Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

THE GREAT BIG FAT GREEK THREAD

Recommended Posts

sounds to me like Draghi is implying that he didn't like the political interference - e.g. in ELA

shame he didn't shout up sooner

also says that no one questioning whether debt relief is necessary. The question is how to do it legally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds to me like Draghi is implying that he didn't like the political interference - e.g. in ELA

shame he didn't shout up sooner

also says that no one questioning whether debt relief is necessary. The question is how to do it legally

The same way both Germany and Greece ran illegal deficits during the past 15 years, governments ignore the rules because it suits them.

Edited by DungBeetle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or to put it more simply, the EU/EZ say/impose nothing on the nature of the welfare system, nor the taxation system in the first instance.

What they do say is that the welfare system and taxation system should be consistent, because if it isn't, the consequences of dealing with that inconsistency falls on the collective states rather than the individual.

Well I think this is the ultimately the EU game plan.

To be certain the Greek/PIIGS crisis will be used to argue for, or impose, fiscal union and tax harmonisation, followed if they can by a common foreign policy and political union. All under an unelected EU President and unelected technocracy.

I love Europeans, as distinct nations with their individual characters, not as a homogenous opressed superstate.

Which is one resaon why I prefer the alternative for the UK - leaving the EU. My objections are not primarily financial, I fear the EU is becoming a fascist state. Just look at the new Spanish draconian laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think this is the ultimately the EU game plan.

To be certain the Greek/PIIGS crisis will be used to argue for, or impose, fiscal union and tax harmonisation, followed if they can by a common foreign policy and political union. All under an unelected EU President and unelected technocracy.

I love Europeans, as distinct nations with their individual characters, not as a homogenous opressed superstate.

Which is one resaon why I prefer the alternative for the UK - leaving the EU. My objections are not primarily financial, I fear the EU is becoming a fascist state. Just look at the new Spanish draconian laws.

If their plan is harmonisation then they need to get on with it rather than pussyfooting around.

The thing is lack of harmonisation causes all sorts of issues. The issues we see in Greece, the issues with immigration etc and movement of people in order to get better benefits/welfare. All this i reduced if there is no bias between the countries.

I don't think the issue of unelected president is a serious one, mainly because it is clear that the president has no power, irrespective of what any bits of paper say. Clearly the EU parliment and presidency at the moment are an interim step on the way to having a fully working EU government. All the power is still vested in the heads of state in the European Council.

I don't see the EU becoming a facist state any more than the US is. UK IMO is best out of Europe until it decides it is committed or not. Joining means that you get the benefits of joining but in return have a smaller voice in deciding what goes on. I don't think UK people are ready for this trade. But I think in general people in the UK massively underestimate how much support there is in the individual EU nations for the EU concept as a whole.

Edit : reminds me, technically the Prime Minister of the UK isn't elected by the people either.

Edited by Gigantic Purple Slug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spanish new laws...mainly designed to make protest/demonstrations impractical - in fact, borderline illegal. (Fine if you don't show proper respect to the police, for example.)

We're getting a taste of it here with the govt trying to ban strikes this week, after all, they're terribly inconvenient to the general public, donchaknow.

Another example of the conservative party now formulating key, banal phrases and then disseminating them to their MPs, supporters to recite tirelessly. I've heard several tories coming out with the same line already - it's not fair to people getting the bus to work or taking their kids out of school - which has been scripted and given to them. There was a lot of this in the election. The latest iteration of newspeak...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Much as I dislike defending HMG I feel they may have been a bit more open about acknowledging the size of their bank bailout than some EZ countries. I have a suspicion that many EZ taxpayers are not fully aware of how much their governments have put them on the hook for This is one of the reasons the EZ is so unwilling to contemplate a Greek debt write down because it would start to make the losses manifest

+1 The whole point of the original bailout of Greece 2010 was to enable the rescue of Banks without having to admit that it was happening- what they did was use Greece as a conduit through which they could channel funds to the bail out the banks. 90% of the original Greek 'bailout' funds went to bailing out private creditors

Then having done this- with grotesque hypocricy- they turned to the Greek public and said 'Look at all this debt you now have you lazy Greek people!- You will need to have an an austerity programme if you want to pay that lot back.'

And so the sorry saga began of austerity leading to economic contraction leading to more loans (to stop the first loans going bad) leading to more calls for austerity ect ect.

If there was a case for the EU to bail out banks in Greece, France and Germany then that case should have presented openly to the people of Europe, instead of cynically pretending to help the people of Greece while in reality loading them up with private sector debts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which are?

Link

1. If you photograph security personnel and then share these images on social media: up to €30.000 fine (particularly if photo exposes violence used against a member of the public). This fine could increase depending on the number of Instagram or social media followers you have.

2. Tweet or retweet information or the “location of an organized protest” can now be interpreted as an act of terrorism as it incites others to “commit a crime” (now that “demonstrating” in many ways has become a crime). Sound “1984”-ish? Read about Orwell and his time in Spain.

3. Snowden-like whistle blowing is now defined as an act of terrorism. If you write for a local publication, be careful what you print, whom you speak to, and whether the government is listening.

4. Visiting or consulting terrorist websites – even for investigative purposes – can be interpreted as an act of terrorism. Make sure you use “Tor” browser, reject cookies, and don’t allow pop-ups. Not to mention, don’t post it on your Facebook timeline!

5. Be careful with the royal jokes! Any satirical comment against the royal family is a new crime “against the Crown”. For example, “What did Leticia and the Bishop have to say after they ––“ (SORRY CENSORED).

6. No more hassling elected members of the government or local authorities – even if they say one thing in order to be elected, but then go and do the exact opposite. Confronting them about this hypocritical behavior. Even if you see them in the street chatting to a street cleaner, dining at their favorite expensive restaurant, or having their shoes shined by that physics graduate who cannot find a decent job in the country, hassling them about their behavior is now a criminal offence.

7. Has your local river been so polluted by that plastic factory along the edge that all life has extinguished? Well, tough! Greenpeace or similar protests are now finable from €601–€30.000.

8. Protests in a spontaneous way outside Parliament are now illegal. For example if Parliament passes a hugely unpopular bill, or are debating something extremely important to you or your community, it is now finable from €601 – €30.000. Tip: Use Google Maps to protest just around the corner – but don’t tweet the location!

9. Obstructing an officer in the course of their business, “resisting arrest”, refusing to leave a demonstration when told, or getting in the way of a swinging baton are all now finable offences from €601 – €30.000.

10. Showing lack of respect to officers of the law is an immediate fine of €100 – €600. Answering back, asking a disrespectful question, making a funny face, showing your bottom to an officer of the law, or telling him/her that their breath reminds you of your dog’s underparts is now, sadly, not advisable.

11. Occupying, squatting, or refusing to leave an office, business, bank or other place until your complaint has been heard as a protest is now a €100 – €600 fine (no more flash mobs).

12. Digital protests: Writing something that could technically “disturb the peace” is a now a crime. Bloggers beware, for no one has yet defined whose peace you could be disturbing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see the EU becoming a facist state any more than the US is

The more the EU tries to centralize power the more authoritarian it must become. The EU and Democracy are not merely incompatible they are oxymoronic- what does centralization mean if not an erosion of the power of elected state governments to enact the will of their own people?

What the Germans seem to want is a logical absurdity in which the consequences of debt remain entirely a matter for the individual state concerned while the policies regarding the management of that debt are to be decided by a supranational entity located in Brussels. Only an idiot would agree to an arrangement like this.

If the Germans want to collectivize the way that debt is managed-taking control away from the country holding that debt- then they must accept that the burden of that debt must also be dealt with collectively- but this they will not do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If their plan is harmonisation then they need to get on with it rather than pussyfooting around.

The thing is lack of harmonisation causes all sorts of issues. The issues we see in Greece, the issues with immigration etc and movement of people in order to get better benefits/welfare. All this i reduced if there is no bias between the countries.

I don't think the issue of unelected president is a serious one, mainly because it is clear that the president has no power, irrespective of what any bits of paper say. Clearly the EU parliment and presidency at the moment are an interim step on the way to having a fully working EU government. All the power is still vested in the heads of state in the European Council.

I don't see the EU becoming a facist state any more than the US is. UK IMO is best out of Europe until it decides it is committed or not. Joining means that you get the benefits of joining but in return have a smaller voice in deciding what goes on. I don't think UK people are ready for this trade. But I think in general people in the UK massively underestimate how much support there is in the individual EU nations for the EU concept as a whole.

Edit : reminds me, technically the Prime Minister of the UK isn't elected by the people either.

An unelected technocrat EU President is a transitional role. We already see that people like Merkel exercise supranational power within the EU.

I use the word 'fascism' with the meaning that Mussolini, who coined the term (in Italian) - gave it:-

“The definition of fascism is the marriage of corporation and state ”

Edited by happy_renting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 The whole point of the original bailout of Greece 2010 was to enable the rescue of Banks without having to admit that it was happening- what they did was use Greece as a conduit through which they could channel funds to the bail out the banks. 90% of the original Greek 'bailout' funds went to bailing out private creditors

Then having done this- with grotesque hypocricy- they turned to the Greek public and said 'Look at all this debt you now have you lazy Greek people!- You will need to have an an austerity programme if you want to pay that lot back.'

And so the sorry saga began of austerity leading to economic contraction leading to more loans (to stop the first loans going bad) leading to more calls for austerity ect ect.

If there was a case for the EU to bail out banks in Greece, France and Germany then that case should have presented openly to the people of Europe, instead of cynically pretending to help the people of Greece while in reality loading them up with private sector debts.

Totally agree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more the EU tries to centralize power the more authoritarian it must become. The EU and Democracy are not merely incompatible they are oxymoronic- what does centralization mean if not an erosion of the power of elected state governments to enact the will of their own people?

What the Germans seem to want is a logical absurdity in which the consequences of debt remain entirely a matter for the individual state concerned while the policies regarding the management of that debt are to be decided by a supranational entity located in Brussels. Only an idiot would agree to an arrangement like this.

If the Germans want to collectivize the way that debt is managed-taking control away from the country holding that debt- then they must accept that the burden of that debt must also be dealt with collectively- but this they will not do.

But as ever you've completely missed the point, and got the situation about face.

The actual point is that in this case the debt wasn't managed by a supranational entity and therefore certain countries who make up that entity don't see why they should be responsible for it.

If you look into the design of the Euro it was actually designed quite well. With countries having to adhere to certain rules and regulations. The problem was with the politicians who then both circumvented the rules and ignored transgressions. That's why both sides should and need to pay a penalty for the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree...

Well apart from the fact it totally misses out why they took on loads of private debt in the first place. But my guess is that that isn't convenient to the narrative.

Edit change credit for debt.

Edited by Gigantic Purple Slug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well apart from the fact it totally misses out why they took on loads of private credit in the first place. But my guess is that that isn't convenient to the narrative.

OK a poor decision to borrow, but also a poor decision to lend. The creditor banks should have been made to take the pain for their reckless lending decision, rather than being made whole through the conduit of a bail-out which was really designed to shore up European banks by the back door.

The fundamental mistake is Greece being in the Euro, the trade imbalances caused by a fixed exchange rate allied with banks betting (correctly) that the Eurozone institutions would move heaven and earth to avoid a Eurozone sovereign default gave Greek politicians too much rope with which to hang themselves. I'm not sure how much blame you can really attach to the average greek on the street for this mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you lived in a country where there was plenty of work bars and restaurants were full why wouldn't you borrow?

Unfortunately all what you see around you is an illusion caused by other people taking on debt and as you take out your loan the illusion is reinforced.

I'm a lorry driver now. and I can't help but notice all the German cars going pass me on the motorway and very often my work mates will point at a car and say they would like that car and it's always German. You don't need to go to Greece to find an idiot just look in the bathroom mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just crazy. So they are going to lend them money so they can pay them back. There are EU law that stop the EU giving them money so now the EU has to find ways around the laws they have written so they can do what they want to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure anyone else had a choice either.

Of course not....

Dave pulled a blinder..

Trusted the EU not to stitch you up Dave? You poor deluded fool........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not....

Dave pulled a blinder..

Trusted the EU not to stitch you up Dave? You poor deluded fool........

Could backfire on the Dave & EU when and if we get to vote on membership. All grist to the mill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now what? The Greek government is emasculated, and has gone against the referendum outcome.

Greece has been loaned another billion or so.

No haircut is on offer, even real can-kicking is contingent on how and if Greece implements further austerity measures.

The IMF may scupper further loans to Greece anyway

Greece has to implement cuts in the face of a disgruntled population.

When the banks open, they will be emptied..

And the markets react as if everything is being fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now what? The Greek government is emasculated, and has gone against the referendum outcome.

To add to the confusion what the Greeks rejected was terms to extend the second bailout. The new agreement is about a much bigger third bailout.

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.

  • 351 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

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


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



×
×
  • 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.