Org Mobile Site
Thread: Euro Area
so which part of greece should we partition for the next 45 years?
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
These banks that are getting government welfare... Are their execs and senior staff still getting bonuses?
Of course! because they have to retain their talented staff! (largely the same crew of shysters and morons that got us in this mess to begin with)These banks that are getting government welfare... Are their execs and senior staff still getting bonuses?
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
Of course! because they have to retain their talented staff! (largely the same crew of shysters and morons that got us in this mess to begin with)
I really, really hope that a load of their stock options which were worth millions are now practically worthless.Of course! because they have to retain their talented staff! (largely the same crew of shysters and morons that got us in this mess to begin with)
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
Europe is getting fed up with Greece.
Ireland and Portugal are going through very rough times. But they do what is necessary. They deserve our support.
Not Greece. In Greece, Europe is still dealing with the same lying statisticians. The same corrupt, self-serving politicians. They don't want to be bailed out.
Also, ever since day one of its membership, Greece has played the same game of milking Europe for what it's worth. They have come to think, based on actual experience, that the patience and stupidity of Europe is infinite. Add in the costs of a Greek bankryptcy for Europe, and it is clear why the Greeks think they can use this crisis to steal even more money from Europe than before.
Autists.
There is no electoral support anywhere for support for Greeks. It is against any electoral instinct that politicians throughout Europe are still trying to do the responsible thing and keep Greece - an entire European country - afloat. This sense of responsibility is not infinite, there comes a time when one realises that the last effort has been made. There is nobody in Greece to work with. The Greeks have neither the will, nor even the capacity to change their ways. (Capable civil servants, non-politicised semi-governmental agencies, at least some rationally functioning non-corrupt segments of state)
You are correct about the lack of electoral support, but this has been true for some time.Europe is getting fed up with Greece.
Ireland and Portugal are going through very rough times. But they do what is necessary. They deserve our support.
Not Greece. In Greece, Europe is still dealing with the same lying statisticians. The same corrupt, self-serving politicians. They don't want to be bailed out.
Also, ever since day one of its membership, Greece has played the same game of milking Europe for what it's worth. They have come to think, based on actual experience, that the patience and stupidity of Europe is infinite. Add in the costs of a Greek bankryptcy for Europe, and it is clear why the Greeks think they can use this crisis to steal even more money from Europe than before.
Autists.
There is no electoral support anywhere for support for Greeks. It is against any electoral instinct that politicians throughout Europe are still trying to do the responsible thing and keep Greece - an entire European country - afloat. This sense of responsibility is not infinite, there comes a time when one realises that the last effort has been made. There is nobody in Greece to work with. The Greeks have neither the will, nor even the capacity to change their ways. (Capable civil servants, non-politicised semi-governmental agencies, at least some rationally functioning non-corrupt segments of state)
Question: If the Greeks had been given a referendum on EMU would they still have the Drachma? I'd say that bet was, at worst, even money.
To be more blunt, if EU integration had proceeded via plebicite rather than Political Conference, would we be in this mess?
As to the Greeks being corrupt, with the Spanish overfishing everyone's waters, the French and Italians leaching the CAP for every drop of Blood and the English laundering the money that passes through the EU how could the Greeks see it as anything other than a racket to be milked?
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
So USA had there zero doc home loans and the EU Greece.
These banks that are getting government welfare... Are their execs and senior staff still getting bonuses?
yes usually they are unfortunately, the claim is because there employment contracts cannot be reneged on.So USA had there zero doc home loans and the EU Greece.
These banks that are getting government welfare... Are their execs and senior staff still getting bonuses?
Thats what they claiimed in Ireland and I'm sure the same waffle is spouted elsewhere.
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy:
yes usually they are unfortunately the claimm is because employment contracts cannot hardly be reneged on.
Thats what they claiimed in Ireland and I'm sure the same waffle is spouted elsewhere.
Interesting...yes usually they are unfortunately the claimm is because employment contracts cannot hardly be reneged on.
Thats what they claiimed in Ireland and I'm sure the same waffle is spouted elsewhere.
If the companies were forced into "pre-packaged" bankruptcy, all contracts can be reviewed / broken. Might have been a better option.
The only time bonuses are contractually provided for is when you poach someone from another bank at a point of time in between bonus periods when you might pay them out for the bonus they believe they have accrued at their current employer and will "lose" by jumping ship. Also CEOs tend to have contracted bonuses (because in most cases they also chair the compensation committee!)
The over-riding reason why bonuses are being paid at the banks that have received government funds is that a) the governments did not give themselves any rights over determining compensation and b) the banks are generating huge profits from trading and are afraid they will lose their best people to competitors if they do not 'keep up with the Joneses'.
To a large extent this is true - most investment banking employees have close to zero loyalty to their employer who they recognise as a soulless money-making machine which will fire them as soon as they stop making money. They are, on the whole, right about that.
The over-riding reason why bonuses are being paid at the banks that have received government funds is that a) the governments did not give themselves any rights over determining compensation and b) the banks are generating huge profits from trading and are afraid they will lose their best people to competitors if they do not 'keep up with the Joneses'.
To a large extent this is true - most investment banking employees have close to zero loyalty to their employer who they recognise as a soulless money-making machine which will fire them as soon as they stop making money. They are, on the whole, right about that.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
Interesting...
If the companies were forced into "pre-packaged" bankruptcy, all contracts can be reviewed / broken. Might have been a better option.
Yes if they were put into examinership or recievership, not if there bailed out or brought into state ownership which is what happened.Interesting...
If the companies were forced into "pre-packaged" bankruptcy, all contracts can be reviewed / broken. Might have been a better option.
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy:
if they were put into examinership or recievership
Then their bad loans would have to be marked to market, their creditors and the counterparties to all their transactions would realise a whole load of currently unrealised losses, financial contagion would spread like wildfire again as banks would be unable to lend to each other and to industry, the economies of western countries and quite possibly export-driven emerging market countries would fall off a cliff and we'd fall back into a depression the like of which we haven't seen since the 30s.if they were put into examinership or recievership
Which is why the government stepped in to begin with, right?
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
Then their bad loans would have to be marked to market, their creditors and the counterparties to all their transactions would realise a whole load of currently unrealised losses, financial contagion would spread like wildfire again as banks would be unable to lend to each other and to industry, the economies of western countries and quite possibly export-driven emerging market countries would fall off a cliff and we'd fall back into a depression the like of which we haven't seen since the 30s.
Which is why the government stepped in to begin with, right?
So they say, plenty a top-economist insists it's better to default, for us and for these feta-munchersThen their bad loans would have to be marked to market, their creditors and the counterparties to all their transactions would realise a whole load of currently unrealised losses, financial contagion would spread like wildfire again as banks would be unable to lend to each other and to industry, the economies of western countries and quite possibly export-driven emerging market countries would fall off a cliff and we'd fall back into a depression the like of which we haven't seen since the 30s.
Which is why the government stepped in to begin with, right?
Originally Posted by Fragony:
So they say, plenty a top-economist insists it's better to default, for us and for these feta-munchers
Let's be clear - to all intents and purposes Greece has defaulted. It can't pay its debts and others are being forced to do so for it. The only debate is whether the resulting loss is taken by governments (via bailout funds) or by the banks that hold its loans.So they say, plenty a top-economist insists it's better to default, for us and for these feta-munchers
For me the scariest chart I saw throughout the whole financial crisis in '08 had nothing to do with bank losses but showed the volume of global trade. It fell off an enormous cliff because banks were not extending the finance necessary to keep it going. World trade is the world economy.
Whatever you think about the causes of all these issues (and I am increasingly coming to the view that there was clear fraudulent activity on a massive scale in the origination and packaging of the sub-prime mortgage loans) one thing is clear to me: the banks are in too much of a mess to be simply cut loose. This was true in '08 and it remains true now because substantially the same problem exists and has simply been moved from one place to another.
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
one thing is clear to me: the banks are in too much of a mess to be simply cut loose. This was true in '08 and it remains true now because substantially the same problem exists and has simply been moved from one place to another.
only problem is that western governments no longer have any spare money, or any good credit, with which to launch into round 2.0 of the bailout circus.one thing is clear to me: the banks are in too much of a mess to be simply cut loose. This was true in '08 and it remains true now because substantially the same problem exists and has simply been moved from one place to another.
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
only problem is that western governments no longer have any spare money, or any good credit, with which to launch into round 2.0 of the bailout circus.
I think Germany and France are creditors of sufficiently good standing to sit behind the eurozone debtors, if the political will were there. Which of course it is not.only problem is that western governments no longer have any spare money, or any good credit, with which to launch into round 2.0 of the bailout circus.
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
I think Germany and France are creditors of sufficiently good standing to sit behind the eurozone debtors, if the political will were there. Which of course it is not.
france isn't.I think Germany and France are creditors of sufficiently good standing to sit behind the eurozone debtors, if the political will were there. Which of course it is not.
and as you note there is no political will to subsidise non-family massively in perpetuity.
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
france isn't.
and as you note there is no political will to subsidise non-family massively in perpetuity.
Germany and France in combination. Even better for them if others get involved to share the load.france isn't.
and as you note there is no political will to subsidise non-family massively in perpetuity.
As I've outlined here before there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash required to keep Greece afloat for the foreseable future (aka kick the can down the road and hope for something to happen to help them out).
Either they do so, or they let Greece default which will cause european banks to have to recognise huge losses and hold larger capital reserves against the bad loans, which in turn will kill off trade finance, world trade and impact global growth. Cue market panic!
Or they allow their precious Euro to break apart, Greece devalues and effectively defaults causing the same issues.
Or they create a political and fiscal union and issue Eurobonds to replace the entirety of eurozone sovereign debt. Goodbye Germany and France as sovereign countries!
The will be war if they do that.
Originally Posted by InsaneApache:
The will be war if they do that.
Do you mean revolution? Because in order for them to create political union they would need (of course) the consent of governments which would be included. It would be practically impossible otherwise.The will be war if they do that.
Of course that consent will not be forthcoming even if Germany and France were interested in doing so (which I do not believe they are). There is no desire among the public of Eurozone countries for closer political and fiscal union. The draft consitution was rejected en masse in 2005 and I don't believe events since then would have made people more welcoming of it!
Interestingly though, as respected and sensible an economist as Ken Rogoff believes this is what will be the outcome. Perhaps it goes to show why he is an economic and not a political commentator...or perhaps I am missing something important in my inexpert analysis.
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
Germany and France in combination. Even better for them if others get involved to share the load.
As I've outlined here before there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash required to keep Greece afloat for the foreseable future (aka kick the can down the road and hope for something to happen to help them out).
Either they do so, or they let Greece default which will cause european banks to have to recognise huge losses and hold larger capital reserves against the bad loans, which in turn will kill off trade finance, world trade and impact global growth. Cue market panic!
Or they allow their precious Euro to break apart, Greece devalues and effectively defaults causing the same issues.
Or they create a political and fiscal union and issue Eurobonds to replace the entirety of eurozone sovereign debt. Goodbye Germany and France as sovereign countries!
france does not have the leeway, if it commits to to much more liability on behalf of the eurozone it risks its own credit rating being downgraded.Germany and France in combination. Even better for them if others get involved to share the load.
As I've outlined here before there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash required to keep Greece afloat for the foreseable future (aka kick the can down the road and hope for something to happen to help them out).
Either they do so, or they let Greece default which will cause european banks to have to recognise huge losses and hold larger capital reserves against the bad loans, which in turn will kill off trade finance, world trade and impact global growth. Cue market panic!
Or they allow their precious Euro to break apart, Greece devalues and effectively defaults causing the same issues.
Or they create a political and fiscal union and issue Eurobonds to replace the entirety of eurozone sovereign debt. Goodbye Germany and France as sovereign countries!
Italy has just been downgraded, that however was expected, but the eurozone cannot afford to have the 'other' supporting pillar beside germany dissolve.
There is no appetite for political union. If one is forced onto people, well look at Jugoslavia as a template for what happens when different cultures are forced together. Ironically the very thing that Monet and the rest of those idiots wanted to avoid.
Interesting viewpoint in the Guardian, I think the comparison to Argentina is apt even if I do not agree with his conclusions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-and-quit-euro
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-and-quit-euro
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
Germany and France in combination. Even better for them if others get involved to share the load.
As I've outlined here before there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash required to keep Greece afloat for the foreseable future (aka kick the can down the road and hope for something to happen to help them out).
Either they do so, or they let Greece default which will cause european banks to have to recognise huge losses and hold larger capital reserves against the bad loans, which in turn will kill off trade finance, world trade and impact global growth. Cue market panic!
Or they allow their precious Euro to break apart, Greece devalues and effectively defaults causing the same issues.
Or they create a political and fiscal union and issue Eurobonds to replace the entirety of eurozone sovereign debt. Goodbye Germany and France as sovereign countries!
Default is what is going to happen saying, "there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash" misses the crucial point, neither the populace nor the national Parliaments will wear it. Nor should they.Germany and France in combination. Even better for them if others get involved to share the load.
As I've outlined here before there is no realistic alternative to their continuing to stump up the cash required to keep Greece afloat for the foreseable future (aka kick the can down the road and hope for something to happen to help them out).
Either they do so, or they let Greece default which will cause european banks to have to recognise huge losses and hold larger capital reserves against the bad loans, which in turn will kill off trade finance, world trade and impact global growth. Cue market panic!
Or they allow their precious Euro to break apart, Greece devalues and effectively defaults causing the same issues.
Or they create a political and fiscal union and issue Eurobonds to replace the entirety of eurozone sovereign debt. Goodbye Germany and France as sovereign countries!
What EVERYONE needs to consider is how to get on after Greece defaults and exits the Euro. once they have done that a loan to help rebuld their economy might be an idea worth considering, but it is a lot less atractive than it was in 2010. If we had allowed Greece to default in reality and then required them to actually collect their own taxes, after which providing money for recovery, we would be in a much better place than we are now.
Time to get real, the crisis is entering the Second Act and, like all good Tragedies, this is where it gets ugly.
Europe needs strong leaders who accept the consequence of the crisis. The electorate is restless, and is not willing to foot the bill any longer. Therefore, the EU needs to abolish neo-capitalism forthwith. It was always a recipe for disaster.
Switzerland last week pegged the Franc to the Euro. Currency fluctuations have been wreaking havoc on the Swiss economy. The Swiss crave the economic stability of an absense of currency fluctuations with your major trading partners.
To help them out, I vote we fasttrack Swiss EU and Euro membership.
~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~
Switzerland last week pegged the Franc to the Euro. Currency fluctuations have been wreaking havoc on the Swiss economy. The Swiss crave the economic stability of an absense of currency fluctuations with your major trading partners.
To help them out, I vote we fasttrack Swiss EU and Euro membership.
Originally Posted by :
The Swiss National Bank said Thursday it will
continue to keep short-term interest rates as low as possible and defend
the peg of the Swiss franc to the euro in order to counter the
currency’s appreciation resulting from inflowing capital in search of a
safe haven amid the Eurozone debt crisis.
http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2011/0...close-to-zero/
The Swiss National Bank said Thursday it will
continue to keep short-term interest rates as low as possible and defend
the peg of the Swiss franc to the euro in order to counter the
currency’s appreciation resulting from inflowing capital in search of a
safe haven amid the Eurozone debt crisis.
http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2011/0...close-to-zero/
So Greece doesn't have the marbles to think their way out or The Marbles leftover to pay their way out.
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla:
neither the populace nor the national Parliaments will wear it.
You may be right about that - if so it will constitute a failure of political leadership at least as bad as the one which has gotten us here in the first place.neither the populace nor the national Parliaments will wear it.
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla:
What EVERYONE needs to consider is how to get on after Greece defaults and exits the Euro
Move all your investments to cash and prepare for a severe and prolonged global recession. It really is going to be that bad.What EVERYONE needs to consider is how to get on after Greece defaults and exits the Euro
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla:
once they have done that a loan to help rebuld their economy might be an idea worth considering
Versus lending money to Greece now to prevent global economic armageddon? I fail to see why that is a preferable option.once they have done that a loan to help rebuld their economy might be an idea worth considering
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla:
If we had allowed Greece to default in reality and then required them to actually collect their own taxes, after which providing money for recovery, we would be in a much better place than we are now.
I agree that Greece should be required to fundamentally restructure its tax system in order to ensure government revenues are on a firm footing in future. One suggestion for how to do this is in the Guardian article I posted. But I think allowing Greece to default on its debts rather than stumping up the first set of bailout funds would have been as disastrous as letting it happen now, for all the reasons I have outlined above.If we had allowed Greece to default in reality and then required them to actually collect their own taxes, after which providing money for recovery, we would be in a much better place than we are now.
(EDIT: I should add that suddenly and sharply raising (or starting to collect) taxes while at the same time cutting government spending is not exactly the recipe for growth! And it's growth that Greece needs in order to service its debts.)
I don't think you fully appreciate the integral part the European banking system plays in international trade. Literally the only thing keeping the world economy in positive growth at the moment is trade between the developing and developed countries. This is largely financed by the lending of European banks.
These banks are currently holding a vast amount of European sovereign debt. Greek, Portuguese, Irish etc. Capital reserve requirements only require the banks to hold a certain amount of equity (read: cash) against these loans at present. Call it 25%, I'm not sure of the exact figure since Basel 2. This means they have to reserve 25% of the value of the loan as un-used capital. the other 75% can be used to capitalise other loans, for example trade finance and loans to businesses in Europe.
If the Euro sovereign loans go into default they are required to hold closer to 90% of capital against them. This will significantly impact their ability to make further loans. And the sovereign debt that was not Greek will drop dramatically in value, further impairing their balance sheets (or it would do if they were required to mark those loans to market). The short-term shock of all this will drive several banks into bankruptcy. Banks will be unwilling to lend to one another again for fear of counterparty risk and therefore unable to lend to non-banks.
Kiss goodbye to global growth in that scenario.
I can't imagine how anyone except the most extreme anarchist would welcome that chain of events or deliberately choose them.
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
You may be right about that - if so it will constitute a failure of political leadership at least as bad as the one which has gotten us here in the first place.
No, it is a failure of representative democracy, in that their political leaders ceased being interested in representing the will of the people.You may be right about that - if so it will constitute a failure of political leadership at least as bad as the one which has gotten us here in the first place.
Now they've got themselves in a pickle, have been recognised as such by their peoples, who now demand an end to foolishness they never sanctioned in the first place.
Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey:
You may be right about that - if so it will constitute a failure of political leadership at least as bad as the one which has gotten us here in the first place.
That horse has bolted, which is EXACTLY why we are in this mess.You may be right about that - if so it will constitute a failure of political leadership at least as bad as the one which has gotten us here in the first place.
Originally Posted by :
Move all your investments to cash and prepare for a severe and prolonged global recession. It really is going to be that bad.
So... like now where the banks are just recapitalising and won't lend?Move all your investments to cash and prepare for a severe and prolonged global recession. It really is going to be that bad.
Originally Posted by :
Versus lending money to Greece now to prevent global economic armageddon? I fail to see why that is a preferable option.
Hasn't worked, it's just good money after bad at this point. If they had defaulted first we wouldn't have even more bad loans to deal with and Ireland and Portugal might be better off.Versus lending money to Greece now to prevent global economic armageddon? I fail to see why that is a preferable option.
Originally Posted by :
I agree that Greece should be required to fundamentally restructure its tax system in order to ensure government revenues are on a firm footing in future. One suggestion for how to do this is in the Guardian article I posted. But I think allowing Greece to default on its debts rather than stumping up the first set of bailout funds would have been as disastrous as letting it happen now, for all the reasons I have outlined above.
(EDIT: I should add that suddenly and sharply raising (or starting to collect) taxes while at the same time cutting government spending is not exactly the recipe for growth! And it's growth that Greece needs in order to service its debts.)
A large proportion of Greeks don't pay taxes, something stupid like 2/3 was a figure I heard once, but no one really knows. If all Greeks payed existing taxes then the deficit would dissapear.I agree that Greece should be required to fundamentally restructure its tax system in order to ensure government revenues are on a firm footing in future. One suggestion for how to do this is in the Guardian article I posted. But I think allowing Greece to default on its debts rather than stumping up the first set of bailout funds would have been as disastrous as letting it happen now, for all the reasons I have outlined above.
(EDIT: I should add that suddenly and sharply raising (or starting to collect) taxes while at the same time cutting government spending is not exactly the recipe for growth! And it's growth that Greece needs in order to service its debts.)
Originally Posted by :
I don't think you fully appreciate the integral part the European banking system plays in international trade. Literally the only thing keeping the world economy in positive growth at the moment is trade between the developing and developed countries. This is largely financed by the lending of European banks.
These banks are currently holding a vast amount of European sovereign debt. Greek, Portuguese, Irish etc. Capital reserve requirements only require the banks to hold a certain amount of equity (read: cash) against these loans at present. Call it 25%, I'm not sure of the exact figure since Basel 2. This means they have to reserve 25% of the value of the loan as un-used capital. the other 75% can be used to capitalise other loans, for example trade finance and loans to businesses in Europe.
If the Euro sovereign loans go into default they are required to hold closer to 90% of capital against them. This will significantly impact their ability to make further loans. And the sovereign debt that was not Greek will drop dramatically in value, further impairing their balance sheets (or it would do if they were required to mark those loans to market). The short-term shock of all this will drive several banks into bankruptcy. Banks will be unwilling to lend to one another again for fear of counterparty risk and therefore unable to lend to non-banks.
Kiss goodbye to global growth in that scenario.
I can't imagine how anyone except the most extreme anarchist would welcome that chain of events or deliberately choose them.
IIRC it's a 5% reserve, or was before the crash. You are thinking like the EU Comissioners, and ignoring the basic facts - high debt and low confidence. Continuing defaults are GOING to happen, if national governments continue to indebt themselves to banks (by borrowing money for bailouts) or banks take on more bad debts theselves you cannot stop the necessary rebalancing, only put it off and make the eventual shock potentially even bigger.I don't think you fully appreciate the integral part the European banking system plays in international trade. Literally the only thing keeping the world economy in positive growth at the moment is trade between the developing and developed countries. This is largely financed by the lending of European banks.
These banks are currently holding a vast amount of European sovereign debt. Greek, Portuguese, Irish etc. Capital reserve requirements only require the banks to hold a certain amount of equity (read: cash) against these loans at present. Call it 25%, I'm not sure of the exact figure since Basel 2. This means they have to reserve 25% of the value of the loan as un-used capital. the other 75% can be used to capitalise other loans, for example trade finance and loans to businesses in Europe.
If the Euro sovereign loans go into default they are required to hold closer to 90% of capital against them. This will significantly impact their ability to make further loans. And the sovereign debt that was not Greek will drop dramatically in value, further impairing their balance sheets (or it would do if they were required to mark those loans to market). The short-term shock of all this will drive several banks into bankruptcy. Banks will be unwilling to lend to one another again for fear of counterparty risk and therefore unable to lend to non-banks.
Kiss goodbye to global growth in that scenario.
I can't imagine how anyone except the most extreme anarchist would welcome that chain of events or deliberately choose them.
There is an excellent article in the Sep 17th Economist called "How to save the Euro". I can't post a link here because it's behind a paywall but I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in this topic.
In essence it argues that:
- the Euro must be saved because the alternative is too terrible (along the lines of what I have outlined above)
- insolvent nations (eg. Greece, maybe Portugal and Ireland) must be allowed to default but only after
- governments use the funds they had earmarked for the Greece bailout to shore up the banks instead and make the strongest possible commitments to stand behind solvent nations which are facing liquidity issues (eg. Italy and Spain)
The thesis being this would stop the horrible chain of events that I believe would follow a Greek default.
PVC with respect to the Greek taxes where is the cash coming from to pay them?
Furunculus that may well be the case but it must be explained to the people of Europe that simply getting fed up with the whole thing and chucking the towel in is not going to help anyone. Maybe no-one wanted the Euro but now we (by which I mean the whole world!) have it and the cost of letting it go to the dogs would be global recession and maybe even depression. Political leadership and not populism is what is required!
In essence it argues that:
- the Euro must be saved because the alternative is too terrible (along the lines of what I have outlined above)
- insolvent nations (eg. Greece, maybe Portugal and Ireland) must be allowed to default but only after
- governments use the funds they had earmarked for the Greece bailout to shore up the banks instead and make the strongest possible commitments to stand behind solvent nations which are facing liquidity issues (eg. Italy and Spain)
The thesis being this would stop the horrible chain of events that I believe would follow a Greek default.
PVC with respect to the Greek taxes where is the cash coming from to pay them?
Furunculus that may well be the case but it must be explained to the people of Europe that simply getting fed up with the whole thing and chucking the towel in is not going to help anyone. Maybe no-one wanted the Euro but now we (by which I mean the whole world!) have it and the cost of letting it go to the dogs would be global recession and maybe even depression. Political leadership and not populism is what is required!
"sorry, it is too late for you to get het-up about 'freedom', you have a responsibility to everybody else to put up with a system of governance that is neither legitimate nor representative because being the cause of another recession would be EVIL!"
Great message, wonder how well that will go down?
Great message, wonder how well that will go down?
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
"sorry, it is too late for you to get het-up about 'freedom', you have a responsibility to everybody else to put up with a system of governance that is neither legitimate nor representative because being the cause of another recession would be EVIL!"
Great message, wonder how well that will go down?
I'm not suggesting anyone should be railroaded into anything and a recapitalisation of German banks by the German government hardly counts as illegitimate if it's enacted by their democratically elected government. My point is that government should act responsibly in putting the real facts of the matter to their people so that everyone can make an informed decision. As opposed to the current situation where policymakers are basically talking nonsense. Isn't the official position still that Greece is solvent?"sorry, it is too late for you to get het-up about 'freedom', you have a responsibility to everybody else to put up with a system of governance that is neither legitimate nor representative because being the cause of another recession would be EVIL!"
Great message, wonder how well that will go down?
Thread Ratings provided by
Thread Ratings (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO