Log in

View Full Version : World Politics - Euro Area



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]

Greyblades
10-21-2012, 21:16
Are some people actually arguing that British parliamentary system is the only valid/legitimate/democratic system there is?

Not me, I'm just messing with krazelic.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-21-2012, 21:51
A lot of countries stole your idea and added variations to it, so you Brits no longer get to decide what a "proper" parliamentary system is ~;p

The defining feature is that the executive depends on the willingness of parliament to support it, and that conversely it can be sacked by a vote of no confidence.

That ministers can't have seats in parliament over here is, as you indicated, meant to seperate powers. It's thought that parliament would be a more credible check on the executive if the executive doesn't get a vote.

The defining feature of a parliamentary system is that the parliament is Sovereign - hence the executive is drawn from the parliament, and must be. Otherwise, you would have two Sovereign branches who can oppose each other.

Having an elected chamber is a feature of most systems of government - it is not unique to the Parliamentary System.

What is unique is the deliberate lack of Separation of Powers.

Recently, Britain has been infected by European governmental practice via the EU, so that the Lord Chancellor is no longer the highest Judge in the land, we now have a separate and excessively activist "Supreme Court" and the Lords are no longer presided over by the Lord Chancellor, with the result that the last three Lord Chancellors have sat in the Commons, not the Lords.


Are some people actually arguing that British parliamentary system is the only valid/legitimate/democratic system there is?

No - I'm just arguing that a separate executive is not a "Parliamentary" System.

Kralizec
10-21-2012, 22:47
Not according to political science or constitutional theory. According to those, most systems in the world would fall under to one of these catagories:

1. Presidential systems, with an executive President who is completely independant of the legislature
2. Parliamentary systems, where the head of state is either a king or a non-executive president, and where the actual executive must enjoy support from the legislature.
3. Hybrid systems, or "semi-presidential" systems, of which France is the most well known. The ministers are appointed by the president but must also be supported by the assembly.

In Westminster systems the executive is derived from, and has seats in parliament. In other countries like Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands having a seat in parliament is not necessary - and in the case of the Netherlands, not allowed. They still operate as parliamentary systems, regardless.

EDIT:

Recently, Britain has been infected by European governmental practice via the EU, so that the Lord Chancellor is no longer the highest Judge in the land, we now have a separate and excessively activist "Supreme Court" and the Lords are no longer presided over by the Lord Chancellor, with the result that the last three Lord Chancellors have sat in the Commons, not the Lords.

I know about those changes, good stuff. Allthough I suppose people can disagree on that.

What does the EU have to do with it?

Fragony
10-22-2012, 07:09
Not me, I'm just messing with krazelic.

Which is always a good idea imho

Conradus
10-22-2012, 11:07
The defining feature of a parliamentary system is that the parliament is Sovereign - hence the executive is drawn from the parliament, and must be. Otherwise, you would have two Sovereign branches who can oppose each other.


I don't know where you got that definition. Wiki: A parliamentary system is a system of democratic government in which the ministers of the Executive Branch derive their legitimacy from and are accountable to a Legislature or parliament; the Executive and Legislative branches are interconnected.

Whether or not your ministers were members of Parliament doesn't change anything about their accountability to Parliament, or the legitimacy of their government.

Fragony
10-22-2012, 12:15
I don't know where you got that definition. Wiki: A parliamentary system is a system of democratic government in which the ministers of the Executive Branch derive their legitimacy from and are accountable to a Legislature or parliament; the Executive and Legislative branches are interconnected.

Whether or not your ministers were members of Parliament doesn't change anything about their accountability to Parliament, or the legitimacy of their government.

We kinda have a problem there don't we. We Dutch can't stop the EUSSR but we will forever hate you.

SoFarSoGood
10-22-2012, 14:32
What does the EU have to do with it?

Do you regard the EU as democratic?

Vladimir
10-22-2012, 17:30
New EU poster:

7455

I count more hammers and sickles and Muslim Crescents than Chritian Crosses...

Sorry, late.

When was this poster created? It tickles the Cold War part of my brain and wonder how old it is.

SoFarSoGood
10-22-2012, 18:14
Not sure but this year-ish albeit from some 'private' EU fanclub.

Beskar
10-22-2012, 18:18
Not sure but this year-ish albeit from some 'private' EU fanclub.
Opposed to a 'public' one?

SoFarSoGood
10-22-2012, 20:00
Private money I assume but are you suggesting that the EU gives 'grants' to it's cheerleaders? Appalling!

Beskar
10-23-2012, 00:53
Private money I assume but are you suggesting that the EU gives 'grants' to it's cheerleaders? Appalling!

Well, that is what you was insinuating with use of the marks. I was just trying to draw it out from you!

SoFarSoGood
10-23-2012, 01:35
Since you evidently have not checked I can confirm for you that "Europeforall.com was developed, with the support of the European Commission, by the pan-European partnership, OSSATE, which stands for "One-Stop-Shop for Accessible Tourism in Europe"."

Among other rubbish it clearly states that OSSATE (project); "The project is co-funded by the European Commission “eContent” programme." Yes we are paying for this!

See: http://www.europeforall.com/about.seam?conversationPropagation=end&conversationId=4252 for other madness on 'Photo and Measurement Guides' which Hotels etc are asked/required to use to join some unknown proposed Hotel Guide presumably. Of course this is being done and lunatic posters commissioned (I wonder how much it cost?) while Greeks starve. So good to live off the taxpayers... Happy Days!

Fragony
10-23-2012, 08:05
Sorry, late.

When was this poster created? It tickles the Cold War part of my brain and wonder how old it is.

Late as well, it can't be real but because it is the EUSSR it could be real

SoFarSoGood
10-23-2012, 13:52
More 'democracy' coming from Berlin: 'Dave' Cameron is threatening to veto an increase in EU spending. So some bright spark in Germany has suggested canceling the meeting so that no veto can be used: "We don't like what you're going to say so no talking". Meanwhile MEPs have approved a 6.8% EU budget increase in 2013. This means that Greece, Spain and Portugal must ALL pay more to the EU while they are cutting their own budgets. You wouldn't believe it if it was in a book or film...

Here's a giggle: When's a carrot not a carrot? When you make jam with it! By Directive 2001/113/EC jam can only be made with fruit so if you make carrot jam the carrot ceases to be a vegetable and becomes a fruit.

Beskar
10-24-2012, 00:30
Since you evidently have not checked I can confirm for you that "Europeforall.com was developed, with the support of the European Commission, by the pan-European partnership, OSSATE, which stands for "One-Stop-Shop for Accessible Tourism in Europe"."

Among other rubbish it clearly states that OSSATE (project); "The project is co-funded by the European Commission “eContent” programme." Yes we are paying for this!

See: http://www.europeforall.com/about.seam?conversationPropagation=end&conversationId=4252 for other madness on 'Photo and Measurement Guides' which Hotels etc are asked/required to use to join some unknown proposed Hotel Guide presumably. Of course this is being done and lunatic posters commissioned (I wonder how much it cost?) while Greeks starve. So good to live off the taxpayers... Happy Days!

europe4all is different to europeforall ...

europe4all is a political group
europeforall is a tourist site

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-24-2012, 00:33
I have a better giggle for everyone - the Directive on the Cornish Pasty specifies that it should be crimped ONLY on the side, but many traditional recipes are crimped on the top, and they use the harder rye pastry rather than wheat pastry common to the modern pasty.

According to the EU - a traditional Cornish Pasty is not a Cornish Pasty.

Tellos Athenaios
10-24-2012, 00:45
But the joke is on your Cornish pastry makers, because those directives are merely about protectionism for local specialities and they are not drawn up by Brussels on its own: they are submitted/requested by trade organisations. So the purveyors of traditional Cornish pastry have effectively disallowed themselves from marketing their perfectly traditional foods as such ...

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-24-2012, 01:10
But the joke is on your Cornish pastry makers, because those directives are merely about protectionism for local specialities and they are not drawn up by Brussels on its own: they are submitted/requested by trade organisations. So the purveyors of traditional Cornish pastry have effectively disallowed themselves from marketing their perfectly traditional foods as such ...

This is not lost on me - but neither is the fact that the EU didn't tell them to take a hike. Someone in Brussels enjoys drawing these things up and enacting them.

Beskar
10-24-2012, 01:23
Same category as Spettkaka in Skane (South Sweden)
Or like how Champagne can only come from Champagne.

I prefer Cornish Icecream to pastries anyway, though best Icecream is Bonds (http://www.bondsofelswick.com/) which is a locally produced one near here.

Tellos Athenaios
10-24-2012, 01:31
This is not lost on me - but neither is the fact that the EU didn't tell them to take a hike. Someone in Brussels enjoys drawing these things up and enacting them.
And if the EU did tell them to take said hike, the Cornish would go all "big bad EU trampling over our precious Cornish pastry, no respect for local traditions or values whatsoever!" If the EU were a proper government with proper power as opposed to a bunch of treaties with lots of hyper sensitive toes sensing being trod on then telling to go take that hike could work. As it is, it would merely result in complaint burried in the annual fodder of complains to bring up when something is up for negotiation: "and the EU doesn't recognise our Cornish pastry traditions neither, for shame!"

You know it would.

Anyway a lot of that stuff is just the various cries of me-too after the big ones (champagne, parma ham) got meaningful protection from (inferior) products out of it.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-24-2012, 10:02
And if the EU did tell them to take said hike, the Cornish would go all "big bad EU trampling over our precious Cornish pastry, no respect for local traditions or values whatsoever!" If the EU were a proper government with proper power as opposed to a bunch of treaties with lots of hyper sensitive toes sensing being trod on then telling to go take that hike could work. As it is, it would merely result in complaint burried in the annual fodder of complains to bring up when something is up for negotiation: "and the EU doesn't recognise our Cornish pastry traditions neither, for shame!"

You know it would.

Anyway a lot of that stuff is just the various cries of me-too after the big ones (champagne, parma ham) got meaningful protection from (inferior) products out of it.

The Cornish winged when a Cornishman tried to carry a Cornish flag over the Tamar during the Olympic torch run and a policeman took it off him.

In order for the EU to be a "proper" government it needs popular backing - these medieval ordinances are designed to foster that, but like most else they're counter-productive.

Furunculus
10-24-2012, 20:00
the foolishness of a FTT:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/timworstall/100020933/someone-somewhere-is-either-lying-or-ignorant-about-the-financial-transactions-tax/

SoFarSoGood
10-24-2012, 21:31
Quite... By their own figures it doesn't work!

Fragony
10-25-2012, 13:54
More foolishness, the appointment of a white male in the ECB was blocked by the European Parlement because he is a white male, they absolutely crave a female or an immigrant no matter what, es muss sein after all.

SoFarSoGood
10-26-2012, 09:58
Douglas Carswell's Private Member's Bill in the Commons today. He proposes that European Communities Act (1972) should be repealed. UK out of the EU at one fell stroke. He says "Unless the Whips office mount an operation, there is a realistic chance that the prospect of quitting the EU will be debated on the floor of the Commons."

http://www.talkcarswell.com/home/a-bill-to-quit-the-eu-debated-in-the-commons/2512

Of course the motion will fail and if I were totaly cynical I might suggest that it may have something to do with the fact that he recently launched a book; 'The End of Politics'.

Idaho
10-26-2012, 12:51
The Cornish winged when a Cornishman tried to carry a Cornish flag over the Tamar during the Olympic torch run and a policeman took it off him.
Really? What did they do that for? You see loads of Cornish flags here in Devon and I've never seen any bother from it. My guess is that the incident had nothing to do with the flag and everything to do with trying to cause a newsworthy incident.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-26-2012, 22:15
Really? What did they do that for? You see loads of Cornish flags here in Devon and I've never seen any bother from it. My guess is that the incident had nothing to do with the flag and everything to do with trying to cause a newsworthy incident.

They did it to make a point - by carrying it across the Tamar, obviously. The Police were having none of it. Cue hysterics.

While we're on local news: The rai around here, yech, and is it just me is it suddenly a lot colder tonight.

Rhyfelwyr
10-26-2012, 23:02
Does the modern county of Cornwall actually correspond geographically to ancient Cornwall/the Cornwall that the nationalists want to be independent, or is it bigger? Would people in Devon be Cornish nationalists?

Beskar
10-26-2012, 23:13
I am guessing it is based from the Dumnonia period and the area of the Cornwall Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornwall_Council).

SoFarSoGood
10-26-2012, 23:24
Belongs to Prince Charles the Prince of Wales and boundaries, if I recall are the Tamar (?).

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-26-2012, 23:41
Does the modern county of Cornwall actually correspond geographically to ancient Cornwall/the Cornwall that the nationalists want to be independent, or is it bigger? Would people in Devon be Cornish nationalists?


I am guessing it is based from the Dumnonia period.

Cornish Nationalists take the modern County (that they call a Dutchy) as their claim - the people of Devon are entirely Anglicised.

Thanks be to God.

InsaneApache
10-27-2012, 04:06
Define Anglicised.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-27-2012, 10:43
Define Anglicised.

"They think they are English".

SoFarSoGood
10-27-2012, 16:50
To be honest most Cornish regard themselves as British. My great Grandmother defined herself as Kentish first but only because she claimed that Kent was the first 'English' Kingdom.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-27-2012, 23:08
but what does that mean?

Increasingly the English do not see themselves as "British" even though the Cornish, Welsh, Scots and Irish do.

What does that tell you?

Strike For The South
10-28-2012, 01:14
Bloody hangers on, that's what

I'm utterly fascinated that these provincial backwaters get so much say.

Tellos Athenaios
10-28-2012, 01:45
Which is exactly what "that" tells you. As relative power is removed from the "English" but they still remain on the hook for the bulk of the taxes and incurred debts, to the English "Britain" increasingly means "you pay for us to ignore our demands".

SoFarSoGood
10-28-2012, 02:12
Means I have more in common with a Cornish person than I do with French person; we can both accept being 'British', we speak the language, have a generaly shared history for the last 1,700 yrs etc, both recognise the Queen as Head of State.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-28-2012, 10:10
Which is exactly what "that" tells you. As relative power is removed from the "English" but they still remain on the hook for the bulk of the taxes and incurred debts, to the English "Britain" increasingly means "you pay for us to ignore our demands".

"Spending without representation".

It's fairly clear the UK is coming part at the seems - and I can no longer summon the energy to care.


Means I have more in common with a Cornish person than I do with French person; we can both accept being 'British', we speak the language, have a generaly shared history for the last 1,700 yrs etc, both recognise the Queen as Head of State.

What does it mean to the Cornish though?

Go find 10 Cornishmen in Penzance who agree with you.

Beskar
10-28-2012, 15:46
Part of why Regionalism within a European Framework would work the best. It would give the autonomy needed to allow areas to truly prosper on their own two-feet.

SoFarSoGood
10-28-2012, 20:13
Part of why Regionalism within a European Framework would work the best. It would give the autonomy needed to allow areas to truly prosper on their own two-feet.

Except that neither the majority of Cornishmen or Men of Kent/Kentish Yeomen (depends which side of the Medway you were born) regard themselves as 'European'.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-28-2012, 21:22
Part of why Regionalism within a European Framework would work the best. It would give the autonomy needed to allow areas to truly prosper on their own two-feet.

How's that working out for the Greeks?

They haven't been "standing on their own two feet" they've been even more propped up by EU money than the Welsh and Cornish are by English money - and they're still spiraling into poverty now.

I applaud you ideals Beskar, but you have no plan to implement them. Remember when you tried dividing England into regions and EVERY Englishman here complained about the divisions?

I'm sorry - but your ideas justd lack any grounding in political reality.

Beskar
10-28-2012, 22:16
I applaud you ideals Beskar, but you have no plan to implement them. Remember when you tried dividing England into regions and EVERY Englishman here complained about the divisions?

I'm sorry - but your ideas justd lack any grounding in political reality.

You mean these? Regions of England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England)
They already exist, just ran by unelected quangos. Unfortunately, the concept was scrapped after the failure of the North-East vote.

They already exist for other countries.
Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_Germany) France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_France) (so on)

It would simply be regional divisions based around NUTS1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:NUTS_1_regions_EU-27.svg&page=1)-NUTS2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:NUTS_2_regions_EU-27.svg&page=1) depending on historical context and already implemented status quo.

It would be removing a middle layer of government, that being, the "nation state" into the already existing component parts which make up the area. With these powers diverting mainly to the regions themselves, with Europe playing a limited role, it would create a far stable Europe giving greater decentralisation to the areas that require it.

So political reality as in tomorrow morning? That would be entirely foolish to think that. But Political Reality as in something achievable? Then I think so.

Beskar
10-28-2012, 22:46
The lesson of modern Europe is obvious: In a globalized world, you all have to pool your resources to compete. That much is 100% obvious to everyone, I think. The question is how, and under what kind of structure.

Whilst I agree, others don't. That is the issue. The problem is the 'nation states' looking out for themselves, at the expense of others. Ranging from Greece to Germany. In a way, think of them as "power-blocs" within an union, and like it or not, people underneath those power blocs have to toe that party-line, even if they agree with someone else on how to deal with the issues.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
10-28-2012, 23:19
You mean these? Regions of England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England)
They already exist, just ran by unelected quangos. Unfortunately, the concept was scrapped after the failure of the North-East vote.

They already exist for other countries.
Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_Germany) France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_France) (so on)

It would simply be regional divisions based around NUTS1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:NUTS_1_regions_EU-27.svg&page=1)-NUTS2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:NUTS_2_regions_EU-27.svg&page=1) depending on historical context and already implemented status quo.

It would be removing a middle layer of government, that being, the "nation state" into the already existing component parts which make up the area. With these powers diverting mainly to the regions themselves, with Europe playing a limited role, it would create a far stable Europe giving greater decentralisation to the areas that require it.

So political reality as in tomorrow morning? That would be entirely foolish to think that. But Political Reality as in something achievable? Then I think so.

Yeah, try getting government going in those "regions".

Why abolish the Nation-State? Why not abolish regionalism instead? Either way, every piece of evidence points to the Central Government trying to accrue more power, and the EU ALREADY does this with every treaty.

Actual alliances would serve everyone better, rather than this hamfisted attempt to bolt the Roman Empire back together.


The lesson of modern Europe is obvious: In a globalized world, you all have to pool your resources to compete. That much is 100% obvious to everyone, I think. The question is how, and under what kind of structure.

When was the world economy not globalised?

Norway traded with Byzantium and Viking merchants when as far as the Black Sea.

Competition is a matter of Power, Power requires the imposition of one group's will upon another's.

Like the British Empire - the most powerful government and economic bloc ever.

Sarmatian
10-29-2012, 14:48
So, barring some acceptable form of unification, Europeans will simply have to accept that some areas will be poorer than others.

Que?

Aren't some areas of US poorer than others?

Kralizec
10-29-2012, 15:56
There's a vast difference between the "regionalism" in Germany and France. The former has a federal constitution with significant powers awarded exclusively to the Lander. The latter is a very centralised state which has granted some autonomy to the regions but actively meddles in their affairs, sometimes amounting to micromanagement.

It's really up to the existing countries themselves to decide the balance between centralism and regional autonomy. Some countries are really too small to justify a sub-division into regions. Allthough it would be funny to see the Dutch lands renamed "the Nether Regions" on maps of Europe.


When was the world economy not globalised?

Norway traded with Byzantium and Viking merchants when as far as the Black Sea.

Competition is a matter of Power, Power requires the imposition of one group's will upon another's.

Like the British Empire - the most powerful government and economic bloc ever.

And Europe has (indirectly) traded with the far east since time immemorial. I thought it was obvious that globalization refers to a massive increase in volume, both in goods and traffic of persons.

Even the most ardent eurosceptics generally acknowledge that some cooperation is beneficial; the difference being that they want issues decided on a case-by-case basis with multilateral treaties. As GC said, "the question is how, and under what kind of structure."


Britain is an odd duck, and when i speak of Europe i don't tend to think of the UK as part of it.

What i meant was that in todays world, nations like Spain, Italy, and Greece can't stand on their own without lowering their own quality of life. In order to create a Europe with "equality" in standards of living across the board, there would need to be an institutionalized way to spread the burdens and benefits around.

It would be the same situation if the USA was divided into smaller countries--certain regions would not be able to stand on their own.

All of those eurozone countries which are now in trouble functioned as autonomous economies before, there's no particular reason why they can't be self-sufficient even under a shared currency.

The issue about living standards is that some southern European countries, Greece in particular, were not industrial powerhouses like Germany but nevertheless their citizens felt that they deserved a comparable standard of living and pushed for wage increases year after year. Some have proposed that we need a long-term transfer union to make sure that Greeks and Italians can continue on basicly the same path. Others, me included, feel that we should mop up the current mess one way or another and in the long term ensure that these countries live with what they have.


So, barring some acceptable form of unification, Europeans will simply have to accept that some areas will be poorer than others.

Pretty much.

There are already EU funds for regions that are underdeveloped, or to increase synergy between regions across national borders. That, and the fact that contributions to the EU budget are already linked to GDP means that the EU is already "spreading the wealth" at a modest level. These projects are vastly more useful than the CAP (agricultural subsidies) but IMO there should be no transfers beyond these.

HopAlongBunny
10-29-2012, 16:32
It sounds like a federal system would be the best choice. Local decision making with a transfer union to ensure roughly comparable levels of public services.

Keeping health and education services comparable would ease labor movement within the union. But again you run into at least the perception of a "free-ride" being handed to the less economically advantaged.

Furunculus
10-29-2012, 16:51
Que?

Aren't some areas of US poorer than others?

indeed they are, but federal taxation is ~25% of GDP and the variation in spending levels between rich and poor states is ~5% of GDP, so a variation of roughly 20% of federal spending.

How big a budget would the EU need to be able to slosh around 5% of combined GDP into the poor regions (bearing in mind the current budget is only 1% and heavily constrained by CAP payments)?

The other point is that americans accept this, they are all american, whereas we are rapidly finding out just how german the germans are, and finnish the finns are, when it comes to firehosing cash at nations they consider to be essentially delinquent!

This 'sloshing' occurs in the form of:
1. national pay-bargaining which benefits poorer regions (teachers, nurses, etc)
2. national social benefits more generous than poorer regions could afford alone (eg.housing benefit in glasgow)
3. targeted regional development grants/discounts to encourage business growth (objective 1 EU/WEFO funds)
4. additional infrastructure spending to support the local economy (the mainland-skye bridge)
5. operating national services hubs from depressed regions to boost wages (DVLA in swansea, etc)

Beskar
10-29-2012, 17:15
There's a vast difference between the "regionalism" in Germany and France. The former has a federal constitution with significant powers awarded exclusively to the Lander. The latter is a very centralised state which has granted some autonomy to the regions but actively meddles in their affairs, sometimes amounting to micromanagement.

The point was more that these units already exist and already in place by the various countries. Sure they differ politically, but the units are in already in place.

As for country size and the like, that doesn't matter. The idea was have the divisions based upon NUTS1 to NUTS2 divisions, which are based around population. The main concept would be a NUTS1 framework with extra divisions/regions based on practical and local-historical desires. Though on a brighter note, Belgium is actually made up of 2 NUTS1, which goes along the Flanders/Wallonia line. So it would split that current 'nation state' into two, and would oddly enough, make both regions more stable politically and economically.

Fragony
12-03-2012, 11:35
This is just too funny, the socialist ex-mp of Greece somehow managed to put half a billion euro on his mother's bank account. Dear Greeks, isn't it about time you give your political elite a French shave. I know it isn't really your fault. Over here we will be cheering for ya

gaelic cowboy
12-03-2012, 18:06
Speaking of Greece did ye all notice they managed to default on payments again and the world didnt collapse, maybe there finally copping that Greece needs to be allowed to walk away from these debts.

If they don't then Angela will have to continue shoveling money into the fire.

Lemur
12-03-2012, 18:26
[D]id ye all notice [Greece] managed to default on payments again and the world didnt collapse
I expect that any institution holding Greek debt has partially or completely written it down by this late date.

gaelic cowboy
12-03-2012, 19:01
I expect that any institution holding Greek debt has partially or completely written it down by this late date.

indeed and the euro politicians are still running scared of the gnomes of zurich

Fragony
12-11-2012, 05:20
Yikes! The international socialism wants control over the funding and legitamcy of political parties, not pro-superstate, no go, you have to be pro-EU to be represented in the EP. Parties like the UKIP or the PVV will simply be banned, more and more is it's true form comming into shape, there cannot be any doubt about the international socialism if they get their way. These guys are truly scary. Even the most rabidly europhile party D66(6) are not 100% sure about this

(Dutch) http://imgur.com/OuvzY

Beskar
12-11-2012, 15:51
Any sources in a written format opposed to a picture (and preferably in English, but I could google translate the dutch), Fragony?

Fragony
12-12-2012, 07:46
Can get you the pdf but it's in Dutch

Ain't it great, the unelected eurocrats who want to decide if a elected party is legitimate

Sarmatian
12-12-2012, 09:33
Dutch .pdf files are notoriously unreliable.

Furunculus
12-15-2012, 12:08
britain and sweden got exactly what we wanted out of the banking union:

1, Legal recognition that the eurozone is separate from the single market, and nothing it does should prejudice the wider interests of the 27.
2, Double qmv to ensure eurozone caucusing cannot prejudice the interests of those outside the euro.

made of win!

HopAlongBunny
12-17-2012, 07:38
Side-note: UBS tagged in ongoing LIBOR investigation. In a common refrain it appears some individual traders are to blame, certainly not the bank...never the bank. A fine of 1.5 billion francs, and business as usual.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/15/us-ubs-libor-fine-idUSBRE8BE05M20121215

Fragony
12-20-2012, 10:41
Lol, chech republicic, where did these 26.7 billion euro's the international-socialism gave you go.

HopAlongBunny
01-12-2013, 11:46
It looks like Royal Bank of Scotland is up next for a wrist-slap over LIBOR.

Nothing official as yet, but again it looks like fines with no criminal liability; Thank God they're are all so innocent! It really would have been so tacky if criminals had been involved :p

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20973971

We may raise questions about the exact meaning of "Justice is Blind" :)

Fragony
01-15-2013, 09:18
Money well spend, the international-socialism wires 5 billion to the Muslim-Brotherhood. And still people believe the Eurbia-theory isn't real. After the excessive dhimmitude of the unelected 'good after the war' Schultz a lot of eyebrows are being raised with people who don't read quality-media. Why the hell give 5 billion euro to the islamist winter.

Fragony
01-21-2013, 12:47
Kewl. Dutch politicians are amongst the least trusted by their population in the world. There is hope. Only 6% believe in their integrity we beat Africa. There is a storm comming mister Wayne

InsaneApache
03-16-2013, 16:16
The Mediterranean island nation becomes the fifth country to turn to the eurozone, following in the footsteps of Ireland, Greece, Portugal and Spain.

The emergency funding will be used to prop up the country’s banks which were hit by the financial restructuring of nearby Greece.

The Cypriot banking system had grown to be eight times the size of the country’s fledgling economy - which accounts for just 0.2pc of the eurozone’s gross domestic product.

But in a departure from previous bail-outs, the country’s savers are being asked to make sacrifices.

The terms of the deal mean that Cyprus’s savers will sacrifice up to 10pc of their deposits in a move which will raise as much as €6 billion.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/9934565/Cypriot-savers-hit-as-eurozone-agrees-10-billion-bail-out.html

I thought the EU was mad, now I know it is. Idiots.

gaelic cowboy
03-16-2013, 16:25
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/9934565/Cypriot-savers-hit-as-eurozone-agrees-10-billion-bail-out.html

I thought the EU was mad, now I know it is. Idiots.

The Cyprus bailout if it took 100% of savings couldn't be paid for.

Also what an incentive to take your savings out at a time when banks in Cyprus require capital. They will hit them for 10% over the weekend and then people will withdraw 100% monday morning, monday afternoon cyprus needs new bailout.

Also there basically penalising ordinary savers for what the EU elite caused by kicking the can so long with Greek banks.

Plus the russian oligarch thing is over played in the media there generally residents and there also generally russian banks

Fragony
03-16-2013, 18:08
All Russian mob-money is stored there, the Russian gangs are retrieving it and the banks are falling. The international-socialism acts in the only way it knows, getting funds from the ESM aka the northern countries. We are sooooooo better of without the international-socialism of a Flemish ferret who looks like an owl who just dropped from his tree, his Portugese waitor and a German booksalesman. The sooner the international-socialism dies the better.

InsaneApache
03-17-2013, 13:40
Rumour has it that Troops based in cyprus threatened to storm the banks and take their money, hence the scramble to compensate them.

I'd forgotten about Akrotiri. A couple of rounds from a smooth bore 120 mm cannon should do nicely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Akrotiri

Husar
03-17-2013, 13:49
Would've been better to just let everyone go bankrupt, devalue the Euro and then rival China's production.

Also british tanks don't have 120mm smoothbore guns, the Challenger 2 has a rifled gun.

InsaneApache
03-17-2013, 14:00
Haha I thought you'd know a thing about tanks!

They might have the odd Abrams hanging around. :wink:

Andres
03-17-2013, 14:21
Also there basically penalising ordinary savers for what the EU elite caused by kicking the can so long with Greek banks.


QFT.

Anyone who is wealthy, doesn't have most of his assets on a savings account, it's spread over real estate, shares, bonds, gold etc. and probably some black money abroad.

This is hitting nobody else but the ordinary people who work their butt off every day for a meagre salary and whose only wealth is a bit of money on a savings account. This is outrageous, this must be the biggest organised theft ever. Those bastards are simply hitting the easiest targets.

One thing's for sure, if they ever do that here, I'll be on the streets. And not to wave with a white balloon or to sing peaceful songs.

InsaneApache
03-17-2013, 14:26
The thing is this sets a precedent. How long before other governments, under orders from Bruxelles, start to pinch people money from their banks? This is why I dislike the EU. Accountable to no one. Can't be sacked.

Any Euro fans like to defend this latest outrage?

A comment from a Telegraph article on this sums it up.


A 'tax' which discriminates only against a certain portion of the population (those who have deposits) without good reason (why should just depositors pay - they will include ordinary people with small life savings in a deposit account for instance) is not a tax at all; it is outright theft.

Andres
03-17-2013, 14:43
The thing is this sets a precedent. How long before other governments, under orders from Bruxelles, start to pinch people money from their banks? This is why I dislike the EU. Accountable to no one. Can't be sacked.


Why doesn't the Cypriotic government show its' middlefinger to the so-called troïka?

Argentina showed its' middlefinger to the IMF and, apparently, they came through their collapse of their banking system much better than Greece does nowadays.

InsaneApache
03-17-2013, 14:54
Well if they carry on like this there will be unrest, perhaps even civil disorder. If that happens the EU peace prize is going to look very hollow indeed.

I've just read that initially they wanted to confiscate steal 40% of the savings, Now that would have started a revolution never mind a riot.

Andres
03-17-2013, 15:08
Well if they carry on like this there will be unrest, perhaps even civil disorder. If that happens the EU peace prize is going to look very hollow indeed.

I'm afraid we're only seeing the beginning of our downfall.


I've just read that initially they wanted to confiscate steal 40% of the savings, Now that would have started a revolution never mind a riot.

If we let them get away with stealing 10 % of the Cypriotic people, then maybe next time, they'll simply take everything.

Vladimir
03-17-2013, 16:51
I recently spoke with a car salesman from Cork the other day and he impressed upon me that Ireland was :daisy: for the next 100 years. It seems the most sensible option was to hit the reset button even if 100% of savings were lost. The quick suffering for a decade not being as bad as a slow suffering for ten.

He seemed amused at the thought that the Germans couldn't conquer Europe with their military and that they're trying to do so with their banks.

gaelic cowboy
03-17-2013, 20:12
This austerity rubbish will not fix our banks unless they start some proper write offs our problems will continue.




The thing is this sets a precedent. How long before other governments, under orders from Bruxelles, start to pinch people money from their banks? This is why I dislike the EU. Accountable to no one. Can't be sacked.

Any Euro fans like to defend this latest outrage?

A comment from a Telegraph article on this sums it up.

It's such a laugh you need to increase capital in banks so you steal savers money, it'll encourage people to remove all there deposits just in case they go looking for another 10%.

If people take out there money there gonna need more capital and potentially another bailout.

Plus they have breached a principle in that people's money is now not safer in banks, this could have a ripple through the whole EU banking system.

HopAlongBunny
03-17-2013, 21:00
It certainly does not seem designed to instil confidence in the banking system; but most confidence games are about getting hold of other peoples money...

Husar
03-18-2013, 01:23
Oh come on, the spice money must flow.

And if it's sitting idle on some bank account, it is actively hurting the economy, they should take 50% and tell people to invest or lose.
It's also funny how everybody is putting the blame on Germany when we wanted to spare the small savers who have below 100k.
I just heard on the radio that that was our plan but cypriot politicians (the elected kind) and the EU(the bank mostly IIRC) wanted to include everyone.

This little BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21824495) supports that notion with the following quote:

The speaker of the European Parliament, Germany's Martin Schulz, has called for the levy to be revised to protect small-scale bank customers.

There was even an idea they mentioned that the small savers would be given shares of the bank in return.
You can put your sensationalist outrage under your pillows, next to that stash of money that is destroying your economy a bit more every day. :whip:

Papewaio
03-18-2013, 02:25
In general your savings is being invested by the bank. That is why they pay rental ie interest on the savings parked there. Not only that, most banks can loan out a multiplier of the amount of savings that are held within their savings accounts.

So money saved in the bank is actually invested multiple times. This becomes an issue when everyone tries and gets their savings at the same time as the money is on assignment at other places and is being leveraged on top of that.

Fragony
03-18-2013, 07:40
QFT.

Anyone who is wealthy, doesn't have most of his assets on a savings account, it's spread over real estate, shares, bonds, gold etc. and probably some black money abroad.

This is hitting nobody else but the ordinary people who work their butt off every day for a meagre salary and whose only wealth is a bit of money on a savings account. This is outrageous, this must be the biggest organised theft ever. Those bastards are simply hitting the easiest targets.

One thing's for sure, if they ever do that here, I'll be on the streets. And not to wave with a white balloon or to sing peaceful songs.

You know they will, the EU wanting an army just got scarier no

Fragony
03-18-2013, 09:26
Surprise surprise, vending machines are locked down, nobody has acces to their money despite it being their own money. The unelected international-socialists will never give up, the political union muss sein

Husar
03-18-2013, 10:14
In general your savings is being invested by the bank. That is why they pay rental ie interest on the savings parked there. Not only that, most banks can loan out a multiplier of the amount of savings that are held within their savings accounts.

So money saved in the bank is actually invested multiple times. This becomes an issue when everyone tries and gets their savings at the same time as the money is on assignment at other places and is being leveraged on top of that.
I know, but the banks are obviously not investing it well and waste it all or they wouldn't be in trouble.
People should take up personal responsibility and invest the money themselves, not only do they get more than 1 or 2% return then (which is funny if you have 2% inflation....), they would also fulfill their civic duty of personal responsibility and shaping the market. The lazyness of paying the bank to decide on investments is backfiring as we see now.


You know they will, the EU wanting an army just got scarier no
No.


Surprise surprise, vending machines are locked down, nobody has acces to their money despite it being their own money. The unelected international-socialists will never give up, the political union muss sein
Yes, that's absolutely correct, the socialist banks will never give up their schemes of making bad investments, paying high bonuses and then socializing their losses among all the socialist fiscally conservative money savers. And to think that their owners are unelected just adds insult to injury.

Fragony
03-18-2013, 10:31
Mock it all you want, you must be reading quality media

Andres
03-18-2013, 10:52
@Husar (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=3510) , it's a question of trust. In Belgium (as in the rest of the EU if I'm not mistaken), the state guarantuees money in a savings account up to an amount of 100.000,00 €. So, if the bank falls, 100.000,00 € of the money you had with that bank is safe.

This gives people a (probably virtual/fake, but still) feeling of a savings account being, well, save. Just taking 6,75 % (below 100.000,00 € in savings) or 9,9 % (over 100.000,00 € in savings), like Cyrpus does now, is a serious breach of trust. What was promised yesterday is now being violated and the Cypriotic people didn't even get a chance to make adjustments, like investing in something else.

Also, who are you to tell people what they should do with their money? It's money they earned and where they already payed taxes on. You don't have anything to say about it; nanny state doesn't need to tell me what I should with my money. Besides, our governments, with their huge deficits, are not very well placed to give me financial advice. I'm not the one swimming in debt, the government should perhaps take lessons from me instead of me from them.

The 100.000,00 € treshold is too low. Sure, for a young guy like you, 100.000,00 € seems like a lot of money. But look at it from somebody aged 60, close to his retirement. We have a grey population. You can no longer count on the government to ensure you a reasonable living standard once you retired (allthough they should, the bloody bastards, given the insane amounts I pay every month on social security), so you'll need savings of your own. The man who worked his butt off every day for 40 years is now being robbed of 9,9 % of the money he saved; money he counted on to be able to maintain his living standard after his retirement. It's money he needs and that he has only because he lived under his means for 40 years. It's his reward, for being careful. And now you take away 10 % off it? It's a disgrace.

Money must roll? Don't keep it at a savings account? Pump it into the economy? Isn't it my god given right to do with my own money (what's left after paying crazy amounts of taxes, so I already fullfilled my duty to society, thank you very much) whatever the hell I want? Besides, it is my intention to pump it into the economy. After my retirement. Because I'll have to since the government, malgré me paying plenty of social security, can't ensure me a decent living standard after retirement.

First they tell you to put your money in a savings account where it's save and then they rob 10 % of it. Just like that. What message does that send to the European population? I'll tell you. The message is: "transfer your money to banks outside the EU, because you can't trust us."

The risk with this sort of decision is a serious capital drain for the entire EU. Or is the next step a 90 % tax for transferring money to a bank account outside the EU?

They're playing with fire.

Andres
03-18-2013, 11:18
I know, but the banks are obviously not investing it well and waste it all or they wouldn't be in trouble.
People should take up personal responsibility and invest the money themselves, not only do they get more than 1 or 2% return then (which is funny if you have 2% inflation....), they would also fulfill their civic duty of personal responsibility and shaping the market. The lazyness of paying the bank to decide on investments is backfiring as we see now.

We count on our governments to make sure banks become more trustworthy again. Instead, banks and governments work together to rob us even more. How long do you think you can get away with that? How long before you'll see normally decent, working people raising kids, coming out on the streets demanding justice? Do you expect people will stay cool and rational if you just rob them off their money?

As we speak, millions of Europeans require food aid (http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/food-distribution-at-european-red-cross-at-greatest-level-since-war-a-888182.html). Food distribution by the Red Cross in Europe is at its' highest level since the end of World War II.

People who are starving and are getting robbed by their own governments won't stay calm and rational for long. When you're hungry and being robbed, you no longer care about whose fault it is. You turn into a creature that lusts for blood. Hunger is food for war.

They're dumb teenagers playing with fire.



Yes, that's absolutely correct, the socialist banks will never give up their schemes of making bad investments, paying high bonuses and then socializing their losses among all the socialist fiscally conservative money savers. And to think that their owners are unelected just adds insult to injury.

That's indeed absolutely correct and exactly what is happening now, saying and writing March 18th 2013.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-18-2013, 11:50
What a strange concept - that the state might guarantee your money!

Andres is fundamentally right - for the last half decade we've all watched our incomes and opportunities decrease, now the EU actually wants to actively steal the money we've already paid taxes on?

I'm not sure if this is Nazi Germany or Orwell's 1984.

Greyblades
03-18-2013, 12:18
Well... crap. Why do we have a party to leave the union and not one to get the guys who are running the European union replaced for incompetence

gaelic cowboy
03-18-2013, 13:31
What a strange concept - that the state might guarantee your money!

it's not strange if you want to have a banking system with a good velocity of money (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity_of_money)


Andres is fundamentally right - for the last half decade we've all watched our incomes and opportunities decrease, now the EU actually wants to actively steal the money we've already paid taxes on?

I'm not sure if this is Nazi Germany or Orwell's 1984.

this actually undermines trust in banking and encourages people to withdraw all deposits, it's crazy stuff at a time they need cypriots to SAVE money.

Therefore I say it's Orwellian

gaelic cowboy
03-18-2013, 13:41
Oh come on, the spice money must flow.

And if it's sitting idle on some bank account, it is actively hurting the economy, they should take 50% and tell people to invest or lose.
It's also funny how everybody is putting the blame on Germany when we wanted to spare the small savers who have below 100k.
I just heard on the radio that that was our plan but cypriot politicians (the elected kind) and the EU(the bank mostly IIRC) wanted to include everyone.

Husar the banks are already lending your money when it's on deposit and even when there is NONE there still lending it on the strength of assets. A million in a back account is not idle however a million in a tin box under the bed most certainly is.

This bailout encourages tin box banking which could cause another bailout next year(and potential bank runs if anyone else needs a bailout later on)



This little BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21824495) supports that notion with the following quote:


There was even an idea they mentioned that the small savers would be given shares of the bank in return.
You can put your sensationalist outrage under your pillows, next to that stash of money that is destroying your economy a bit more every day. :whip:

shares in banks that are bust while the bondholders will get full returns its frankly immoral


It is now clear that negotiators of the bailout in Brussels drastically underestimated the reaction in Cyprus, says the BBC's Mark Lowen.

A tiny eurozone economy feels it is being blackmailed by the most powerful, and the growing resentment will do nothing to foster European solidarity,

Did they seriously not expect people to react badly

Stocks tumble as Cyprus reworks divisive bank tax (http://www.independent.ie/world-news/stocks-tumble-as-cyprus-reworks-divisive-bank-tax-29137446.html)


MICHELE KAMBAS – 18 MARCH 2013 Irish Independent

CYPRIOT ministers were trying to revise a plan to seize money from bank deposits before a parliamentary vote tomorrow that will secure the island's financial rescue or could lead to its default, with reverberations across the euro zone.

The weekend announcement that Cyprus would impose a tax on bank accounts as part of a €10bn bailout by the European Union broke with previous practice that depositors' savings were sacrosanct.

The euro and stock markets fell on concern the euro zone crisis was returning.

Before the vote, which is too close to call, the government was working to soften the blow to smaller savers by tilting more of the tax towards those with deposits greater than €100,000. Many of these depositors Russians and the planned levy has already elicited an angry reaction from President Vladimir Putin.

The government says Cyprus has no choice but to accept the bailout with the tax on deposits, or go bankrupt.

A Cypriot source told Reuters the introduction of a tax-free threshold for smaller bank deposits - maybe up to €20,000 - was under discussion but not yet agreed.

The parliamentary speaker said debate on the bank levy would be delayed until 1600 GMT tomorrow, suggesting banks, shut today for a bank holiday, will remain closed tomorrow

The euro zone has indicated that changes would be acceptable as long as the return of around six billion euros is maintained. If the Cypriot parliament votes the deal down, the euro zone would face a risk of being dragged back into crisis.

"It is up to the government alone to decide if it wants to change the structure of the ... contribution (from) the banking sector," European Central Bank policymaker Joerg Asmussen, who was pivotal in the weekend negotiations, told reporters on the sidelines of a Berlin conference.

"The important thing is that the financial contribution of 5.8 billion euros remains," he said.

Residents on the island emptied cash machines to get their funds over the weekend. The move also unnerved depositors in the euro zone's weaker economies. Investors feared a precedent that could reignite market turmoil that the European Central Bank has calmed in recent months with its pledge to do whatever it takes to save the euro.

The euro fell before tempering losses. European stocks did similarly, dropping two percent before more than halving losses.

In the bond market - often the most reliable guide to euro zone stress - safe haven German Bund futures shot up while Italian equivalents dived, suggesting some concern that Cyprus could infect its larger neighbours.

"The most important question is what would happen the following day if the bill isn't voted," Cyprus central bank governor Panicos Demetriades told parliament.

"What would certainly happen is that our two big banks would need to be consolidated. This doesn't mean that they would be completely destroyed. We will aim for this to happen in a completely orderly way."

Brussels has emphasised that the measure is a one-off for a country that accounts for just 0.2 percent of European output. The worst fear is that savers in other, larger European countries become nervous and start withdrawing funds, although there was no immediate sign of that on Monday.

U.S. economist Paul Krugman wrote in The New York Times: "It's as if the Europeans are holding up a neon sign, written in Greek and Italian, saying 'Time to stage a run on your banks!'"


PUTIN ANGRY

Cyprus's banking sector dwarfs the size of its economy and its banks have been severely hurt by exposure to much larger neighbour Greece.

Its open economy has meant its banks also attract cash from Russians. Moscow is considering extending an existing 2.5 billion euro loan to help bail the island out and said the fact it had not been consulted about the bailout would come into play.

"It turns out that the euro zone actions ... took place without discussions with Russia, so we will consider the issue of restructuring the (Cyprus) loan taking into account our participation in the joint actions with the European Union," Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told Reuters.

President Vladimir Putin criticised the bank levy as unfair and setting a dangerous precedent.

"Putin said that such a decision, should it be made, would be unfair, unprofessional and dangerous," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.




Approval in Cyprus's fractious 56-member parliament is far from a given: no party has an absolute majority and three parties say outright they will not back the tax. A vote initially planned for Sunday was rescheduled to give more time to build a consensus.

On Sunday, a source close to the consultations told Reuters authorities were hoping to cut the tax to 3.0 percent from 6.7 percent for deposits under 100,000 euros. The rate for deposits above that would then be jacked up to 12.5 percent from 9.9 percent.

Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades, a conservative elected just three weeks ago, said in a TV address that the tax was an alternative to a disorderly bankruptcy. It was painful, but "will eventually stabilise the economy and lead it to recovery".

Savers who lost money would be compensated by shares in commercial banks, with equity returns guaranteed by future revenues expected from natural gas discoveries, Anastasiades said. But many legislators remain unconvinced.

"Essentially parliament is called to legalise a decision to rob depositors blind, against every written and unwritten law," said Yiannakis Omirou, speaker of parliament and head of EDEK, the small Socialist party. "We refuse to subscribe to this."

A country that I beleive is what .1% of the GDP of EU sends EU markets down by a many multiples of that.

Cyprus deal sends shares tumbling and pushes gold up (http://www.independent.ie/world-news/cyprus-deal-sends-shares-tumbling-and-pushes-gold-up-29137369.html)

MARC JONES – 18 MARCH 2013

THE surprise decision by euro zone leaders to part-fund a bailout of Cyprus by taxing bank deposits sent shockwaves through financial markets today, with shares and the bonds of struggling euro zone governments tumbling.

The bloc struck a deal on Saturday to hand Cyprus rescue loans worth €10bn, but defied warnings - including from the European Central Bank - and imposed a levy that would see those with cash in the island's banks lose between 6.75 and 9.9 percent of their money.

Parliament in Cyprus put off a vote on the measure - which has shaken depositors' confidence in banks across the continent

- until tomorrow, however, and with public anger at the deal widespread the government said it was already looking to ease the pain for small savers.

Without the rescue, Cyprus would have be unable to avoid a default.

That would have undermined the promise that Greece's debt writedown last year was a one-off, but the unprecedented move to hit depositors adds a radical new dimension to the crisis across the euro zone.

The initial response of investors was unambiguous. Shares lurched lower, the euro fell to a new three-month low, while safe-haven assets such as gold and German government bonds jumped.

The cost of insuring the debt of even high-quality European banks against default also rose sharply with analysts citing fears the decision could spark contagion across peripheral regions with the potential for widespread outflows of deposits.

"If I were a saver, certainly in Spain or maybe Italy, I think I'd be looking askance at these measures and think this could yet happen to me," Peter Dixon, global financial economist at Commerzbank said.

The European Markit iTraxx senior financials index, which tracks the most important European bank credit default swap (CDS) rates, widened by 17 basis points.

Some credit default swaps in Spanish, Italian and Portuguese banks widened more sharply with the five-year CDS for Spain's

Santander 30 basis points higher, while for Italy's UniCredit it was 23.5 basis points wider.

However, some in the markets were drawing support from a view that the safety measures put in place at the European Central Bank should contain the fallout.

"Clearly this is a negative development for European assets but in the terms of contagion we think it is quite limited," said Guillermo Felices, head euro asset allocation at Barclays in London.

"There are tools - such as the ECB's OMT (bond buying programme) and the option of more 3-year LTROs (ECB loans to banks) that can provide liquidity if needed - that the market will feel comfortable about when assessing the longer-term implications."

Three of the world's biggest central banks are also expected to signal their fresh commitment to loose monetary policies this

week.

The Bank of Japan welcomes a new governor on Wednesday who is likely to begin pumping huge amounts of yen into the recession-hit economy. On the same day the Bank of England may get a new pro-growth mandate in the British government's annual budget, while the Federal Reserve is expected to reaffirm its commitment to the current aggressive U.S. bond-buying programme.

Equity markets were underscoring the more immediate worries, however, that the Cyprus deal could see savers and firms in other highly indebted countries like Italy and Spain rush to pull money out of their own banks.

By 1115 GMT the pan-European FTSEurofirst 300 had clawed back around half of its initial losses but was still down 0.8 percent in its worst morning since last month's inconclusive Italian election.

London's FTSE 100, Frankfurt's DAX and Paris's CAC-40 were down 0.8, 1 and 1.4 percent respectively, leaving MSCI's global share index down 0.85 percent.





CENTRAL BANK SUPPORT

In the currency market, the euro staged a slight recovery after having dropped as low as $1.2882 in the Asian trade, to session be up 0.1 percent on the day $1.2950.

The dollar itself, which investors often head for when tensions in Europe rise, gained 0.45 percent.

"Euro zone politicians will be at pains today to manage down the danger of contagion to other markets. The euro will find a little bit of support from that but markets will remain jittery," said Jane Foley, senior currency strategist at Rabobank.

Italian and Spanish bond yields both jumped sharply as the two countries remain at the centre of concern in the euro zone due to the size of their economies which some economists warn would be too big to rescue.

If savers and firms did pull their money en masse from already strained banks it could tip the region back into full-blown crisis, although the ECB's backstop measures are designed to prevent such problems.

The widespread anxiety drove up German government bonds, the traditional favourite of risk-adverse European investors, and indiscriminately pushed up the cost of insuring against a sovereign default in the euro zone's southern rim.

drone
03-18-2013, 15:32
Nothing solves an economic crisis like a bank run. Well done! :applause:

gaelic cowboy
03-18-2013, 15:47
Nothing solves an economic crisis like a bank run. Well done! :applause:

Why didnt they just take it all from everyone over the €100,000 mark and pay for the whole bailout??

Husar
03-18-2013, 16:25
Husar the banks are already lending your money when it's on deposit and even when there is NONE there still lending it on the strength of assets. A million in a back account is not idle however a million in a tin box under the bed most certainly is.

Already said I'm aware of this, but it means you entrust your money to the bank, and if your bank cannot be trusted then you lose your money. Now the government may guarantee some amount but it seems like the government can't be trusted and the fault for this lies with the people, who elected that government. If the people trusted a lie and didn't check back whether all these guarantees actually work out, then it's their own fault for electing the same liars again and again. Now you may say some 48% or whatever didn't elect the liars but that's how the world works. People die every day and it's none of their fault. The alternative is to let the banks go belly up and then 100% of the savings are lost.

The real issue is that nothing was done about the reliance on the banks before they went down the drain and nothing is being done about it now that the problems are obvious. And to say that the government should do something is funny because half of Europe elected conservative, free-market parties that are against government meddling in the private industry.

And Andres, if you have such a problem with Cypriots surrendering some of their money to get money from Germany and the EU, maybe you want Belgian taxpayers to chip in the amount that the Cypriots would have to pay instead?

gaelic cowboy
03-18-2013, 16:37
Already said I'm aware of this, but it means you entrust your money to the bank, and if your bank cannot be trusted then you lose your money. Now the government may guarantee some amount but it seems like the government can't be trusted and the fault for this lies with the people, who elected that government. If the people trusted a lie and didn't check back whether all these guarantees actually work out, then it's their own fault for electing the same liars again and again. Now you may say some 48% or whatever didn't elect the liars but that's how the world works. People die every day and it's none of their fault. The alternative is to let the banks go belly up and then 100% of the savings are lost.

this could be edited quite easily to say Germans closed there eyes to the faults of the Euro and it's banking system too.

Or more simply there is enough blame to go round in both the borrower and lender category.

No exchange rate difference was taken for no risk by lenders and borrowers, we now know that was totally wrong but it is been rewarded by heaping bailout debts onto sovereigns.


The real issue is that nothing was done about the reliance on the banks before they went down the drain and nothing is being done about it now that the problems are obvious. And to say that the government should do something is funny because half of Europe elected conservative, free-market parties that are against government meddling in the private industry.

Indeed and the simplest thing to do is just allow outright monetary financing of all eurozone banks by the ECB. but that wont happen.

At it's core this problem was a pan european bank to bank :daisy: up which has exposed the poor design of EMU.

You wont solve this problem heaping debts on countries balance sheets when the problem is banking liquidity.

Andres
03-18-2013, 17:13
Already said I'm aware of this, but it means you entrust your money to the bank, and if your bank cannot be trusted then you lose your money. Now the government may guarantee some amount but it seems like the government can't be trusted and the fault for this lies with the people, who elected that government. If the people trusted a lie and didn't check back whether all these guarantees actually work out, then it's their own fault for electing the same liars again and again. Now you may say some 48% or whatever didn't elect the liars but that's how the world works. People die every day and it's none of their fault. The alternative is to let the banks go belly up and then 100% of the savings are lost.

The real issue is that nothing was done about the reliance on the banks before they went down the drain and nothing is being done about it now that the problems are obvious. And to say that the government should do something is funny because half of Europe elected conservative, free-market parties that are against government meddling in the private industry.

And @Andres (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=17742), if you have such a problem with Cypriots surrendering some of their money to get money from Germany and the EU, maybe you want Belgian taxpayers to chip in the amount that the Cypriots would have to pay instead?

Is this the best they could come up with?

Why not saving the banks by splitting them and putting the toxic products in "bad banks", use European money to recapitalise the "good banks" and bring those "good banks" under control of Europe?

And please, don't give a fleming lessons in solidarity. I have been paying for Wallonia's misery ever since I started working, yet no hair on my head that thinks about robbing the Walloon citizens of my country of their hard earned savings. Their politicians are scum, but that doesn't mean I would ever advocate robbing the Walloon population of their savings.

If that is the sentiment in Germany, then perhaps you should just admit you don't really want a European Union where we stick together in good times and in bad and instead leave us, so that we can devaluate the euro; a measure we can't take with Germany in the Union, since then it would only benefit Germany.

But you won't, because the Euro suits German interests very well. If Germany were outside the Eurozone, your German Mark would be a much stronger currency than the Euro, which would be bad for your succesful export. Compared to what the German Mark would be, the Euro, certainly without Germany in the zone, is weak, so you can now hide behind the Euro which benefits your economy at the expense of the rest of Europe.

You can look at it from that angle too, you know.

Anyway, I'm not saying Germany should just pay off debts of the poorer southern countries, but robbing the population like that is not the way to go. I don't know how this is sold to the German people, but you undermine the entire European banking system with this measure. You are asking for a run on the banks which will make things much worse for the Cypriotic people. And the Italian, Spanish, Portugese and Greek.

Andres
03-18-2013, 17:21
Indeed and the simplest thing to do is just allow outright monetary financing of all eurozone banks by the ECB. but that wont happen.

That's indeed a much better solution (after splitting the toxic products off of the rest).

Husar
03-18-2013, 18:17
this could be edited quite easily to say Germans closed there eyes to the faults of the Euro and it's banking system too.
We closed our eyes when the Eurozone was established already, I never disputed that and have to live with it today...


Why not saving the banks by splitting them and putting the toxic products in "bad banks", use European money to recapitalise the "good banks" and bring those "good banks" under control of Europe?
Because that's socialism.
Also who wants a bad bank and what do you do with them?


And please, don't give a fleming lessons in solidarity. I have been paying for Wallonia's misery ever since I started working, yet no hair on my head that thinks about robbing the Walloon citizens of my country of their hard earned savings. Their politicians are scum, but that doesn't mean I would ever advocate robbing the Walloon population of their savings.
We paid Russia to get East Germany and then we started to pay East Germany to get anywhere, additionally the German states also redistribute money from stronger to weaker ones. However, they are also all united under a central government that establishes some rules, which is the part where the Eurozone fails miserably because everybody still believes in independent nation states...


If that is the sentiment in Germany, then perhaps you should just admit you don't really want a European Union where we stick together in good times and in bad and instead leave us, so that we can devaluate the euro; a measure we can't take with Germany in the Union, since then it would only benefit Germany.

But you won't, because the Euro suits German interests very well. If Germany were outside the Eurozone, your German Mark would be a much stronger currency than the Euro, which would be bad for your succesful export. Compared to what the German Mark would be, the Euro, certainly without Germany in the zone, is weak, so you can now hide behind the Euro which benefits your economy at the expense of the rest of Europe.
And in return we give lots of money to everybody else to keep them afloat. Also the notion that Germany wants to deprive small time cypriot savers of their money is wrong as I have demonstrated earlier. The idea actually came from the EU and their elected government.


You can look at it from that angle too, you know.
That's anti-teutonism and you ignore the part where our economy benefits but the people don't because there was more the government ruined back then in addition to the eurozone entry.
Another thing, if it only benefits Germany, why did Greece fake its finances to get in in the first place?


Anyway, I'm not saying Germany should just pay off debts of the poorer southern countries, but robbing the population like that is not the way to go. I don't know how this is sold to the German people, but you undermine the entire European banking system with this measure. You are asking for a run on the banks which will make things much worse for the Cypriotic people. And the Italian, Spanish, Portugese and Greek.
We are not, you still assume we are the (only) driving force behind this move, which is wrong.
Of course the best move would be to let companies that failed fail. However people are afraid that letting banks fail would be the end of society as we know it and think of all the jobs and stuff.

Fragony
03-18-2013, 18:33
Why did the EU accept the Greece scamming, better question. Because they knew it was exactly that. I am glad I payed everything off first opertunity I got and a toast on all of who thought the sky was the limit. Feeling very relaxed in my small but stylish comfortable bliss with my two cats.

InsaneApache
03-18-2013, 19:14
Another thing, if it only benefits Germany, why did Greece fake its finances to get in in the first place?

Free money.

Husar
03-18-2013, 20:25
Free money.

But we're not allowed to blame them because they are our victims?

InsaneApache
03-18-2013, 20:40
I didn't say that the Greek government is blameless but are the Greeks? Are the Cypriots?

I'd say the blame squarely lies with those fanatics who want to shoehorn a diverse Europe into a nation state.

Beskar
03-18-2013, 21:18
I'd say the blame squarely lies with those fanatics who want to shoehorn a diverse Europe into a nation state.

Because economics 101 is clearly significantly different in 'diverse' cultures.

Husar
03-19-2013, 00:04
I didn't say that the Greek government is blameless but are the Greeks? Are the Cypriots?

Did they elect their governments to represent them? Can you say the behaviour of a country's politicians generally reflects the political culture and societal values of a country? If not, why do people elect such politicians to represent them then?


I'd say the blame squarely lies with those fanatics who want to shoehorn a diverse Europe into a nation state.

I'd say the blame squarely lies with those people who continuously block political integration in the EU, which allowed for these huge differences in monetary policy and culture in the first place.

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 00:25
I'd say the blame squarely lies with those people who continuously block political integration in the EU, which allowed for these huge differences in monetary policy and culture in the first place.



The blame lies with the original EU politicains back in the 90s thinking you could integrate the money but not the costs, integrate the booms but not the busts, integrate the economy but not banking.

in short they took a political decision without any thought to it's consequences, costs or the requirments to make it REALLY work.

For it to really work you do indeed have to pay for it and that means everyone in the Eurozone pays for a bust bank anywhere that is under it's jurisdiction. Or more simply the ECB just prints till there fixed just like our central banks did before we stupidly half integrated our money.

Were waving voodoo dolls of inflation and we wonder why people are voting for extremes

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-19-2013, 02:39
Did they elect their governments to represent them? Can you say the behaviour of a country's politicians generally reflects the political culture and societal values of a country? If not, why do people elect such politicians to represent them then?



I'd say the blame squarely lies with those people who continuously block political integration in the EU, which allowed for these huge differences in monetary policy and culture in the first place.

We're so far past this petty argument, I can't believe you still want to have it.

Fact: Social unrest is rising everywhere.

Fact: EU integration would not pass a Plebicite anywhere.

So stop complaining about who the electorate are not enlightened enough and get to grips with the problem at hand, viz. actually restoring confidence and making the Euro workable.

So break the blooding thing in two already, rather than tying everyone to the D-Mark.

Brenus
03-19-2013, 08:57
“Did they elect their governments to represent them? Can you say the behaviour of a country's politicians generally reflects the political culture and societal values of a country? If not, why do people elect such politicians to represent them then?”
Massive abstention is questioning your statement.
Government are not representing the country, but only the small “elite” coming from the same school and network. No, the politicians don’t reflect the culture and value of a country.
And we have no choice in electing them as they have the same background. Helped by massive media campaigns, they brainwash the populations making them believe there is no alternative.

Greyblades
03-19-2013, 09:24
For crying out loud brenus learn to use the quote option!

Unrelated: I have no frame of reference outside of the previous set of mooks who caused the current set of problems and the current ones who keep mucking up the recovery, but were there ever any competent governments in anywhere in the world or is this complete lack of competence the norm and our ancestors got lucky enough to not have thier governments cock up on this level?

Husar
03-19-2013, 10:43
We're so far past this petty argument, I can't believe you still want to have it.

Fact: Social unrest is rising everywhere.

Fact: EU integration would not pass a Plebicite anywhere.

So stop complaining about who the electorate are not enlightened enough and get to grips with the problem at hand, viz. actually restoring confidence and making the Euro workable.

So break the blooding thing in two already, rather than tying everyone to the D-Mark.
Yes, and the plebiscite also cheered for Total War 70 years ago. As for the problem at hand, that's what I'm talking about instead of the usual "they did it wrong in the 90ies, I blame the europhiles of the 90ies" that I got in return. The problem at hand requires more political integration and that is blocked by the same plebiscite which is complaining about the problem at hand.
I can't make the Euro workable alone, it requires the votes of many so why would I not complain about them being wrong? Or are you suggesting I become emperor of the northern euro zone and institute a new NorthernEuro that excludes the southern countries of the eurozone? That also makes sense only if the plebiscite are not enlightened enough to vote for such an option...


Massive abstention is questioning your statement.
Government are not representing the country, but only the small “elite” coming from the same school and network. No, the politicians don’t reflect the culture and value of a country.
And we have no choice in electing them as they have the same background. Helped by massive media campaigns, they brainwash the populations making them believe there is no alternative.
Massive abstention just says that people have no idea and can't be bothered to think about a solution, how does that reflect positively on them? The Americans, despite their weird two-party system, know that democracy requires some level of active participation to work and that comes from normal people. In our parties the party representatives are all elected to some extent by the party base. So if the parties keep electing people from the same background then it's still the fault of the people from other backgrounds who vote for them to rise in the party ranks in the first place. The pirate party leaders here aren't from that same background as far as I can tell, however people don't dare to vote for them, they rather want someone from "that same background" and keep wondering why nothing really changes. I think it was Einstein who said: "Stupid is who keeps doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result."

Your idea that the masses are brainwashed and Phillipus' suggestion that I should stop looking at the plebiscite as not enlightened enough don't go well together. What people forget though is that one can form a new party that is different from the established ones, it is then up to the voters whether they want something new or whether they want to stay with what they know and don't like. In the latter case I'll not shut up telling them they're not behaving in a very clever way. I'm in no way saying the pirate party has all the solutions but if the other parties feel there is some competition, they usually start to reconsider their stance.

On that topic we have a funny situation here in Germany where Merkel does whatever is popular with some exceptions, yet she is criticized for not having her own opinion. So people need to decide whether they want politicians who do what the voters want or politicians who do what they think is right regardless of the opinions of the voters. One thing is for sure, you can never make everyone happy, regardless of the politics you choose.

Sir Moody
03-19-2013, 13:27
Massive abstention just says that people have no idea and can't be bothered to think about a solution, how does that reflect positively on them? The Americans, despite their weird two-party system, know that democracy requires some level of active participation to work and that comes from normal people. In our parties the party representatives are all elected to some extent by the party base. So if the parties keep electing people from the same background then it's still the fault of the people from other backgrounds who vote for them to rise in the party ranks in the first place. The pirate party leaders here aren't from that same background as far as I can tell, however people don't dare to vote for them, they rather want someone from "that same background" and keep wondering why nothing really changes. I think it was Einstein who said: "Stupid is who keeps doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result."


Sorry I disagree with this massively - Brenus is on the money here - the current political systems are set up to "rig" the result to a few set parties often populated by the same "type" of person.

Over here that would be private schooled social elites - these make up the bulk of both Labour and the Conservatives and due to our system these are the only parties that truly matter (the only reason the liberals (who incidentally are predominately social elites as well) are currently important is because they are in Coalition). Since both parties benefit from the current political system neither will push forward the radical and sweeping changes we need to "fix" the system so Politics once again represents the people and not just the Social Elites view of the people. Which of course assumes it ever did represent the people - I would argue it NEVER has and has always been a game of the Social Elite and we simply aren't buying their bullsh$t anymore...

On a side note the quote is "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 14:41
Yes, and the plebiscite also cheered for Total War 70 years ago. As for the problem at hand, that's what I'm talking about instead of the usual "they did it wrong in the 90ies, I blame the europhiles of the 90ies" that I got in return. The problem at hand requires more political integration and that is blocked by the same plebiscite which is complaining about the problem at hand.
I can't make the Euro workable alone, it requires the votes of many so why would I not complain about them being wrong? Or are you suggesting I become emperor of the northern euro zone and institute a new NorthernEuro that excludes the southern countries of the eurozone? That also makes sense only if the plebiscite are not enlightened enough to vote for such an option...


Massive abstention just says that people have no idea and can't be bothered to think about a solution, how does that reflect positively on them? The Americans, despite their weird two-party system, know that democracy requires some level of active participation to work and that comes from normal people. In our parties the party representatives are all elected to some extent by the party base. So if the parties keep electing people from the same background then it's still the fault of the people from other backgrounds who vote for them to rise in the party ranks in the first place. The pirate party leaders here aren't from that same background as far as I can tell, however people don't dare to vote for them, they rather want someone from "that same background" and keep wondering why nothing really changes. I think it was Einstein who said: "Stupid is who keeps doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result."

Your idea that the masses are brainwashed and Phillipus' suggestion that I should stop looking at the plebiscite as not enlightened enough don't go well together. What people forget though is that one can form a new party that is different from the established ones, it is then up to the voters whether they want something new or whether they want to stay with what they know and don't like. In the latter case I'll not shut up telling them they're not behaving in a very clever way. I'm in no way saying the pirate party has all the solutions but if the other parties feel there is some competition, they usually start to reconsider their stance.

On that topic we have a funny situation here in Germany where Merkel does whatever is popular with some exceptions, yet she is criticized for not having her own opinion. So people need to decide whether they want politicians who do what the voters want or politicians who do what they think is right regardless of the opinions of the voters. One thing is for sure, you can never make everyone happy, regardless of the politics you choose.



Bollocks the ECB doesnt need a state to work with it only needs to act like a central bank (which it doesnt at present) national vetoes dont come into it.

The ECB is interperating it's charter in a very narrow scope because it revels in being most independent central bank in the world. No central bank would have done the things it did the last 4yrs from raising interest rates to threatening to cut off funding to it's own banking system.

there is something rotten at the heart of europe but it aint nationalism (the standard genuflection of europhiles) rather instead it's congenital-elitism of an unelected bureaucratic caste.

No need for asset levy outside of Cyprus - Eurogroup head (http://www.independent.ie/business/world/no-need-for-asset-levy-outside-of-cyprus-eurogroup-head-29140507.html)


THERE will be no need to impose a levy on assets in other euro zone countries along the lines of that Cyprus plans on bank deposits to limit the size of emergency loans it needs, the chairman of euro zone finance ministers said on Tuesday.

Cyprus plans a levy on deposits above €20,000 of 6.75pc and 9.9pc on deposits higher than €100,000, to raise cash for the recapitalisation of its oversized banking sector, hit hard by the Greek sovereign debt restructuring.

This raised concerns that a similar measure could be used in other euro zone countries, undermining depositors' confidence in banks. But Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem, who chairs meetings of euro zone ministers, said it would not happen in other countries.

"It is absolutely out of the question, there is no need for a one-off levy in other countries on assets," Dijsselbloem said in the Dutch parliament.

He reiterated that because of the size of the Cypriot banking sector and its recapitalisation needs, it was inevitable that depositors had to be called on to help.

thankfully saner ideas seem to be coming through on Cyprus anyone under 20000 is exempt

InsaneApache
03-19-2013, 15:23
t was inevitable that depositors had to be called on to help.

They're not called on or asked. They were told and effectively mugged. Also that it wont happen in other countries? If you believe that, I have a bridge........etc

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 15:59
They're not called on or asked. They were told and effectively mugged. Also that it wont happen in other countries? If you believe that, I have a bridge........etc

Seems like it will happily be defeated in a vote anyway apprently the votes off for now (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21842966)

Fragony
03-19-2013, 16:18
Not so pleased the people in Cyprus are with a Flemish ferret who looks like an owl who just dropped from a tree, a German who has been good after the war since 1945 and a Portugese waitor. Time to reconsider things a bit no. Cyprus bank are in trouble because Russia/russiuan maffia took their money back, and that is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth your honour

Husar
03-19-2013, 17:50
Sorry I disagree with this massively - Brenus is on the money here - the current political systems are set up to "rig" the result to a few set parties often populated by the same "type" of person.
How, why and which political systems do you mean? It's not like Britain, the USA, Germany and France for example have the same political system. Unless you're a monarchist trying to tell me democracy is bad. Germany for example has more political movement than the USA, still not as much as I'd like to see, but in some elections the smaller parties get a considerable chunk of the votes and in quite a few cases they can become part of a government coalition. I prefer that a whole lot over a two-party system but please explain how and which systems are rigged as I'm not exactly seeing it here and probably don't have enough insight concerning the system in the UK.
In the US it's a media thing because people are easily swayed by shiny ads, definitely a problem of education and little effort on the part of the voters IMO.


Bollocks the ECB doesnt need a state to work with it only needs to act like a central bank (which it doesnt at present) national vetoes dont come into it.
So you think the states should do whatever they want and the ECB should print as much money as the lowest common denominators need to keep up their spending? The point of political union is to have a somewhat united fiscal policy, I wasn't aware that how much money Greece spends and collects in taxes is somehow the fault of the ECB.

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 18:22
So you think the states should do whatever they want and the ECB should print as much money as the lowest common denominators need to keep up their spending? The point of political union is to have a somewhat united fiscal policy, I wasn't aware that how much money Greece spends and collects in taxes is somehow the fault of the ECB.

states can only access money on the bond market or through taxation, any printed ECB money would go to banks not countries.

it still wouldnt be ideal but it's better than fooling yourself into thinking people will be fine paying the unemployment benefits of millions other europeans not in there own polity in a fiscal union.

No fiscal union anywhere has the kind of united fiscal policy your talking or thinking of, they do often however have a united treasury. (which is not the same thing)


were 4-5years in here and were still talking about greeks spending which is a joke, it is a tiny economy the problem was banks liabilities outside greece owed by greece. Greeks do the sensible thing and not pay and suddenly the whole credit system would collapse, because of the refusal of the ECB to lend to eurozone banks to protect them. This was a complete banking failure whereby the ECB never gave as much as a peep about countries selling bonds to EU banks.

All that happened was that exchange rate risk was exchanged for sovereign risk (but sovereign risk was ignored as there was no exchange rate risk)

that was a monumental :daisy: up and only the ECB had the tools and data to potentially see an prevent it coming. They didnt and instead they allowed a potential banking system collapse in country after country (cos inflation is gonna eat my baby or summit)

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 19:59
Cyprus parliament rejects deposit tax for bailout (http://www.independent.ie/world-news/cyprus-parliament-rejects-deposit-tax-for-bailout-29141319.html)


19 MARCH 2013

CYPRIOT lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected a deeply unpopular tax on bank deposit this evening, throwing into doubt an international bailout for the troubled euro zone member needed to avert default and a banking collapse.

The 56-seat parliament voted by 36 votes against and 19 abstentions to bury the bill, a condition of a €10bn European Union bailout for the Mediterranean island. One deputy was absent.

not a single vote in favour apparently

InsaneApache
03-19-2013, 20:03
Well if they want to get re-elected I'm not surprised. I wonder who thought up this wonder levy idea? My monies on UKIP. :creep:

gaelic cowboy
03-19-2013, 20:14
Cyprus furore is rocky start for new Dutch "Mr Euro" (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/19/eurozone-cyprus-dijsselbloem-idUSL6N0CBGC120130319)


For Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the new face of the euro zone, a furore over a decision to hurt savers in Cyprus has been a baptism of fire in his role as chairman of the Eurogroup of finance ministers of the currency area. After just his third meeting in the job, the Dutch minister faces accusations of failing to anticipate the wrath that a confiscatory levy on small savers would spark, risking a rejection by the Cypriot parliament that could plunge the euro zone back into crisis. Dijsselbloem and ECB executive board member Joerg Asmussen barely mentioned the levy on all bank accounts when they announced an EU bailout deal for Cyprus at 4 a.m. on Saturday, growing irritated when journalists pressed them on the issue.

Insiders who attended the talks said German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble and Asmussen, a fellow German, had called the shots while the 46-year-old chairman, a minister for just four months, was too inexperienced to carry much weight.

"There is a realisation, a frustration, that countries outside the troika (European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund) and Germany are becoming bystanders in these crucial Eurogroups, and Dijsselbloem is just going along with that, cementing that reality," said one diplomat from a small euro zone country.

Dijsselbloem's predecessor, veteran Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, who relinquished the role in January after more than eight years, made clear his disapproval in an interview with an Austrian newspaper.

"It was the first time I wasn't in the Eurogroup. I would have wished for a more gentle approach to small savers," he told Der Standard daily.

JUNCKER'S WILES

Some euro zone officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the wily Juncker, a walking encyclopaedia of European integration who had participated in every EU financial decision since the 1991 Maastricht summit that created monetary union, would have sensed the danger.

"If he were still chairman, he would not have allowed this kind of anti-European integration rhetoric that we are hearing now," one official with close knowledge of the Eurogroup said.

The chain-smoking Juncker could be erratic and cantankerous in chairing late-night ministerial meetings, but his political lightning-detector was finely tuned and he was more willing to stand up to the EU's German paymasters, another said.

Many Cypriots blamed Germany and the European Central Bank for coercing Nicosia to impose a one-off tax on even small savings, triggering fury in Cyprus and raising uncertainty for savers in other troubled European countries.

Officials from Berlin and the ECB countered that they had never specified how a 5.8 billion euro ($7.52 billion) Cypriot contribution to the cost of bailing out the island should be divided up among depositors.

Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades had forced the decision to put a levy on all bank accounts by insisting the hit on the biggest holders must not exceed 10 percent, they said.

The move has raised doubts among savers across the euro zone about the value of an EU-wide government guarantee on bank deposits of up to 100,000 euros, enacted after the 2008 global financial crisis.

The European Commission said the guarantee applied only if a bank collapsed and did not protect savers from fiscal measures decided by parliaments. Dijsselbloem sought to reassure depositors elsewhere that there was no need for a one-off levy on assets in other countries.

Determined to minimise the cost of bailing out Cyprus to German taxpayers in an election year, Schaeuble said depositors in Cyprus had only themselves to blame.

"Whoever deposits their money in a country because it will be taxed less and controlled less runs a risks when the banks in these countries are no longer solvent," he said on Tuesday.

"That is what happened in Iceland and in Ireland some years ago. European taxpayers should not be made responsible for this risk."

UNORTHODOX INVITATION

For Dijsselbloem, the trouble began with the unorthodox way he called Friday evening's meeting.

Schaeuble made clear his irritation at learning of the summons via Twitter at a time when it was not clear whether a majority could be found for any Cyprus deal.

"I'm an old-fashioned person. I have not yet received an invitation and I was in parliament, so I wasn't looking on Twitter, which I don't do on other occasions either," he said.

Another euro zone official said Dijsselbloem had made a good start and was better organised than Juncker, but shortcomings in the preparation of the Cyprus meeting had irked some ministers. The troika's report was only circulated a few hours before the meeting and there were no options and alternatives drafted.

"Of course, he lacks respect, direct and confidential private ties with key leaders that Juncker had. But he can catch up with this in time," said the official, who like others requested anonymity because he is not authorised to speak in public.

When protests erupted in Cyprus, savers stormed cash machines to withdraw their money and the Cypriot parliament put off a vote on the bailout, Dijsselbloem called another Eurogroup meeting by teleconference on Monday to row back on applying the levy to small deposits.

In a statement, he said ministers hoped the levy would not be applied to accounts under 100,000 euros, and the money would be raised instead from a higher rate applied to larger accounts.

"Even though all the ministers now insist they did, nobody fought for the small depositors on Friday night," said a person who participated in the Eurogroup conference call.

The change of heart may have come too late to save the Cyprus rescue package, which Anastasiades said on Monday a majority in parliament was likely to reject.

If that happens, Dijsselbloem may find himself presiding over a full-blow return of the euro zone's sovereign debt crisis that will sorely test his political skills.

According to reuters it was Wolfgang Schäuble (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schaeuble) and Jörg Asmussen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6rg_Asmussen) probably due to upcoming elections in Germany


Former Cyprus central banker Orphanides on Cyprus Bailout, Europe's Banks Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/video/orphanides-on-cyprus-bailout-europe-s-banks-Aw79nWd1QH~jz5tVDF7cRA.html)

never heard of this fella before but he pretty much nails it

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-19-2013, 22:54
Yes, and the plebiscite also cheered for Total War 70 years ago. As for the problem at hand, that's what I'm talking about instead of the usual "they did it wrong in the 90ies, I blame the europhiles of the 90ies" that I got in return. The problem at hand requires more political integration and that is blocked by the same plebiscite which is complaining about the problem at hand.
I can't make the Euro workable alone, it requires the votes of many so why would I not complain about them being wrong? Or are you suggesting I become emperor of the northern euro zone and institute a new NorthernEuro that excludes the southern countries of the eurozone? That also makes sense only if the plebiscite are not enlightened enough to vote for such an option...

Ah yes, the Germans don't believe in democracy because it elected Hitler.

Oddly, neither did Hitler.

Yes, Germany should leave the Euro - Germany's economy is not compatible with the majority of the block. Once Germany leaves the other countries in the Eurozone will become more competetive, and the D-Mark is not even projected to rise in value that much, which shows the influence you have.

Husar
03-20-2013, 02:12
Ah yes, the Germans don't believe in democracy because it elected Hitler.

Oddly, neither did Hitler.

Wrong event, I'm not aware of people cheering for total war before they elected Hitler. As such I also wasn't saying that I or Germans don't believe in democracy.


Yes, Germany should leave the Euro - Germany's economy is not compatible with the majority of the block. Once Germany leaves the other countries in the Eurozone will become more competetive, and the D-Mark is not even projected to rise in value that much, which shows the influence you have.

We have parties that want to leave the Eurozone I think, but they don't get enough support in elections even though most Germans seem to view the change to the Euro as a mistake and are against spending of their tax money for bailing our banks or other countries or our banks' investments in other countries out.


(cos inflation is gonna eat my baby or summit)
Yes, if the inflation does not apply to wages in the same way, then some people will have trouble feeding their babies.

a completely inoffensive name
03-20-2013, 02:37
There have been so many scares, I don't know what to be afraid of anymore. Should I be afraid of Cyprus's decision?

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-20-2013, 03:38
We have parties that want to leave the Eurozone I think, but they don't get enough support in elections even though most Germans seem to view the change to the Euro as a mistake and are against spending of their tax money for bailing our banks or other countries or our banks' investments in other.

That's the same as the UK - people vote on domestic politics, and they don't consider Europe domestic. That rather puts a damper on "further integration" if even the Germans aren't interested.

InsaneApache
03-20-2013, 04:45
FFS can we have at least one thread that mentions Germany without Hitler being chucked in the mix again. Even for a Monty Python fan it's getting very thin.

Husar
03-20-2013, 11:46
FFS can we have at least one thread that mentions Germany without Hitler being chucked in the mix again. Even for a Monty Python fan it's getting very thin.

But we're trying to take over Europe again by making the southern europeans suffer, it only makes sense.

Andres
03-20-2013, 11:54
An interesting analysis in the Washington Post. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/19/cyprus-is-rejecting-its-bailout-now-what/)

Belgian newssites this morning suggested Cyprus might turn towards Russia. One of the possible deals is Gazprom bailing out Cyprus in return for exclusive rights on Cypriotic gas. If I'm not mistaken, Turkey (a NATO member (which Cyprus isn't)) claims that gas as well (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/13/world/middleeast/gas-field-off-of-cyprus-stokes-tensions-with-turkey.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0). This could get ugly.

European incompetence seems to have the potential of leading us towards a dangerous geopolitical game.

So, how is the incompetent and unable to make fast decisions Europe going to react? Do we want Russia to buy itself into the EU? And if Russia buys Cyprus (because, let's face it, that's what will happen if Russia saves Cyprus instead of the EU), what will hold them back to "buy" Greece as well, eventually?

Or did we all really think the Russian bear was defeated permanently after the fall of communism? And how will the US react if Russia tries to spread its' sphere of influence into the EU?

Not sure if I'm happy to live in such interesting times.

Husar
03-20-2013, 19:05
Russia already owns half of the EU, where have you been living in the past ten years?
Our friends from the east are always welcome to help us out.

Andres
03-20-2013, 23:09
Russia already owns half of the EU, where have you been living in the past ten years?

Do you have anything substantial to back up that statement or did you just pull that out of your behind?

Fact is that the so-called troïka screwed up with its' ridiculous demand of confiscating the deposits of the Cypriotic population.

Cyprus has always had a good relationship with Russia, so of course, they asked Moscow for help. And how can Russia resist an island in the Mediterranean with the extra bonus of natural resources. At 17 billion, it's a bargain.

But no, out of fear of losing votes, some go the populist route and yell that the Cypriots will need to pay for their own mess. Which in itself is a fair point, but making them pay in this way is sheer stupidity. Sure, the Russians will make the Cypriots pay for their help, but not with an idiotic "just take 10 % from the savings of the population".

Why didn't we offer money in return for a substantial share of the profits of the exploitation of Cyprus' natural resources? The politicians of the rich European countries could've 'sold' it to their voters as "see, we're making a good investment here" and the politicans of Cyprus could've "sold" it to their voters as "see, our resources will be used for the benefit and overall good of the country".

But no, "Cypriots need to pay for their mess, take their savings!" was deemed to be the more intelligent route :wall:

InsaneApache
03-20-2013, 23:56
and yell that the Cypriots will need to pay for their own mess.

They didn't cause it. Joining the Euro did.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-21-2013, 00:02
FFS can we have at least one thread that mentions Germany without Hitler being chucked in the mix again. Even for a Monty Python fan it's getting very thin.

No - we can't - because it continues to cast a shadow over German politics, and Europe in general.

I don't think the Germans are anti-democratic, but I do think populism makes them flinch and triggers a knee-jerk reaction. By the same token. the "make Cypriots pay" proposal smells German, just like the "make the Greeks pay" one - the idea that this is some sort of Lutheran morality tale about frugal living is wearing a lot thinner than the Nazi joke.

gaelic cowboy
03-21-2013, 01:08
Cyprus depositor threat is a catastrophe for EU (http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-mcwilliams/cyprus-depositor-threat-is-a-catastrophe-for-eu-29141856.html)


The Cypriot parliament has now thrown the ball back to the EU with its rejection of the bailout. It has also opened up the door to the Russians to get involved in the EU's internal problems by sending a delegation to Moscow. The Russians may still come out of this with a charge over Cypriot gas reserves in return for a taking equity in the bust Cypriot banks. The EU now has to go back to the drawing board and come up with a better deal for Cyprus or else face political, diplomatic and economic defeat. If the Cypriots get a better deal from all this, many here will argue that their tactics of saying no will have served them better than our stragety of being the "best boy in the class".

And all this carnage suffered in order to protect the euro, for which our political leaders are prepared to destroy trust within the EU both between countries and between the people and the State.

It is difficult to describe the proposed weekend bailout package to Cyprus as anything more than theft. The confiscation of 6.75pc of small depositors' money and 9.9pc of depositors' funds over €100,000 is without precedence. Now the EU is rowing back because the Cypriots won't bear it, but the precedent is set and the EU looks incompetent.

On Saturday the EU tried to confiscate people's savings. This is a breach of fundamental property rights. Although the EU tried to present this as a one-off, it is not willing to rule out similar measures elsewhere. Why should we expect any kind of limitation to what measures the troika and EU might take when the crisis – in Spain, for example – really starts to bite?

If you can do this once, you can do it again and if you can confiscate 10pc of a bank customer's money, why not 50pc?

This is just the latest in a series of measures designed to protect the euro. Remember, the euro was supposed to protect us, not the other way around.

But the weekend's efforts to steal deposits in Cyprus and now the involvement of Moscow, reveals just how many moving parts have to be assessed in order to get a handle on the politics and thus, economics of the EU. The level of spin coming out of Brussels, swallowed, it must be said, by all sorts who should know better, reveals the fact that no one is in charge. It is this very lack of political leadership at a time when economic growth is falling and debts are rising, which makes so many of the EU's decisions seem like second rate compromises.

On Saturday, the EU broke known corporate finance rules by trying to expropriate deposits in Cyprus to pay for its banking collapse. Based on the experience of the Great Depression and more recently, the Asian crisis, most policymakers realise that the most crucial initial reaction to a banking crisis is to prevent a run on bank deposits.

This is why trying to steal people's deposits and dress this up as a 'tax' is precisely the worst thing to do as it engenders the very panic that the authorities are trying to avoid.

In addition, by going after depositors, the EU is breaking one of the understood rules of the game (to the extent that there are rules). That rule is that depositors are different.

Depositors are a different type of bank creditor to any other sort. In an insolvency situation, they ought to be regarded as "trust creditors" or "creditors in trust". They deposit their money, in the main, because they trust the system. They are not investors in the traditional sense like shareholders or bondholders. They trust the system to look after their savings and as such, they need to be protected. If you actively break that trust, as the EU tried to do at the weekend, you do so at you peril.

And of course the peril or risk here is that depositors in other countries with still-unresolved banking crises, such as Spain, will see the Cypriot deposits being looted, think "we're next" and take their money out of the banks.

This deposit flight is the bank run which is the very upshot that the authorities are most keen to avoid. Bank runs happen quickly, which is why they are called bank runs, not bank strolls or bank ambles.

The truly intriguing thing about this episode is that everyone knows all this. The people in power are not stupid.

They know that gouging people's savings will cause panic, as we have seen in Cyprus, so why do it? Why not impose all losses on bondholders, orchestrate an organised sovereign default or change the terms of the deals?

Only politics explains what is happening. The first thing to put into the mix is the German election in September. It is clear Ms Merkel will do nothing to upset her voters before that. It is also becoming obvious that Germans and other creditor nations are becoming a bit fed up of bailouts. Equally, the southern periphery is fed up of austerity and is voting against Germanic policies in the Mediterranean. Finally, in Cyprus there is the Russian factor. Because so many of the large depositors in Cypriot banks are Russian, there is a movement within the EU to teach Cyprus a lesson about unregulated banks, money laundering and safe havens for dodgy money.

But now that move, designed to satisfy all these varying concerns, has backfired, satisfying none, where does that leave the EU? The Cypriots will not accept the deal. This puts the EU on a collision course with Russia and, maybe more crucially, blows out of the water the notion that we are working towards a banking union where all EU savers will be treated equally.

This latest crisis reveals that the crisis hasn't gone away. In fact, it has morphed into a different beast. With Germany in election mode, nothing serious will be done until October at the earliest and thus Europe will be rudderless for more or less the rest of this year.

We will stumble from one mini-crisis to another, making enemies unnecessarily and scaring the wits out of the people in the process because they know once you let this deposit-robbing genie out of the bottle, it's very hard to put it back in.



It's ironic really defending the euro is destroying the EU, the very euro that was designed to cause integration.

200 or 300 billion loaned to the Eurozone banking system would have squashed this like an ant 5 year ago.

Roll up roll up lets wait for the next dominoe

Husar
03-21-2013, 09:10
Do you have anything substantial to back up that statement or did you just pull that out of your behind?

They invested in european football clubs and real estate, they provide the gas half of Europe needs to keep warm and they shelter our poor millionaires and ex-politicians who give them huge popularity by saying Putin is a perfect democrat. Additionally the are starting to do business with us in many other ways. The gas alone gives them quite a bit of leverage of course, they already turned it off for Ukraine and Poland not too long ago because these two didn't behave.


Why didn't we offer money in return for a substantial share of the profits of the exploitation of Cyprus' natural resources?
Maybe because "we" don't have the tech and know-how to exploit such resources and make a profit, or maybe "we" are too concerned about the conflict with Turkey, our next member-to-be and current NATO ally. Besides, the Cypriots would probably blame us later for taking away their resources when they were down -> exploitation.


FFS can we have at least one thread that mentions Germany without Hitler being chucked in the mix again. Even for a Monty Python fan it's getting very thin.

No, we can't. (http://p4.focus.de/img/gen/6/3/1363786930_20090101-130320-99-04378_2458582_4_dpa_Pxgen_r_700xA.jpg)


They didn't cause it. Joining the Euro did.

And since they never joined the Euro, noone can blame them.

Andres
03-21-2013, 09:52
They invested in european football clubs and real estate, they provide the gas half of Europe needs to keep warm and they shelter our poor millionaires and ex-politicians who give them huge popularity by saying Putin is a perfect democrat. Additionally the are starting to do business with us in many other ways. The gas alone gives them quite a bit of leverage of course, they already turned it off for Ukraine and Poland not too long ago because these two didn't behave.

You don't see the distinction, do you?

Yes, they sell us gas and we need that gas. Just like they need us paying for that gas. Sure, they can threaten to put us without gas. They can even do it for a short while. But all in all, it's something they can use to put pressure on us. They have influence and they can pressure, but they don't have real decision making power here.

Compare that to what would happen if they pay for Cyprus' debts.

One of the elements of the deal on the table is a Russian harbour on Cyprus for their military fleet. That means Russian warships in our Mediterranean. And the Cypriotic government becoming a puppet of Moscow. And all natural Cypriotic resources become Russian. That's a whole different story than Russian investors having influence and the Russians selling us gas we need. So far, they didn't rule one of our member states. If they bail out Cyprus, they'll rule it. And we'll have their warships in our sea. And it gives a precedent for the Russians buying Greece. Doesn't all that make you feel uncomfortable?


Maybe because "we" don't have the tech and know-how to exploit such resources and make a profit, or maybe "we" are too concerned about the conflict with Turkey, our next member-to-be and current NATO ally. Besides, the Cypriots would probably blame us later for taking away their resources when they were down -> exploitation.


But "we" are good at making compromises. We can make a deal with Cyprus involving their gas. Tech and know-how we can obtain by investing. And the EU can make an acceptable compromise with Turkey, since we're not warmongerers. And we can guarantee the Russians that they won't lose their money.

The Russians will simply take the gas, put warships around it and show their middlefinger to us and Turkey, which will lead to a very explosive situation.

What Europe is better at is sucking up to everybody a little bit, manage to gain something out of it ourselves and keep the peace.

Instead, we came with the moronic "give us your savings".

Everybody responsible for that idea should get fired and never, ever allowed into a position of power anymore. Put capable people on the top, please. They're getting paid more than enough to be capable.


And since they never joined the Euro, noone can blame them.

You're missing the nuance InsaneApache is trying to make. There's the common people, the ordinary Cypriot who works his butt off and tries to save a little bit, just like you, me and most everybody in the EU. And then you have the elite, screwing us over. I don't know how it happened, but somehow down the line, somebody made you believe that the Cypriotic people, the ones who go to work every day for a meagre salary and try to save some money for the future, are guilty and need to pay the bill. You shouldn't let that happen. Your loyalty, my loyalty, our loyalty should be towards the Cypriotic people, not towards our politicians and bankers. As long as our leaders are able to divide us (the rich North against the poor South) and make us believe the common man in the street is to blame, they'll do whatever the hell they want with us, like taking away our savings just like that or like letting people starve, like in Greece.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-21-2013, 14:00
This is what Furunculus has been saying for years, Andres, Husar feels closer to his own politicians than poor Cypriots. It's the fundamental problem with the EU and why it doesn't work - people don't see it as a pan-European political issue, they see it as a pet project of the elite, and it's not like people voted for the Euro - it's just that all the big parties supported the Euro.

Andres
03-21-2013, 16:16
This is what Furunculus has been saying for years, Andres, Husar feels closer to his own politicians than poor Cypriots. It's the fundamental problem with the EU and why it doesn't work - people don't see it as a pan-European political issue, they see it as a pet project of the elite, and it's not like people voted for the Euro - it's just that all the big parties supported the Euro.

@Furunculus (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=215) is, just like everyone else who shares my viewpoints and agrees with me, clearly a genius. He should be put at the head of the Eurozone and the EU and lead us to glory.

Sarmatian
03-21-2013, 16:42
This is what Furunculus has been saying for years, Andres, Husar feels closer to his own politicians than poor Cypriots. It's the fundamental problem with the EU and why it doesn't work - people don't see it as a pan-European political issue, they see it as a pet project of the elite, and it's not like people voted for the Euro - it's just that all the big parties supported the Euro.

Furunculus is under a childish belief that what is now has always been. He deems himself British by nationality, which is already kind of supra-national identity as he really is English, which may or may not be forced onto him after the Scottish referendum, also ignoring that Great Britain came into existence a few centuries ago. Prior to that, the the Saxon and Norman melting pot created the English nation, which also didn't exist.

He's clinging to the status quo which may well prove to be extremely short, history-wise.

InsaneApache
03-21-2013, 17:06
Prior to that, the the Saxon and Norman melting pot created the English nation

Not true.

Greyblades
03-21-2013, 17:30
Furunculus is under a childish belief that what is now has always been. He deems himself British by nationality, which is already kind of supra-national identity as he really is English, which may or may not be forced onto him after the Scottish referendum, also ignoring that Great Britain came into existence a few centuries ago. Prior to that, the the Saxon and Norman melting pot created the English nation, which also didn't exist.

He's clinging to the status quo which may well prove to be extremely short, history-wise.

What does any of that have to do with anything?

Beskar
03-21-2013, 17:38
You're missing the nuance InsaneApache is trying to make. There's the common people, the ordinary Cypriot who works his butt off and tries to save a little bit, just like you, me and most everybody in the EU. And then you have the elite, screwing us over. I don't know how it happened, but somehow down the line, somebody made you believe that the Cypriotic people, the ones who go to work every day for a meagre salary and try to save some money for the future, are guilty and need to pay the bill. You shouldn't let that happen. Your loyalty, my loyalty, our loyalty should be towards the Cypriotic people, not towards our politicians and bankers. As long as our leaders are able to divide us (the rich North against the poor South) and make us believe the common man in the street is to blame, they'll do whatever the hell they want with us, like taking away our savings just like that or like letting people starve, like in Greece.

Last I heard, small savers would not be effected (Ie: the common folk) in the revised plans.

Link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21875246)

Correspondents say the new plan may include nationalising pension funds of semi-public companies and limiting the bank levy to deposits above 100,000 euros.

InsaneApache
03-21-2013, 19:40
So if you've been frugal and saved all your life you still get bilked by the EU. Sorted.

Sarmatian
03-21-2013, 20:30
What does any of that have to do with anything?

It has everything to do with everything.

EU is criticized, most vocally on these boards by Furunculus, because it is a supra-national organization. In lay terms, it won't work because a guy from Marseille doesn't care for a guy from Krakow, and a guy from Ljubljana doesn't care for a guy from Copenhagen, you get the concept. On the other hand, in a nation state, supposedly, people do care about each other, so a guy from London cares about a guy from Edinburgh.

And, it's bollox, naturally, for two reasons

1) Nation state exists for a very small amount of time in human history. The concept of nation state isn't the same in all countries. The concept of nation itself isn't the same everywhere and at all times. British nationality, which I used, exists for a relatively short time, and may cease to exist when/if Scotland declares independence. Since Great Britain was created by the Act of the Union between Scotland and England, if Scotland secedes, there will be no British nationality in that sense, we're back to English and Scots, as citizens of two nation states that haven't existed for three centuries. There are numerous examples like that, another being Yugoslavia where up to a certain point number of people who declared as Yugoslavians was on a significant rise only to drop to just a few in later years. In the space of a decade or two, a few million people changed their position on their nationality. So, not only the idea of what nation state is that change over time, the core components of that nation may change their idea as well.

2) Second reason is purely selfish - I do agree that a guy from Marseille doesn't care for a guy from Krakow, but I also think that when **** hits the fan, a guy from London doesn't care any more for a guy from Edinburgh. It's all fine and dandy when it's all fine and dandy, but if the guy from London had to choose between seriously tightening his belt or telling the guy from Edinburgh to fend for himself, I'm certain that he would tell him to **** off. For example, since the crisis, there has been a steady increase in general indifference to Kosovo situation in Serbia, which is now at a point where I'm pretty sure there wouldn't even be mass protests if Serbia recognized Kosovo. People are focusing on their own problems, they worry about paying back their loans and keeping their jobs. Yeah, sure, Kosovo is very nice, it's important and all, but they can't eat it, if push comes to shove. Likewise, it is quite natural and normal when people are tightening their belts are crying murder if they feel that someone else is taking an additional dime from them. It happens in the nation state and in supra-national state. There are other examples as well, like Italy and Spain.


Once we are past this, we can focus on the real problems of the EU.

Greyblades
03-21-2013, 20:52
Yeah cool that you can parrot your preferred ideology but I could not give a fig, what has your strawman character assassination diatribe of Furunculus earlier have to do with anything.

Sarmatian
03-21-2013, 21:18
This is what Furunculus has been saying for years,


@Furunculus (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=215) is, just like everyone else who shares my viewpoints and agrees with me, clearly a genius. He should be put at the head of the Eurozone and the EU and lead us to glory.


Yeah cool that you can parrot your preferred ideology but I could not give a fig, what has your strawman character assassination diatribe of Furunculus earlier have to do with anything.

Que?

Strawman? Character assassination?

I was quite clearly disagreeing with his position, not attacking him. The only reason he's mentioned by name is because he's been arguing that case more frequently than anyone else and was mentioned in that capacity by at least two posters, and only after that did I mention why I disagreed with his opinion on the issue. Maybe you haven't read most of the thread, I know it's quite long, but that has been the most prominent point of friction throughout it.

I don't really see a problem here, but whatever strikes your fancy...

Husar
03-21-2013, 21:20
You don't see the distinction, do you?
Lies.


Yes, they sell us gas and we need that gas. Just like they need us paying for that gas. Sure, they can threaten to put us without gas. They can even do it for a short while. But all in all, it's something they can use to put pressure on us. They have influence and they can pressure, but they don't have real decision making power here.
I've been saying that they need our money as much as we need their gas for years but I always felt ignored. As such I've now used the opposite argument and immediately got your attention. I think I'm on to something...


That means Russian warships in our Mediterranean.
You're a....Belgian.... :inquisitive:



And the Cypriotic government becoming a puppet of Moscow. And all natural Cypriotic resources become Russian. That's a whole different story than Russian investors having influence and the Russians selling us gas we need. So far, they didn't rule one of our member states. If they bail out Cyprus, they'll rule it. And we'll have their warships in our sea. And it gives a precedent for the Russians buying Greece. Doesn't all that make you feel uncomfortable?
No, Russians are cool.
And to channel gaelic cowboy, why are we still discussing this? The government of Cyprus keeps spawning ideas that would avoid a deal with Russia yet I'm supposed to happily look forward to more russian involvement.




But "we" are good at making compromises. We can make a deal with Cyprus involving their gas. Tech and know-how we can obtain by investing. And the EU can make an acceptable compromise with Turkey, since we're not warmongerers. And we can guarantee the Russians that they won't lose their money.
Not before Monday.


The Russians will simply take the gas, put warships around it and show their middlefinger to us and Turkey, which will lead to a very explosive situation.
Would make watching the news interesting again, Turkey is busy treating German soldiers who came to help them at the syrian border in the worst way possible anyway.


Everybody responsible for that idea should get fired and never, ever allowed into a position of power anymore. Put capable people on the top, please. They're getting paid more than enough to be capable.
Only the voters can do that but they would rather abandon the EU.


You're missing the nuance InsaneApache is trying to make.
You don't know that, you can only assume it, because you may be missing my insincerity.


There's the common people, the ordinary Cypriot who works his butt off and tries to save a little bit, just like you, me and most everybody in the EU. And then you have the elite, screwing us over. I don't know how it happened, but somehow down the line, somebody made you believe that the Cypriotic people, the ones who go to work every day for a meagre salary and try to save some money for the future, are guilty and need to pay the bill. You shouldn't let that happen. Your loyalty, my loyalty, our loyalty should be towards the Cypriotic people, not towards our politicians and bankers. As long as our leaders are able to divide us (the rich North against the poor South) and make us believe the common man in the street is to blame, they'll do whatever the hell they want with us, like taking away our savings just like that or like letting people starve, like in Greece.
The elites playing with us? I thought I made that point earlier when I said the voters are allowing them to do just that. The people have a lot of power but they do not use it. Instead they do things like voting for the same party every time because they always did that.
I have sympathy with the people, but I also see that the people make mistakes, sometimes knowingly, and as such are partly to blame themselves. The Greeks for example still pay bribes to pass their driver's license test and many, many other things. The whole society is corrupt to some extent, why would their politicians be any different? They come from this society after all. And with "whole society" I don't mean every single person but quite a lot of them. As for the elites, they will always play with people who know less, knowledge means power and that's why I mentioned education. People collect bonus points here but for a long time many didn't even know that the other side of the coin was that all the info about their purchases was sold and used for market research. It's possible to know about quite a few things but it requires some education and some interest, which is often not there and as such these people are easily exploited.

Greyblades
03-21-2013, 23:26
Que?

Strawman? Character assassination?

I was quite clearly disagreeing with his position, not attacking him. The only reason he's mentioned by name is because he's been arguing that case more frequently than anyone else and was mentioned in that capacity by at least two posters, and only after that did I mention why I disagreed with his opinion on the issue. Maybe you haven't read most of the thread, I know it's quite long, but that has been the most prominent point of friction throughout it.

I don't really see a problem here, but whatever strikes your fancy...

Ah crud.
"Slight" overreaction on my part but I found the bit you said about British/english/anglo saxon yada-yada irrelevent and coming from nowhere, your second post seemed to ignore that and I got annoyed, and annoyed means irrational apparantly.
:embarassed: You know that feeling when you just realised you said something wrong? It sucks.

InsaneApache
03-22-2013, 00:56
Nation state exists for a very small amount of time in human history.

1200 hundred years here and counting.

Andres
03-22-2013, 10:02
I've been saying that they need our money as much as we need their gas for years but I always felt ignored. As such I've now used the opposite argument and immediately got your attention. I think I'm on to something...

I haven't read this entire thread, so if you've been saying that for years, I didn't read it. Sorry.


You're a....Belgian.... :inquisitive:

See, that's where the EU fails. If want to be truly Europeans, then we need to consider the Mediterranean as our sea. As long as we think "Belgian", "German", "French", etc. this whole European Union thing won't work.

Contrary to how it may seem, I'm not at all opposed to a European Union. I do am opposed to the way things are being run now. There's so much going wrong with the EU that it's easy for local politicians (Belgian, French, English, etc.) to (rightfully) critizise the entire project and of course, plenty of people are turning their backs towards the EU. Europe needs to start getting its' act together or we'll fall apart and then it'll be each country for its' own again.


And to channel gaelic cowboy, why are we still discussing this? The government of Cyprus keeps spawning ideas that would avoid a deal with Russia yet I'm supposed to happily look forward to more russian involvement.


No, I'm saying that you seem to be defending the people who screwed up with their moronic "give us your savings" plan, which now gives an opportunity for Russia to turn Cyprus into a Russian puppet state. Perhaps (and hopefully) it won't happen, but the fact that this opportunity has been created is bad enough. Not to mention the latent risk that people will indeed perform a run on the bank whenever their country risks to perhaps get in trouble.

The people responsible for that idea should get fired and never allowed into office again. And they should be fired immediately, not after the next election.



Not before Monday.


Never heard of long term investments? You put in money now and get a return within 5 years. Or is too difficult for our glorious leaders to think past behind the next election?



Only the voters can do that but they would rather abandon the EU.


Only the EU in its' current form.


The elites playing with us? I thought I made that point earlier when I said the voters are allowing them to do just that. The people have a lot of power but they do not use it. Instead they do things like voting for the same party every time because they always did that.
I have sympathy with the people, but I also see that the people make mistakes, sometimes knowingly, and as such are partly to blame themselves. The Greeks for example still pay bribes to pass their driver's license test and many, many other things. The whole society is corrupt to some extent, why would their politicians be any different? They come from this society after all. And with "whole society" I don't mean every single person but quite a lot of them. As for the elites, they will always play with people who know less, knowledge means power and that's why I mentioned education. People collect bonus points here but for a long time many didn't even know that the other side of the coin was that all the info about their purchases was sold and used for market research. It's possible to know about quite a few things but it requires some education and some interest, which is often not there and as such these people are easily exploited.

You just gave the answer to why the elites are still in power yourself.

But you're wrong to assume that people let themselves been screwed over because of a lack of education or interest. Not everybody is born with good set of brains and the capacity to see through everything. And even if they do have such capacities, the ordinary man needs to work his butt off, so he doesn't always have the time to keep following things very close by.

Sure, if you look and search hard enough, you'll find plenty of data and figures, but when are people with families and jobs going to do that?

And so, we keep getting exploited, until somebody goes a step too far, like "give us your savings!". And if they keep going further, eventually, you'll get a bloody revolution.

You're wrong in assuming that true change (not the Obama kind of change or, here in Belgium, the NVA "power of change") will come through the democratic process. At best, you'll get the same old same in a new package.

Conradus
03-22-2013, 13:48
1200 hundred years here and counting.

Yeah, not really, no. Even the kingdom of England was only founded in the 920ties and that wasn't yet a nationstate.

Husar
03-23-2013, 01:28
1200 hundred years here and counting.
As Conradus mentioned, there wasn't even a concept of a nation back then.


I haven't read this entire thread, so if you've been saying that for years, I didn't read it. Sorry.
I mean in general, not necessarily in this thread.




See, that's where the EU fails. If want to be truly Europeans, then we need to consider the Mediterranean as our sea. As long as we think "Belgian", "German", "French", etc. this whole European Union thing won't work.

Contrary to how it may seem, I'm not at all opposed to a European Union. I do am opposed to the way things are being run now. There's so much going wrong with the EU that it's easy for local politicians (Belgian, French, English, etc.) to (rightfully) critizise the entire project and of course, plenty of people are turning their backs towards the EU. Europe needs to start getting its' act together or we'll fall apart and then it'll be each country for its' own again.
Someone else pointed out long ago that the USA were also not founded on popular opinion but by the elites who decided it and made the people follow. There was apparently even resistance to that union and look how they cheer for it now. Many of these ideas do not start out perfectly and I won't deny there is a need for some reforms but it's hardly as oppressive and bad as some make it out to be.




No, I'm saying that you seem to be defending the people who screwed up with their moronic "give us your savings" plan, which now gives an opportunity for Russia to turn Cyprus into a Russian puppet state. Perhaps (and hopefully) it won't happen, but the fact that this opportunity has been created is bad enough.
Being a russian puppet state isn't that bad, many former East Germans will tell you that East Germany was really better.


Not to mention the latent risk that people will indeed perform a run on the bank whenever their country risks to perhaps get in trouble.
Only works if you get in before the bank is out of money, better to give them their 10% and keep 90% than be too late and lose 100%.
The rest and why bank runs happen anyway should be explained by a group psychologist.


Never heard of long term investments? You put in money now and get a return within 5 years. Or is too difficult for our glorious leaders to think past behind the next election?
Or you invest in someone's house because it will only grow in value and there's really no danger to it even if he doesn't earn anywhere near enough to pay for the credit. We should sell Cyprus to the Russians and use the profit to help Greece. Once Russia joins the EU, it'll all be fine again anyway. ~;)


But you're wrong to assume that people let themselves been screwed over because of a lack of education or interest. Not everybody is born with good set of brains and the capacity to see through everything. And even if they do have such capacities, the ordinary man needs to work his butt off, so he doesn't always have the time to keep following things very close by.
Yes, but noone else is going to stand up for that man, sad fact of humanity. I don't see how that proves my assessment wrong.


Sure, if you look and search hard enough, you'll find plenty of data and figures, but when are people with families and jobs going to do that?
You don't change the world using data and figures, you need power, for the little man this means gathering, even the elites have consortiums, groups and representatives who speak for many of them because it gives them more leverage than fighting alone does.


You're wrong in assuming that true change (not the Obama kind of change or, here in Belgium, the NVA "power of change") will come through the democratic process. At best, you'll get the same old same in a new package.
I said there is a way to change things through the democratic process. My point was that it does not happen because so many people are not willing to change their voting patterns enough for it to happen. But if you think the democratic process is not an option, what is? change back to monarchy and hope the next king will introduce radical change in the right direction? The idea of democracy is that the people can vote for someone else if they do not want the current course, it does not work because the people do not use that power and vote based on habit and advertisements. The poor may work hard for 8 hours a day but managers often work far longer and still manage to think about political stuff.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-23-2013, 02:53
Furunculus is under a childish belief that what is now has always been. He deems himself British by nationality, which is already kind of supra-national identity as he really is English, which may or may not be forced onto him after the Scottish referendum, also ignoring that Great Britain came into existence a few centuries ago. Prior to that, the the Saxon and Norman melting pot created the English nation, which also didn't exist.

He's clinging to the status quo which may well prove to be extremely short, history-wise.

Bede was the first person to call us "The English", but it was Alfred the Great, his son Edward the Elder and his grandson Aethelstan the Magnificent that forged us into a political nation. Overall, the Norman influence is a tint, not a core component, to our identity.

Regardless, Furunculus, were he here, would tell you that it's not historical fact by historical myth that defines a national character. The Scots and English can just about stand each other - but there exists little to no fraternity between the English and French, and only slightly more between the English and Germans.

Husar's opinions, and those of others, demonstrate this.

Fragony
03-23-2013, 06:09
Husar is right, the concept of a nation-state is a very modern idea, 19centurish

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ascendancy-Europe-M-S-Anderson/dp/0582772591 < pretty good

Husar
03-23-2013, 09:54
I also forgot to mention that "1200 hundred" years are 120,000 years, that's quite a stretch IA. ~;)

Furunculus
03-24-2013, 16:40
This is what Furunculus has been saying for years, Andres, Husar feels closer to his own politicians than poor Cypriots. It's the fundamental problem with the EU and why it doesn't work - people don't see it as a pan-European political issue, they see it as a pet project of the elite, and it's not like people voted for the Euro - it's just that all the big parties supported the Euro.

Indeed i have.


@Furunculus (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/member.php?u=215) is, just like everyone else who shares my viewpoints and agrees with me, clearly a genius. He should be put at the head of the Eurozone and the EU and lead us to glory.

Well quite. If you want some vintage Furunculus then i think this statement has stood the test of time:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?118607-Dawn-of-a-new-EU-European-Conservatives-and-Reformists-Group-springs-into-life&p=2271636&viewfull=1#post2271636


Shinseikhan - "Would a European gov't be more authoritarian and secretive because it would be someone ruling from Paris or Brussels instead of the current splendid lot?"

yes. in my opinion this is an inevitable result of moving the cratos further away from the demos, and severing the link that allows both groups the trust the other.
an electorate that watches its masters enact policy that is inimical to the will of the people will grow resentful and contemptuous, especially when they are so far removed from the centre of power, and such a small function of that power, that they see themselves powerless to change things via the democratic process.
a ruling class that enacts policy over a multitude of differnt social and cultural electorate groups must know that it cannot please everyone, (and will in fact please no-one in its compromises) will learn to harden themselves against voter opinion, especially when there is no local link that allows them to empathise with 'their' electorate, and the electorate is so massive and fractured that their can never be effective opposition to individual acts.
it is not that these problems do not occur in national government, merely that they will be greatly magnified on a federal level if we take as disparate a group as the electorates of the 27 eu nations.

i think i deserve a fricking medal!

Furunculus
03-24-2013, 17:05
Furunculus is under a childish belief that what is now has always been.

Utterly wrong, for i have always accepted the fundamental truth that britain has been as successful ass it has in large part because it has adapted to events, and that in consequence our political settlement has largely dispensed with periodic revolution precisely because that ceaseless change has [slowly] ground on.

I can even evidence that with some vintage Furunculus:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?118607-Dawn-of-a-new-EU-European-Conservatives-and-Reformists-Group-springs-into-life&p=2306521&viewfull=1#post2306521


successful nations adapt and evolve to the situation around them, and who knows, in a hundred years time my two tests may have different answers, but for britain now and the near future there is no point in subsuming into dysfunctional federal europe.

If there is one reason I am sympathetic to the Tories it is the definition of what British Conservatism is:

the role of Conservatism is not to oppose all change but to resist and balance the volatility of current political fads and ideology, and to defend a middle position that enshrines a slowly-changing organic humane traditionalism.

If there is one reason why I am sympathetic to the Lib-Dem's it is because the Tories don't always live up to the statement above.


He deems himself British by nationality, which is already kind of supra-national identity as he really is English, which may or may not be forced onto him after the Scottish referendum, also ignoring that Great Britain came into existence a few centuries ago.

The thing you don't understand is that I am British because it is an identity that I am comfortable with, and englishness is quite irrelevant.
Britain is a multi-nation state, similar to the ambitions of the EU.

However, the difference is that almost nobody considers fellow european nations to be their 'family' in the same way they do their countrymen whereas britishness is a widespread and popular identity. Yes, it co-exists with englishness, and welshness, and scottishness, and which is considered the dominant identity varies from person to person, but they can happily coexist.

You mention the Scottish referendum and I laugh, I laugh heartily, for the Scottish question is EXACTLY the same as the EU one:

are you my family, willing to look to the interests of me and mine, as I would you and yours?

That is the question the Scots are being asked to answer, and family is a two way relationship, so yes if they vote to leave I will have to reevaluate my commitment to the Scots and 'Britishness' will mean less in consequence.

I am british, i consider myself kin to all of the parts of the uk, and care little for any identity that derives from the place of my birth (england). If the scots reject that familial link, i will have to change in response, they will become kith. I would be disappointed, but a 'marriage' demands the commitment of both partners.

The crucial feature of indirect democracy is the perception of representation, the collective trust in shared aims and expectations that allows the people to put their destiny in the hands of another, safe in the knowledge that even if ‘their’ man doesn’t get the job then the other guy will still be looking after their best interests.

The manner in which this trust is built is the knowledge that you and ‘he’ have a history of cooperation, and that your respective families likewise have a shared social and cultural history of cooperation, all of which allows you to trust that when adversity strikes ‘he’ will act in a predictable and acceptable way.

I simply do not recognise a sufficiently congruent set of aims and expectations to assent to being governed by the common will of the EU.

This does not mean that we should not strive towards harmonious cooperation and collaboration wherever a common viewpoint will bring a more effective outcome, but............

A nation is either:
1. a broadly sovereign state within the EU (as Britain has tried to become)
2. a functioning part of a larger sovereign entity (such as the converged euro-core will become)

The only other alternative is being a dependent adjunct to a larger sovereign entity. A Sanjak, in short, as Greece was in Ottoman times and is again today.

Becoming an EU Sanjak is neither liberal nor democratic, so propose me a solution because otherwise we will be leaving…………

more vintage Furunculus:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?118607-Dawn-of-a-new-EU-European-Conservatives-and-Reformists-Group-springs-into-life&p=2269020&viewfull=1#post2269020


if the mainstream parties continue to ignore the will of the electorate, then we all may very well find that parties like UKIP do just fine at the next elections, the recent euro-elections should be seen as warning shot across the bows.

in this light the conservative move to create an anti-federal bloc within the EU is very important.

Furunculus
03-24-2013, 17:40
EU is criticized, most vocally on these boards by Furunculus, because it is a supra-national organization. In lay terms, it won't work because a guy from Marseille doesn't care for a guy from Krakow, and a guy from Ljubljana doesn't care for a guy from Copenhagen, you get the concept. On the other hand, in a nation state, supposedly, people do care about each other, so a guy from London cares about a guy from Edinburgh.

I do agree that a guy from Marseille doesn't care for a guy from Krakow, but I also think that when **** hits the fan, a guy from London doesn't care any more for a guy from Edinburgh.

Not a bad summation, more or less exactly what is said four years ago.

More vintage Furunculus:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?118607-Dawn-of-a-new-EU-European-Conservatives-and-Reformists-Group-springs-into-life&p=2269201&viewfull=1#post2269201


it always comes back to the question of; why does britain need to do this? and i at least never hear a convincing answer.

my skepticism about how democratic a federal EU will be is informed by the base concept of what democracy is:

which is to say that you and I consent to be governed by the british government because the shared values, culture, and history will 'ensure' that those elected to govern in your name will do so in a manner that you can live with.
you elect a local politician based on his knowledge of your communities needs, and the assumption that because he is local he will fight to see those needs met.
your local politician then works with other broadly similar (read: british) politicians to govern the nation, which as Churchill agreed is the least bad form of governance yet devised.

it is a matter of trust, you don't lightly let convicted thieves operate tills in your shop, you don't let unvetted strangers run your kids play-group.

i don't have that confidence that the brussels collective will legislate/govern/arbitrate/negotiate in a manner that i am willing to be bound by, and lots of other people share that view too. and its not just brits, Louis would be horrified were it occur that les anglo-saxons had turned corsica into a tax-haven where french hedge fund managers could squirrel away money that should be spent on the hard working french citizen! i am dismayed that germany cuts energy deals with russia that result in pipelines going around former eastern-bloc countries and thus making them susceptible to extortion. finland doesn't like our closeness with america and refuses to join NATO. Norway sees the benefit of NATO but not much advantage in the political end of the EU. germany wouldn't trust an italian or a greek to be within a square mile of german economic policy.

every nation forms its collective values from their own shared history and culture, and none of that is bad in and of itself, but people get riled when views they do not hold to be of value are forced upon them by 'outsiders'. "it's one thing for my mother to tell me i drink too much, but who the hell does my milkman think he is to say such a thing!"

the natural answer to this lack of legitimacy is an increase in authoritarianism, as the only way to govern those who hold no loyalty to the governors. aka tryanny.

so when there is no need for britain to join a federated europe, and the only result is less representative government................ why do it?

Regarding the relative good will to edinburgh vs krakow, well we are about to find out in less than eighteen months.............. Watch this space!

Furunculus
03-24-2013, 18:00
Regardless, Furunculus, were he here, would tell you that it's not historical fact by historical myth that defines a national character. The Scots and English can just about stand each other - but there exists little to no fraternity between the English and French, and only slightly more between the English and Germans.

Fortunately for you.............. "Huzzzzaaarrrr!"

My answer is best given in vintage Furunculus:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?118607-Dawn-of-a-new-EU-European-Conservatives-and-Reformists-Group-springs-into-life&p=2303351&viewfull=1#post2303351


Subotan - "don't understand (Most) Eurosceptics. They say that the EU is undemocratic; which is a fair criticism, and needs to be addressed. But this somehow translates into the whole concept being flawed, and that the EU should be dismantled. Ok, fair enough. But what's your alternative? Go it alone against USA, India, Russia and China?"


No, the whole concept is unecessary and inherently un-demos-cratos. I say this because I believe in the sovereign nation-state. 1000+ years of co-existence and co-dependence has forged the English people, and latterly the British peoples, into a group with a shared culture, shared social norms and values, and a shared world view. Therefore I trust this body of people act in a way that I generally approve of, and to produce a governing body that will act broadly in manner that I understand and accept. Therefore I am willing to be bound by their decisions, and thus is my acquiescence to the will of the state created. I am, in short, willing to suffer the consequence of my governments actions. I share no such empathy and common history with the continental nations, therefore I have no trust that they (the EU) will act in a manner that I approve of, and thus I do not acquiesce to be governed by the EU. In short, I am unwilling to suffer the consequence of the EU's actions conducted in my name. It will never be right that I should be governed by those I do not consider my 'family', hence I will never support the EU's political ambitions.
You know what, i'm pretty sure there are lots of people in europe who feel the same way about britain too, and that's okay, why should they want our free-booting capitalist ways interfering with their own political evolution.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 08:35
Cyprus

EUSSR: all your savings are belong to us

Simon says: bankruns all over the eurozone

Brenus
03-25-2013, 08:44
Not only Eurozone. UK as well, as we saved the banks for the managers to get their bonuses.

Husar
03-25-2013, 09:03
That's a good thing, the banks will finally fail as they should have in 2008.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 09:13
That's a good thing, the banks will finally fail as they should have in 2008.

Not such a good thing if it's your money, and pretty dumb if it's Russia's maffia/industry money. In a way I am glad the EUSSR made the biggest mistake in their already impressive repertoire of total faillure. How many billions does Germany has invested in Russia? I forgot but a lot. Chario

Husar
03-25-2013, 09:33
Not such a good thing if it's your money, and pretty dumb if it's Russia's maffia/industry money. In a way I am glad the EUSSR made the biggest mistake in their already impressive repertoire of total faillure. How many billions does Germany has invested in Russia? I forgot but a lot. Chario

Don't put your money into banks that could fail, it's capitalism. Are you a communist?

Fragony
03-25-2013, 10:02
Don't put your money into banks that could fail, it's capitalism. Are you a communist?

Nice try, but Russia isn't very happy that the EU is going to steal their money, there will be consequences for investors in Russia, say goodbye to your tripple-a status already

Husar
03-25-2013, 10:43
Nice try, but Russia isn't very happy that the EU is going to steal their money, there will be consequences for investors in Russia, say goodbye to your tripple-a status already

And the EU wasn't very happy that Russia wanted to steal its gas. So what?
If Russia wants to scare away investors that's their problem, I'm not aware they have a triple-a status that they could lose.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 10:53
And the EU wasn't very happy that Russia wanted to steal its gas. So what?
If Russia wants to scare away investors that's their problem, I'm not aware they have a triple-a status that they could lose.

You do. They probably won't shut of the gas supply but will threaten with it making people very nervous, a lot of the money stored there is from Gascom which supplies essential gas supplies. The EU shot itself in the foot and I couldn't be happier really. Timber.

Husar
03-25-2013, 10:57
You do. They probably won't shut of the gas supply but will threaten with it making people very nervous, a lot of the money stored there is from Gascom which supplies essential gas supplies. The EU shot itself in the foot and I couldn't be happier really. Timber.

Yeah, the best thing that could come out of it would be another war.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 11:06
Yeah, the best thing that could come out of it would be another war.

I very much prefer war over the EU, it will come anyway, these idiots already rebuild all the conditions that can lead to it

Catiline
03-25-2013, 12:03
The Russians can't threaten cutting off gas, no one will buy it in the future if they do.

War is better than the EU...:inquisitive:

Fragony
03-25-2013, 12:43
The Russians can't threaten cutting off gas, no one will buy it in the future if they do.

War is better than the EU...:inquisitive:

As if they haven't done that before, not threatening but actually doing it. EU is rebuilding 1848 but it's now north and south

Catiline
03-25-2013, 12:48
They did it to the Ukraine, which isn't the quite same thing as doing it to the EU directly. They'll destroy their energy market in the long term if they do it again. there are other sources of gas if the Russians make themselves unreliable.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-25-2013, 12:57
Except they have, and they will.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 12:58
They did it to the Ukraine, which isn't the quite same thing as doing it to the EU directly. They'll destroy their energy market in the long term if they do it again. there are other sources of gas if the Russians make themselves unreliable.

You almost make it sound like the EU isn't desperately trying fix deeper problems with short-term solutions like stealing from the Russians. The EU cares about the EU, not about you.

Catiline
03-25-2013, 13:47
I'm in Dubai and not paying any taxes, so I'm not that worried if the EU cares about me or not for the moment.

The Russians haven't cut off gas to Europe. They've cut it off to Ukraine and Belarus, which had knock on effects in Europe, but that's not the same as using it as a tool directly against the EU. The Russians might be obscure in their thinking, but they're not stupid, and holding the energy to ransom isn't in their best interests.

Fragony
03-25-2013, 17:13
I'm in Dubai and not paying any taxes, so I'm not that worried if the EU cares about me or not for the moment.

The Russians haven't cut off gas to Europe. They've cut it off to Ukraine and Belarus, which had knock on effects in Europe, but that's not the same as using it as a tool directly against the EU. The Russians might be obscure in their thinking, but they're not stupid, and holding the energy to ransom isn't in their best interests.

Won't be cut you are right about that.

Sarmatian
03-25-2013, 17:53
As if they haven't done that before, not threatening but actually doing it. EU is rebuilding 1848 but it's now north and south

Russians never cut of gas to EU. Russia never cut off anything to Europe for that matter, even during the biggest crisis of the Cold War. The biggest and most stable industrial power in Europe is powered by Russian energy, so go figure.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-25-2013, 22:57
Ukraine isn't in Europe, then?

Kralizec
03-25-2013, 23:26
About the Cyprus situation...

I can see why people say it's an unwise decision; setting a precedent that frightens deposit holders in other financially troubled countries and all that. But unfair? Without this deal the people who had deposits at Cypriot banks could very well have lost the bulk of their money. Even people with less than 100.000 E's would not be safe - look at Iceland; the only reason people got back any money at all was because the Icelandic government nationalised the parts which held accounts from natives and because the British and Dutch governments helped out their own citizens and were never compensated.

In the deal that was voted down the other day, most deposit holders would pay about 6% of their assets - which is pretty close to the interest rate that these banks pay for one single year. Am I supposed to feel sorry for these people, who've parked tens or hundreds of thousands of euro's in a place that yields extremely high returns, which would never be offered by a sustainable bank which operates responsibly, and are asked for a contribution equal to one single year of interest for bailing out their sorry asses?

Furunculus
03-25-2013, 23:57
I have no problem with the concept of risk in a fractional reserve banking system, but it is risky to do so when the decisions are considered to have no legitimacy, because they are perceived to have been imposed by an 'outside' power.

Are you my family?

Kralizec
03-26-2013, 00:12
I found out the other day that I have some Scottish ancestry. Then again, they're not your family either, are they?

If the Cypriots think they're being screwed over by other European countries, they need to realise:
1) at some point the assets of Cypriot banks equaled 7 times the size of their own GDP. The financial and economic policies of their government may not be the fault of the average Cypriot bloke, but it sure as hell isn't the fault of the Finnish, Dutch or French taxpayer
2) if they weren't an Eurozone member, their government would probably have devalued its currency by now, which would have been far worse then a single, one-off 6% tax on their deposits.

But regardless I'm sure that whatever I say, some people (not you) will find always find way to argue that Cyprus' woes are not in any way the responsibility of the country in question but rather an expression of German racism.

Furunculus
03-26-2013, 01:02
I found out the other day that I have some Scottish ancestry. Then again, they're not your family either, are they?

But regardless I'm sure that whatever I say, some people (not you) will find always find way to argue that Cyprus' woes are not in any way the responsibility of the country in question but rather an expression of German racism.

quite the opposite, i would be naturally inclined to sympathise with the german position, for why should they assume an unlimited liability for people with whom they do not consider to be their family, i.e. a shared social and cultural history from which springs a sufficiently harmonious set of aspirations and values that you can both assent to a shared destiny................. but,

it isn't that simple, because germany is a democracy and they chose to enter a monetary union and assuming just such a liability is implicit, it is called ever closer union for a reason. they made their bed and they must lie in it.

i say this as someone with enormous empathy for their predicament, and no little understanding for the weight of history that stands behind their decision to abandon the beloved deutchmark, but they are adults of legally sound mind and must therefore take responsibility for their actions.

Germany should leave unless it can accommodate itself to transferring up to 5% of GDP (Edward Chancellor says 3.6%), to its poorer 'family' year-on-year, in perpetuity.

Federal US taxation is ~25% of GDP and the variation in spending levels between rich and poor states is ~5% of GDP, so a variation of roughly 20% of federal spending.

How big a budget would the EU need to be able to slosh around 5% of combined GDP into the poor regions (bearing in mind the current budget is only 1% (and heavily constrained by CAP payments)?

The other point is that americans accept this, they are all american, whereas we are rapidly finding out just how german the germans are, and finnish the finns are, when it comes to firehosing cash at nations they consider to be essentially delinquent!
In the UK this 'sloshing' occurs in the form of:

national pay-bargaining which benefits poorer regions (teachers, nurses, etc)
national social benefits more generous than poorer regions could afford alone (eg.housing benefit in glasgow)
targeted regional development grants/discounts to encourage business growth (objective 1 EU/WEFO funds)
additional infrastructure spending to support the local economy (the mainland-skye bridge)
operating national services hubs from depressed regions to boost wages (DVLA in swansea, etc)

Unless Germany recognises the 'familial' relationship, and the obligation that goes along with that, then it needs to leave for the good of its neighbours.

Catiline
03-26-2013, 06:18
Ukraine isn't in Europe, then?

Debatable for us perhaps. It's not for the Russians...

Sarmatian
03-26-2013, 08:06
Ukraine isn't in Europe, then?

Meant western Europe, but ok.

When we say "cutting off", it really means depriving someone of gas for political reasons. When someone doesn't pay, it's perfectly normal to refuse him further service.

Fragony
03-26-2013, 08:09
Ain't our Dijselbloem a tiger..... I'd suggest he starts checking his food for polonium and let his wife start the car. Stealing from the Russian maffia, always smart

Fragony
03-27-2013, 09:20
lol, what was never expected happened to the no doubt absolute amazement of eurocrats, almost 5.000.000.000 euro has been hauled back from the saved Cyprus bank. Who would have thought, incredible.

InsaneApache
03-27-2013, 10:24
Just found this from the Irish Daily Mail.....


Here is my Saturday Essay in the Irish Daily Mail. It is a lengthy piece, but then in the countries caught in the eurozone, interest in what is happening in Cyprus is intense. British readers can be happy they are not trapped in the single currency. But they are still trapped in the EU...which is why they may want to read on.


Before I can explain what this Cyprus crisis means to Ireland, I have to dust off some Soviet-era vocabulary: nothing else will do.

First, nomenklatura. This was the name given to the self-propagating Communist Party elite who controlled Soviet government, industry, finance and most of the caviar.

Next, apparatchiks. These were the unquestioning loyal subordinates of a Communist apparat or administrative system.

As for other words from the USSR era – transnational, class betrayal and colonialism – you already know those, so now I can get started and explain what Ireland must learn from what the European Union nomenklatura did to Cyprus and its president in the early hours of March 16th.

Picture the scene. We can do that because three reporters from the Wall Street Journal, one in Brussels, the others in Berlin and Nicosia, have managed to piece together an hour by hour account of events leading up to the announcement that eurozone finance ministers would force the Cypriot government to confiscate €5.8bn from bank deposits.

What has happened since that night remain other issues: the rush to Moscow by the Cypriot finance minister desperate for a loan, the attempts by Cypriots to find a Plan B, the possibility of Cyprus leaving the euro.

But above all, there is what happened over the night of the 15th on the sealed-off upper floors of the European Council building. It was the best illustration yet of why a former senior European Commission economist now refers to the EU as the New Soviet Union: the treatment of the President of Cyprus that night showed just how the power over the member states has shifted away from democratic control and into the hands of the unelected elite of a transnational European empire. And what happened to the Cypriot president that night could happen to any Taoiseach.

Berlin propaganda

So, as I say, picture the scene. That night there were ten hours of negotiations trying to put together a deal that would keep the banks in Cyprus solvent. What the Cypriot banks needed was €17.5bn. But the Germans were unwilling to allow such a bail-out. Already the Berlin propaganda machine had been pumping out stories that the Cypriot banks were stuffed with Russian hot money, and decent Germans were not going to protect the deposits of Russian oligarchs.

Which was racial stereotyping by the Germans. There plenty of legit Russian businessmen in Europe. A lot of such businessmen may have
shifted their money into Cyprus to get it away from banks controlled by Putin and Medvedev. Such businessmen clearly thought that EU banking played straight. Now they know different. But that is another story with other implications for how investors from outside the EU will now regard the safety of eurozone banks, including Irish banks.

It also has implications for anyone in the EU who thought that the EU law forcing all member states to guarantee bank deposits up to €100,000 meant something.

This week some of us sat in the press room at the European Commission and listened to Olli Rehn’s apparatchiks deny that confiscation of a percentage of Cypriot bank deposits under 100k was in breach of this legal guarantee. They insisted that this wasn’t confiscation, it was a tax. Since taxes are the ‘competence’ of member states, it didn’t breach the law.

The apparatchiks insisted that, anyway, this was a one-off because the case of Cyprus was ‘special.’ By last Wednesday night however, news had leaked out that the Spanish government now plans to ‘tax’ bank deposits by up to 0.2 percent. You might say that’s not much. But whether it is 0.2 percent or 20 percent doesn’t matter. The precedent of raiding bank deposits with the Troika’s blessing has been set.

Cypriot president alone

Back to the move against Cyprus. It started on the Friday evening when Jeroen Dijsselbloem, president of the eurogroup, called an emergency meeting after the European summit. According to the Journal, ‘Just after 5 p.m., finance ministers, IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, ECB executive board member Jorg Asmussen and the EU’s economic-affairs commissioner, Olli Rehn, filed into a meeting room on the fifth floor of the Justus Lipsius, which houses the EU’s ministerial meetings and summits.’

Now, this is significant: ‘Cyprus’s newly elected President Nicos Anastasiades stayed behind in the country’s delegation on the seventh floor.’ The democratically-elected president was not allowed in the room as the unelected Olli Rehn began with his plans for how to get €5.8bn out of Cypriot bank depositors.

Mr Rehn wanted a straight ‘haircut’ on all deposits in all banks. But then Christine Lagarde said they must gouge between 30 percent and 40 percent from all deposits over €100,000 in the two main Cypriot banks.


The horrified Cypriot finance minister said this couldn’t happen. He began the first of several scrambles upstairs to where President Anastasiades was being kept in isolation. Of course he was. This is how an empire treats uncooperative colonial natives. In the 19th century, Belgian colonial gang-masters would lock Congolese wives alone in windowless sheds until their husbands harvested the right amount of rubber.

In the end, as a representative of Mr Anastasiades told the German newspaper Bild, ‘the Germans held a gun to our chest.’ It was at some time after a meeting of the inner core of the nomenklatura which began in another room at 1 a.m. that Mr Asmussen of the ECB pulled out the gun. He told Mr Anastasiades that either he agreed to the deal on bank deposits, or EU funds would be cut off to the country’s two main banks.

Just to ramp up the 3 a.m. terror, Mr Asmussen then rang Mario Draghi, president of the ECB, in front of Mr Anastasiades. The German warned Mr Draghi that the ECB might have to deal with the collapse of the Cypriot banks on Monday.

You know the rest. The eurogroup came out and announced that the Cypriot president had agreed that there would be a levy on all bank deposits.

Again, this is significant. The EU system of government operates by keeping in place the institutions of the governments over which it has taken power. The public had to be told that it was the president of Cyprus himself who had decided to seize deposits.

Power out of view

Two British historians, Christopher Booker and Richard North, identified this system in their history of the EU, The Great Deception: ‘It is central to the nature of the “project” that the parliaments, officials and judiciaries of each of the member states should all be left in place. But behind them [the project] erected a new supranational power structure which worked through these national institutions, controlling them and enlisting their active collaboration in a way that remained largely out of view.’

If you go through the statements of Monnet and other founders of the project as long ago as the 1920s, ‘the one thing above all the “project” could never be, because by definition it had never been intended to be, was in the remotest sense democratic. The whole purpose of a supranational body is to stand above the wishes of individual nations and peoples.'

It would be supranational government by technocrats, ‘unsullied by any need to resort to all the messy, unpredictable business of elections.’

‘The only useful role left to the politicians in this process was to lend it a veneer of democratic legitimacy.’

Defiance

Which is why the nomenklatura were in such a fury when the Cypriot parliament refused to cast a single vote in favour of the deal: the members of parliament were not being ‘European.’ Indeed, in a top level conference call among eurozone officials on Wednesday – notes from which were leaked to Reuters – the Cypriot parliament’s democratic defiance was denigrated as ‘emotional.’

In fact, the parliament’s defiance was magnificent. But I did not cheer. I know that in the EU, a Yes vote is forever, but a No vote is only ever temporary. The Troika apparatchiks immediately delivered the message that the parliament must keep voting until they get the right answer.

This technique is familiar to anyone who remembers the politics of the USSR: vote all you want, but there is just one possible result.

I am not the only one to see that Soviet similarity. I go back to that former senior commission economist I mentioned at the top. He is Bernard Connolly. I have quoted before from the new edition of his book, The Rotten Heart of Europe.

Mr Connolly was infamously forced out of his job in 1995 when he wrote the book questioning the prospects of monetary union. From his vantage point as one of the nomenklatura, Mr Connolly saw the truth of the ambitions of this elite. They wanted ‘to complete the elimination of sovereignty, law and political legitimacy in Europe, freeing elites – a European nomenklatura – from any residual constraints either of democratic control or law.’

To do this, they have persuaded the ‘useful idiots’ across the member states to suppress the results of referenda and to topple democratically-elected governments ‘in manoeuvres reminiscent of Stalin’s tactics in Eastern Europe after the war.’

What Mr Connolly means, first, are the results of referenda not just in Ireland, but in the Netherlands and France. In 2001, the then-president of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, and other members of the elite made a decision behind closed doors to draw up an EU constitution. They promised that it would not come into effect unless it had the unanimous consent of all member states.

Fifty ways to win

Within a single week in 2005, both the French and the Dutch voters rejected the constitution. Here is how Nigel Farage, MEP and leader of the UK Independence Party, recalled the moment in a recent interview in the Financial Times: He was drinking champagne in the Brussels press bar to celebrate the Dutch rejecting the EU constitution in a referendum when a German MEP came by and said, ‘You may have your little celebration tonight but we have 50 different ways to win.’

Indeed they have. By 2007 they had produced the Lisbon Treaty, which was the constitution in everything but the title on the front page. You know the rest: in 2008 the Irish people rejected the treaty. The nomenklatura rejected the democratic result.

In 2011 the nomenklatura pulled off two Soviet-style coups. They toppled the elected governments of both Greece and Italy. It was
Hungary 1956 without the tanks.

That year George Papandreou, then prime minister of Greece, announced he would hold a referendum on the further austerity demanded by the Troika. But the nomenklatura would not allow a democratic vote. They demanded Mr Papandreou abandon the referendum. The humiliated prime minister was forced to resign.

The Troika then manoeuvred in one of the nomenklatura, Lucas Papademos, former vice-president of the ECB, as prime minister.

The EU elite also toppled the government of Silvio Berlusconi. Following a secret telephone call – later leaked to the Press – Chancellor Merkel told President Giorgio Napolitano of Italy she was worried that Prime Minister Berlusconi wasn’t strong enough to deliver the kind of reforms in Italy that ‘Europe’ wanted. The old Communist Napolitano got the message. He destabilised the prime minister at home, while the ECB got busy rocking the market in Italian bonds. Mr Berlusconi was forced out of office, and President Napolitano parachuted in the unelected choice of the nomenklatura, again one of their own, former European Commissioner Mario Monti.

Would topple Ireland too

If you think the nomenklatura has not been willing to topple an Irish Government, remember the pressure Jean-Claude Trichet, then president of the ECB, put on Finance Minister Brian Lenihan to force him to accept a bailout against the wishes of the Irish people. The pressure was of course applied in secret, we learned about it only from letters and notes of telephone calls released last year.

Mr Trichet pushed Mr Lenihan to accept the terms being offered by the Troika, threatening that the ECB would otherwise cut all emergency funding: that would have toppled the Government.

The finance minister resisted. But he was finally pushed into the deadly deal after Patrick Honohan, governor of the Irish Central Bank, said publicly a bail-out was necessary. That statement finished Mr Lenihan.

What is important to note is the Dr Honohan, though always referred to in Ireland the governor of our central bank, is something else in the EU. He is a member of the Governing Council of the ECB: that makes him a member of the European nomenklatura.

It is now clear the nomenklatura intend they should be without any constraints of democratic control. Mr Connolly notes that they have transferred powers to ‘unelected, unaccountable and explicitly anti-democratic bodies.’ These include the eurogroup, the ECB, the bail-out funds, in particular the new European Stability Mechanism, ‘which, astonishingly, has complete legal immunity for itself and its officers.’

He notes the undemocratic powers of the IMF and the G20. Then there are the banking and supervisory bodies, and the economic government of the euro area which is meant to ensure economic ‘discipline.'

Humiliation

This ‘discipline’ is why the democratically-elected members of our Dail must suffer the humiliation of knowing that a German parliamentary committee now sees our Budget before they do: the committee, free from Irish democratic control, acts for the nomenklatura.

On their trips to Brussels, the Taoiseach and Finance Minister pose as part of this ruling elite. If they were to put Ireland first it would be a class betrayal of their colleagues in the nomenklatura. Alas the Irish people are so submissive that they allow this evil idiocy by our Government.

But the Mediterranean peoples are not submissive. Judging by the mood of the peoples of Cyprus, Greece and Italy in particular, they have
had all the pain they can take. The crowds are already on the streets in their thousands. Now all they need are leaders.

Which is why Cyprus gives me hope. Like that old Soviet villain Lenin, I know that worse is better.

http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk/2013/03/the-new-soviet-union-cyprus-shows-how-the-eu-destroys-democracy.html

Interesting analysis.

Fragony
03-27-2013, 10:51
spot on. The Brussels has always been creepy, but the Brussels really outdid itself and is beginning to show it's true form

Furunculus
03-28-2013, 08:55
if there is one argument I have made over the years against the principle of ever-closer-union - the euro being the star witness - it is that it will lead to a less harmonious europe less at ease with its neighbours, and ultimately going against the founding principle of post-war european integration: reduce the risk of industrial war please.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9957999/Cyprus-has-finally-killed-myth-that-EMU-is-benign.html

appears i'm not alone.

Catiline
03-28-2013, 11:18
Apparently all 4 branches of laiki bank in the UK have been open all week. i wonder whether there's one in Moscow?

Fragony
03-28-2013, 11:31
Apparently all 4 branches of laiki bank in the UK have been open all week. i wonder whether there's one in Moscow?

Yeah there is, not sure if there is one Moscow but they have holdings in Russia

4.500.000.000 -> Russia

Amazing ain't it, who could have seen that one comming

Husar
03-28-2013, 12:18
The government of Cyprus, which came up with this idea.

Fragony
03-28-2013, 13:25
The government of Cyprus, which came up with this idea.

Yeah it hits them really hard on a personal level after all. All the big money has been transfered in time and now the ordinary man can cough it up just as in Greece. And people wonder why they are so angry, just musing, maybe the biggest ripoff ever could be it

Furunculus
03-28-2013, 22:54
'The drive for the Euro has been motivated by politics not economics. The aim has been to link Germany and France so closely as to make a future European war impossible, and to set the stage for a federal United States of Europe. I believe that adoption of the Euro would have the opposite effect. It would exacerbate political tensions by converting divergent shocks that could have been readily accommodated by exchange rate changes into divisive political issues. Political unity can pave the way for monetary unity. Monetary unity imposed under unfavorable conditions will prove a barrier to the achievement of political unity.'

milton friedman.

Fragony
03-29-2013, 00:53
Sad truth is that for the supporters of a federal union things couldn't be better

Husar
03-29-2013, 01:05
Yes, the EU needs to unite under german leadership.

Fragony
03-29-2013, 07:05
Yes, the EU needs to unite under german leadership.

Can't you guys ever resist ;)

Sarmatian
03-29-2013, 07:58
https://img833.imageshack.us/img833/5753/zapamtidobroangela.jpg (https://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/833/zapamtidobroangela.jpg/)

And the caption says: Remember Angela, if I fail, you finish them off with credits.

Fragony
03-29-2013, 09:11
She DOES look like him though. Especially if you prank her with a mustache.

Edit, just for fun's sake http://www.his-forever.com/angela_merkel_and_adolph_hitler.htm

I of course think this is all true

Fragony
04-02-2013, 06:19
lol, Cyprus president hauled 21 million out before the 'rescue'. Fail on fail on fail of the EU

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
04-02-2013, 13:51
Apparently, the Cypriot Patriarch offered the entire wealth of the Church to pay off the debt, and was turned down.

Isn't Easter awesome?

EUSR for the win?

Sarmatian
04-02-2013, 17:34
What is more worrying is how Cypriot Church has such wealth. EUSR are freakin' amateurs. Where's Stalin when you need him?

Papewaio
04-02-2013, 20:42
lol, Cyprus president hauled 21 million out before the 'rescue'. Fail on fail on fail of the EU

If true it's morally equivalent of insider trading.

I wonder what a people's revolution would do with such...

Fragony
04-03-2013, 05:10
If true it's morally equivalent of insider trading.

I wonder what a people's revolution would do with such...

Heh the banks informed all rich clients, the money of the EU is gone

drone
04-03-2013, 15:16
Heh the banks informed all rich clients, the money of the EU is gone

Links? While it wouldn't surprise me if true, I imagine this would be a death knell to the banks that did it. Wouldn't losing that much capital at one time crash the bank, especially if they are already over-exposed? :inquisitive:

Fragony
04-04-2013, 10:09
Links? While it wouldn't surprise me if true, I imagine this would be a death knell to the banks that did it. Wouldn't losing that much capital at one time crash the bank, especially if they are already over-exposed? :inquisitive:

Bank crashed already, rich clients were informed in time and they hauled their savings out. Sucks to be a normal Cypriot (or Greek) huh. Can get you a link but it's in Russian

Fragony
04-09-2013, 11:08
lololol this just can't be real. You have to look for 'EU verslikt zich in propaganda', I can't copy-paste links that are negative for to the EU for some reason. You can find it here www.geenstijl.nl the EU apparently already deleted this Godwin as the Germans weren't very happy with it