CESGRANRIO

            A cidade moderna são os ecos [de um] labirinto - presídio complexo de ruas cruzadas e rios aparentemente sem embocadura - onde a iniciação itinerante e o fio de Ariadne se mostram tênues ou nulos. Invertendo- se uma das interpretações do mito, o labirinto aqui não é a trilha para chegar-se ao centro; é, antes, marca da dispersão. Indica a vitória do material sobre o espiritual, do perecível sobre o eterno. Ou mais, o lugar do descartável e do novo e sempre-igual.

            O homem citadino é presa dessa cidade, está enredado em suas malhas. Não consegue sair desse espaço denso, uma vez que a civilização urbana espraiou-se para além dos centros metropolitanos e continua a preencher grandes áreas que gravitam em torno desses centros. A partir da Revolução Industrial, o fenômeno urbano parece ter ultrapassado as fronteiras das ?cidades? e ter-se difundido pelo espaço físico. O signo do progresso transforma a urbanização em movimento centrífugo, gerando a metrópole que se dispersa. Assim, o citadino - homem à deriva - está na cidade como em labirinto, não pode sair dela sem cair em outra, idêntica ainda que seja distinta.

GOMES, Renato Cordeiro. Todas as cidades, a cidade. Rio de Janeiro: Rocco, 1994.

Na visão do autor, a cidade é um espaço caracterizado por antíteses, por opostos que se somam num todo quase sempre contraditório. Esse ponto de vista se faz presente de forma particularmente significativa em


O mês de fevereiro de um ano bissexto só terá cinco sábados se começar em um(a)


A Demonstração dos Fluxos de Caixa, segundo determinação legal, é composta por, pelo menos, três fluxos, que são os


Em uma disputa, há 34 pessoas: 20 homens e 14 mulheres.

A cada etapa da competição, três concorrentes são eliminados, sendo sempre 2 homens e 1 mulher. O número de homens igualar-se-á ao número de mulheres após a eliminação de número


Freedom of IMFormation

By Reza Moghadam
Posted on September 17, 2009 by iMFdirect

            With the global financial crisis, the world is increasingly looking to the International Monetary Fund- not just for financing but as the global institution charged with overseeing members' economies and policies (what we call surveillance). It's easy to forget that only 10 years ago the Fund was a secretive institution. That's no longer the case. Communicating and engaging with the world at large is now a normal and essential part of the Fund's business.

            The IMF today is a very open institution. The vast majority of our reports are published. The public can search the IMF's archives. And we are making lots of effort to reach out to external stakeholders.

            The benefits of this increased transparency, both for the Fund's surveillance and lending activities, are indisputable. Transparency allows us to engage with the public and to build a broader understanding and support of what we do. It benefits the quality of our advice by subjecting our analysis to outside scrutiny. And more generally, it makes us more accountable for our advice and financial decisions. In all, it makes us a more effective and legitimate institution.

            Frankly, the Fund cannot be a genuine leader on economic policy issues unless it is seen as transparent. We certainly would not have been able to achieve the major reforms of our lending frameworks and the increase in our financial resources had we not been seen as an open and transparent institution. Rightly, the public expects to know what we are up to.

            At the same time, certain aspects of transparency remain controversial. Some believe that publication undermines candor in the reports, the frankness of discussions between staff and country authorities, and the Fund's role as trusted advisor.

            Communicating and engaging with the world at large is now a normal and essential part of the Fund's business. We are gearing up to review the Fund's transparency policy, as part of our efforts to increase our effectiveness.

            The IMF has come a long way over the last 10 years, and publication rates of reports are high. Raising them further is not the main issue, nor one that can easily be resolved without changes much of our membership would consider revolutionary (such as making publication mandatory). Rather, further efforts should focus on making progress on a broad front, on issues that may catch fewer headlines, but are nevertheless crucial:
  • Reducing long publication lags. How can we simplify the cumbersome procedure for obtaining consent?
  • Maintaining the integrity of reports. The IMF's analysis and advice must be, and be seen to be, convincing, candid, and independent. To this end, there is a long-standing and fundamental principle that Fund reports are not "negotiated" documents.
  • Making the Fund's archives more accessible. The current setup for searching the archives-in particular the need to travel to Washington to gain full access to them-is outdated. We should also consider whether we can make some archived material available more quickly to the public.
http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2009/09/17/freedom-of-imformation/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            "I agree wholeheartedly with these transparency initiatives. I would also urge the IMF to keep going further forward particularly in regards to archives, as well as releasing country reports as part of a regular pattern of their activities, and to move to a system of releasing mandatory reports. In order for us not to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, we must be able to discern patterns from real world data. Secrecy is to be shunned since it promotes an imbalance in power and always leads to abuses."

Rahim, on December 14th, 2009 at 12:41 am http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2009/09/17/freedom-of-imformation/#comment-579

The comment above is in tune with Moghadam's ideas, because Rahim states that