2019
DOI: 10.1590/0101-35172019-2870
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Governos Lula: a era do consumo?

Abstract: RESUMO Os governos Lula (2003-2010) foram rotulados de “a era do consumo” e do excessivo endividamento das famílias. Esse rótulo é no mínimo impreciso. O objetivo do artigo é analisar o período 2003-2010 à luz de informações objetivas e a partir da teoria econômica de Keynes e dos pós-keynesianos. Concluiu-se que o consumo foi o ponto de partida, mas o que marcou, particularmente, o segundo governo de Lula (2007-2010) foi o crescimento do investimento público e privado. Durante os dois governos do presidente L… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…-provided a boost to the domestic market, increasing the demand for jobs in sectors that absorbed large numbers of workers. In turn, with the growth of aggregate consumption and investments by the state public sector, private investment grew, making economic growth last for a relatively long period compared to recent economic trends (Bielshchowsky, 2012;Sicsú, 2019). As a result, the annual growth rate of GDP per capita, which had remained low since the 1980s (0.8 per cent per year), increased to 2.5 per cent in the 2003-2006 period, then to 3.6 per cent in the 2007-2010 period (despite the negative impacts of the subprime crisis in the United States), to once again lose strength in the 2011-2014 period, yet still somewhat high at 1.5 per cent per year (Figure 2).…”
Section: Labour Formalisation In Brazil Between 2003 and 2014mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…-provided a boost to the domestic market, increasing the demand for jobs in sectors that absorbed large numbers of workers. In turn, with the growth of aggregate consumption and investments by the state public sector, private investment grew, making economic growth last for a relatively long period compared to recent economic trends (Bielshchowsky, 2012;Sicsú, 2019). As a result, the annual growth rate of GDP per capita, which had remained low since the 1980s (0.8 per cent per year), increased to 2.5 per cent in the 2003-2006 period, then to 3.6 per cent in the 2007-2010 period (despite the negative impacts of the subprime crisis in the United States), to once again lose strength in the 2011-2014 period, yet still somewhat high at 1.5 per cent per year (Figure 2).…”
Section: Labour Formalisation In Brazil Between 2003 and 2014mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…15 In the last years, there has been a discussion about the causes of this economic boom. Authors such as Carvalho (2018) and Sicsú (2019) argue that the main reason for the GDP growth lies not in the expansion of consumption, but rather in public investment. In this sense, social programs and the rise in the minimum wage did not constitute alone the improvement of working-class living conditions.…”
Section: The Workers' Party Administrations: Between Neoliberalism Anmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nessa seara, o Brasil é um caso emblemático de inserção subordinada nessa nova economia mundial. O amplo e acelerado processo de reformas econômicas (abertura comercial, desregulamentação financeira, privatizações, estabilização monetária e reforma do Estado), iniciado no final dos anos 1980 e aprofundado ao longo dos governos Collor, Itamar e FHC, além da condução da política econômica por parte dos governos subsequentes e da valorização dos preços das commodities e da crise de 2008, resultaram, dentre outras coisas, em juros reais elevados, câmbio cronicamente apreciado e rigidez dos gastos públicos (Paulani, 2008(Paulani, e 2013Orair, 2016;Schincariol, 2017;Carvalho, 2018;Sicsú, 2019). Tais processos reduziram o grau de proteção do parque produtivo nacional, inviabilizando mesmo indústrias competitivas internacionalmente, e tiveram importantes consequências sobre as dinâmicas brasileiras de desindustrialização, de reestruturação produtiva e de reprimarização da pauta de exportações (Palma, 2005;Bresser-Pereira, 2008;Morceiro, 2012;Hiratuka e Sarti, 2019;Iedi, 2019).…”
unclassified