing_rousseff_s

AMY GOODMAN: Well, for more, we go to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where we’re joined by Andrew Fishman, researcher and reporter for The Intercept. Along with Glenn Greenwald and David Miranda, he wrote the piece, "After Vote to Remove Brazil’s President, Key Opposition Figure Holds Meetings in Washington."

And we’re joined in New York by Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Weisbrot’s recent article for The Huffington Post titled "Brazilian Coup Threatens Democracy and National Sovereignty." His new book, Failed: What the Experts Got Wrong About the Global Economy.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Mark, why don’t we start with you? What do you believe is happening right now in Brazil?

MARK WEISBROT: Well, I think it is—it is definitely a coup. And, you know, the international media has actually shifted in the last couple of months, and especially more recently. They had been like the Brazilian media, just really reporting it from a pro-opposition point of view as though this were a legitimate impeachment. And now you see more and more they’re saying it’s not legitimate, of course, because there’s no real charges against the president that would warrant impeachment. And it’s really an attempt by the opposition to reverse the results of the 2014 election, to take advantage of the fact that the economy is in recession and go after her.

I think that, you know, that article in The Intercept was very important, and Andrew will talk about it. But one point that they made about the visit of Senator Nunes from the opposition in Brazil to Washington this week was—is it didn’t get attention from the media, but it really should, because he met with Tom Shannon. And Tom Shannon is the most influential person on Latin America in the State Department. He’s going to be the one telling—recommending to Secretary of State Kerry what he should do, what—where the U.S. should come down on this process. And that’s extremely important, because Shannon didn’t have to meet with him. He’s just a senator, you know? By meeting with him, he sends a message to everybody who’s paying close attention in Brazil that the U.S. is OK with this process. It’s very similar to the coup in Honduras. You know, anybody paying close attention to that and everybody in Washington knew the very first day of the coup, when the White House put out a statement that didn’t say one bad thing about the coup, well, that’s the strongest statement you could make in support of a coup, a military coup, in the 21st century. And so, it’s a very similar thing. The media totally ignored it, but that was a signal. And I think it shows what we already know: The United States really does want to get rid of the Workers’ Party and always has.

 

[hawk2025]

I'll take the opinion of the STF over fucking Greenwald, thank you very much.

Absolutely pathetic that the left is doing what it always does: Starting to shift to blaming the US and calling it a coup.

I would be surprised if it wasn't so incredibly obvious.

Keep the denial alive, and you will keep getting hit by reality. Here's another example; How much has the government used unemployment funds benefits for other means over the past years? Check it out:

The Y axis? The percentage of GDP used. Yes, it's nearing 0.7% of the GDP, just in this dimension. It's completely absurd.

Source: Central Bank data, graph generated by Monica DeBolle

 

[Peterthumpa]

I'll take the opinion of the STF over fucking Greenwald, thank you very much.

Absolutely pathetic that the left is doing what it always does: Starting to shift to blaming the US and calling it a coup.

I would be surprised if it wasn't so incredibly obvious.

Keep the denial alive, and you will keep getting hit by reality. Here's another example; How much has the government used unemployment funds benefits for other means over the past years? Check it out:

The Y axis? The percentage of GDP used. Yes, it's nearing 0.7% of the GDP, just in this dimension. It's completely absurd.

Source: Central Bank data, graph generated by Monica DeBolle

What the flying fuck? I didn't even know that the government was allowed to use FGTS resources for like, reasons. Jesus, what a clusterfuck.

 

[hawk2025]

^ To the above: It is an investment fund -- therefore, with some creative (read: extremely dangerous to anyone that might become unemployed, in case it goes wrong) movements, they can account for it as a temporary "investment". It is a complex, complicated move that, if gone wrong, is tantamount to what Collor did with Savings accounts in the early 90's. Think of it as taking your dad's car for a ride even though he hasn't allowed you to specifically: Sure, you expect to bring it back intact; That doesn't change the fact that you went for a joyride with it -- and that you may very well have crashed along the way.



Anyways, the real purpose of the post; One more domino falls.

http://www.istoe.com.br/reportagens...MA?pathImagens=&path=&actualArea=internalPage


I had mentioned before that one of the main points of contention was how money from corruption was used in the election campaign of Dilma. Well, the lid has been blown right off.

The owner of such a company that provided services to the Rousseff campaign has come forward with a whole lot of new information:

- They received nearly $58 million under the table
- This money was used to fuel various internet blogs and "grassroots" campaign helpers, like the well-known "Dilma Bolada" meme
- The actual bank account was even identified: The company's president opened an account in Morgan Stanley, through which fictitious contracts were signed with the construction companies to funnel campaign financing funds to the marketing company in question
- Several blogs, magazines, and other media types names are still under wraps, since this is being spun off into a new investigation: Overall, $58 million was used to simulate grassroots, independent movements.



Let's complain about media bias against the government again, Greenwald. I would like to see if The Intercept will be implicated. I'd guess that Brasil247, Carta Capital, and Pragmatismo Politico are extremely likely to show up.

Her reelection campaign was rotten to the core. It's only a matter of time.

 

[Platy]

Dilma Bolada ?

That is some badly spend money if true =P

 

[Lionel Richie]

I realized something: in case foreign people read this, the process will now be lead by Renan Calheiros, who's allegedly every much a scumbag as Eduardo Cunha. Renan though still has some ties to the government AND is in the same party as Michel Temer, the VP. Actually, Renan doesn't have ties to government, he has those with Lula.

I have now my personall conspiracy theory, bear with me: Lula wants the impeachment, he moved out of Brasilia to signalize that the defeat was inevitable. Came back to support her friend. It passes and he meets with Renan, tells him to do it right and do it soon. And so it's in motion and they will vote against the government again. At that point Dilma is displaced for 180 days and remember those early talks about making another election? Now they would get pretty intense beucase the country is a bit divided. So at the moment when gets displaced, in the act she renounces and doing so proposes a new election and they do everything in their power everything possible to make that happen. It can't be next year, because next year the political parties may probably all be humped. It was to be now. If some it really works, and that's a longshot, Lula can be a candidate and would very much likely win. That is after all the one chance of saving PT.

Am I too off on this? :V

 

[Massa]

PT and Lula don't elections now, they know they'd get wiped. They want things to go as badly as possible under Temer so they'll have a shot at winning back in 2018 - they're already actively working against the country to ensure that happens.

 

[Platy]

So what is happening right now :

PSDB is trying to do some negotiations with Delcidio to free Aécio

Cunha is so dirty that he is saying that if Temer does not free him from the accusations, Cunha will try to impeach Temer, his friend from the same political party

And even if Dilma's election stuff is fucked, people are already trying to distance Dilma's election with Temer's .... you know, the president from his vice president

Also since every link is in english, here is one more in english, this time a Guardian columnist

Not even Brazil’s Masters of the Universe can convince the world that Rousseff’s impeachment is really about combating corruption – their scheme would empower politicians whose own scandals would be career-ending in any healthy democracy.
[...]
Until now, Brazilians have had their attention exclusively directed towards Rousseff, who is deeply unpopular due to the country’s severe recession. Nobody knows how Brazilians, especially the poor and working classes, will react when they see their newly installed president: the pro-business, corruption-tainted nonentity of a vice-president who, polls show, most Brazilians want impeached.

Most volatile of all, many – including the prosecutors and investigators who have led the corruption probe – fear that the real plan behind Rousseff’s impeachment is to put an end to the ongoing investigation, thus protecting corruption, not punishing it. There is a real risk that once she is impeached, Brazil’s media will no longer be so focused on corruption, public interest will dissipate, and the newly empowered faction in Brasilia will be able to exploit its congressional majorities to cripple that investigation and protect themselves.

Ultimately, Brazil’s elite political and media classes are toying with the mechanics of democracy. That’s a dangerous, unpredictable game to play anywhere, but particularly so in a very young democracy with a recent history of political instability and tyranny, and where millions are furious over their economic deprivation.

 

[Maledict]

Um, David Miranda is Glenn Greenwald's other half. You can't reasonably expect anything less biased from him than you can Glenn.

 

[Platy]

The problem is that Greenwald is THE journalist in the USA talking about the brazil situation =P

Even CNN interviewed the guy !!!

But I will try to search non Greenwald related news if this is what you guys want

 

[Lionel Richie]

Cunha is so dirty that he is saying that if Temer does not free him from the accusations, Cunha will try to impeach Temer, his friend from the same political party

That's the least surprising thing ever and people celebrating Cunha during the impeachment process (of which I'm favorable EDIT the impeachment, not Cunha) were always batshit crazy. Cunha is a hardass motherfucker, he feels like a western villain at times. He won't go quietly into that good night, he'll take everyone with him.

But he is going down. If I had to bet, I think there's a bigger chance he loses his job than Dilma. And Dilma is already way gone.

 

[Platy]

The chances of him LOSING HIS JOB are pretty big. Him GOING TO JAIL or NOT BEING ALLOWED TO GO BACK TO POLITICS is another thing entirely.

There are things that can protect him if he resigns so he might use that in last resort..... if his EGO allows

 

[Lionel Richie]

Ah yes, indeed there's a very low chance he goes to jail if history is any indication. Remember that time when the police broke into Collor's house and apprehended his cars? If that shit didn't lead into prison nothing ever will.

 

[M3d10n]

So far, Cunha has displayed all the characteristics of a psychopath. Which is why I think he'll fall eventually: people like him often end up lying/plotting themselves into a corner at some point because they cannot see the accumulation of their deeds/lies/threats/betrayals as something to worry about. It's the psychopath's blind spot.