Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Errol

Financial Rape Of The Greek People

Recommended Posts

The government is committed to significantly accelerate its privatization program. To this effect it will create a professionally and independently managed privatization agency, and has drawn up a comprehensive list of assets for privatization with the aim of realizing revenues of EUR 50 billion by the end of 2015. The government will assess progress against intermediate quarterly and annual targets.

Ah, here we are. What the EU/ECB demanded (and apparently got) is for the government to sell public assets (the things that all Greeks own collectively) and use that money to pay the banksters.

This is a direct financial rape of the Greek people and should be met with immediate refusal - not acceptance - by the Greek population.

Look, the budget has to be slashed. This is unavoidable and simply must happen. The GDP hit will be real, it will be large, and it is unavoidable. It must be accepted, becasue there is no other choice.

But - and this is very important - neither Greece or the US should sell anything to pay these banksters. They knew damn well what the revenue and tax picture looked like when they loaned the money. Sovereigns never borrow "secured", and allowing this precedent to be set is ruinous. In fact, there's an argument to be made that this sort of move by the government of a nation amounts to treason.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=187425

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is committed to significantly accelerate its privatization program. To this effect it will create a professionally and independently managed privatization agency, and has drawn up a comprehensive list of assets for privatization with the aim of realizing revenues of EUR 50 billion by the end of 2015. The government will assess progress against intermediate quarterly and annual targets.

Ah, here we are. What the EU/ECB demanded (and apparently got) is for the government to sell public assets (the things that all Greeks own collectively) and use that money to pay the banksters.

This is a direct financial rape of the Greek people and should be met with immediate refusal - not acceptance - by the Greek population.

Look, the budget has to be slashed. This is unavoidable and simply must happen. The GDP hit will be real, it will be large, and it is unavoidable. It must be accepted, becasue there is no other choice.

But - and this is very important - neither Greece or the US should sell anything to pay these banksters. They knew damn well what the revenue and tax picture looked like when they loaned the money. Sovereigns never borrow "secured", and allowing this precedent to be set is ruinous. In fact, there's an argument to be made that this sort of move by the government of a nation amounts to treason.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=187425

most of government spending goes on either public sector salaries or welfare.

they have borrowed , enriched themselves, and are now refusing to pay back what they owe.

as ever people are blaming the people they loaned money from, not the people that took the money and spent it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most of government spending goes on either public sector salaries or welfare.

they have borrowed , enriched themselves, and are now refusing to pay back what they owe.

as ever people are blaming the people they loaned money from, not the people that took the money and spent it.

Yes, there seems to be this view all borrowers are owing a few hundred quid to stave off starvation.

I suggest debtors prisons for those owing in excess of 1 million £.

All sould be punished, Creditors, Debtors, regulators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most of government spending goes on either public sector salaries or welfare.

they have borrowed , enriched themselves, and are now refusing to pay back what they owe.

as ever people are blaming the people they loaned money from, not the people that took the money and spent it.

Borrowed what?

Paper or PC numbers.

They've been conned. Load of ******** is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
most of government spending goes on either public sector salaries or welfare.

they have borrowed , enriched themselves, and are now refusing to pay back what they owe.

as ever people are blaming the people they loaned money from, not the people that took the money and spent it.

The problem is that the people responsible for making the decisions are not those expected to pay- do you feel personally responsible for the debt of the UK? Would you willingly agree to pay more taxes to clear the debt?

No- because you had no choice- the debt was taken on by others for their own self interested reasons. In other words you don't feel this debt is your debt- even though you may have indirectly gained from it, in the form of better public services.

Essentially we have two groups here- on one side the politicians who want to buy themselves re election and on the other the Banksters who want to lend as much money as possible- now that arrangement has come unstuck they are both trying to get a third group- the population- to take the hit.

It's their error, they should pay- not the people who had no say in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that the people responsible for making the decisions are not those expected to pay- do you feel personally responsible for the debt of the UK? Would you willingly agree to pay more taxes to clear the debt?

No- because you had no choice- the debt was taken on by others for their own self interested reasons. In other words you don't feel this debt is your debt- even though you may have indirectly gained from it, in the form of better public services.

Essentially we have two groups here- on one side the politicians who want to buy themselves re election and on the other the Banksters who want to lend as much money as possible- now that arrangement has come unstuck they are both trying to get a third group- the population- to take the hit.

It's their error, they should pay- not the people who had no say in it.

Class post WP!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the problem is that the money is being paid back by people who got no benefit from it being spent.

Not true.

Maybe particular individuals dent benefit, but in aggregate the Greek people paid one less euro in tax for every euro borrowed and spent instead.

I'm fact in Greece it was as much a problem of not paying as it was spending!

As for 'financial rape', when you sell your assets to stave off bankruptcy of course you've got to sell cheap. You need to sell lots, quickly, and have undermined the value of what you have to sell by wrecking the economy it's based on. None of this is the fault of the *buyers* - if it were such a bargain there would be a crowd of them competing to buy and happy to do so at a higher price.

Finally, don't forget that with below-Market interest rate loans to bail out Greece and probably the eventual partial default or maturity-extension on the loans the Greeks will never pay back much of what they owe anyway. That is a massive wealth transfer from the EU into the pockets of every Greek. They are just upset because the spending of that wealth transfer happened in the past and won't in the future, and they simply feel a sense of entitlement to what they unsustainably borrowed before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that the people responsible for making the decisions are not those expected to pay- do you feel personally responsible for the debt of the UK? Would you willingly agree to pay more taxes to clear the debt?

No- because you had no choice- the debt was taken on by others for their own self interested reasons. In other words you don't feel this debt is your debt- even though you may have indirectly gained from it, in the form of better public services.

Essentially we have two groups here- on one side the politicians who want to buy themselves re election and on the other the Banksters who want to lend as much money as possible- now that arrangement has come unstuck they are both trying to get a third group- the population- to take the hit.

It's their error, they should pay- not the people who had no say in it.

you cut spending.

its a simple formula. when spending exceeds revenues, you cut spending. it means you are spending too much.

dont spend what you dont have. if they cut spending enough they can get back into balance. but they refuse to cut. even today the deficit is 10%.

if someone earns £25,000 and they get into financial difficulty becuase they spend £27,500 a year , what do you tell them to do?

if you ask them to spend £3000 a year less, and they say no - why should you lend them your money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that the people responsible for making the decisions are not those expected to pay- do you feel personally responsible for the debt of the UK? Would you willingly agree to pay more taxes to clear the debt?

No- because you had no choice- the debt was taken on by others for their own self interested reasons. In other words you don't feel this debt is your debt- even though you may have indirectly gained from it, in the form of better public services.

Essentially we have two groups here- on one side the politicians who want to buy themselves re election and on the other the Banksters who want to lend as much money as possible- now that arrangement has come unstuck they are both trying to get a third group- the population- to take the hit.

It's their error, they should pay- not the people who had no say in it.

The politicians represent us and we did have a say in it: it's called elections. An almost laughable lack of understanding here but it may of course be irony which escapes me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you cut spending.

its a simple formula. when spending exceeds revenues, you cut spending. it means you are spending too much.

dont spend what you dont have. if they cut spending enough they can get back into balance. but they refuse to cut. even today the deficit is 10%.

if someone earns £25,000 and they get into financial difficulty becuase they spend £27,500 a year , what do you tell them to do?

if you ask them to spend £3000 a year less, and they say no - why should you lend them your money.

This isn't that though.

This is taking their income and getting them to give it you based on you doing an elaborate confidence trick instead of them spending it on food and clothes.

Not only that but the guy is paying you £12,000 a year to you already based on an earlier con. if he simply told you to go ****** yourself or got you locked up as the fraudster you are he'd have plenty of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't that though.

This is taking their income and getting them to give it you based on you doing an elaborate confidence trick instead of them spending it on food and clothes.

Not only that but the guy is paying you £12,000 a year to you already based on an earlier con. if he simply told you to go ****** yourself or got you locked up as the fraudster you are he'd have plenty of money.

what con?

i lend you x amount of money, you pay me back on this date. its a contract. which part didnt they understand?

the problem is, even to this date, becuase they are use to certain levels of pay - they want to keep it.

its like getting a pay cut and your wife/husband wont cut their spending because their too use to their current lifestyle.

in terms of privatisation , i always say the 2 definitions are the wrong way around.

"privatisation" is an asset owned by the public.

a public organisation is in fact "private" - a clique, a gentlemans club, something that nothing that you or i can influence becuase decisions are made on "behalf" of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hard to feel sympathy for a nation that is protesting because it wants to continue retiring early, taking lots of holidays and getting massive pensions, and wants hard working North Europeans to pay for it.

Sure, individually the people didn't sign up to be in the Euro, but by all accounts it was unsustainable before they joined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The politicians represent us and we did have a say in it: it's called elections. An almost laughable lack of understanding here but it may of course be irony which escapes me.

because elections happen once every 5 years and I have never been able to vote for a candidate that represents my views.

also, oncce the buggers are elected they can do whatever the hell they pease until election time comes around again.

saying - "well they were democratically elected therefore you chose to support everything they did" - is utter tripe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Borrowed what?

Paper or PC numbers.

They've been conned. Load of ******** is what it is.

Would you agree that so long as people are willing to exchange their time and labour for it, it has *some* value, regardless of whether it is intrinsic tangible utility value or not? And regardless of whether you personally regard it as toilet paper most (enough) do not?

And why cant we just go back to what we were doing in the 60s and 70s. Denninger seems to think everything was A OK then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not true.

Maybe particular individuals dent benefit, but in aggregate the Greek people paid one less euro in tax for every euro borrowed and spent instead.

I'm fact in Greece it was as much a problem of not paying as it was spending!

As for 'financial rape', when you sell your assets to stave off bankruptcy of course you've got to sell cheap. You need to sell lots, quickly, and have undermined the value of what you have to sell by wrecking the economy it's based on. None of this is the fault of the *buyers* - if it were such a bargain there would be a crowd of them competing to buy and happy to do so at a higher price.

Finally, don't forget that with below-Market interest rate loans to bail out Greece and probably the eventual partial default or maturity-extension on the loans the Greeks will never pay back much of what they owe anyway. That is a massive wealth transfer from the EU into the pockets of every Greek. They are just upset because the spending of that wealth transfer happened in the past and won't in the future, and they simply feel a sense of entitlement to what they unsustainably borrowed before.

The German bankers who were being paid very handsomely when they bought Greek debt with German savers money appear to not have noticed this when they agree to buy it at German yields. More than that, they assumed (de facto) that in the event of risk not being what it appeared (and since you've easily spotted their error you'd have thought they might have done so too - Greece has never been a model of fiscal probity) that the German taxpayer would foot the bill.

It's entirely the fault of the lenders. If a bank cannot price risk what is it's purpose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what con?

i lend you x amount of money, you pay me back on this date. its a contract. which part didnt they understand?

the problem is, even to this date, becuase they are use to certain levels of pay - they want to keep it.

its like getting a pay cut and your wife/husband wont cut their spending because their too use to their current lifestyle.

in terms of privatisation , i always say the 2 definitions are the wrong way around.

"privatisation" is an asset owned by the public.

a public organisation is in fact "private" - a clique, a gentlemans club, something that nothing that you or i can influence becuase decisions are made on "behalf" of us.

What money?

FRB/zero capital banking needs consigning to history along with leeches, trepanning and runes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you agree that so long as people are willing to exchange their time and labour for it, it has *some* value, regardless of whether it is intrinsic tangible utility value or not? And regardless of whether you personally regard it as toilet paper most (enough) do not?

And why cant we just go back to what we were doing in the 60s and 70s. Denninger seems to think everything was A OK then.

60s and 70#s became today.

We go back, we arrive here again.

But ****** it - i'll pay it all off for them €10trn.

Keep the change. This shit is absurd and needs to stop before people start dying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

60s and 70#s became today.

We go back, we arrive here again.

But ****** it - i'll pay it all off for them €10trn.

Keep the change. This shit is absurd and needs to stop before people start dying.

Its not about the 10trn though, is it. Its where the 10trn comes from. That seems to be the question no one wants to answer.

Unlike Denninger, i dont believe taking it from difference places will yield the same result. Maybe in bare GDP terms, but thats all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not about the 10trn though, is it. Its where the 10trn comes from. That seems to be the question no one wants to answer.

Unlike Denninger, i dont believe taking it from difference places will yield the same result. Maybe in bare GDP terms, but thats all.

It comes from typing it into a PC.

jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The German bankers who were being paid very handsomely when they bought Greek debt with German savers money appear to not have noticed this when they agree to buy it at German yields. More than that, they assumed (de facto) that in the event of risk not being what it appeared (and since you've easily spotted their error you'd have thought they might have done so too - Greece has never been a model of fiscal probity) that the German taxpayer would foot the bill.

It's entirely the fault of the lenders. If a bank cannot price risk what is it's purpose?

Oh, the part I agree entirely with is that I have no sympathy for the lenders who now face default and in effect have paid for past Greek largesse.

But it takes two to tango. A contract always has two counterparties at the least. If there is a mispricing of the risk I don't blame the Greeks for borrowing.

I do blame them for borrowing to excess. Specifically that means to a level where they no longer have credibility as borrowers, meaning lenders no longer wish to lend to them (fair enough) and so rates go up and they can't pay.

What they should have been doing is borrowing at sustainable levels, but enjoying the low cost of servicing it as the major benefit, not using the low cost to jack up the total amount of debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see why Deninger thinks GDP is the be all and end all - it isn't if recirculated borrowed money though public sector wages and handouts is counted as GDP. It shouldn;t be if anything it should be deducted from GDP - that would give a much better picture of how an economy is or is not doing. Same with private expenditure based on borrowing.

Edited by OnlyMe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The politicians represent us and we did have a say in it: it's called elections. An almost laughable lack of understanding here but it may of course be irony which escapes me.

If you hire an accredited financial advisor whose bad decisions land you in huge debt is that your fault or is it his fault?

The point is that we have right to expect out political representatives to behave in a competent fashion- if they fail that test then it's simplistic to blame the people who elected them.

I gave no mandate for the bailing out of Fred Goodwin and his bank- I see him walk away a millionaire while I face possible penury, in part due to his utter incompetence in taking down the economy I need to make a living in.

I did not at any time or any way agree to this- it was brought about through the greed of Goodwin and the incompetence of the government that should have prevented him acting out his greed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What money?

FRB/zero capital banking needs consigning to history along with leeches, trepanning and runes.

they played by the rules of the game and they agreed to the rules of the game. the rules of the game in this instance is not in dispute by greece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think some people know whats really happening here.

The banks help fund and pump up a huge asset bubble here. The bubble burst.

Do you think the bankers should take some of the hair cut, or should the sovereign assets of a nation be sold to make good all the bankers losses?

Private equity is for the small fry, This is asset stripping on a global scale. The biggest land grab in history is underway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.