
It’s a common grumble that politicians’ lifestyles are far removed from those of their electorate. Not so in Uruguay. Meet the president - who lives on a ramshackle farm and gives away most of his pay.
Laundry is strung outside the house. The water comes from a well in a yard, overgrown with weeds. Only two police officers and Manuela, a three-legged dog, keep watch outside.
This is the residence of the president of Uruguay, Jose Mujica, whose lifestyle clearly differs sharply from that of most other world leaders.
President Mujica has shunned the luxurious house that the Uruguayan state provides for its leaders and opted to stay at his wife’s farmhouse, off a dirt road outside the capital, Montevideo.
The president and his wife work the land themselves, growing flowers.
This austere lifestyle - and the fact that Mujica donates about 90% of his monthly salary, equivalent to $12,000 (£7,500), to charity - has led him to be labelled the poorest president in the world.
“I’ve lived like this most of my life,” he says, sitting on an old chair in his garden, using a cushion favoured by Manuela the dog.
“I can live well with what I have.”
His charitable donations - which benefit poor people and small entrepreneurs - mean his salary is roughly in line with the average Uruguayan income of $775 (£485) a month.
In 2010, his annual personal wealth declaration - mandatory for officials in Uruguay - was $1,800 (£1,100), the value of his 1987 Volkswagen Beetle.
This year, he added half of his wife’s assets - land, tractors and a house - reaching $215,000 (£135,000).
That’s still only about two-thirds of Vice-President Danilo Astori’s declared wealth, and a third of the figure declared by Mujica’s predecessor as president, Tabare Vasquez.
Elected in 2009, Mujica spent the 1960s and 1970s as part of the Uruguayan guerrilla Tupamaros, a leftist armed group inspired by the Cuban revolution.
He was shot six times and spent 14 years in jail. Most of his detention was spent in harsh conditions and isolation, until he was freed in 1985 when Uruguay returned to democracy.
Those years in jail, Mujica says, helped shape his outlook on life.
“I’m called ‘the poorest president’, but I don’t feel poor. Poor people are those who only work to try to keep an expensive lifestyle, and always want more and more,” he says.
“This is a matter of freedom. If you don’t have many possessions then you don’t need to work all your life like a slave to sustain them, and therefore you have more time for yourself,” he says.
“I may appear to be an eccentric old man… But this is a free choice.”
The Uruguayan leader made a similar point when he addressed the Rio+20 summit in June this year: “We’ve been talking all afternoon about sustainable development. To get the masses out of poverty.
“But what are we thinking? Do we want the model of development and consumption of the rich countries? I ask you now: what would happen to this planet if Indians would have the same proportion of cars per household than Germans? How much oxygen would we have left?
“Does this planet have enough resources so seven or eight billion can have the same level of consumption and waste that today is seen in rich societies? It is this level of hyper-consumption that is harming our planet.”
Mujica accuses most world leaders of having a “blind obsession to achieve growth with consumption, as if the contrary would mean the end of the world”.
But however large the gulf between the vegetarian Mujica and these other leaders, he is no more immune than they are to the ups and downs of political life.
“Many sympathise with President Mujica because of how he lives. But this does not stop him for being criticised for how the government is doing,” says Ignacio Zuasnabar, a Uruguayan pollster.
The Uruguayan opposition says the country’s recent economic prosperity has not resulted in better public services in health and education, and for the first time since Mujica’s election in 2009 his popularity has fallen below 50%.
This year he has also been under fire because of two controversial moves. Uruguay’s Congress recently passed a bill which legalised abortions for pregnancies up to 12 weeks. Unlike his predecessor, Mujica did not veto it.
He is also supporting a debate on the legalisation of the consumption of cannabis, in a bill that would also give the state the monopoly over its trade.
“Consumption of cannabis is not the most worrying thing, drug-dealing is the real problem,” he says.
However, he doesn’t have to worry too much about his popularity rating - Uruguayan law means he is not allowed to seek re-election in 2014. Also, at 77, he is likely to retire from politics altogether before long.
When he does, he will be eligible for a state pension - and unlike some other former presidents, he may not find the drop in income too hard to get used to.
Read the original on BBC HERE:































Show Comments
Comments (8)
Is it my overly-fertile imagination or is the venerable, the honourable Peter Underwood - who just a few short weeks ago and at mere cost of $100,000 for the few-hours visit hosted that paradigm of trough-feeders Prince Charlie and the Missus - about to announce that he is vacating the opulent sandstone pile in the Bot Gardens in favour of a humble two-bed unit in Howrah Flats????
Where do we find another couple of thousand of politicians like him to help fix the worlds problems.
I totally agree with him on the stupidity of chasing economic growth all the time. More more more will never satisfy anyones needs or desires.
Lets hope that a few other world leaders actually listen to this man’s wisdom.
Surely you jest there Under?
Generally persons of such former high judicial motivity would cling to whatever ancient vestiges of pecuniary compoundment and all that is on offer to such persons who are tasked to provide the tea and bikkies when shallow pocketed royals come a calling to our tiny island?
Has there been of show of interest by a Chinaman to this conveniently located plot of soil with its outdated buildings, (which at this age in our history has already been converted into townhouse units or a large Bunnings outlet?)
This motivity as alluded to in the above has seen this high station lofty pomp and glory judicial appointee ranging across our State in a number of his former law disputational capacities, which oft’ consisted of distancing one’s former clients from the Sheriff and or the Hangman’s rope.
Then along came the opportunity to climb even higher in station to that of a Legal Bulldog, to become a man of much gavel-banging rectitude, the tossing of vagrants into Her Majesty’s Prison out Risdon way, also to the showing of his skills in the manner of imparting his kindest judgements upon the high level felons in our society.
Ultimately when the felons, bounders and the malfeasant were thinning-out down Hobart way, he was then able to grind out a few extra shillings as he was indeed well qualified to tend the grounds of our aged Governors Quarters, there to host afternoon tea parties, then occasionally be called upon to act as host and landlord to the afore-mentioned shallow-pocketed etc, passing through Tasmania.
So the decision seems to have arrived whereby he has had to vacate this old sandstone cottage with its splendid gardens to again engage in his motivity which may soon see this man of high moral rectitude and bearing, seek a more humble dwelling to pass the time of day?
Unless of course his old mate from yesteryear that fellow sitting as the somnambulistic chairman of our vastly under-employed Integrity Commission, can swing a deal to prevent this old sandstone cottage going under the hammer, sold to a Chinamen?
We now wait for further news of this sad State of affairs whereby our State government ministers have to sell off a few odd bits of our heritage here and there, to ensure that Forestry Tasmania’s executive board members still get their colossal annual stipends in return to their seeing to the laying bare of our Primeval Forests and to the slaughtering of the deadly and dangerous creatures that do dwell deep within our Primeval Forested Crown Lands.
The Uruguayan idea of ‘leftist’ is totally different to the Giddings concept. In the Giddings vortex of leftist politics, elderly patients wait for years in pain while she loans $13 million to a private company to develop magazine paper. A product in terminal decline.
http://www.premier.tas.gov.au/media_room/media_releases/future_secure_for_tasmanias_boyer_mill
The fact is that NSW, has a part-time Governor and it does not waste its resources on a redundant job. The Governor Marie Bashir has a 9-5 job in a central city office, lives in her own house and works for a living.
What do we have in an almost bankrupt state? We pay to have breakfast, lunch and dinner served to one family while the hospitals delay operations for 5 years and homeless are on our streets. This is idiotic to believe that we get value for money, we clearly don’t, it is clearly inefficient and a waste. Tasmanian’s simply cannot afford a full-time Governor who is doing a job that in reality no longer exists or is needed once in a thousand days. Surely there is a better way.
Things to do with Government House.
7 star Hotel, museum of Colonial History, Backpackers, private hospital, respite palliative care centre, lease it out as Private accommodation, Wedding function centre, office space, attract an international NGO, etc etc etc. I think that a few entrepreneurs in this State could take it over and pay the Government a good rent and make it a contributor to state coffers not a drag as it is at present.
If our possible future Government led by Will Hodgman had any abilities to change the mendicant nature of this State they would start at the top as an example of what we need to do and how drastic we need to be. This is no longer a joke, we do not need a Governor wasting their talents as an upmarket mendicant.
I have posed this question before, needless to say I never had an answer. If the Chief Justice can take on the Gubernatorial role when the Governor and his wife take off to London, take a holiday, or is acting up in Canberra when the boss cocky is away why can’t the two roles be merged? Prior to one being abolished. Surely we don’t really need a highly paid, double-breasted officially decorated person being driven in a limousine to open Agricultural shows and attend private school speech evenings? Not only is preposterous it is archaic and utterly pointless in this day and age. Its time this pointless role went the way of the feathered tricor-hat the braided uniform and the horse and carriage. And why can anyone tell me y does the Governor still have an official barge????
What a terrible example this man is setting for the great elected leaders of the world.Where is his big car(s)?,and helicopter and private plane.
And take a look at those unhealthy looking clothes.Why the man doesn’t even have a complete dog!How can we disbelieve people like this,I ask you.
Removes tongue from cheek,exits stage left.
Yes Pete (#2): this thing called economic growth has proved to be a two-edged sword. It has meant being trapped in front of shelves of breakfast cereal trying to decided which one to buy. It has meant buying things because that’s what other people have and it has meant ‘doing it for the kids’, so that they can have something better than we had. It has meant unnecessary consumption of our natural resources. Allied with population growth, and the stupidity of many in our society, we are daily increasing the problems, not solving them. Anne Cadwallader (#3 http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/nick-mckim-the-volatility-of-political-opinion-polls/show_comments) opined that all bar a certain 15% were numbskulls. She wrote that it is the 15% of our Tasmanian society that are tertiary educated and that this same group which votes Green. I don’t agree with that. It sounds nice and maybe we are all tempted to say things like that, but in our hearts we would know that support for the Greens is from across the social spectrum, just as opposition to them comes from all areas of the social spectrum. Anyway, that’s a bit of a red herring that I’ve snuck into this comment, so I’ll return to your point about economic growth.
It’s my view that not only does economic growth require continued exploitation of our natural resources, but also that capitalism seems to demand increased productivity and increased profits each year. Any economic model that does not account for the increasing exploitation of non-renewable resources – finite – is blinkered. Live within our means, live sustainably, choose governments who would move in that direction, etc. Population? How about revising the old Aussie warning into something more relevant: ‘Populate and Perish!’