Education in Brazil

No longer bottom of the class

Weak and wasteful schools hold Brazil back. But at least they are getting less bad

See article

Readers' comments


James AntiBr

Brazilian Politicians pay themselves higher salaries
then their counterparts in the US, UK and Europe.

If they really valued education, they would have
vote to raise teachers, firemen and policemen salaries
while keeping their salaries in check like responsible

James AntiBr


Getulio Vargas was an intellectual, yes. He had a vision for
Brazil and contrary to others in position of power (i.e. Elites),
he fulfilled his vision (unfortunately):
"Em seu segundo mandato Getúlio Vargas criou empresas estatais fortes como a Petrobrás e a Vale do Rio Doce. Getúlio era um nacionalista fervoroso e lutava pelo monopólio estatal do petróleo, esse foi o motivo da criação da petrobrás. "

As for your abrasive, disruptive, and disrespectful language, they
reflect your education and societal standing. If they represent
what a Brazilian "Elite" is all about, I stand by the Anglo ideal
of 'Fair Play' and manners. I also stand by the American ideal of
opportunity regardless of one's background, gender, politics, etc.

Your penchant for tweaking percentages to validate your point is
quite laughable. Sure you posted quite a filibuster posts filled
with all sorts of song and dance, smoke and mirrors figures.
In the end, it is commodities and the Tupi/Pre-Salt oil that are
the leverages Brazil has to claim the title of neo developed
nation. Vale, Petrobras, Gerdau, and Eike Batista's firms (raw
materials again) are really some of Brazil's biggest names. I
don't dispute that there are a few things manufactured in Brazil.
However, there are no major Brazilian brands on the shelves of
American, Canadian, European, Australian retailers, etc. If they
were, you could have saved a lot of typing by posting those.
You, instead, continued to post your blah blah without a concrete
proof. Unless Brazil start competing tomorrow with Taiwan, Korea, and Europeans head on, my point still stands. Brazil, like Saudi
Arabia, will enrich itself with its natural resources and will not
invest into things that matter. When the oil is eclipsed by
solar, wind and electric energy, Saudi Arabia will be like the
Amazon after the rubber rush ended in the early 1900s. The perfect
example is the Teatro Amazonas. A vestige of the rubber boom that
did not last. Actually, the stupid "Elites" of the time did not know
how to invest into the next thing to keep their wealth. There are
lots of semi run down Mansions (real Developed world class Mansions) throughout the Amazon region to prove my point.


Do Brazilian elites fear competition ? I don´t think they would be elites if they did. I don´t see the point in making a liberal analysis and finding the discrepancies between reality and liberal ideology. You are not the first one to defend genuine liberal ideas in Brazil. If you have a way to make those ideas a reality I would congratulate you. Otherwise the whole criticism is pointless, but you are free to make it anyway. In Brazil there´s a saying: "Sonhe com os pés no chão"
Dream, with your foot on the ground. Your dream is good, but your feet is in the air.

James AntiBr

BR-NZ wrote:

"I always find your posts funny, I've generally assumed your Trolling is for entertainment value..."

Entertainment value???

Are the following "entertainment value":
More opportunities for the poor to get educated (GED, CLEP, Pell
Grants, and a Vestibular (Brazil's SAT) test allow to happen
5-6 times a year to give someone a second chance to go to Uni.

Private sector venture capital with sweat equity and promotion
of ideas regardless of source (i.e. a favela dweller, a lower
middle class person, a third grade educated man or woman, etc.)
In other words, venture capital firms scouring (searching) Brazil
for people with ideas and investing into their ideas like in the
U.S. Not stealing their ideas, etc. Rather, focusing on the merit
of the idea and funding it. I have already posted lots of examples
on the topic and anyone can easily find lots of now Billionaires
who were once very poor, but idea rich which brought venture
capital to get their idea started.

Patents, etc. Brazil seriously lack in its own technology. There
are very brilliant, but unutilized brains (note the plural in
brains) not just in the South, but in the Northeast as well.

Afro Brazilian CEOs - 50% of the population are of Afro/African
descent. Not a single Afro-Brazilian CEO? What is up with that?
Just Samba and Caipirinha? I don't think so. Prudential CEO (UK)
is African, and American Express CEO is African American. Many
of Brazil's so call "Elites" would be shocked if they learned that.
There has been a subtle racism in Brazil since the beginning, and
there is something that would have to be corrected if Brazil wants
to be really seen as a major power. Brazilians can fool foreign
investors with red carpet treatment and great ROIs. However, just
like the Chinese were found lacking after their gaining WTO membership. Brazil will find itself in some serious pressure once
the above is more widely known throughout Africa and countries where
meritocracy vaulted African descent Professionals to the highest
positions in the private sector.

Now, can you explain what is so entertaining?

James AntiBr

James_anti-br wrote:

>The “Elites” don’t want the kind of competition true >entrepreneurship brings

Rafael11 responded:

False. There´s room for everyone to prosper in this world(or else economics is not a positive sum game). I don´t know who exactly are you pointing at when you refer to elites. But most of
the wealthy people I know have accepted that they have little competition because none ventures into their areas. Entry costs exists all over the world.

False? Just because there is micro loans (SEBRAE), etc that
does not represent the kind of entrepreneurship and upward
mobility I was referring to. What I have been referring all along
is the venture capital in a similar vein as Silicon Valley. In
other words, a game changer. The two guys that started Hewlett
Packard in the 1930s started in this small middle class garage
Not an opinion. It is a fact. below are a few more facts like it.

Now, Brazil does not have that kind of entrepreneurship. Otherwise,
there would have been famous Brazilian brands, etc about it.
In fact, not even the so-called "elites" have duplicated what
a former homeless man John Paul Dejoria achieved with Paul Mitchell
Systems (Shampoo) and Patron Tequila. Someone with money (i.e.
what you would call the U.S. Elites poured money into these people
with ideas regardless of background. In other words, there were no
uninviting responses like the Brazilian Elite would say: "Voce
esta pensando como Gringo!; Que eh isso/Que exagero, Pe no Chao;
Nao, nao tem campo" which altogether amounts to a "No way Jose" kick
into one's rear for having an idea, concept with potential. That
is why Brazil has not produced anything noteworthy for the Elites
don't care about competing internationally as noted above and also don't want to financially back someone who could.




I guess we are separated by optimism vs pessimism.

I'm of the opinion that a circumstance is the largest factor determining life chances. Brasil has always been a stark reminder of that.

But I also think that Brasil is in a positive feedback loop that (should), as the middle class expand further create a rather unique civilisation. Remember that Europe and America are not so far from Brasil ten years ago, pre-WW II both were deeply hierarchical societies with terrible school and weak public institutions prone to corruption. The advance of the middle class and consuming and better educated working class creating the same situation as is happen in Brasil now and there is no reason that shouldn't repeat. I'm sure then there were people in the US and Europe in better social and education positions that said exactly the same things as you are saying now.

I say this over and over, but you can't fix 500 years of shocking (non)leadership by Brasil's elites in 16 years. And after 8 years of FHC, who despite what many people think was an average president (plan Real and his second term macro-economic policy deserve the highest praise, but don't forget the doubling of foreign debt, blackouts and non-existant investment in infrastructure), Lula for all of his faults is an extremely astute politician and has capitalised on FHC structural reforms and deserves praise. He never fell into the trap Chavez did by dividing society, regardless of the court ruling towards O Estado de S.Paulo over Sarney's son he has maintained press freedom, despite a partisan private media that has unfair legal State protection via limitations on foreign ownership.

If you've never seen this...

Muito Além do Cidadão Kane

Watch it and share it around other Brasiians.

I suspect Dilma will be a lot more radical than Lula in shaking up Brasil's State and private sector. She may not have the same political connections, but I believe her "outsider" status from party politics could pay dividends. The only one she owes favours to is Lula, and he won't want to screw up his legacy by appearing at a puppet master. I've seen plenty of interviews with Dilma and it's pretty obvious she won't tolerate inept, inefficient colleagues. Most of the Cabinet at ruthless, serious, technocrats, not smiley faces. I believe she'll want to stamp her mark solidly on Brasil as the first female President and beyond PAC, keep and eye on the first corruption problem that occurs, she'll hit the roof in fury. Education could be due a shake up as well once the big picture is sorted. Again, her lack of union connections could be a good thing. (and if this month Exame special on Infrastructure is anything to go Brasil is looking look to achieve most of her ambitions - this is a recommended read for Portuguese readers).

I won't bore you with an essay on way I believe Brasil is the BRIC that will really take off. We're back for Christmas and New Year but next year we are moving back for good, this time to São Paulo. I can't wait.

Oh, and the food is fantastic, the wine needs a little work ;-)

Ed (Brazil)


Fisrt of all, thanks for your comments !

"Brazilian need to stop this mindset that everything foreign in good and everything Brazilian is bad. Brazilians have the same flaws as everyone else."

I never said I think ALL things are better in Brazil if they are foreign. I can tell you with no doubt that food here is MUCH better than anywere else in the world I have been to. Rice, meat, fruits are more fresh.

But when it comes to things that depend on the goodwill, hardwork of people, we are not better and don't wanna be. BRAZIL IS NOT A SERIOUS COUNTRY !!! If you need another crisis, coruption scandle or another presidencial Inpeahment (remeber Mr Collor ?) to understand that, by advice to you is: Just wait and see....



With respect, and this may not be the case, but maybe you are making a similar mistake I often see in Brasil, people holding up different groups in society to different standards. You can hardly blame every poor person in Brasil (or MST member) for the actions of the few. The MST has a fair grievance, if some people take advantage of that it does do tarnish every single over person seeking a more just distribution of land, with is the direct result of from colonial policies and then US interference.

To be honest, most people around the world are the same, blaming the State for all their problems.

I imagine we agree on a lot, the devil is in the details.


BR-NZ:I disagree with you. Look at the MST: They are given land, sell it and become landless again. It´s true that there´s lots of untapped potential in the favelas, but Brazilians for the most part just want Messiah to come and solve their problems. The cause of our problems used to be the Portuguese, then the Britons, then Americans and now what ? You said you lived in NZ and Britain. You are probably aware of how people in developed nations are less likely to blame their problems on others, and focus on solving them instead. They also don´t expect Messiah to come for problems to be solved.


What I find amazing in all of these (rather pointless) internet "debates" about Brasil is that people have such a narrow understanding of history and short memories.

Brasil has been governed at a criminal level of incompetence for most of her history and that is one of the main reasons for the problems today. One thing that really annoys me is when I hear Brasilians making comments that the poor are that way because they are somehow to blame for their situation... they are not. We are all creatures of circumstance, the reality is that until very recently being born into a family with money was the single reason you end up with money and likewise being born poor meant you stayed poor. Finally that is changing.

People (Brasilians included) need to remember that Brasil is a developing country, not a First World country with pockets of poverty. I find some Brasilians in the middle class and above live in a glass bubble, ignore the rest of the country, often at their own expense. Leftover colonial ideas of hierarchical entitlement still hold. This idea that because you are wealthy that you are "better" than those with less has created the rot you see in Brasil. One of the most basic corruptions in any society is a lazy elite that would rather see it's country decay into nothing rather than give up power.

This is finally changing, societies thrive on meritocracy. This is where the role of the State comes in. Every child born in favela has just as much potential as a child in Jardims, São Paulo, the only difference is access to resources. For Brasil to become the country it deserves to be, rich, well educated, and at peace it needs strong and efficient institutions (government and private sector) that create a level playing field for everyone, allowing even children from the poorest background to rise and contribute to the social and economic capital of the nation.

This is good for everyone, rich and poor. But it does mean that those at the top need to start engaging
with Brasil as a whole and to stop seeing poor children as potential bandits or servants and start realising that every talented child the fails to rise to their full potential is a tragedy for every Brasilian, not matter your economic and social class.


"Saudi Arabia/Brazil
$14,540 per capita gdp US$ 2009 (Saudi Arabia)
What manufactured high tech goods do you buy from Saudi Arabia? Can’t you see the uneven distribution of wealth in Saudi Arabia?"

During the 2000-2008 period, 52% of Brazilian exports were manufactures. By contrast, only 9% of Saudi Arabia exports during that period were manufactures. Any comparison between those two countries can only be made by someone with no knowledge of the facts. Don't believe me if you don't want to. But as always, I have sources to back me up. See the two graphs below.

"Furthermore, what would you call a country dependent mostly on commodities and Pre-Salt oil as income generators?"

That's ridiculous. Brazilian pre-salt oil drill has't even started. How can Brazil be dependent on it, then? What an idiot. As for Brazil being reliant on commodity exports to grow, that's not true. See the article below. It was authored by two analysts from S&P, a credit rating agency.

Main quotes.

"However, despite their dramatic growth, exports alone do not tell the whole story. In fact, Latin American economies' growth engines remain more defocused on domestic rather than external demand. These economies remain fairly closed, with relatively low exports-to-GDP ratios. Within Latin America's largest economies, only the exports of goods and services in Chile constitute more than 30% of GDP. In Brazil, that ratio only marginally exceeds 10%.

"Within [Latin America], consumption remains the critical source of growth from the perspective of aggregate demand. In some countries, such as Peru and Brazil, investment has also started to play a more dominant role. This is one of the main differences between Latin America and Asia. For the latter, net export growth remains a key engine for the region's economic development. In China in particular, despite the importance of domestic components, net exports still contribute significantly to GDP growth. Conversely, in Brazil, net exports only made a positive contribution to GDP until 2005. After that, investment growth diminished the importance of the external sector. Net exports have actually had a negative contribution to GDP growth ever since.

"In addition, although Chinese demand has bolstered commodity prices, the importance of this is often overestimated when assessing the impact of China on Latin America's growth. Changes in terms of trade over the past decade have had significant benefits for some Latin American countries, like Venezuela, Chile, and Bolivia. However, the impact of changing terms of trade for most of the economies in the region, including larger ones such as Brazil, Mexico, and, to some extent, Argentina, was not very significant because increasing import prices partly offset the higher income from metals and agricultural commodities."

Given your reading difficulties, I'm rather doubtful whether you can understand the paragraphs above. But to sum it up, they mean the following: that, in order to grow, Brazil and most other Latin American countries have thus far relied on domestic demand: that is, investment and consumption. International trade actually has had a negative contribution to GDP, something that one can see in the fact that some countries in the region - specially Brazil - have been having very small current account surpluses, or even current account deficits, for some years. Commodity exports have been important only to a handful of countries: for example, Chile (a major exporter of copper) and Venezuela (an exporter of oil). For most others, as the authors themselves say, exports have not had an important contribution to GDP.

As for Taiwan, I'll repeat what I'd said previously. Taiwan is a very innovative country even by the standards of developed nations. France and the UK are each three times more populous than Taiwan. Yet Taiwan registers more patents to the USPTO than any of those two countries. To suggest that France and the UK are not powers in their own right because they are outcompeted by Taiwan in the science field is ridiculous.

And finally, as for your rejection of the use of percentage calculation to measure progress, I must say that I've never read anything stupider. Percentage is the way one calculates all kinds of variation, specially in economics. The strength and progress of an economy are measured by calculating, percentage wise, GDP and GDP per capita growth, and variations in debt, trade, and also current account and budget surplus/deficit changes. It is also by means of past variations that one can forecast future ones.


I'm the one who is doing the distortions? I'm sorry -- but my challenge to you was to prove your assertion that there are no CEOs of African descent in Brazil. How come showing a list of African-American CEOS in the US proves that statement? You're really insane. And not only that, but you also have some serious reading difficulties. You're so incoherent, it's almost ludicrous. One asks you something about a subject, and you answer with something else not at all related to the topic at hand. In other words, you're either stupid or a deceiver, and a poor one at that.

I'm going to renew my challenge to you: prove there are no CEOs of African descent IN BRAZIL. And please, do not tergiversate this time. Do not present me meaningless lists of things I have not asked you about.

And I've got to this, those lists of African-American "inventors" and scientists caused me a good chuckle. One of them, that of wikipedia, only presents 58 names of African-American scientists. And the names go back to the 18th century! See, since the past century the US has stood out as the most scientifically innovative country ever. Yet, you -- or your source -- say that for the last three centuries, from the XVIII to the XX century, there have been only 58 worthy remembering African-American contributors in the science and technology fields? And do you think it's a good thing? Look, I bet that in the 1990s alone one could find a list of Asian or European American, specially Jewish American, scientists far more extensive than the ones you showed of African Americans.

Nowadays every country, region, ethnicity, race, and language group, can name at least a few of their own who have made scientific careers. Scientists abound in this world. (That's why I don't take your small lists seriously.) But only of them are awarded world recognition: the ones who've made the most useful or the most meaningful discoveries or inventions. These become known even to laymen, both in their own time and afterwards. For example, one doesn't need to be a physicist to know who Einstein or Newton were, or why even today they're important. That's because of the grandness of their intellectual creations - dicoveries of laws of nature who and the crafting og mathematical formulae that properly predict the behavior of such laws.

For that same reason Feynman, James Watson, and Bill Gates are known not only in the US but in the world at large. They've made inventions, discoveries, or worked in theories, that were of very high relevance for the computer technology, biology, or physics world. Can one say the same of one, any one, African-American scientist, engineer or computer mogul? Is there a single African-American whose merits rival those of the men I've brought about? Where are the African-American Nobel Prize winners in science? See, no country in the world has received more such prizes than the US. The lack of relevant African-Americans deserves some explanation.

"It could range from Washington Luis to Getulio Vargas to writers, etc."

Writers? I ask you some names, and you only adduce "writers"? As for Washington Luis and Getúlio Vargas, neither of them were intellectuals. They were presidents.
Washington Luís was president from 1926 to 1930. During that period world economy production -- save for some few countries, basically the US, Japan and some in Western Europe -- was still limited to agriculture goods and low-grade manufactures (textiles, for instance). Even the East Asian new science powers you hype much about -- South Korea, China, and Taiwan -- were still exporters of basic goods at that time. South Korea only commenced to industrialize by the end of the 50s, a process in which US economic aid was not of small importance. And the same goes to Taiwan. As for China, it itself only began to export more manufactured than basic goods by the end of the 80s. See the graph below.

So to adduce Washington Luís to assess Brazilian economy as it now stands, is ludicrous. Proves how inane you are.

As for Getúlio Vargas, that you mention him as an example of "intellectual" who has purposelly followed a growth strategy based on basic goods exports, proves my stupid fellow, how little knowledge you have of Brazil. Vargas was the president who began the first serious industrialization process in Brazil. He was the one who took power away from the "coffee and milk" oligarchs that had been ruling the country before 1930. He was the one who fathered the councils aimed at leading the import substitution model of industrialization that predominated during his 15-year rule. He is not, as you say, an example of "intellectual" who has not believed in Brazil's ability to be competitive in the higher value chain. His actions refute your words.


and @Ed (Brazil)

I hate to surprise you but MOST people in the world would rather talk about Football and drink beer on the beach.

Having lived in New Zealand, the UK and Brazil I can tell you the percentage of people interested in culture and art is about exactly the same wherever you go.



@James AntiBr


but it is important to clear up some of you comments with little fact: Commodities have provided a base for growth but the actual reason is the expansion in the internal market from the new middle class.

If all of your doom and gloom was right why does Brazil have investment grade status? What about the US$300 billion in reserves? Why has Standards & Poors announced it intends to raise Brazil's credit rating? Lowest unemployment in history. 7.5% growth expected this year before a stable 4.5% for the coming years. Fifth largest economy in the world within the next 2-5 years. A recent Housing Market report showing market appreciation is demand (i.e. stable) driven not speculation... On Wednesday the Finance Minister announced a lowering of tax on private bank lending and a retreat of government backed lending indicating a strengthening private lending market.

Brazil is not a perfect country, it's politicians and institutions are a reflection for 500 years of utterly incompetent rule by the wealthy and 20 years of equally useless Military rule. Considering Brazil has had less than 20 years of vaguely decent governance she is doing pretty well!

But as the economic conditions continue to rise and stablise the same thing will happen that has happen in every other developed country the new Middle Class with demand competent politicians and better State institutions. Brazil is in a positive feedback loop.

Sorry James but the facts don't show your view on Brazil to be valid.


James AntiBr wrote:

>Rafael11 wrote:
>1)“It´s not a fault of the few that many don´t prosper.”

The reasons have been explained. Most people prefer samba and caipirinha to education.
Was this rhetorical ?

>The U.S. made significant progress early in its history

Brazilian monopolies are natural. Entrepreneurship laws make few want to do it legally.
If natural monopolies were dissolved here, there wouldn´t be any companies left in some industries.
The government doesn´t want that so it ends up supporting the monopolies.



>By contrast, Brazil everything is politicized

True. It has been so since Brazil began to be colonized by Europeans. The king ruled, the rest obeyed(a
little defiantly, but in the end, obeyed). After the monarchy, power went to a military coup and elites who resented the end of slavery. In the 30s Vargas went to power and pendulum swung to the people who
supported French like social laws and positivist ideology. Any thought of liberalism from then on has brought the idea of 19th century slavery and exploitation. If you can remove that from our culture, that would be appreciated.

British history was different, there was a civil war, Stuart got the guillotine and busynesses flourished without tyranny. England became world power and the United States followed and expanded liberal culture. If you have any way to change our 500 years old tradition by all means tell me.

James AntiBr

NeoKn wrote:

“James The Insane,”

Let’s see how "insane" I am…shall we.

Response to your points follows

1)Afro/African descent CEOs

Your overreaching,and ‘detuparcao’ is by now well known. From your posts, one can infer that African descent and Afro-Brazilians are inheritedly not as bright as Caucasians and Asians. Read the links above and start weeping. Don’t forget to re-read your post below:

“I myself know of none wealthy Afro-Brazilian who isn't an athlete or a musician. But as you see, the same happens in the US.”

Brazilian intellectuals- You want names, ok. It could range from Washington Luis to Getulio Vargas to writers, etc. The so called “Elites” who hold the money and the power.
What do you call the only standing business after a major earthquake? lucky? rich? without competition. Right?
What would you call a country brimming with natural resources and unscathed after two major world wars? lucky? Rich? Without competition. Right?

So why Brazil couldn’t get its head out of a paperback and rise to say number 2, 3 or 4 after each world war????? The resources and potential it has now, it had it back then.

Saudi Arabia/Brazil
$14,540 per capita gdp US$ 2009 (Saudi Arabia)
Furthermore, what would you call a country dependent mostly on commodities and Pre-Salt oil as income generators? BTW, I challenged readers to post manufactured products global brands “made-in-Brazil” available in their region/area/country. I still have not read a single rebuttal.

As for Taiwan and Brazil comparisons, you have a penchant for percentage points rather than the reality on the ground. showing minute improvements percentage wise is an easy cop-out. Taiwan is an island 100 miles by 300 miles, and it could fit many times inside Brazil. Taiwan has a highly educated workforce, “Elites” that invest in individuals with ideas who are not connected with the government or through Q.I. (Quem Indicou) . Brazil is a country brimming with natural resources, but vision and leadership poor. I seriously fail to see Brazil rising anytime soon to challenge Taiwan innovation wise. Furthermore, Chile may become the first develop nation in South America ahead of Brazil.

James AntiBr

Rafael11 wrote:

The U.S. made significant progress early in its history


2)Taiwan and South Korea have a much higher number of University graduates than Brazil. When people are not working, they are studying. Brazil??? If you don’t believe in second and third chances, your response is appropriate.

If you believe in opportunities, your response is not justified. Anyway, the U.S. proved that it works. Anyway, what good is education without capital to bring innovation to existence?

3)Again the problem with entrepreneurship rest with both the government and the so called “Elites.” The government as you illustrated make things overly complicated to start a business, hire and fire employees, etc. The “Elites” don’t want the kind of competition true entrepreneurship brings. Else, the lists that I posted earlier showing that Brazil has not changed much since the 1970s would be populated with new blood, new names (in addition to the ones posted either a little higher or a lot lower).
The entrepreneurs that I posted earlier were not wealthy. Someone wealthy invested money on them and their ideas. By contrast, Brazil everything is politicized. BNDES have not invested a single red cent into an idea rich, but capital poor individual. Else,
You would have a brand new company/IPO like GEELY (China), Suntech Power (China), Nokia (Finland), etc. SEBRAE and whatever else exist out there are really Microloans for micro capitalization.
There isn’t a private source like the one who vaulted Netscape from an University student idea to an once dominant global product.


Unfortunately in Brazil the education is worse and the politicans only know to steal and they don´t worry about this problem.


Also, I'm not Thiago. It might make you feel better to think that I'm the only one who sees you as a low IQ troll with particularly poor reading skills and argumentation ability. But that doesn't mean it's true.

As you see, I can be quite open in criticizing you when I want to. I don't have to resort to "alternative accounts" to do that.


James The Insane,

I'd decided to withdraw from my conversation with you since you were really dumbing yourself down the more you posted. But I see that things are getting worse. Now you look downright deranged. Are you just going to post in here all random anti-Brazilian stuff that you can find? What does that prove, why the resentment, and why expressing such resentment in so stupid a way?

"Brazil has no CEOs of African descent."
As I said, I don't really care about that. And perhaps neither should you. To be a saner person, you'd be better off by not feeding your race hatred. Be that as it may, I doubt what you say is true. Otherwise, prove me wrong. During that entire discussion I had with you, you invented all sorts of things: that East Asian countries have modeled their development strategy after the US economy; that private enterprises are really the main source of economic activity in China; that Brazilian intellectuals - which you have never named even after I challenged you to do so - have advocated a growth strategy based on commodity exports; that Brazil's just like Saudi Arabia when it comes to reliance on commodity exports etc. All stuff I've refuted with easy-to-find internet sources. Now I'm challenging you once again: prove me there are no CEOs of African descent in Brazil. Considering my previous experience with you - considering just how often I've refuted previous lies of yours - I'm quite sure you'll again be unable to prove your statement.

You know the African-American guy whom you showed me and who's supposed to be a proof of African-American high achievement in science? I've never heard of him. And I bet neither have most run-of-the-mill Americans. Feynman, Gates, James Watson: there are a number of American people, specially those of Jewish or Asian ancestry, whom I can name as examples of heavyweight contributors in the science or technology fields. But African-Americans? No. Not one. And again, I bet most ordinary US citizens can't name one either. There are 37 million American people who identify as African American. Most of them enjoy far higher life quality - and that includes higher education quality - than African Brazilians, or white Brazilians for that matter. So how do you explain the deficiency I've just pointed out?

The following illustrates my point quite well.

"Forbes Magazine is a long-standing source of record-keeping for America's wealth. A view of the wealthiest Caucasian Americans reveals oil magnates, real estate tycoons and computer moguls. When searching for African-American wealth, however, the occupations change. The jobs of choice are entertainment and sports. African-American billionaires and millionaires are entertainers, musicians and athletes."


As for the innovation thingie, that you choose to compare Taiwan with Brazil is quite funny. Of all the countries who have filed patents to the USPTO, the organization whose numbers you've adduced, Taiwan tops all but three - precisely the ones you showed. Taiwan's level of scientific output, at least as reported to the USPTO, is superior even to that of France and the UK: two developed countries with substantially larger populations than Taiwan. So aren't France and the UK economic powerhouses? Of course they are. But can you see where I'm going? Can you see just how dumb your arguments look?

The numbers you showed are those reported by the USPTO (btw, I haven't been able to confirm that Brazil number you showed.) The USPTO receives only a share of overall patent filings from abroad. If you want to have a broader perspective on international patent filing applications, you should have a look at WIPO, an organization who reports the combined data from a number of international patent filings organizations, including the USPTO.

Compare Brazil's patent output with that of other developing economies.

China 2,512
India 679
Russia 660
Brazil 270

China 7,906
India 836
Russia 662
Brazil 496

2005-2009 change
China 214%
Brazil 83%
India 23%
Russia 0.03%

(2009 WIPO data)

So while it is true that Brazil's number of international patent applications is inferior to that of other BRICs, it is also true that activity in this field has been growing faster for Brazil than for the other ones save for China. And see this: according to WIPO, just a decade ago (that is, in 2000) China's patent filing output was of 500 - practically the same number Brazil displays today (remember just how much bigger China is as compared to Brazil.) So you saying that Brazil is doomed to be an economic dwarf because of a relatively low number of patent filings output, shows just how simplistic your reasoning is. You have no perspective for the long-term.



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

