The solution is not to sell Brazilian land to foreigners to obtain investments, but to lower taxes. Congratulations, therefore, to the Federation of Agriculture of Paraná (FAEP), which at its General Assembly of 25/01/2021, with representation of union delegates from the municipalities of the State, condemned the sale of land to outsiders.

They rightly argue that “it is not fair for foreigners, especially large enterprises, to use one of the sectors in which Brazilian rural producers have demonstrated great aptitude and are showing great technological capacity“. And he continues: “In other words, if there is a sector in which Brazilian rural producers dominate and is expanding, there is no reason to hand it over to foreigners,” says Ágide Meneguette, president of FAEP.

In addition, several agricultural powers in the world have specific legislation for the acquisition of real estate by foreigners. In the United States, some states prohibit the purchase of land by non-Americans. Similar and even more drastic restrictions apply in Israel and Spain.

“Our position is similar to what other countries do, which defend their agricultural production and property for nationals”. It does not mean that immigrants cannot acquire property, but within the limits imposed by the law in force. We need to prevent large foreign corporations from being able to acquire large parcels of land”- he adds.

Finally, FAEP is in favor of the veto on the acquisition of land by NGOs with foreign capital or headquarters outside Brazil, foreign sovereign funds, private foundation of NGOs and foreign companies.

Other entities, organizations and politicians have also spoken out. Therefore, the solution is not to sell land to obtain foreign exchange, but to lower taxes so that entrepreneurs in the private sector can invest, generate wealth, jobs and taxes, in such a way that the taxation axiom applies: “It is better to earn little a lot than a lot of the little…”.

Were it not for communist oppression and the Chinese dictatorship, we could approve the low taxation on production, because, along with other obscure factors, it was what attracted large industries there.

It is worth remembering a fact that occurred at a press conference in Montes Claros-MG, when a journalist asked the then vice-president of the Republic, José de Alencar – a great businessman in the textile industry with three factories in the city, of which only one remains – why he had bought 25% of a large American cotton processor to set up in China one of the largest textile industries in the world, generating thousands of jobs there, while here in this poor and jobless region he closed two of his units.

With his mentality unscrupulous businessman who used his personal success to flatten the rejection of the business class to Lula’s candidacy, the José de Alencar response could not have been different: “As Vice President, I have struggled to lower interest rates here ; but as a businessman, I have to think about my family and my future. If in Brazil I pay 37% in taxes, and in China I pay 7 to 10%, where am I going to set up my factory ?! It is the logic of capitalism; but it’s the logic, unfortunately!“

The solution is to lower the tax burden, dismantle the mastodontic state and privatize as much as possible. Why not give in to foreigners only to explore non-strategic businesses? During the time of the Dilma government, I asked a senior director at Petrobras (at the height of the robbery) why the company did not produce nitrogen for fertilizers, since it is made based on fossil fuels. My question was not answered …

On another occasion, technicians from the Ministry of Mines and Energy demonstrated that Brazil has large deposits of potassium, especially in the Amazon. For example, one, already identified, that starts near Oriximiná (northwest of Santarém), whose vein continues for about three hundred kilometers west towards Manaus (distance from São Paulo to Ribeirão Preto).

Its exploration would not cause any environmental damage, as the ore would be removed by blasting water and, after being purified, the tailings and sediments of soil and sand that the Amazon River would take to the Ocean would fill the open tunnel.

Why not give these two productions abroad, in order to produce cheaper inputs for our already competitive agribusiness? Why sell the chicken when we can sell the golden eggs, which are the products of agribusiness, which go to more than 200 countries and territories around the world?

In a recent conference, Dr. Evaristo de Miranda, Director of Embrapa Satellite Monitoring, stated that we are already close to feeding two billion people in the world. And that studies by specialists already consider that agribusiness with its secondary branches – transportation, banking, vehicle purchase, among others – already account for almost 50% of the National GDP.

There is a sinister mystery in this alleged negotiation that leaves us perplexed. Isn’t a white invasion behind this maneuver by the only power that has the money and population to dominate the country?

The bill presented in the Senate says: “Article 8 – The sum of rural areas owned and leased to foreigners may not exceed ¼ (one quarter) of the surface of the municipality where they are located. Paragraph 1. Persons of the same nationality may not own or own, in each municipality, more than 40% (forty percent) of the limit set in this article.“

We ask: What are, besides the Chinese, “those of other nationalities”? – Cubans, North Koreans, Nicaraguans, Venezuelans Chavistas…? Here is the saying: “If insurance died when old, the suspicious person still lives”, because one should not believe everything that politicians say and write.

May God and Our Lady Aparecida enlighten our authorities so that they repel a project with such an aberration! Put pressure on the deputies and the authorities in your region.