How to deal with the illegality that guarantees the material well-being of the top 0.1% of the pyramid?
The magistocracy has a protocol. A form of argumentative violence that says more by what it silences. It hides the state philosophy behind unspoken premises. By withholding assumptions, it hinders frank debate about justice and legality. He prefers the magistocratic and paints privilege with neutrality. Illusionism facilitates misunderstanding and political victory.
Last week two documents were published on public super salaries (those above what the Constitution allows): the study “International remuneration comparison, redesign scenarios and budgetary impact”, carried out by Sérgio Guedes-Reis (República.org); and the technical note “Remuneration for State Careers and the Constitutional Ceiling”, by the Advisory Commission to the Three Powers of the Republic.
The first looks at real Brazil and proposes reform scenarios. The second looks at Brazil from the category’s sense of merit and proposes a transition to more or less the same place.
Guedes-Reis describes the “acute detachment” of 1% of civil servants in relation not only to the country’s socioeconomic reality, but to the international reality. More than 85% of members of the Public Ministry and the judiciary received it. Compensation amounts and retroactive payments bring the real remuneration to double or even “six times” the notice salaries.
The study looked at the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Portugal, Argentina, Mexico, Chile and Colombia. Brazil “leads the remuneration rankings in virtually all compared statements”. The “best paid 25% of the Brazilian judiciary receive more than all 53 thousand judges in the ten countries analyzed”. It proposes salary redesign models that would save at least “R$500 billion in 20 years”.
The technical note says that the ceiling of R$46 thousand, if it were corrected from the value it had in 2003, would be R$63 thousand today. If corrected in light of the 2006 value, it would be worth R$71 thousand today. Given this finding, he combines the following words: lag, salary loss, flattening, disincentive, overload, acquired right, legal security and even, with an undertone of threat, continuity of public service. A legal mantra that diverts from the substantive debate.
According to the note, a “temporary referral” would be “operationally viable” in which “remuneration funds, even if they are called compensation”, would be subject to a “specific percentage or nominal limitation.”
He acknowledged, by euphemism, the illegality of the penduricalhos: “compensation funds were appearing with the purpose of compensating for additional responsibilities”. And he explained: “The creative solution, however, is not ideal.”
Instead of suggesting the cancellation of huge illegal retroactive liabilities, the note suggests, to be “fiscally responsible”, stretching the “debt” over time. Not only does it not save money, it also generates additional expenses. They agreed to pay in installments everything that is “due” to them to maintain their social place. A place longed for and frozen in time and space.
The magistocracy does not admit arguing from the society in which it lives, but from the accounting of its lifestyle. The budget must include a reserve fund for your consumption pattern. Even if for “creative solutions”.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
