Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
markinspain

Odious Debt

Recommended Posts

I think politicians should be more responsible for the rubbish they impose upon us. PFI is a joke. Gordon should be dealt with for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine Bliar and his cohorts having to pay it all back personally.

"When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfill one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilised for purposes which, to the lenders' knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation – when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them – unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler." [1]

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think politicians should be more responsible for the rubbish they impose upon us. PFI is a joke. Gordon should be dealt with for that.

Gordon and his mates can pay off the debt with their fat pensions and that includes his banker mates like Goodwin and Applegarth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imagine Bliar and his cohorts having to pay it all back personally.

"When a despotic regime contracts a debt, not for the needs or in the interests of the state, but rather to strengthen itself, to suppress a popular insurrection, etc, this debt is odious for the people of the entire state. This debt does not bind the nation; it is a debt of the regime, a personal debt contracted by the ruler, and consequently it falls with the demise of the regime. The reason why these odious debts cannot attach to the territory of the state is that they do not fulfill one of the conditions determining the lawfulness of State debts, namely that State debts must be incurred, and the proceeds used, for the needs and in the interests of the State. Odious debts, contracted and utilised for purposes which, to the lenders' knowledge, are contrary to the needs and the interests of the nation, are not binding on the nation �" when it succeeds in overthrowing the government that contracted them �" unless the debt is within the limits of real advantages that these debts might have afforded. The lenders have committed a hostile act against the people, they cannot expect a nation which has freed itself of a despotic regime to assume these odious debts, which are the personal debts of the ruler." [1]

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

No need for a law, it emerges from the act of revolution: if a state is overthrown then the successors make new laws. China didn't take on the debt of its pre-revolutionary government; neither did America (arguably the American revolution happened partly because the colonists decided to repudiate their "share" of the state's debt).

I even believe there are municipal bonds from before the creation of modern Germany that are in default.

The problem is that a revolution is a damn uncomfortable thing to live through ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   292 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.