[:pb]As eleições norte-americanas se aproximam e é fundamental que os brasileiros, principalmente os imigrantes e naturalizados, compreendam as diferenças entre os candidatos e o jogo de poder estabelecido. Com este objetivo o Two Flags Post apresenta alguns trechos da excelente matéria – As duas faces da América corporativa – publicada em 09 de julho de 2016 pelo THE ECONOMIST

The Economist é editado em Londres, se dedica a temas internacionais e pertence ao The Economist Newspaper Ltd. , publicado desde 1843. Interessante destacar que a publicação sempre se apresentou como um jornal, apesar de ser impresso no formato de revista. Para se ter uma ideia de sua importância e difusão internacional, no ano de 2006 sua circulação média foi de cerca de 1,5 milhões de exemplares, metade vendido nos USA.

A matéria em foco analisa alguns aspectos da relação entre o panorama econômico e o político e centra suas observações nas duas faces antagônicas do processo eleitoral. Para maior compreensão da matéria, resolveu-se destacar alguns de seus aspectos mais reveladores. Anexou-se, também o texto em inglês na sua integralidade.

Advertisement

As duas faces da América corporativa

Pontos favoráveis aos Democratas:

A política xenofóbica apresentada pelo candidato Trump vem criando um sentimento de hostilidade, antirrepublicano, entre as grandes empresas americanas, visto que A Wells Fargo, a JP Morgan, Chase, Ford, Coca Cola e Apple reduziram ou eliminaram o valor de seu patrocínio à convenção republicana. O corporativismo americano se encontra, hoje, entre os 10 maiores do mundo e seus executivos consideram o país em um período promissor. No setor de tecnologia a liderança dos EUA está crescendo e a holding da Google considera que o modelo que garantiu seu sucesso nos últimos 40 anos, está cada vez mais sólido.

As grandes empresas obtém 40% de sua renda no exterior e tem ampliado o mercado interno com fusões e lóbis. Esses grandes executivos tem sido hábeis em se livrar de impostos visto que as 50 maiores empresas pagaram 24% sobre seus lucros, enquanto a alíquota oficial chega a 39%.

Com a percepção das mudanças demográficas que estão em curso, pois sabe-se que até 2020 os hispânicos, grupo de consumidores que mais cresce nos EUA, crescerá 2% enquanto os indivíduos considerados brancos diminuirão os mesmos 2% e   que o país está mais progressista em termos sociais, contrariando a política de Trump, reforça o sentimento antirrepublicano pela América corporativa, nestas próximas eleições.

Pontos favoráveis aos Republicanos:

Pequenos e médios empresários americanos estão com Trump. Consideram que Obama travou a economia e se queixam que seus lucros ainda não retornaram aos patamares de 2006. Consideram que os benefícios sociais implantados tornaram os trabalhadores mais preguiçosos, que licenças e impostos elevaram custos e que regulamentações restringiram o crédito nos bancos.

No caixa de campanha de Trump aparecem centenas de contribuições de pequenas empresas, completamente desconhecidas de Wall Street ou Washington.

Trump promete acabar com o Obama Care e que nenhuma empresa pagará mais do que 15% de imposto, de forma a terem o mesmo tratamento que as multinacionais.

Nos EUA as atividades lobistas são muito grandes e segundo Trump, corrompem a política e já chegaram a 3 bilhões de reais. Enquanto isso a criação de novas empresas encontra-se em seu patamar mais baixo desde os anos 70.

Segundo o The Economist  uma agenda com bom senso, com políticas de incentivo ao livre comércio, combate aos oligopólios, aos lóbis, redução da burocracia e uma reforma no sistema tributário corporativo atenderia reivindicações tanto dos republicanos como dos democratas.

 IN:

2016 – The Economist Newspaper Ltd / O Estado de São Paulo

Tradução de Alexandre Hubner

Capas e Logo from The Economist

THE leaders of America’s multinational firms are usually a picture of self-control, with sincere handshakes, grown-up hair and scripted sound bites. But ask them about the election and emotion takes over. At a drinks party in Manhattan, a mega-bank’s boss froths that Donald Trump is a madman. Thumping an office table, the head of one of the country’s biggest technology firms, and a rare Republican in Silicon Valley, solemnly vows to vote for Hillary Clinton. The chief of a huge transport firm giggles uneasily that a Trump presidency will destroy free trade—and his firm’s booming business with Mexico.

The feeling of contempt is mutual. On June 29th Mr Trump laid into the Chamber of Commerce, big business’s favourite lobbying organization. “It’s totally controlled by the special-interest groups,” he said, to wild cheers from a crowd in Maine.

In this section

Big international firms do not share Mr Trump’s diagnosis of America as a country that has stopped winning. For them, it has been a golden decade. Share prices are near an all-time high; the operating earnings of S&P 500 firms have risen by 137% since the crisis year of 2009. Many of the trends that have hurt Middle America have made USA Inc. stronger. Big firms have cut jobs to increase productivity and now make 40% of their sales abroad. They are more dominant at home because of a wave of mergers and their mastery of lobbying. They grumble about tax, but have become superb at avoiding it. The top 50 firms paid a cash tax rate of 24% on their global profits in 2015, compared with an official rate of 39%. Even the big banks have learned to live with more regulation: they are thrashing their European rivals across the globe.

At the very point that swathes of the public say the economy isn’t working, USA Inc. is on top of the world, occupying all of the ten top spots in the global corporate rankings, measured by market value. Bosses of multinational firms think their country has everything to play for. The worst of the job losses attributable to cheap Chinese labour have already happened; with luck, Chinese consumers will start buying more from the rest of the world. America’s lead in technology has never been bigger. New trade deals, such as the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, are remarkably skewed towards American interests in areas such as intellectual-property rights. “The American model that got us through the last 30 to 40 years is stronger than ever,” declared Eric Schmidt, the executive chairman of Alphabet, the parent company of Google, to the Economic Club of New York last month.

The hostility of big firms towards Mr. Trump goes beyond free trade. They know that America’s demographics are changing. The fastest-growing cohort of consumers are Hispanic, with their share of overall spending forecast to rise by about two percentage points by 2020, even as the share of white Americans drops by the same amount, according to Morgan Stanley, a bank. Bosses see a much more socially liberal America, too. None of this sits well with Mr. Trump’s nativist agenda, which is perhaps why Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Ford, Coca-Cola and Apple have either cut their support for the Republican convention this month or will not support it at all.

Yet a thousand miles south of Manhattan, in suburban Florida, the mood is different. The boss of a construction firm says he is fed up. His firm does all its business within America’s borders and profits have not yet recovered to 2006 levels. The Obama administration, in his view, has crippled the economy. More generous welfare benefits means labourers have got lazy. Permits and local taxes have proliferated, raising costs. The crackdown on banks has hobbled lending. Vote for Hillary? Not a chance, he says. Trump it has to be—and if he is psychologically erratic and vulgar, better that than an endless stagnation.

The construction boss is not alone. Opinion polls suggest that Mr Trump is also popular with small-business owners. His campaign-finance disclosures show hundreds of contributions from the owners of small firms that no one on Wall Street or in Washington, DC, has ever heard of: Biagi Plumbing, James River Air Conditioning, Rosenberger Construction, Allen Unique Autos, Texan Drywall Inc. and Podell Fuel Injection.

A demagogue and a hypocrite, with a point

The complacent response is that these entrepreneurs are fools who have been deceived. After all, Mr Trump’s business career has been built in the heart of the globalized part of the economy, not slogging it out in the trenches of Middle America. About 66% of the value of his business operations sits in New York, mainly in buildings in glittering Manhattan, according to Economist estimates. Global too-big-to-fail banks are tenants in two of Mr Trump’s most valuable properties. He has courted foreign investors, from Hong Kong to the Middle East, since the 1990s.

But Mr Trump speaks the language of business owners when he says he will abolish Obama care, the health-care scheme that companies say has created piles of red tape. When he promises that no firm will pay a tax rate of more than 15%, small and domestically-focused business see not a fiscal absurdity, but a chance that they might enjoy the same treatment that multinationals already enjoy (Apple, America’s biggest firm, paid a cash tax rate of 18% in 2015). And when Mr Trump complains about special interests dominating the economy, and corrupting politics, he is right. Lobbying budgets have reached $3 billion a year. Two-thirds of industries have become more concentrated since the 1990s. With big companies ascendant, the number of new entrant firms being created is at its lowest level since the 1970s.

A sensible economic agenda for America would please—and annoy—both sides of the divide. It would pursue free trade but also attack oligopolies, lobbying and bureaucracy and reform the corporate tax system. In other words, it would listen to the polished sophisticates who run America’s biggest companies, but also to those business leaders who support Mr Trump.

(*)  Schumpeter, The two faces of USA Inc, American bosses are divided when it comes to Donald Trump, Jul 9th 2016/ from the print edition

 [:]

DEIXE UMA RESPOSTA

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.