Economist and one of the great intellectuals of the 20th century, Albert Hirschman (1915-2012) published in 1991 “The Rhetoric of Reaction”, which would be translated into Portuguese as “”. In this jewel of intelligence and scholarship, in less than 200 pages he identifies three typical arguments of reactionary opposition to proposed reform proposals: allegations of perversity, futility and threat.
Thus, for the refractory to the changes, a reform would be “wicked” by aggravating the problem it would intend to solve; “futile” for not leading to any palpable result; and “threat” by endangering another harsh objective, value or achievement.
To illustrate the theses of wickedness, futility and threat, Hirschman used examples taken from history, such as the criticism of conservative thinkers to the French Revolution of 1789; to the establishment of universal suffrage; and to the advent of social welfare policies. But it is not difficult to find the arguments of reactionary rhetoric in many of the negative criticism of the bill that deals with changes in, formulated by the minister and sent to Congress by President Lula a week ago.
As is well known, it is a full exemption from the tax to those who earn less than R $ 5,000 a month and establish decreasing discounts for those who receive between R $ 5,000 and R $ 7,000. To compensate for the lost collection, a modest and progressive increase in the contribution of about 140,000 citizens who earn over R $ 50,000 per month was proposed. A moderate proposal – it is long awaited and promised – in the course of the most equal distribution of income.
Because it is, to include so many contributors-it is calculated that it can benefit about 10 million people-and focus on the issue of income inequality, the objections to the proposal did not aim above all the exemption. Those who oppose it are certain that the legislature will change the chapter of compensation.
Thus, the project was criticized for its alleged perverse consequences for the already delicate fiscal situation and the inevitable loss of revenues if the tax paid for the richest is not taken. Perverse would also be the results if dividends will be taxed, creating unwanted risks of tax evasion and capital escape.
If the balance between exemption and new revenues, provided for in the executive text, will be obtained, there will be more inflation, which will corrode the gains obtained by those who will no longer pay taxes. And the reform, in short, will have been futile. Finally, the most radical criticism of the initiative says it understands it as a threat to the existence of a well-ordered economy as the exemption from income tax also also above the poverty line would strengthen the idea that the population does not need to pay taxes.
Critics do not have a single alternative to improve the project, without prejudice to the goal of greater equity. As in the examples offered by Hirschman, the defense of the indefensible status quo is not declared; It parades as a vaticinium of disasters that progressive change can bring. Nothing new under the sun.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
