Porque não conseguem os economistas prever uma crise? (Parte I)

Fazer previsões sobre o futuro da nossa situação económica tornou-se uma grande incógnita

Desde 2008 que o cidadão comum tem recebido quantidades gigantescas de informação sobre a crise económica. Vimos pelos ecrãs dos nossos televisores, ouvimos pela rádio ou lemos em jornais ou pela internet inúmeras notícias e artigos com informação sobre a actual situação económica. A situação chegou ao ponto de o cidadão comum debater assuntos de teor económico como um expert no assunto. Mas o mais curioso é que o cidadão comum parece que conseguiu prever que a crise financeira de 2008 inicaida nos EUA iria afectar seriamente a Europa e que esta não iria acabar em 2009 como muitos economistas afirmaram.
Então, porque os economistas, analistas e estudiosos reagiram de forma tão impotente e estupefacta perante o que se passou na economia mundial nos últimos anos?

Crash de 1929 vs Crise de 2008

Muitas têm sido as comparações feitas entre o crash de 1929 e a crise de 2008. E de facto podemos encontrar no crash de 1929 um dos exemplos que justifica tamanha surpresa dos economistas face ao desenrolar dos acontecimentos na economia internacional nos últimos anos: o excesso de confiança no sistema económico que os levou a acreditar que a economia não poderia passar por uma crise semelhante ao crash de 1929.
O que está na base do que se passou com a economia mundial recentemente, é a consequência dos ciclos económicos e toda a perplexidade e impotência com que os economistas reagiram, mostra o pouco avanço que foi feito pelos cientistas económicos na área da análise, previsão e explicação dos ciclos económicos. E quando os economistas não conseguem ter esta visão de longo-prazo que englobe fases de expansão e declínio, está a falhar o que é mais importante na ciência económica: visão global, pensamento estratégico e capacidade de actuação antecipada e prevenção.
Isto pode chegar a parecer ridículo mas é a verdade. A governação das nossas sociedades centra-se quase exclusivamente na previsão de curto-prazo e muitas vezes apenas se governa como reacção aos fenómenos que acabaram de ocorrer, sem conseguir antecipar qualquer situação por mais iminente que se encontre de ocorrer.
De facto, o excesso de confiança e a crença de que a economia mundial estava "protegida" contra quaisquer crises de carácter devastador, foram os motivos da negligência face aos indicadores, tanto nos anos 20 do século passado, como na primeira década deste século.
Há no entanto obviamente, bastantes diferenças no mundo entre 1929 e 2008. E infelizmente essas diferenças fazem com que a actual crise tenha consequências ainda mais devastadoras e mais duradouras do que a de 1929, ainda para mais pelo facto de que, ao contrário do que até muitos economistas afirmaram, o mundo sofreu duas crises distintas, desde 2008.

Crise de 2008 e crise de 2010: crises financeiras vs crises económicas

Outro factor que explica a impotência de muitos economistas e decisores políticos em reagir a esta crise, reside no facto de na verdade ter ocorrido não uma mas duas crises. Sim é verdade: em 2008 o mundo foi brutalmente atingido por uma crise financeira, esta unicamente causada pela mão do Homem, e provocada pelas consequências da sua obra. Mas em 2010 o mundo sofreu outra crise: desta vez uma crise económica, fruto da evolução do planeta e do próprio ciclo da natureza e que não é fruto da mão do Homem.
Não se devem portanto confundir crises financeiras com crises económicas, se bem que as primeiras podem ajudar a implosão das segundas, como de facto aconteceu em 2010.
Uma crise financeira, sendo única e exclusivamente consequência da acção do Homem, pode ser evitada ou pelo menos pode ver os seus efeitos atenuados. No entanto uma crise económica faz parte das condições do planeta e a Humanidade tem que aprender a viver com ela.
Se analisarmos a História da sociedade humana é fácil constatar que a um período de crescimento e expansão da actividade e aumento da riqueza produzida se seguiu um período de crise com contracção da actividade, aumento do desemprego e redução do rendimento dos agregados económicos. E a frequência com que estes ciclos mudam tem até alguma regularidade, mesmo tendo em conta os factores extraordinários que podem ocorrer: e nestes factores extraordinários encontram-se as acções provocadas pela mão do Homem, como as crises financeiras.


É possível concluir pela História económica que o Homem ao "complexificar" a ciência económica, está a torná-la indomável e algo difícil de analisar e de estudar o seu padrão, agindo preventivamente.
Solução? Aquilo que tem sido apresentado e defendido por vários pensadores: o regresso às origens.

Unpaid internships: exploitation or a consequence of modern trends?

One of the biggest consequences of the current crisis was the incredible increase in the unemployment rate across almost all over the world, and both in the developed and developing countries.
All groups of people were highly affected: the youngers with no experience, the olders with years or even decades of experience, the people with higher education or with the basic education.
However, even being dramatic for the people in the 40's or 50's to find a new job or to change their careers, in my oppinion the problem is even bigger within the youngers, especially those with higher education, because after completing their studies and doing their part of the task, our current society is not corresponding with the other part. But, even not being the fault of the youngers, the reality is that they are who is really suffering the most.
The companies don't want to waste time teaching the youngers, especially because they see that, what the students learn on college is too far away from the reality. Also the recession and the increase in the retirement age don't allow the economy to create enough vacancies for the youngers who are starting to join the labour market.
So we are facing a very hard dilemma: the youngers want and need to find a job, and the labour market can't give them one. What is the solution for this dilemma? On one side we have the youngers, desperate to find a job and to show they value, ready to do anything and to obtain some work experience. On the other side we have the companies that, even the recession and the increase in the retirement age, they always need new employees, But, since the main goal of any company is to maximize the profits, by reducing the costs, the best way to achieve it, is by subcontract and explore the workforce. And the better way to do that, is by the unpaid internships.

Some years ago, before the beggining of the current crisis, this could be seen as an abuse. However, the arguments used now turn it in the best way for the youngers to enter the labour market.
I can admit that one paid internship can be a good way to enter the labour market and to know how the labour market really works. I even made one on holidays. But when the internship is not a summer internship? And when it's lenght is more than 3 or even 6 months? And when the youngers  take not only one but many more unpaid internships? What about the many youngers that arrives to the 30's only doing unpaid internshiops without any permament job?
The argument of "a unpaid position to help the yungers to adapt themselves to the labour market" is not valid anymore? And in fact, it was never valid. The companies are trying to turn the fresh graduates in some kind of some illiterate people, like if they don't even know how to use a computer, how to make mental calculus, or to take care of some tasks. It's true that there is a gap between what is learnt on the college and what is the reality, but that doesn't mean that the graduates are so unable like rocks with diplomas. And a 3 month placement can be used as an argument for the experimental period. And what about the longer internships?
Is it really necessary so much time to learn the tasks, especially when the intern is working always in the same department, in the same team and even doing the same tasks?

The other argument used by the companies is the fact that the interns don't create value for the company, and the comapnies are loosing money and time teaching the interns.
To answer this, we need to analyze what the interns do in the company. Do they start to take important and full of responsabilities tasks? The answer is obvious! But even being the less important tasks, that abyone want to do, they are still necessary for the company's activity.
And no one needs so much time to understand and to make the tasks right!

To conclude, more than never, the unpaid internships are a consequence of the current crisis. And until the power of decision is not balanced between the demand and the supply of work, they will still persist.
Probably the youngers don't have other choice than accept them. But of course, there are limits. When the life, the safety and the respect by the intern are not fullfiled. Even not receiving a salary, the unpaid interns should nottake some situations that don't respect his integrity.
There are a line, beyond it's really considered slavery.

Eurovision in Copenhagen 2014: after-show analysis (II)

Let me analyze now the second semifinal.

This was the semifinal with the most difficult predicitions, since only a few countries are used to make a presence in the grand final. I'm talking about Greece and Romania, which really advanced to the grand final, even thought I need to admit with weaker performances than usual. Especially Romania: there was lots of expectation about the duet Paula &Ovi, but I was very disapppointed with the performance. The same for Greece: I'm glad they changed the style, like last year, but I knew that the juries wouldn't rank the greek entry very high.
As for the other qualifiers, I was expecting the qualification of Norway (Carl really gave a great performance and brought lots of emotion for the stage), Poland (especially due to the public which appreciated such "happy" performance! I didn't like the english part, but it was very funny to see the performance) and Finland (due to the unique style in this semifinal and to the power and energy brought by the band).
As for the others, everything was unknow. Like the previous years Malta was unfairly benefited by juries and Belarus by the public. The first song was to simple and without a climax, and the second was to "plastic" and empty of emotions, and a little bit ridiculous.
I had two positive surprises: the qualification of Switzerland and Slovenia. I was happy for the qualification of these two countries, which rarely advance to the grand final. Both had great peformances on stage. And finally the controversial performance of Conchita. If at the beginning (weeks before the show) many expected a non-qualification of Austria, the tru was that his popularity was growing a lot. This allied to a great performance, put Austria in the grand final.

For the countries that didn't advance for the grand final, the biggest surprise was Israel. Everyone was expecting the qualification of Israel, and even with the bad choice of the dancers' choreography, Israel deserved the qualification due to the great vocals of Mei Finegold.
The Georgian song and performance were the worst before the semifinal and the performance on stage didn't help in anything.
I never understood the Lithuanian and Irish entries, especially the favouritism around the sencond one. The songs and the performances were to confused and even being both good singers, they didn't show their potential on stage that day.
And finally Macedonia. Even being also a good singer, the strange performance didn't help Macedonia to advance to the grand final.

Being a semifinal were almost everyone was a possible finalist, there wasn't big surprises, neither anything special to comment, except of course the non-qualification of Israel.

Eurovision in Copenhagen 2014: after-show analysis (I)

Unfortunately for another year was impossible for me to analyze all the songs in competition.
So at least I want to leave my comment after the show, about the songs and the controversies, which were so many this year!

Semifinal I:

This was the most hard semifinal, with many of the countries that usually go to the grand final. We had many countries that went to the grand final as usually: Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Sweden and Russia with all the controversies (more about the country's situation - the anti-gays laws and the situation with Ukraine).
Armenia, Hungary and Sweden were among the favourites since the beginning and their live performances in the tuesday's evening confirmed that. All well performed with strong voices creating interesting performances.
About Ukraine, I was a little desapointed before the great performance and especially the great singer and voice of Zlata. This song was more comercial and empty of content. However Mariya Yaremchuk deserved a place on the grand final.
Also Azerbaijan, even thought the lower popularity of the song, and the performance too simple and minimalist, deserved a place among the finalists. I really like Dilara's voice.
Now the special cases. In this semifinal we had two controversies that reached the final. First Russia. I can't find anything good on the song and on the performance. But for me the most strange thing was the fact that, being a country that created in the past so many anti-gay laws, wants to participate in the most unofficial gay event of the year, also inviting a gay to be on stage. Is Russia trying to show an image about the country different from the reality only to receive votes? Is Russia acting falsely? I think so.
And second Iceland. With an image of non-discrimination, using a performance a little bit confuse. However, even not being among the favourites of this semifinal, Iceland qualified for the saturday's final, despite almost all the predictions. Probably the energy was the key factor.
On the other side, the countries that (almost) never take part in the grand final. First San Marino, which was the big surprise. In the third attempt Valentina Monetta went to grand final. Many people said that after the last year's "great" song was inpossible for San Marino to achieve the grand final due to the political votes that would always put San Marino outside the grand final. But the fact is that, the good performance of Valentina was enough to put San Marino in the grand final for the first time.
The next country for the first time in the grand final was Montenegro. Like San Marino, everyone was saying that if this year Montenegro didn't achieve the grand final, it would neve be possible for this Balkan country. The performance and voice of Sergej were brilliant, which makes me to not understand the so low place in the grand final. Probably with many Balkan countries voting (but not present) in the final, the result would be different.
And finally a country that only last year went to the grand final. the Netherlands. With a song worse, in my oppinion, it was for me a big surprise when I saw the Netherlands as a finalist, and even more when the results were revealed showing that The Netherlands were placed in the first place both in teh juries and the the televoting. The duet have a great voice and the performance was very charismatic: these were the ingredients for the success.
For the countries that didn't advance for the grand final, the big surprises were Estonia and Portugal. Even with all the bad comments saying that Tanija made a bad copy of Euphoria, I always believed in the qualification of Estonia, which didn't occur due to the televoting. For my (amd many others) surprise, it didn't occur. And, even with all the bad comments in the home country, many were the people expecting the qualification of Portugal, which didn't occur due to the juries.
For the other countries, the result was the expected: Moldova sent a very confuse song, Albania made the terrible mistake to change the song to English and the latvian entry was too pathetic to be approved by the audience.

Paixão de Cristo: a inocência dos "culpados"

Sexta-feira Santa. A Igreja católica celebra hoje o dia da morte de Cristo. Por todo o mundo, centenas de milhões de pessoas acorrem às Igrejas para participar nas celebrações litúrgicas oficiais, e saem às ruas para participarem em inúmeros actos de piedade cristã que evocam as últimas horas da vida de Cristo, baseando-se nos relatos da Bíblia e na tradição popular. Em muitas cidades e em muitos países este é um dos dias mais importantes do calendário religioso e civil. É sem dúvida nenhuma um dia carregado de emoções e repleto de tradições.
Claro que neste dia não é só invocada a pessoa de Jesus Cristo, mas também das outras personagens que de acordo com a Bíblia tomaram parte, muito ou pouco, activa nas últimas horas da vida de Cristo. Desde a Virgem Maria aos pelos Apóstolos, Verónica, Simão de Cirene, Nicodemos ou os ladrões crucificados um de cada lado de Cristo. Alguns ou todos eles são representados na arte própria deste dia e tomam parte nas inúmeras procissões que neste dia se fazem.
Mas para além destas personagens que caíram nas boas graças da piedade popular e da tradição da Igreja, existem muitas outras, que foram sendo odiadas ao longo dos séculos pois sempre foram vistas como as culpadas da condenação, paixão, crucificação e condenação de Cristo. No entanto esse ódio pode não passar de um mal-entendido. Vejamos:


O povo judeu

O mesmo povo que uns dias antes aclamava Jesus como Messias Salvador,
acabou por clamar pela sua crucificação

Começo por falar do povo judeu em geral, daqueles cujos nomes não são referidos nos Evangelhos, sendo apenas referidos como "uma multidão". É esta multidão que alguns dias antes da noite de quinta-feira santa aclamou Jesus como Rei, Messias e Salvador quando este entrava solenemente em Jerusalém, e que a Igreja celebra anualmente no Domingo de Ramos. É esta mesma multidão que diante de Pilatos pediu alguns dias depois a morte de Jesus pela cruz e que o insultava e agredia enquanto levava a Cruz a caminho do Calvário.
É certo que se pode argumentar que este povo era analfabeto e pouco culto e que foram fortemente influenciados pelos sumos sacerdotes, que detinham um poder inquestionável dentro da sociedade judaica. Mas não nos podemos esquecer que ao longo dos séculos, muitas vezes o povo analfabeto e inculto conseguiu fazer ouvir a sua voz, contra as classes dominantes, quando achava que existia alguma situação errada, e muitas vezes através de revoltas e tumultos conseguiam fazer valer a sua vontade.

Os Sumos Sacerdotes

Caifás e toda a coorte foram a primeira autoridade a condenar Jesus à morte.

Caifás e seu sogro Anás, juntamente com todo a coorte foram os primeiros a condenar Jesus. Nos Evangelhos se pode ler todo o diálogo entre Jesus e os Sumos Sacerdotes, e todas as tentativas desesperantes que estes encontraram para incriminar Cristo. Ao contrário da multidão, os Sumos Sacerdotes eram muito cultos e bem conhecedores da lei e dos preceitos judaicos. Foram os principais impulsionadores da condenação de Jesus, porque viram n'Ele uma ameaça ao seu poder, depois de verem os efeitos que Jesus tinha junto das multidões. Conseguiram convencer não só a multidão como persuadir Pilatos, ao colocarem-no entre a espada e a parede. Apesar de não se saber o que aconteceu aos sumos sacerdotes depois da morte de Jesus, a Igreja e a tradição sempre os colocou entre os culpados da condenação de Cristo, nunca havendo alguma voz discordante.

Judas Iscariotes

Este beijo de Judas a Jesus tornou-se
 o gesto de traição mais conhecido na História

Vou agora falar da pessoa mais odiada em todos os Evangelhos, ao ponto do Evangelho segundo S. João referir que o próprio Diabo estava dentro do apóstolo Judas. Desde a Véspera do Sábado de Páscoa do agora conhecido como ano 33 da nossa Era, que sobre Judas saiu uma das maiores maldições da História. Actualmente as probabilidades de se encontrar nos países maioritariamente cristãos, alguma pessoa ou até um animal com o nome de Judas são quase nulas. Chamar Judas a alguém é um insulto, sinónimo de falso, traidor, vendido ou criminoso. Mais do que a multidão ou os sumos sacerdotes, Judas Iscariotes foi ao longo dos séculos o mote para todo o ódio contra os Judeus e a sua culpabilidade no processo de condenação e morte de Cristo.
Nunca houve uma voz dissonante ao longo dos séculos que atenuasse todo o ódio dirigido a este discípulo de Cristo, até recentemente. Numa mensagem que eu publiquei há alguns meses atrás, dei conta da descoberta de um pergaminho que mais tarde foi cientificamente comprovado como sendo original e antiquíssimo, intitulado "O Evangelho de Judas". Nele, a pessoa de Judas é apresentada numa perspectiva completamente diferente da ideia que dele foi sendo construída ao longo dos séculos. Claro que a ideia de Judas a entregar Cristo se mantém, só que neste "Evangelho" este gesto não é visto como traição mas antes como a prova do lugar privilegiado que Judas detinha. Judas é visto como o discípulo mais amado por Cristo e o único que percebia de facto qual a missão de Jesus, e por isso o único em quem Cristo de facto confiava. Por isso, em vez de ser a criatura mais desprezível nesta História, segundo este texto Judas seria um Santo e um dos mais importantes aos olhos de Cristo.
 Apesar dos fortes argumentos a favor da veracidade deste "Evangelho", a verdade é que a imagem negativa sobre Judas vai-se manter quase inalterável.

Pôncio Pilatos

Apesar da ordem definitiva da condenação à morte de Jesus,
a culpabilidade de Jesus tem sido desviada para outras personagens

Esta é para mim a personagem mais intrigante e mais misteriosa. Apesar de já ser o governante emissário do Imperador Romano para a Palestina muito antes da paixão e morte de Cristo, a verdade é que a referência a Pilatos apenas surge no relato da Paixão e volta a desaparecer para o anonimato.
Pilatos não era Judeu e apenas se mudou para a Palestina quando foi nomeado Prefeito. E apesar de ser quem decretou a condenação de Cristo à morte na Cruz, a verdade é que os próprios Evangelhos canónicos apresentam vários sinais da inocência de Pilatos em todo este processo. Primeiro, pelo seu choque face à maneira como os sumos sacerdotes e toda a multidão procuravam desesperadamente razões para condenar Cristo e como tratavam um Homem que não tinha constituído até então qualquer perigo para o poder de Roma naquela região. Depois a ordem de mandar açoitar Cristo foi vista como uma forma de procurar contentar a população sem implicar a morte deste Homem, que muitos defendem que aos olhos de Pilatos, era um inocente e até um Santo. Os Evangelhos são bem claros ao referir que Pilatos procurou várias vezes, razões para libertar Jesus.
Por fim, o gesto que aparece no Evangelho segundo S. Mateus do lavar das mãos como sinal de que Pilatos não queria qualquer responsabilidade sobre o que se iria passar com Cristo, apesar de pretender mostrar que Pilatos não concordava com o que se iria passar, não esconde que foi Pilatos que deu ordem para Jesus ser morto.
No entanto, pouca culpabilidade foi atribuída a Pilatos e nas Igrejas Orientais ele é aclamado como Santo, tendo a tradição referido que Cristo apareceu mesmo a Pilatos depois de ter ressuscitado.



As Sagradas Escrituras dizem-nos que estava predestinado desde o princípio que Jesus iria padecer desta forma. E de facto para tal acontecer, alguém teria que contribuir para tal. Era inevitável, e se ninguém tivesse assumido da responsabilidade da morte de Cristo, Este não teria depois ressuscitado. No entanto, tal protagonismo trouxe um ódio que perpetua ao longo dos séculos e que não pode ser dissociado das celebrações deste dia.


BOA PÁSCOA PARA TODOS!!!

Desafios para o cristianismo

No mês em que celebramos a Páscoa, a maior festa do calendário cristão, achei por bem dedicar este post a analisar quais penso que sejam os maiores desafios no presente para a Cristandade. Obviamente que, estando o cristianismo dividido em três principais religiões, catolicismo, ortodoxismo e protestantismo, existem algumas diferenças entre elas. No entanto, vou-me centrar naquilo que as une: a pessoa de Jesus Cristo e aos desafios que de uma maneira geral se colocam à religião cristã no geral.

O poder e a grandiosidade do Cristianismo
estão a ser postos em causa pela nossa sociedade actual

Evangelização e Re-evangelização

Um dos princípios básicos assumidos pelo cristianismo é a Missão: levar a palavra de Cristo a quem não a conhece e tentar converter (durante muitos séculos à força) quem ainda não tinha aderido ao cristianismo.
Nos séculos passados foi missão do cristianismo evangelizar e levar o Evangelho às terras descobertas desde o século XV: África, América, Oceania e algumas zonas da Ásia. Essa tarefa não está obviamente terminada. Existem ainda muitas regiões que não ouviram falar da palavra de Cristo. Ao anúncio do Evangelho se associa a ajuda ao desenvolvimento das comunidades locais e no apoio em defesa dos direitos humanos. De facto, os países do 3º mundo são o território perfeito para a tradicional Missão associada ao cristianismo nos últimos anos. Mas entretanto, desde a segunda metade do século XIX, como efeito da Revolução Industrial, mas com mais intensidade a partir da segunda Guerra Mundial, a Europa considerada o berço e centro do cristianismo começou a viver um forte período de descristianização pautado pelo crescente ateísmo e pela fé depositada na ciência e na tecnologia, e no próprio Homem.
Apesar do liberalismo religioso que vigora actualmente na Europa, a religião foi colocada em segundo plano, com o argumento da criação de um Estado Laico e baseado no Direito e na Democracia, e na igualdade de todos os cidadãos independentemente de qualquer diferença, incluindo a religião. Apesar de em alguns países o número de cidadãos que se dizem crentes e baptizados ser ainda relativamente elevado, sobretudo nos países do Sul da Europa, a verdade é que, quando se analisa a percentagem de cidadãos que têm uma prática dominical regular, a percentagem desce drasticamente.
Posto isto, concluímos que actualmente as Igrejas cristãs enfrentam duas importantes frentes de actuação potencialmente contraditórias. Por um lado, existe ainda um vasto caminho de Evangelização e Missão nos países de terceiro Mundo, e por outro uma Europa já evangelizada, mas que está a perder a sua identidade cristã e cada vez se identifica menos com os princípios cristãos. A religião é cada vez mais remetida para a vida privada e como algo completamente à parte da vida em sociedade.

Novos comportamentos e modos de vida

Se olharmos para o que tradicionalmente a Igreja apelida de bons costumes e analisarmos os costumes e hábitos das sociedades actuais, sobretudo nos países Ocidentais, vemos que as coincidências são quase inexistentes. Muitos foram os hábitos e comportamentos adoptados pela sociedade moderna que foram contrariando aquilo que era defendido pelo cristianismo. Desde o divórcio e co-habitação, ao aborto, à generalização do uso de métodos contraceptivos até mais recentemente ao casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo, tudo são hábitos que se foram ou estão a enraizar-se na sociedade humana, sobretudo na Ocidental, e que mostram a perda de influência do cristianismo na opinião pública e na esfera privada das pessoas.
Este de facto constitui um outro grande desafio para o cristianismo, pois a sociedade actual tem-se vindo a afastar dos preceitos cristãos. E a tendência será para tal se vir a acentuar. Os bons costumes foram substituídos pelos valores e hábitos concordantes com a forma como a sociedade actual funciona e como o Homem se projecta no mundo.

Escândalos e polémicas

Um dos temas quentes para o catolicismo e que foi bastante abordado pelos meios de comunicação social, foram os escândalos de pedofilia que, ocorreram um pouco por todo o mundo católico e que descredibilizaram a instituição Igreja.
Outro dos escândalos, que é bem transversal às principais Igrejas cristãs são os escândalos de corrupção financeira e branqueamento de capitais. Desde a Igreja católica até às pequenas Igrejas cristãs, todas têm sido ocasionalmente alvo de inspecções e auditorias, muitas delas com resultados que mancham a reputação destas Igrejas.
A par destes escândalos, está outro problema que afecta a essência do cristianismo. É verdade que a Bíblia não foi escrita de acordo com os rigores científicos actuais, para além do facto de ter sido escrita em línguas já não faladas, traduzidas posteriormente numa época que ainda não primava pelo rigor nessa área (as diferentes interpretações dadas aos livros sagrados foram um dos fortes motivos para o aparecimento de várias divisões no seio do cristianismo), acrescentando o facto de que o objectivo da Bíblia não ser o de constituir um livro ou enciclopédia histórica sobre a época em que os eventos lá relatados ocorreram.
Por isso mesmo, surgiram nos últimos anos teorias mais ou menos fundamentadas, mostrando que aquilo que o cristianismo defende como os seus princípios é afinal mentira. Tudo foi posto me causa: que a Virgem Maria afinal teve mais filhos, os irmãos de Jesus, que Jesus desposou Maria Madalena e que dela teve descendência, chegando ao extremo de afirmar que Jesus não ressuscitou, ou que nem sequer era o Messias enviado por Deus. Houve de facto várias histórias desviantes deste género ao longo dos séculos, mas que foram logo abafadas como sendo heresias. Mas o que parece torná-las mais fortes actualmente é não só a apresentação de fontes consideradas provas irrefutáveis dessas informações (como a descoberta de supostos erros de tradução ou o aparecimento de documentos antigos considerados por muitos especialistas como verídicos), como também o facto de o actual grande distanciamento das pessoas face à religião, torna-as por um lado mais receptivas a este tipo de afirmações polémicas, como por outro lado constituem um motivo que justifique o afastamento das pessoas da religião.
O cristianismo encontra também aqui uma forte área a intervir, tanto na criação de maior transparência no funcionamento das instituições de cada uma das Igrejas, bem como na procura de lidar com todas as teorias que se desviam daquilo que a Igreja tem vindo a afirmar desde o princípio.


Ao contrário do que muitos já afirmam, não acredito que o cristianismo desapareça de vez, mas caso os seus responsáveis não façam nada para inverter esta situação, o seu futuro em termos de fiéis está muito ameaçado. Cabe ao Cristianismo saber acompanhar e adaptar-se aos tempos modernos, visto que é uma religião fundada por Deus mas vivida pelos Homens.

Eurovision: Destination - Copenhagen 2014 (III)

Here are my comments for two more countries.

Iceland and  Pollapönk 

People, I think we've found the 2014 entry joke - a performance not to laught of sadness but of craziness - . In my oppinion Iceland had been placed in an unfair place many times in the last years, especially from the juries, but I can't defend Iceland this year.

The group's clothes remember me the crazzy groups sent to this Contest in the 80's and 90's. And if that time, they are a little crazy but fun, send that type of song in the 21st century is a big risk, and so far it seems a bad decision: it's too weird and difficult to listen more than one time. I can hardly find a good thing on this song and performance.
As for the other song that went to the superfinal but came 2nd, Sigríður Eyrún Friðriksdóttir with the song "Up and Away" could be certainly a better choice, even though it's also very far away from what I'm used to see from the. At least the 2nd ranked gives us a good feeling and certainly could attract more the audience. And of course the voice of the singer is more secure and powerful than the winners'. Probably the reason for the Pollapönk win was the fact that in the superfinal only the votes from the public counted.
I usually can give examples of what the performers can do on stage to increase or maintain the chances to go to the Grand Final. But in the icelandic case this year... I only can say that the singers need to improve their vocal apparatus.
Fortunately Iceland will participate in the semifinal I, where will vote Denmark, Sweden and Portugal that are among the countries that usually give more points to this country. However this year Iceland will need more than political vote... especially because I think that the juries will not find the fun on this entry joke.

Malta and firelight

Malta definetly surprised me last year. It was one of the countries that benefited more with the new voting system. And it seems that Malt chose to stay in the same style this year. The style can be the same, but the song is a little far away from last year's in terms of quality. I like the group's style, especially the use of the tradtional elements. And in vocal terms there's nothing especially to point.
At least it was better than the 2nd ranked (the singer De Bee with the song "Pin The Middle") and the 3rd ranked (Daniel Testa with the song "One Last Ride" who represented Malta at the Junior Eurovision Song Contest in 2008). The song has a good message, something that Malta is getting us used to it, since 2011. Unfortunately it's the only thing that stands out in this song. Is unlikely to reach the final,and even more unlikely achieve the same result as last year.
Malta will compete in the second semifinal. The countries voting in this semifinal that usually give points to Malta is only the United Kingdom. It seems that if Malta wants to have a place in the grand final they need to improve a lot their performance comparing with the national final.

The city of the future - The reality is comming

Masdar - United Arab Emirates

Songdo - South Korea

 The "current" cities of the future:

                                                   

                                                             Migaa - Kenya

Let's immagine a city without any kind of polution, wgere no one can be late due to trafic or strikes, where the children can play freely on the streets and everyone feels safe to go out at any hour. Basically, a city whitout problems: a perfect city.
This is how the city in the future will look like. Or at least how it should look like. In this article I will not talk about how the possible city will look like in the future if the current situation will continue, but how the city of the future shoul look like. But unfortunatelt, as everything else, the city of the future could have a negative side with bad consequences for  the world.

The intelligent city: a way to emend the nistakes of present cities

Currently we associate many problems to our cities. These problems affect the quality of live of their inhabitants. So, the main purpose of the intelligente city (called this way because of the way the city will work) is to provide a good way of living for its inhabitants, since the main purpose of any inhaboitant is his own welfare.
One of the worst characteristics of a city is the traffic. In the intelligent city this should not happen, because the public transports will be a very attractive way of traveling. For that, the current problems related to the public transports will disappear: the quality of the infrastructres, the schedule and the net of the service. If the public transports can offer infrasctructures with good quality (buses, trains, subways among others) with schedules that satisfy the costumers' needs and can cover all the city, most of the citizens don't have the need to use their own cars, reducing the traffic and the air polution.
About the polution, it's an important goal of an intelligent city the use of clean sources of energy - the renewable sources, like solar energy, water, wind - that do not pollute and after the expensive initial investment are very cheap in the future. Related to the polution is the production of waste - domestic or industrial - . A way to avoid that is to build the buildings

So, we can see so far that the intelligent city can produce its own energy and the basic goods like food and drinking water, by treating the unsafe water.
As for the outside space, the intelligent city needs to have a perfect equilibrium between buildings and the green spaces, because it's essential the preservation of the biodiversity.
As for the self-sustainability, the intelligent city needs to be able to using its resources effective and efficiently, producing, being able to produce the goods and services and the energy essential to satisfy the citizens' needs.

The challenges of creating the city of the future in our world already "constructed"

However, the ideal city of the future brings many problems and challenges. The current cities, have builds and zones that are not prepared for the requirements of these intelligente cities. And of course this historical heritage can be destroyed. Also the culture associated to any territory can be
annihilated by the futuristic cities. And of course, it will be impossible to satisfy all the citizens' needs and/or wills: an action of one citizen can easily have bad consequences on another(s).
These new cities will also create many job vacancies, which will attract many people, especially from the country, that can overcrowd the cities, increasing the unemployment (the demand for work can easily overcome the job vacancies available) and the prices (which would be already higher comparing to the current cities, in order to cover the extra costs related to the management of such "perfect" city).
And, since we can't simply destroy the big part of the current cities, the trend could be to construct the cities isolated from the rest of the world.

In a simple sentence, the ideal city of the future need to be constructed and work toward two main goals: the welfare and the sustainable development. However, the challenges and the dangers are very, and it's a possible scenario to create ghetos with more problems and the current cities.

The History of Gregorian Chant

The Gregorian Chant is the official chant of the catholic church since the Roman Rite.
It's a monocordic chant sung in unison without any instrument (musical accompaniment). Despite that today the catholic liturgy has more kind of sacred chant, it still saying that the Gregorian chant is the best way to connect the Man with God, the best way to express the prayers by the music.

an example of the one of the oldest notations of the Gregorian Chant

So, let's have a brief look about the History of this chant.
First the name: it's called Gregorian thanks to the Pope Gregory (590 - 604) who colected, selected, ordered the melodies heard in teh churches these dyas, making also some of them. Around the 12th century, it started to be called as plainchant, that comes from the latin "cantus plenus".
the first songs in Gregorian derivate from the songs sang in the jewish liturgy, including influences from the polytheist religions from the Roman Empire.
Using the existing melodies, the catholic church adopted tehm using the texts specially from the Bible, but also form the tradition. Until the 9th cnetury all the songs were transmited only oraly, which means a very hard work to memorize the songs.
So, to help the singers (the monks), in the end of the 9th century, the first music sheets appeared. The different kinds of notation appeared in orser to help to sing and to improve their capacity to sing new pieces without memorize them.
In the 10th century come the sript and the Dry lines drawn. In the beginning of the 10th century it's possible to determine the position for the semitones by the introduction of two lines: one red for the "Fa" and the other yellow for the "Do", and the use of letters for the clef: "C" and "F". But the changes didn't stop there.
In the second-half of the 11th century appeared the tetragramma, and the most perfect diastemasia is achieved. With all this evolution, it becomes possible to read a piece without a master.

An example of the quadratic notation.

But, meanwhile emerges the polyphonic melodie and the Gregorian chant started to die in the end of the 13th century. The Gregorian chant emerged again in 1845 when Danjou, an organist in Paris, has found the bilingual manuscrit of Montpellier. Since then, there wew many initiatives to study the ancient pieces of Gregorian chant and to introduce them again in the liturgy, thanks to the help of many personalities like: Fr Lambillote, Don Guéranger, Don Pothier, Don A. Mocquereau, Don J. Gajard, Cardinal Pizzardo, the Popes Pius X, Pius XI and Pius XII and the monks from Solesmes that published many works about this theme.
Despite the high number of notations, the most used now is the quadratic. And, since in the time where the Gregorian was born and diffused the communications were so difficult, we can find now in Europe many kinds of ways to write the Gregorian Chant.
The most important, just because it's the most studied now, is the notation from St. Gall, that emerged in the St. Gall monastery, in a region now in Switzerland.

St. Gall Monastery

Eurovision: Destination - Copenhagen 2014 (ALL SONGS)

This week the last songs were revealed. Here they are. What's your favorite?

SEMIFINAL I:

ALBANIA:

Artist - Hersi

Song - "One night's anger" (English)

ARMENIA:

Artist - Aram MP3

Song - "Not Alone" (English)

AZERBAIJAN:

Artist - Dilara Kazimova

Song - "Start a fire" (English)

ESTONIA:

Artist - Tanja

Song - "Amazing Life" (English)

ICELAND:

Artist - Pollapönk

Song - "No prejudice" (English)

LATVIA:

Artist - Aarzemnieki

Song - "Cake to bake" (English)

RUSSIA:

Artist - The Tolmachevy Sisters

Song - "Shine" (English)

SWEDEN:

Artist - Sanna Nielsen

Song - "Undo" (English)

BELGIUM

Artist - Axel Hirsoux

Song - "Mother" (English)

HUNGARY:

Artist - András Kállay-Saunders

Song - "Running" (English)

MOLDOVA:

Artist - Cristina Scarlat

Song - "Wild Soul" (English)

MONTENEGRO:

Artist - Sergej Ćetković

Song - ""Moj svijet" (Мој свијет)" (Montenegrin)

THE NETHERLANDS:

Artist - The Common Linnets

Song - "Calm After the Storm" (English)

PORTUGAL

Artist - Suzy

Song - Quero ser tua (Portuguese)

SAN MARINO

Artist - Valentina Monetta

Song - Maybe (Forse) (English)

UKRAINE:

Artist - Maria Yaremchuk

Song - Tick-tock (English)

SEMIFINAL 2

AUSTRIA

Artist - Conchita Wurst

Song - "Rise like a Phoenix" (English)

GEORGIA

Artist - The Shin and Mariko

Song - "Three Minutes to Earth" (English)

ISRAEL

Artist - Mei Finegold

Song - "Same Heart" (English, Hebrew)

LITHUANIA

Artist - Vilija Matačiūnaitė

Song - "Attention" (English)

MALTA
Artist - Firelight
Song - "Coming Home" (English)

NORWAY
Artist - Carl Espen
Song - "Silent Storm" (English)

POLAND
Artist - Donatan & Cleo
Song - "My Słowianie" (English, Polish)

BELARUS
Artist - TEO
Song - "Cheesecake" (English)

FINLAND:
Artist - Softengine
Song - "Something Better" (English)

GREECE
Artist - Freaky Fortune feat. Riskykidd
Song - "Rise Up" (English)

IRELAND
Artist - Can-Linn feat. Kasey Smith
Song - "Heartbeart" (English)

MACEDONIA
Artist - Tijana
Song - "To the Sky" (English)

ROMANIA
Artist - Paula Seling & OVI
Song - "Miracle" (English)

SLOVENIA
Artist - Tinkara Kovač
Song - Round and Round (English, Slovene)

SWITZERLAND
Artist - Sebalter
Song - Hunter of Stars (English)

BIG 5 + HOST

DENMARK
Artist - Basim
Song - "Cliche Love Song" (English)

FRANCE
Artist - TWIN TWIN
Song - "Moustache" (French)

GERMANY
Artist - Elaiza
Song - "Is it Right" (English)

ITALY
Artist - Emma Marrone
Song - La mia citta (Italian)

SPAIN
Artist - Ruth Lorenzo
Song - "Dancing in the Rain" (English, Spanish)

UNITED KINGDOM
Artist - Molly
Song - "Children of the Universe" (English)

LET'S START THE SOW!!!!!

The freedom of press... the freedom to live

Font: International Politics and http://rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php

The degree of freedom of the press can say many things about the conditions in a specific country. More even than we can immagine at a first analysis.
And for this scenario we can see that the world situation is not so good as the most optimistic viewers could immagine. And if we associate the freedom of the press to the economic position some countries have in the global context, the scenario could be even more worrying.
But we first need to see what is and what are the implications related to the degree of freedom of the press. We can see the freedom of the press as the possibility of the press to write, publish or show to the people, their vision of the what is happening in the homeland and in all the world, without any concerns about possible punishments. This means for example to turn on the TV at news time and see the news about anything about my home country or about another country, and see the information the most similar possible to the reality, without any deliberate interference to change the reality. The same if I decide to read a newspaper, to listen the radio or any other way to receive any kind of information.
From a country where the freedom is higher, this could see something so simple and basic that it's difficult to imagine a violation of this elementar people's right. The people must have the right to receive the real and accurate information about any subject. As citizens and members of the society, using the local, regional and global goods, making their own contribution for the society's wealth and welfare, the people have of course the right to receive the information in good quality about anything they want to know. And from the side of the people that provide the information, the same rules can be used. The people must have the freedom of search, make and turn out public the information. The right to know, it's seen as a basic right that anyone should have. Because in the countries where the degree of freedom is higher, only with an access of good and reliable information, the citizens can make the best choices and be more productive, efficient and effective for the society and economy. Only with the right information, the citizens can achieve their goals - so, the individual rights are above of the common rights in these countries - .
Let's see the other side. The countries with the lower degree of freedom of the press, have their own reasons which for them are the right ones. If the information is available for the public without having first an official authority to analyse it and to eliminate some information, or only parts of it, or the way it is transmitted, the people can make the wrong decisions, can be less productive, less efficient and effective, and can be a threat for the Government, the public institutions and for the society and the country itself. So, the common interest is above everything else.
I can present thousands of arguments defending and rejecting both ways of thinking. But we need to analyse something else.
A lack of information will never teach the people how to do the best choices and the countries with the higher degree of freedom are the most developed countries, with a higher respect of the human rights, and where the welfare is higher and the peace and institutional stability is higher.
And the freedom of the press has also an impact in the economic activity, in the policies decisions, in the public system, in the cultural, ideological and values' changes,
So, it seems that there must be a positive relation between degree of freedom and development. But this map shows a concerning scenario.
Let's analyse it by parts:
- Most developed countries: all of them, Western Europe, North America, Japan, Australia and New Zeland, are in the best two positions of the scale. And despite the problems, many of them related to the economic crisis, or politic misunderstoods, the trend would be to itensify the increase in the degree of freedom.
- Emmerging economies / especially the BRIC's: it's impossible of course to analyse our world without taking into account the countries' economic role. As I explained here, the emerging economies, especially the BRIC's have an important role in the global economy, and the importance will continue to increase in the future. So, seeing that in almost all of these countries, especially the BRIC's an the emerging economies in Asia, that have been increasing their power in the global context, the degree of freedom is very low, is a matter of concern of global institutions.
- Less developed countries: especially Africa, this map shows the opposite side - that a low degree of freedom is an impediment for a healthy growth and development of the country and society.
What lesson can we take from this map? That the world has along way to go, and that the threat of a reverse in the improvement is a constant presence, which is harming the people's welfare and quality of life.

Eurovision: Destination - Copenhagen 2014 (II)

Here we are in a very busy month for the Eurovision path to Copenhagen. Many countries will reveal their artists and songs this month.
Here I analyze more two countries, curiously both will be represented in Denmark with a band.

Finland and Softengine

Despite the winning in 2006 with the 3rd most voted song ever in the contest, Finland is among the lest
successful in the scandinavian "block". Even missing only 2 times the grand final after 2006, Finland never was in the TOP10 or closer to that.
Last year, this scandinavian country brought a very funny song and a very controversial performance. But, despite all the controversy the song came in 24th position.
This year Finland brings a different song from last years. In the national final there were some very good songs, especially the songs that finished in the TOP3. All these three songs could be a very good choice for the contest but, despite many people prefere the second ranked Mikko Pohjola, I prefere the winning song.
Let's start to analyze the 2nd and 3rd ranked. The band MIAU is probably the most original from all three, but I think it's not the most adequate for this kind of contest and could be very misunderstood, especially by the juries.
As for the 2nd ranked, he has probably the best voice in the TOP3 (and maybe among all the candidates), but the sing is not so memorable , and this could be a disadvantage in the time to vote.
And finally, my comment to the winner. I like this kind of performances on the Eurovision: a band singing pop-rock songs. The song probably doesn't bring us anything new, could be similar to many others, but at least it's a style that the most part of the people like to listen, and if they keep the same performance in the national final, I can't find (so far, it will depend on all the competition of course) reasons for Finland miss the grand final this year. The group has the passion to give a great performance to the audience and the singer is vocaly very secure.
This year Finland will perform in the 2nd semi-final and unfortunately Finland cannot count with the countries that tend to give it more points. None of the scandinavian neighbors will vote in this semi-final and, according to the statistics the only country that tends to give more points to Finland that will vote in this semifinal will be Israel, which in the last years is not among the countris that gives more points to this Nordic country.
So, at least thank God Finland will bring a good song, able to attract votes from the countries that doesn't give points to Finland due to the neighbor block system.

Switzerland and Sebalter

Switzerland is among the countries more damaged by the current block voting system, and in the last years has had some very unfair results. However I agree with the last year result, and honestly, I hope this year Switzerland has the same destiny. The group is interesting, transmits good feeling but the song is a little far away from what could be. It's not only because of the whistles, although is the biggest reason. I think that something is missing in this song, to give it more power and to transmit all the message and emotions the song has. And the vocalist needs to pay more attention to some vocal failures during the performance. But at least was the best choice from all the finalists. Only the 2nd ranked could also have been a good choice, although the song was too average.
Switzerland doesn't have a easy life in this competition and of course this country cannot count to benefit from the political vote this year as usual. The countries that according to the statistics give more points to Switzerland and that will vote in the same semifinal are the United Kingdom, Austria and in a lower level Finland and Germany.
Well... if the artists maintain the good mood (that is probably, together with the diversity of instruments used, the best aspect of all the song and performance) in the semifinal, they could not pass to the grand final but at least will not be among the crappy swiss participations.

The emerging economies and their role in the current crisis

The emerging economies are those who are cuurently in the path between the underdevelopment and the development situation. Of course they usually have an important role in the world economy. According to the flying geese model, these economies started to receive the labour intensive industries, and are now changing to the capital intensive industries and having an important role in some sectors.
However, maybe more than never, these economies are having an important role, especially in the current crisis.
Could the current economic situation be worse without the role of these economies? Could the solution for the current crisis be in the emergent economies?
That's what we are trying to see now.

Could the exit for the current crisis be in the BRIC's economic performance?

The great performance
One of the biggest facts of the last decades is the development and the economic growth of the so called "emerging economies", especially the BRIC's: Brazil, Russia, India and China, that are now among the biggest contributors to the world economy. And their weight will increase in the next decades. And in the recent years, one factor appears: the intra-emerging economies trade. In 2005, already 50% of the trade of these countries were among them. This is the result of the improvement in the consumptions patterns and the increase in the domestic demand.
But there are other groups inside the big group of the emerging economies. And, if some of them have already an important role in the regional trade and are achieving the high-income, others are still in the beggining of their path. We can divide the emergent economies into three groups:

> the developed emergents, which includes countries with high economic growth rates, like the BRIC's, but have a long way to achieve the political and isntitucional development, and others like Portugal or South Korea which achieved a good level of industrialization but are facing some economic problems especially the middle-income trap, and in gaining a important position in the global market;
> the mono.economies, which have the productive activity extremly concentrated in one product. They can face the risk if they don't diversify their productive activity, neither take advantage of the good seasons of their mono-product;
> insufficient emergent economies, the countries which development path is still in the beggining phase. They were the countries who suffered the most with the crisis by the reasons we will se later.

So, in the beggining of the current crisis it seemed that the emergent economies will not be affected by it, or at least will suffer just a litlle bit. This idea that the economic performance of the emergent economies would be independent of the economic performance of the most developed economies, especially the USA, received many supporters, including the political leaders of the emergent economies.
So, when the current crisis started, the reactions from the emergent economies were almost nonexistent. And in  fact they had good reasons to react like that. The most developed economies could renovate their debts thanks to the credibility they had in the international markets. And of course, the emergent economies didn't have the credibility to do that. So, the only way they had to constantly renew their debts was thanks to the currency reserves accumulated by the countries in the 90's. This accumulation was the result of years of comercial surplus with the outside, which led to a reduction in the debt and in the risk of financial crisis.
However, even with these good aspects, the trade between these economies and the western economies was still about 50% in the biggenning of the current crisis. With the progress of the economic crisis, it became obvious that emerging economies would be directly affected by the crisis started in the USA.

GDP growth in the BRIC's

Source: World Bank statistics 2014

Exports growth in the BRIC's
Source: data obtained by the information available on the World Bank Statistics 2014

By these graphics is possible to see that the recession arrived to the emergent economies later, but had negative effects especially in the mono-economies, whose industrial specialization made ​​them more vulnerable to terms of trade deterioration. And even with the high cuurent accumulation, the markets were awared about what happened in the 90's, and the access to the credit became more difficult.
The second problems faced by the emergent economies, is the contraction of the international demand of the commodities (that still has an important weight in the total exportation in most of these economies). And the third is the decrease in the commodities and raw-materials prices, having especial effects in the insufficient emerging economies.
So, it seems a bad scenario for the emerging economies. However, these economies had two advantages comparing to the most developed countries. First, since they took place in the industrizliation process later, the creation and investment in financial securities which were the responsibles for the crisis, weren't so disseminated. And, since their were in the middle of the development process, the domestic market wasn't full explored like in the developed countries. So, the domestic demand was in the ascending process, and these countries could cover the decrease in the international demand, by the increase in the domestic demand. And since the big part of the population are now emerging from the poverty, they have enough income to consume the intensive labour, or low technologic products that the big part of these countries still produce.
And in three of the emerging economies, Brazil, India and especially China, they have an advantage, that can also give the opportunity to export to the most developed countries where the crisis is bigger: the so called "social dumping".
The techological assimilation, associated to the extremly low labour costs and bad work conditions, gives to China the possibility to produce and export products more sofisticated than before, at a more competitive prices than the companies in the developed economies. So, even with lower productivity, these economies can compete with the similar products produced in the developed economies, thanks to the lower prices.
Bur of course, even with the possibility to export to the developed economies with a competitive price, the emerging economies will recover faster than the others, thanks to the domestic demand. And of course the level of recovering will also depend on the government's role in these areas:
> fiscal and incentive policies;
> social programs to stimulate the domestic demand (give the opportunity to the people increase their consumption, especially for the goods that the country can't put in the external market);

The recovering of the emerging economies can in fact help the recovering of the most developed economies. But to achieve that it will be necessary the coordination of policies and procedures at the international level. The basic areas of intervention are the creation of a new finantial regulation system, the reform of the international financial system and the extension of the regulation and the penalization to the fiscal paradises.

So, as we can see in this article, the reason why the people speak more now about the emerging economies, is because the exit for the current crisis could depend a lot of their performance.