of urban myths, censorship and some things more A salad of topics:
myths and prejudices
easy: there are some things to be repeated often become absolute truths that undermine our perception of events social, political and economic. And I want to refer to some of the most widespread, as a contribution to enable clear that the reality is much more complex than can occur within 30 seconds of a news story on a television news or in 4000 characters in the print media.
For example, always speaks with great self-confidence levels of budget execution of public institutions as an unmistakable proof of its inefficiency, also in this country has become, through a conceptual extrapolation interested in synonymous corruption. But the fact is that non-implementation of budgets, many factors converge. It is certainly possible to find displeasure in a few public officials, but there are other elements that in most cases are the real culprits of the level of implementation of public budgets.
One is conceptual: the Comptroller General of the Republic there are only two states in the implementation of the budget process, budgeted and spent. But the truth is that there is a third state: committed. In many cases the government buys goods and services that do not pay until you get the products purchased. But these resources, even if not strictly "spent" are not available because they are committed to be used when obtaining goods and services purchased. We illustrate with an example: the purchase MOPT Bailey bridges but not paid until they reach the country, which may take several months. Meanwhile, the resources to pay the bridges are maintained in the coffers, even though they are no longer available, despite this, the Auditor General considers this amount as the budget is not executed and reported in such a way that seems to be a great inefficiency. But the truth is a bit more complex.
Second, institutions often receive resources in a time of year that they have no time to run. In the case of all taxes to fund specific programs and institutions, the amounts depend on the spin rate of collection, in some cases the bulk of what is collected is obtained in the second half, given the current legal system is virtually impossible to carry out acquisitions of some magnitude within 6 months. On the other hand he Ministry of Finance "mounts a horse" resources are scarce and when you turn the urgency usually first and accommodating others is the availability of resources. It also generates low levels of implementation, especially the municipalities, which have millions items from specific taxes.
Another myth, that I saw in the news: "public institution that purchased luxury cars for tours of its officials." Posted this news and spread the idea that public officials use institutional funds to unnecessary or undeserved luxuries. The truth is that the tenders for the vehicle purchase specifications typically do not include extras, but these things are added by suppliers as a way to make their offerings more attractive. So even if the institution has tendered the purchase of such a 4x4 vehicle up to 5 people and motor of at least 2500 cc, a supplier may, to sweeten the deal, offering luxury rings, radios with MP3 input, climate and stirrups, all without additional cost to the administration. And they do not because they want help, of course, but because they want to win the award and especially relationships with institutions that require more vehicles for their work. That is why in many cases public institutions end with a chuzos that seem too flashy, but not what the administration really tender.
Finally, a recurring myth that I do not understand how it still exists: Members receive no pension at the end of his term in the Legislature, unless they are entitled in any other regime. The four years in the Assembly, in light of a recent ruling by the Ministry of Labour, even serves to increase an existing pension, as some would have pensions former deputy of the National Teaching. But the truth is that no member will end his tenure as deputy to a pension of two and a half million colones for the rest of his life. If so, José María Villalta would be the nation's youngest pensioner.
About UCR incident-James Watson: For me the fact is relevant because it confirms to me something I have been claiming for some time. It's amazing that we have reached the point where a group of university officials believe they have sufficient grounds to determine what is acceptable and what is not for the rest of the university. This is the corollary of a trend towards intolerance manifestations that were very evident in the past was not allowed a presidential candidate to record a program on Channel 15 in the 2006 elections the debate on NAFTA ended up being a disrespectful and intolerant outcry against those who supported the Treaty, but now, assumed even more elaborate with reasons by the University Council, shows clearly the need to defend certain principles that define unambiguously the university life.
And the issue is not whether we agree or disagree with what Watson has said, probably an overwhelming majority rejected his claims misogynist, racist and homophobic, "but there is an objective danger we begin to relax the criterion of exclusion and end up censoring those who think like us. What are the limits of freedom of expression? Who defines it? What are the ethical values \u200b\u200b"institutional"? Who checks? What about those who disagree?
The Facebook page of my good friend Alberto Cortes, who defended the Council's position with real intellectual honesty and having a respectable view, Mauricio Herrera wrote something I thought was interesting and I share with you:
Should we censor literary conferences Borges for his "ambiguity" to the dictatorship in Argentina, or Vargas Llosa for being a neo-liberal or Shostakovich concert to defend the Soviet communism, or burn the books of Juan Ramón Jiménez by mistreating his wife, or outlaw Allan Poe for being a drunk or García Márquez to defend Fidel and the Revolution? We started censoring a molecular biologist who talks about science at a university and then could censor any speech that does not conform to any @ s considered morally or politically correct. The debate should be stimulated, not inhibited, and we can not go around telling people what should or should not listen and discuss, based on what one group considers to be "values" appropriate. What has been dangerous is when some feel possessors of the truth about what is right for your company, and end up imposing censorship: Chavez, Fujimori, Franco, Fidel, Mc Carthy and many others demonstrating good moral intentions for their companies ... It seems that the University Council made an excess of UCR, with the best intentions, and that its decision prior censorship set contradicts the Constitution
Excellent contribution me seems the best summarizes the subject matter.
