I don't know what to say, most of the people actually believe that if they take out dilma of the presidency, then the corruption on brazil will end and everything bad will ruin and everything good will prosper
We reap what we sow
I don't know what to say, most of the people actually believe that if they take out dilma of the presidency, then the corruption on brazil will end and everything bad will ruin and everything good will prosper
We reap what we sow
Corruption and the state go hand in hand, doesn't matter whom you elect.
I thought Dilma would be a better president than Lula. It's amazing actually how bad she turned out to be.
Ka-pi96 said:
There are different levels of corruption though. Even if you can't eradicate it entirely, less is still better. |
This, corruption is never good and it's effects can be very damaging ecspecially in developing nations.
This is way bigger than what happened back in June 2013.
I'm waiting to see what's going to be the results. There are more and more people coming.
Ka-pi96 said:
There are different levels of corruption though. Even if you can't eradicate it entirely, less is still better. |
I think different politicians are better at hiding it. The only time corruption seems to be minimized (in the paradigm of a state) is when you have competing elements in government. That is why I don't understand why people love it when the people in government are working together. The less they work together the easier it is to prevent any one power from gaining so much control that they can abuse it with no consequences.
If it doesn't matter who you elect, kick out the system. Risks are huge, but otherwise, nothing might change for Brasil.
The Brazilian President should learn from our President. Never show your ugly head early in your term, always do it midway. So you have enough people brainwashed on your side and there won't be enough to rise up against you. lol!
sc94597 said:
I think different politicians are better at hiding it. The only time corruption seems to be minimized (in the paradigm of a state) is when you have competing elements in government. That is why I don't understand why people love it when the people in government are working together. The less they work together the easier it is to prevent any one power from gaining so much control that they can abuse it with no consequences. |
A cohesive government might translate to more growth and a better direction of public policies, though. It might be that people like it because the gains on quality of life and wealth outweight the potential losses with corruption when compared to a clear and competitive, but ultimately inneficient, government.
Enough with the extreme left in South America.
They are not happy in Brazil. They are not happy in Ecuador. They are not happy in Argentina. They are not happy in Venezuela.