IBOV 174,598.05 ▼ 0.31% IPSA 11,457.15 ▼ 0.12% IPC MEX 65,580.29 ▼ 0.38% MERVAL 2,992,575 ▼ 0.29% COLCAP 2,488.20 ▼ 0.06% BVL PERÚ 60,779.49 ▲ 0.58% USD/BRL5.21▲ 0.96% USD/MXN17.04▲ 0.32% USD/CLP929.61▲ 0.35% USD/COP3,198▲ 2.26% USD/PEN3.36▲ 0.16% USD/ARS1,512▼ 0.02% USD/UYU40.27▲ 1.50% USD/PYG5,900▲ 0.50% USD/BOB11.78▲ 3.59% USD/DOP58.61▲ 0.96% USD/CRC446.65▲ 0.98% USD/GTQ7.62▲ 2.25% USD/HNL26.84▲ 0.40% USD/NIO36.62▼ 0.02% USD/VES789.69▼ 0.13% USD/PAB1.00— 0.00% USD/BZD2.00— 0.00% USD/JMD 157.28 — 0.00% USD/TTD6.72▲ 0.77% EUR/BRL6.04▲ 0.67% BRENT 88.88 ▼ 0.03% WTI 83.11 ▼ 0.11% IRON ORE 161.91 — — COPPER 6.61 ▲ 0.03% GOLD 4,461 ▲ 1.78% SILVER 65.59 ▲ 1.26% SOY 1,184 ▲ 3.20% CORN 480.50 ▲ 10.02% WHEAT 655.00 ▲ 3.93% COFFEE 317.25 ▼ 5.51% SUGAR 16.43 ▼ 1.79% ORANGE JUICE 138.55 ▼ 0.47% COTTON 85.03 ▲ 2.33% COCOA 5,719 ▲ 3.18% BEEF 223.60 ▼ 3.93% CATTLE 339.10 ▼ 3.16% LITHIUM 75.20 ▲ 1.47% PETR4 41.64 ▼ 0.05% VALE3 72.97 ▲ 0.83% ITUB4 38.60 ▼ 1.03% BBDC4 16.85 ▲ 0.36% ABEV3 14.89 ▼ 0.80% BBAS3 19.37 ▲ 0.47% B3SA3 14.26 ▼ 0.21% WEGE3 47.59 ▲ 0.49% PRIO3 59.14 ▼ 0.19% SUZB3 41.33 ▲ 2.35% RENT3 34.68 ▼ 0.09% AZZA3 15.89 ▼ 2.63% CSAN3 3.22 ▼ 1.83% RAIZ4 0.25 — 0.00% PCAR3 2.75 ▼ 0.36% GMAT3 3.65 ▼ 1.08% PSSA3 48.13 ▼ 0.54% CVCB3 1.33 ▼ 2.92% POSI3 3.36 ▲ 2.44% SLCE3 13.34 ▲ 0.30% NATU3 8.14 ▼ 0.73% IBOV 174,598.05 ▼ 0.31% IPSA 11,457.15 ▼ 0.12% IPC MEX 65,580.29 ▼ 0.38% MERVAL 2,992,575 ▼ 0.29% COLCAP 2,488.20 ▼ 0.06% BVL PERÚ 60,779.49 ▲ 0.58% USD/BRL 5.16 ▲ 0.01% USD/MXN 17.06 ▼ 0.24% USD/CLP 913.98 ▲ 0.04% USD/COP 3,140 ▲ 0.03% USD/PEN 3.36 ▼ 0.66% USD/ARS 1,493 ▲ 0.10% USD/UYU 40.27 ▲ 1.24% USD/PYG 5,939 ▲ 1.68% USD/BOB 11.64 ▼ 0.76% USD/DOP 58.34 ▲ 1.25% USD/CRC 445.92 ▲ 0.89% USD/GTQ 7.62 ▲ 2.21% USD/HNL 26.79 ▲ 1.57% USD/NIO 36.62 ▲ 0.69% USD/VES 762.44 ▼ 0.13% USD/PAB 1.00 — 0.00% USD/BZD 2.00 — 0.00% USD/JMD 157.28 — 0.00% USD/TTD 6.70 ▲ 0.61% EUR/BRL 5.95 ▲ 1.01% BRENT 88.88 ▼ 0.03% WTI 83.11 ▼ 0.11% IRON ORE 161.91 — — COPPER 6.61 ▲ 0.03% GOLD 4,461 ▲ 1.78% SILVER 65.59 ▲ 1.26% SOY 1,184 ▲ 3.20% CORN 480.50 ▲ 10.02% WHEAT 655.00 ▲ 3.93% COFFEE 317.25 ▼ 5.51% SUGAR 16.43 ▼ 1.79% ORANGE JUICE 138.55 ▼ 0.47% COTTON 85.03 ▲ 2.33% COCOA 5,719 ▲ 3.18% BEEF 223.60 ▼ 3.93% CATTLE 339.10 ▼ 3.16% LITHIUM 75.20 ▲ 1.47% PETR4 41.64 ▼ 0.05% VALE3 72.97 ▲ 0.83% ITUB4 38.60 ▼ 1.03% BBDC4 16.85 ▲ 0.36% ABEV3 14.89 ▼ 0.80% BBAS3 19.37 ▲ 0.47% B3SA3 14.26 ▼ 0.21% WEGE3 47.59 ▲ 0.49% PRIO3 59.14 ▼ 0.19% SUZB3 41.33 ▲ 2.35% RENT3 34.68 ▼ 0.09% AZZA3 15.89 ▼ 2.63% CSAN3 3.22 ▼ 1.83% RAIZ4 0.25 — 0.00% PCAR3 2.75 ▼ 0.36% GMAT3 3.65 ▼ 1.08% PSSA3 48.13 ▼ 0.54% CVCB3 1.33 ▼ 2.92% POSI3 3.36 ▲ 2.44% SLCE3 13.34 ▲ 0.30% NATU3 8.14 ▼ 0.73%
since 2009
Friday, August 28, 2026

Opinion: The Curmudgeon on Maxi-Devaluations

By · March 19, 2015 · 3 min read

Daily Brief

The morning intel from across Latin America. Free.

By subscribing you agree to our privacy policy. We never share your email.

Opinion, by Michael Royster

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – In early 1999, the Curmudgeon watched, aghast, as the dollar went from R$1.20 to R$2.10 in less than a week; in late 2002, the Curmudgeon watched, astonished, as the dollar went from just over R$2 to just below R$4; the Curmudgeon has now watched, approvingly, as the dollar rises from R$2.40 to R$ 3.25.

The Curmudgeon, aka Michael Royster.
The Curmudgeon, aka Michael Royster.
One-stop reference
Company Intelligence
Every listed company in Latin America — financials, ownership and structure for 1,450+ companies across 26 exchanges, in one place.
Browse the directory →
RT
Ask Rio Times
17 years of Latin America reporting, on demand.
Open the full Ask Rio Times →

The Curmudgeon is not worried nowadays because he’s seen far worse before — between 1967 and 1994 he saw a total of twelve zeros fall off Brazilian banknotes. In all those cases, the maxi-devaluation had the effect of increasing inflation dramatically. Brazil’s basic underlying economic problems were only cured in 1994, when FHC abandoned price controls and indexation and allowed prices to adhere to market realities.

In the 1999 and 2002 devaluations, inflation initially surged, but then fell back. This was a function of market forces. Brazil’s economy, even after globalization, has a much larger domestic than international content, meaning it is not overly dependent on imported goods and services. So, in 1999, when fishmongers tried to charge double for imported sea food, consumers said “no” and bought domestic sea food.

This stability is due to the nature of the Plano Real, which relies wholeheartedly upon market forces. Much of Dilma’s economic program did exactly the contrary — it sought to protect and foster uncompetitive local businesses without weakening the currency.

Dilma’s new economic team knows that doesn’t work, and so has refused to continue those expensive and inefficient measures (customs duties, tax breaks, subsidized government loans) to support local content. Local production is naturally favored by a lesser “real” because customers think twice about buying imports, and look closer to home.

Sooner or later, assuming markets are allowed to prevail, both prices and currency will reach equilibrium. It happened after 1994, it happened after 1999, it happened after 2002 — it will happen in 2015 as well.

Unless, of course, Dilma and Congress are unable to resist the blandishments of the Brazilian industrial complex, and continue to shower benefits upon them. Congress will be sorely tempted, and not just because these behemoths contribute to political campaigns, under and over the table — they employ millions of workers, and workers vote.

The workers are not happy, partly because they feel they’ve been betrayed. It’s not their fault their employers now have to shut down, because the company officers and directors got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. A recent poll among pro-government protesters on Friday the 13th found that almost two out of every three protesters believe that Dilma knew about the skulduggery in the Petrolão. A more general public opinion poll shows Dilma’s support at only 27 percent of the populace, down from over sixty percent just before the elections; the necessary conclusion is that Dilma would be soundly trounced in a “third round”.

But, maxi-devaluation or no, there will not be any third round. FHC’s popularity plummeted to 19 percent right after his maxi-devaluation, but climbed back up during the next three years. Dilma’s popularity likewise has almost nowhere to go but up.

The above “almost” hangs upon whether someone can prove Dilma knew about the Petrolão. If they can, she will surely be impeached or resign.

The Curmudgeon first fetched up on these shores twelve currency zeros ago, still loves it here, where his favorite spectator sport is politics, from a waspish point of view.

Read More from The Rio Times

The Rio Times · Power Map
See who really holds power in Latin America
Click to open the Power Map

Rotate for Best Experience

This report is optimized for landscape viewing. Rotate your phone for the full experience.