Syriza wins Greece election

[Thanas]

No one said it was a 100% equivalency.

And yet you proceed to treat it as such by claiming that because something happened over 60 years ago this must mean people who mostly were not alive by then should pay for that. Either come out and say that Germany because of her past should have an obligation to pay debts until...when exactly?

But then I submit that the same shall be true for all nations who have done shitty things in the past (in which case we shall end up with an unworkable system.)

While Greece suffers 30% unemployment, literal starvation in some areas, inability to provide healthcare for its most vulnerable, deflation, the EU is demanding deep political reforms that established countries took many years or decades to implement (I know Australia took decades) before their suffering can even begin to end?

Greece scores a 0,853 on the HDI, ahead of EU members Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Slowenia, Portugal, Hungary, Cyprus, Malta, Bulgaria and Romania. Please tell me how their "suffering" is more terrible than that of those nations and how they are more deserving than others.

As for the "literal starvation", 1. most of that happens to illegal immigrants who would not have access to the market even in better times 2. The EU is taking measures to stop this.

Konstantinos Arvanitopoulos, Greece’s education minister, said the government had secured European Union financing to provide fruit and milk in schools, and vouchers for bread and cheese. It is also working with the Greek Orthodox Church to provide thousands of care packages. “It is the least we can do in this difficult financial circumstance,” he said.

Honestly, the EU doesn't deserve to exist if this is what economic union means.

Sure, I hear a 2% problem always invalidates entire unions.

As a sidenote, Greece currently runs a budget surplus if the interest payments on its debts are subtracted out. In other words, they can default on their existing debt and still be able to run their country. Obviously, this doesn't take into account the financial chaos & mayhem which a default would inflict on its economy & the EU in the short to medium term. If we use Iceland as a model since it's the most recent example of a debt default in a modern nation, we're looking at a couple years of utter suckiness followed by strong growth in subsequent years.

Ireland had far better starting positions. Besides, if Greece wants to default, let them try it. Fact is they have refused that option every time, because they full well know that default is worse than reform. But hey, if they want to default, they should feel free to do so. But they don't want to. They want to have their cake and eat it too, by leaving the risks to Germany, not reforming and continuing on as before.

Which means if most of the debt is written off, Greece will actually be a productive country which contributes to the EU.
But we can't allow that into the official narrative since that would get in the way of the EU's agenda.

And if the debt of all nations are written off, they too will be productive members. Nevermind the fact that Greece already gets a very preferential treatment. A treatment they chose and applied for. And a treatment which numerous other members of the EU do not have access to.

You forgot to include genocide as well.

Oh yes, what percentage of your personal wealth have you transferred to aboriginies? 100%? 90%? 50%? Oh wait, I forgot, this only applies to Germany.

It took over 50 years to get the EU to where it is now. You just cannot take so many different societies and say "blow it all up and let's reform". It is a pipedream. It is the sort of thing nobody even remotely familiar with the EU thinks possible, except for the Neonazis of Pegida and AFD. The challenge alone of trying to recreate the customs treaties the EU has with other nations is beyond stupid.

Can the EU be changed or is it currently writ in stone forever? No, I'm not that familiar with the details of how the EU is structured. What mechanism for change exists?

Any change to the treaties that govern the EU needs to be approved unanimously by all nations. That is because the EU is not a nationstate, but a collection of sovereign entities. A comparison to the US would be if every state assembly could scrap any constitutional change. So it doesn't matter if 99,9% of the EU want something. As long as the 0,1% says no, that is that. Think of how hard it is to even get the EU to cooperate on a single subject. Imagine if the US had to find a foreign policy that would be aligned to the interests of all states. Then try to find an economic policy that would be approved by all. Those are the rules the EU operates under.

I don't know – is bankruptcy always the worst possible choice?

No. The problem is back then Greece decided not to default. That option is still open to them. But they don't want to default - they want to continue to get money from the EU instead of returning to the market because the conditions the EU gives them are much better. Seriously, you try to find a credit that has a 0% interest rate for the next five years and you don't have to start repaying until 2035.

Part of the problem here is that while Greece's new government has been in power what, less than a week, there seems to be assumption they are no different than their predecessors. I am not conversant enough with Greek politics to be able to say either way, although it's a legitimate concern. However, is it that inconceivable that the new crowd should be given at least a token chance to make a change?

If they are trying to go for a change, then rehiring thousands of the corrupt workers who caused the problem in the first place seems like a very odd way to go.

Read my post again – I was suggesting a jobs program rather than more loans. Greece needs help but if you can't trust them with money then assistance will have to take a different form.

The EU already has initiatives and subsidies for that. They could do more but that would involve the Greeks surrendering direct control over their labour market to the EU and require them in effect be governed by Brussels. No chances of that happening.

I'm not familiar with how the Greek tax collection system is supposed to work. Over here, taxes are customarily withheld from a worker's paycheck, sent to the government by the employer, and if said worker wants anything back (a “refund”) then said worker must fill out forms and prove he/she is entitled to such a refund. Does Greece have an analogous system? If so, could a foreign investor insisted a condition of employment is participation in such a program, thereby ensuring that taxes are paid by the employees? Would that be an acceptable way to enforce the law? Jobs for compliance with tax law.

My apologies. I failed to make one thing clear - tax evasion is not a problem based on the salaried jobs. Those automatically get deducted iirc. The problem is to everything else - doctors, companies, lawyers, repairmen, farmers, hotels - in short, everybody who works on receipts. Because most people will just not register that income and demand to be paid in cash. The globe article I linked to earlier shows the scale here and how this corruption happens.

It is estimated that this shadow economy is, in absolute size, twice as large as that of Germany's own shadow economy - despite the differences in population and wealth.

Are there people who are qualified to perform that work who don't have a tainted history?

I don't know, but the main question is if there is work to be done at all. The Greek Governemnt has

about 700,000 employees and 80,000 more who work for government-owned entities like the power company. Thirty years ago, experts say, the public sector was about one-third that size. (Until a census was carried out last year, however, government officials admitted they did not really know how many employees they had.)

if one scales that up to Germany (and only using the 700k and not those who work in the government companies) one would expect to have about 7.7 million civil servants in Germany. Germany has 4.6 million. (scaled for the USA, one would expect 21 million civil servants. The USA has ~ 3million total.) What work are all those people doing all day?

Not to put too fine a point on it, I suspect the Greeks, like a lot of Europeans, might be wary of having Germany too involved in running their lives. I realize that the current generation of Germans are very different from those of the Nazi era but the fact remains that the last time Germans were running Europe things turned out very badly for a lot of people. Is that fair to your generation? No. That is one of the suckitudes of war, it leaves people with unfair legacies like that.

This strikes me as rather stilly. If you make an honest effort to clean up and somebody offers you help in doing so, don't you take that help? What have you got to lose at that point anyway?

Here's the thing – you say one thing, J says another. Who do I believe?

Here's one hint - only one of us has been consistently wrong about the effects of peak oil, the financial crisis in the US ("bread lines") and the effects of the financial crisis on the Euro ("two or more countries will leave by 2014"). As long as Greece pays about the same level as France for their debts I don't see why they cannot pay their debts.

That's like saying the US shouldn't be saddled with the taint of the slave trade because we haven't officially had slavery since the 1960's, or that the current administration shouldn't have to address historical wrong against Natives since the Feds haven't engaged in any massacres lately.

Yeah well last I checked I didn't argue for reparations for slavery either. This is going beyond "remember your history" and has crossed into "remember your history and pay" territory.

The world is very happy that Germany has made some profound changes in recent generations. That doesn't mean you're free of that taint of WWII.

What do you mean precisely by that and what obligations should follow from that? Because I find it very hard to argue that somebody should pay for something that happened when he wasn't even born, especially not if he got nothing out of it.

Even if I accept your definition of “recent history”, it IS recent history to people who are still alive. Granted, they're all elderly now but first person memory hasn't vanished yet. Sorry, Germany – even if the government has changed – doesn't escape the taint that easily. You don't understand why your neighbors might have trust issues?

It is a bit disingenious to ask for a handout while telling the person giving it that they are a bad guy, especially if that bad guy wasn't born then and hasn't done anything bad. I mean, I am reasonably sure you don't shoot a Philippino for breakfast while whipping your black neighbour, but hey, once a slaver always a slaver right?

Who is going to be the enforcement arm for that?

Maybe one or two of the 700k civil servants could be dispatched with a bag and a really huge bulldozer. They do have a police.

Who is going to enforce the law on the Greek oligarchs? Germany? Wow, I can see some issues with armed Germans marching into Greece no matter how pure the intentions, starting with elderly folks having flashbacks to the 1930's and 1940's whether they should or not. Does the EU have some sort of EU police force with sufficient force to actually pull this off? Are you going to call in the UN?

The thing is, you just can't continue taking the money and making no effort. That won't work because at some time, the people giving the money will be royally fed up and just refuse to pay. But of course that would be bad for the Greeks. This emotional hostage taking is really despicable.

OK, I can see your position. So... if there is legitimate suffering (it does seem the oligarchs are sucking the life out of the proles) is there a way to render aid to the needy without it being diverted? Probably without it being frank cash.

The EU is already providing food for children and partnering with local charities. The EU does not have the legal right to demand social change on that level. This can only be done with leverage. But Greece does not want to give the EU any leverage.

If Germany hadn't been rebuilt and assisted after WWII by outsiders, your former enemies, what state do you think Germany would be in today? You owe at least a part of your current prosperity and security to the goodwill of people who had little reason to trust your parents and grandparents.

Everybody owes at least a part to something but I don't see this ever being used as a legitimate negotiation tactic, much less of a reason why money is actually flowing. I don't see the US paying reparations to blacks and the Philippines. I don't see Britain paying reparations to India and China. I don't see the entire western world paying reparations to Africa. And I especially don't see Greece paying reparations to Italy, the balkans, france, turkey and Iran.

[Crown]

That's awesome, maybe you should have lead with that instead of more about them politicking.

7. That’s the rebuttal to an argument that you have yet to make with which I’m meant to ‘lead with’.

I never said they should have everything solved, and in light of what they've actually done thus far I think they may actually have a shot at making things better. However none of that was posted here, what was posted was them making promises that anybody who got elected would have made. Plus they still stand every chance of failing to fix Greece if they can't tackle the endemic corruption and recover money owed to them by tax dodgers and this isn't something that will be easily done.

The source of that was ‘The Guardian’ an exotic and little known news paper which is understandably not available to anyone who wishes to read up on an issue before opining like a dick on it, oh wait, that was sarcasm.

Yes, blame everybody but the fucking Greeks who have flat out not done what has been asked of them thus far when they are the ones failing to enact sensible reforms. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if they've purposely gone about this is the least effective way possible given how badly they've done. If you don't believe me lets look a pair of examples to give some examples of how well the Greeks have implemented reforms thus far.

I’m not seeking to assign blame, I’m looking for a solution. You have failed categorically to even engage in any attempt to justify a failing, unproven and fucked up policy beyond your pathological desire to meat out punishment. If you were in charge of drug policy you would jail junkies and legalise dealers.

More than 80% of the ‘bail out’ didn’t go to Greece where it got wasted due to <insert Greek racial slur which will help lubricate a lie here>, it went to German and French (and Greek) banks. The price that neo-liberal policy of ‘privatise profit and socialise losses’ means that the German taxpayer is essentially paying for kleptocrats knowingly and willingly lending money to a lender they knew could never repay them.

First let us look at tax reform. <snip>

The fact is Greece is corrupt. <snip>

Now we can debate if austerity was the best plan, but you have to blame Greece and the Greeks themselves first for not actually solving any of their crippling issues.

Tax dodging and the Lagrade List was already brought up and dealt with by me on page 2/3 and by Aerius later.

And Greece being corrupt doesn’t excuse the collective punishment of the entire populace by mandating a failing policy that has no record of success ever and will not because it’s Hoodoo.

Your own source says:

Jesus titty-fucking Christ; “An error very frequently made in press reports, is the confusion of the discussion regarding Greece’s Eurozone entry with the controversy regarding usage of derivatives’ deals with U.S. Banks by Greece and other Eurozone countries to artificially reduce their reported budget deficits. A currency swap arranged withGoldman Sachs allowed Greece to “hide” 2.8 billion Euros of debt, however, this affected deficit values after 2001 (when Greece had already been admitted into the Eurozone) and is not related to Greece’s Eurozone entry.”

So I was merely presenting information that raises doubts that the numbers they submitted were ever true at all. Even if everything was above board they barely made the cut and were lying to themselves and the rest of the EU if they thought that such levels of debt were going to be sustainable.

You were repeating a lie in order to perform a further character assassination to justify your perceived righteousness in your outrage.

They aren't being forced to do anything, if they didn't want the money they could have simply refused to take it and not had to deal with the conditions attached to it.

Fun fact; a ‘Grexit’ back then would have been better for Greece now and quite possibly catastrophic for the EU. But because apparently ‘no one wants’ a Grexit then surely the only just thing to do is look for the best solution for all parties while working within the restriction of the Euro, and if that’s true, then austerity wasn’t the answer then and it sure as shit isn’t the answer now.

Greece willingly and knowingly gave up that ability when they joined the EU. They don't get to bitch about it now after taking everybody's money.

They do when they have met all the criteria for loans (as evidenced by the fact that they kept receiving loans by the Troika) and it turns out that the magic fairies didn’t sprinkle enough dust to make austerity magically work.

It's failing because the Greeks themselves are failures at actually fixing their issues. No plan could have worked if the same corrupt Greeks were in charge of it from the start.

No austerity is failing because it is a completely fucking made up economic policy which has no real world example of it working and the IMF its self has admitted it shouldn’t have been a condition. Greece having a corrupt kleptocracy at the help didn’t help the situation, but the inescapable truth is that it would never have worked anyway.

[Crown]

AFAIK much of their olive oil 'exports' come from reexporting olive oil, but I didn't find the exact numbers. But be it as it may, this is an unimportant point anyways.

‘As far as you know’ eh? Is that code for being so astronomically wrong that you're too embarrassed to admit it?

You are delusional if you think that prices would stay the same in Greece without the Euro. The Drachme would lead to a huge raise in costs for imported products.

Prices for foreign goods rising would only serve to make domestically produced goods more competitive. It would also seek to make Greece’s exported goods more competitive in international markets boosting internal production and employment. Iceland’s default and debt write off illustrates this. Furthermore a weak Drachma would boost a section of the economy which already contributes 20% of it’s total GDP, which in your ‘analysis’ you completely ignored.

It's very easy to understand: When a state increases spending, this has only a positive effect on the economy as a whole if this money is spent within this country. If this 'new' money is mostly spent on imports, you boost the economy in the exporters' countries instead.

And? Krugman wasn’t advocating ‘giving’ Greece money to buy German goods (although fun fact 80% of the 'loans' given by the Troika went straight into German and French banks). Your strawman of a Nobel Prize winning economist on economic theory lacks substance, credibility and any resemblance to the facts.

[BabelHuber]

‘As far as you know’ eh? Is that code for being so astronomically wrong that you're too embarrassed to admit it?

OK, I concede this point. So what? It doesn't affect any other topic.

Prices for foreign goods rising would only serve to make domestically produced goods more competitive. It would also seek to make Greece’s exported goods more competitive in international markets boosting internal production and employment. Iceland’s default and debt write off illustrates this. Furthermore a weak Drachma would boost a section of the economy which already contributes 20% of it’s total GDP, which in your ‘analysis’ you completely ignored.

Iceland is a country with 300000 inhabitants or so. Also, only the banks defaulted, the state itself wasn't overindebted. You cannot honestly think that this is a valid comparison!

Which 'domestic goods' could Greece export at all? Save from agricultural goods and tourism, Greece doesn't have much to export. Do you think that this is sufficient to import oil, medicine and all the other stuff the country needs? I don't.

And? Krugman wasn’t advocating ‘giving’ Greece money to buy German goods (although fun fact 80% of the 'loans' given by the Troika went straight into German and French banks). Your strawman of a Nobel Prize winning economist on economic theory lacks substance, credibility and any resemblance to the facts.

So appealing to authority is all that you can do?

I spell it out for you again: The Keynesian approach only works when you have a closed economy (= you can ignore imports and exports, since they don't have much effect on the economy).

When you have an open economy, this simply does not work: When you give your citicens more money, but they spend it on foreign goods you boost the economy of the foreign nations which export to your country.

This is what Krugman ignores - when you just give money to Greece, they will simply use it up. After the money is spent, they will be in the same situation again. You cannot repeat this infinitly.

Instead you have to reform this country.

Greece is like a druct addict, addicted to a flow of foreign money. You cannot help an addicted as long as he is unwilling to see that he has a problem in the first place.

[Crown]

Greece scores a 0,853 on the HDI, ahead of EU members Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Slowenia, Portugal, Hungary, Cyprus, Malta, Bulgaria and Romania.

Not members of the Eurozone; Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria & Romania.

Didn’t join until after World Financial Crisis (2008); Estonia (2011) & Lithuania (2015)

Entered right during the financial crisis; Slovenia (2007), Cyprus (2008) & Malta (2008)

Which only leaves Portugal as being anything remotely close to being a like for like example for Greece’s situation.

[Crown]

OK, I concede this point. So what? It doesn't affect any other topic.

It demonstrates how ignorant you are if nothing else. Who, who in this day and age of Google allows themsleves to make such a patently untrue statement and then gets pissy when they're pulled up on it? You, apparently.

Iceland is a country with 300000 inhabitants or so. Also, only the banks defaulted, the state itself wasn't overindebted. You cannot honestly think that this is a valid comparison!

The state itself wasn't 'overindebted' because Iceland refused to socialise private losses, i.e. it let its banks and its banks creditors (mostly English banks) to default. Greece was forced to socialise private losses of not only its banks but French and German banks as well (that's where 80% of the 'bailout money' has gone). As has been posted; if you take out this debt (i.e. you allow Greece to default) it runs a budget surplus.

Which 'domestic goods' could Greece export at all? Save from agricultural goods and tourism, Greece doesn't have much to export. Do you think that this is sufficient to import oil, medicine and all the other stuff the country needs? I don't.

That's because you're ignorant.

So appealing to authority is all that you can do?

<snip>

Krugman wasn't advocating dumping money into Greece so Greeks can continue to buy Mercedes-Benzs and BMWs you blithering idiot. You continue to make a strawman out of his position as much as you want but I won't indulge you by pretending you aren't.

Instead you have to reform this country.

The only thing we agree on.

Greece is like a druct addict, addicted to a flow of foreign money. You cannot help an addicted as long as he is unwilling to see that he has a problem in the first place.

If you put a drug addict on a cold turkey treatment, you kill them. Hello austerity.

[Crown]

By the way is it escaping anyone's attention who our German posters seem to be completely ignorant of Iceland's financial crisis and yet completely read up (on propaganda) regarding Greece? It's almost as if the German media has been pressing a narrative for one and not another, I wonder why ...

[Broomstick]

As for the "literal starvation", 1. most of that happens to illegal immigrants who would not have access to the market even in better times 2. The EU is taking measures to stop this.

Konstantinos Arvanitopoulos, Greece’s education minister, said the government had secured European Union financing to provide fruit and milk in schools, and vouchers for bread and cheese. It is also working with the Greek Orthodox Church to provide thousands of care packages. “It is the least we can do in this difficult financial circumstance,” he said.

Starvation can be quite patchy, but still exist. The Irish Famine of the 1860's is an example of that - some locations everyone managed to get enough food to survive and the wealthy even managed to eat well while in other places entire villages literally starved to death.

I am glad that someone is doing something about the hungry.

You forgot to include genocide as well.

Oh yes, what percentage of your personal wealth have you transferred to aboriginies? 100%? 90%? 50%? Oh wait, I forgot, this only applies to Germany.

Personally, I can go with "all nations have done terrible things in the past" and leave it at that.

Any [/b]change to the treaties that govern the EU needs to be approved unanimously by all nations. That is because the EU is not a nationstate, but a collection of sovereign entities. A comparison to the US would be if every state assembly could scrap any constitutional change. So it doesn't matter if 99,9% of the EU want something. As long as the 0,1% says no, that is that. Think of how hard it is to even get the EU to cooperate on a single subject. Imagine if the US had to find a foreign policy that would be aligned to the interests of all states. Then try to find an economic policy that would be approved by all. Those are the rules the EU operates under.

Wow, OK, that clarifies things. Hell, the US has enough trouble when something requires a 2/3 or 3/4 majority, getting unanimity on anything is damn near impossible.

I'm not sure if long-term requiring unanimous votes makes for a workable organization. Good luck with that. I think it is an issue if 1 party can scuttle anything for the rest of the crowd.

I don't know – is bankruptcy always the worst possible choice?

No. The problem is back then Greece decided not to default. That option is still open to them. But they don't want to default - they want to continue to get money from the EU instead of returning to the market because the conditions the EU gives them are much better. Seriously, you try to find a credit that has a 0% interest rate for the next five years and you don't have to start repaying until 2035.

I actually did obtain a 0% interest loan on one occasion, but I had an excellent credit rating, good cash flow, and almost no other debt - a situation markedly different from Greece I would say.

Certainly the prior government of Greece wanted to eat its cake and have it, too. At what point does the Greek oligarchy learn its lesson?

Part of the problem here is that while Greece's new government has been in power what, less than a week, there seems to be assumption they are no different than their predecessors. I am not conversant enough with Greek politics to be able to say either way, although it's a legitimate concern. However, is it that inconceivable that the new crowd should be given at least a token chance to make a change?

If they are trying to go for a change, then rehiring thousands of the corrupt workers who caused the problem in the first place seems like a very odd way to go.

Back to Germany again (sorry) post WWII there were people who wanted to bar anyone with any affiliation with the Nazis from ever working in the German government or public sector ever again. It wasn't practical because almost no one would be left to select for those jobs, and "affiliation with the Nazis" whether or not you agreed with them was sort of essential to survival at times. That why I asked if there were sufficient qualified people to do the work who weren't tainted in the Greek situation. When corruption is that widespread you pretty much have the choice of either going along with it or getting drummed out of the organization - that was certainly the problem with employment by the city of Chicago for decades, if you worked for the city you were pretty much forced to participate in the corruption if you wanted to keep your job.

So... are the rehired still planning to be on the take, or are they the competent members of the workforce who can possible be persuaded to work more honestly in the future?

Read my post again – I was suggesting a jobs program rather than more loans. Greece needs help but if you can't trust them with money then assistance will have to take a different form.

The EU already has initiatives and subsidies for that. They could do more but that would involve the Greeks surrendering direct control over their labour market to the EU and require them in effect be governed by Brussels. No chances of that happening.

I would agree with that. Sovereign nations don't surrender control like that of their own volition.

My apologies. I failed to make one thing clear - tax evasion is not a problem based on the salaried jobs. Those automatically get deducted iirc. The problem is to everything else - doctors, companies, lawyers, repairmen, farmers, hotels - in short, everybody who works on receipts. Because most people will just not register that income and demand to be paid in cash. The globe article I linked to earlier shows the scale here and how this corruption happens.

It is estimated that this shadow economy is, in absolute size, twice as large as that of Germany's own shadow economy - despite the differences in population and wealth.

That makes a bit more sense.

We have some issue with that sort of tax evasion here, but our tax enforcement actually has sufficient teeth and investigators to find it a substantial amount of the time. That, and most people only attempt to hide part of their income, not all of it. With so many transactions leaving either a paper or bit trail these days it's getting harder to hide. In fact, even our illegal immigrants tend to pay taxes utilizing fraudulent ID numbers.

See, that's the thing - I've known plenty of Greeks who came over here and worked their asses off and they faithfully pay taxes here in the US. Probably because not doing so has real consequences. I guess they then go back to Greece and stop paying them, which might explain why so many wanted to retire "back home" I guess.

Are there people who are qualified to perform that work who don't have a tainted history?

I don't know, but the main question is if there is work to be done at all. The Greek Governemnt has

about 700,000 employees and 80,000 more who work for government-owned entities like the power company. Thirty years ago, experts say, the public sector was about one-third that size. (Until a census was carried out last year, however, government officials admitted they did not really know how many employees they had.)

That's another good point - artificially inflated payrolls need to be trimmed. In this part of the world they call that "ghost payroll", because the extra workers frequently don't even bother to show up. (Did I mention Chicago has some corruption...?) Chronic problem in certain public sectors, occasionally there have been ghost employees drawing up to three paychecks without ever showing up to work.

Not to put too fine a point on it, I suspect the Greeks, like a lot of Europeans, might be wary of having Germany too involved in running their lives. I realize that the current generation of Germans are very different from those of the Nazi era but the fact remains that the last time Germans were running Europe things turned out very badly for a lot of people. Is that fair to your generation? No. That is one of the suckitudes of war, it leaves people with unfair legacies like that.

This strikes me as rather stilly. If you make an honest effort to clean up and somebody offers you help in doing so, don't you take that help? What have you got to lose at that point anyway?

You see, Thanas, you and I and most of us on this forum are rational people. The majority of humanity is not. They run on emotions.

As long as Greece pays about the same level as France for their debts I don't see why they cannot pay their debts.

There's the whole financial mis-management vs. being able to budget thing. It's why I live a relatively comfortable existence despite being below my nation's poverty income but people making ten times what I do go bankrupt.

That's like saying the US shouldn't be saddled with the taint of the slave trade because we haven't officially had slavery since the 1960's, or that the current administration shouldn't have to address historical wrong against Natives since the Feds haven't engaged in any massacres lately.

Yeah well last I checked I didn't argue for reparations for slavery either. This is going beyond "remember your history" and has crossed into "remember your history and pay" territory.

As I said - not everyone is rational.

Don't forget that there is a LOT of political capital in making the populace fear the "other". You're a historian, I'm sure you can find many more examples of this than I could, and I can find quite a few. Those in power have a vested interest in the status quo and wouldn't hesitate to paint outsiders as bad guys. That is, after all, how you get those right-wing neo-fascist bigoted nationalist parties in a lot of countries. Unfortunately, "YEAARGH!!! NAZIS!" is way too easy which is why it comes up so often.

The world is very happy that Germany has made some profound changes in recent generations. That doesn't mean you're free of that taint of WWII.

What do you mean precisely by that and what obligations should follow from that? Because I find it very hard to argue that somebody should pay for something that happened when he wasn't even born, especially not if he got nothing out of it.

I agree with you. However, not everyone is rational. It's bigotry, it's prejudiced, it's being judged for where you were born rather than the content of your individual character. It does exist, though. Maybe you're not used to being a recipient of such prejudice.

Even if I accept your definition of “recent history”, it IS recent history to people who are still alive. Granted, they're all elderly now but first person memory hasn't vanished yet. Sorry, Germany – even if the government has changed – doesn't escape the taint that easily. You don't understand why your neighbors might have trust issues?

It is a bit disingenious to ask for a handout while telling the person giving it that they are a bad guy, especially if that bad guy wasn't born then and hasn't done anything bad. I mean, I am reasonably sure you don't shoot a Philippino for breakfast while whipping your black neighbour, but hey, once a slaver always a slaver right?

Yes, that is how those people think - you're white/American/whatever therefore you are responsible for what your ancestors did. Oh, your ancestors didn't come to the US until after all that? Well, they would have done that if they could, so they're still guilty and you're still guilty. So pay me. You are absolutely correct that it is irrational. I would say it's wrong. Nonetheless the attitude still exists. Politicians occasionally profits from fanning those particular flames.

Who is going to enforce the law on the Greek oligarchs? Germany? Wow, I can see some issues with armed Germans marching into Greece no matter how pure the intentions, starting with elderly folks having flashbacks to the 1930's and 1940's whether they should or not. Does the EU have some sort of EU police force with sufficient force to actually pull this off? Are you going to call in the UN?

The thing is, you just can't continue taking the money and making no effort. That won't work because at some time, the people giving the money will be royally fed up and just refuse to pay. But of course that would be bad for the Greeks. This emotional hostage taking is really despicable.

Yes. I agree.

You know, I have a friend who is normally very rational. But mention putting a German in charge of something he explodes. I suspect that learning his numbers from his mother's concentration camp tattoo might have something to do with that.

It's going to take a couple generations for that sort of thing to diminish, which is one of my points. It's not fair to your generation of Germans, but it is out there. When Germany plays on the international stage Germany needs to remember those feelings are out there.

If Germany hadn't been rebuilt and assisted after WWII by outsiders, your former enemies, what state do you think Germany would be in today? You owe at least a part of your current prosperity and security to the goodwill of people who had little reason to trust your parents and grandparents.

Everybody owes at least a part to something but I don't see this ever being used as a legitimate negotiation tactic, much less of a reason why money is actually flowing. I don't see the US paying reparations to blacks and the Philippines. I don't see Britain paying reparations to India and China. I don't see the entire western world paying reparations to Africa. And I especially don't see Greece paying reparations to Italy, the balkans, france, turkey and Iran.

The point of bringing that up is that taking a hard line doesn't always work and sometimes giving money/aid to people you don't really like or trust can be the correct choice in the long run.

Of course, a major difference between rebuilding Germany and Japan after WWII is that both of those nations had a culture of working your ass off and giving your taxes to the government so the government had money to run things. If the Greeks aren't willing to make the necessary changes and end the corruption it's just throwing money into a bottomless pit.

[J]

As a sidenote, Greece currently runs a budget surplus if the interest payments on its debts are subtracted out. In other words, they can default on their existing debt and still be able to run their country. Obviously, this doesn't take into account the financial chaos & mayhem which a default would inflict on its economy & the EU in the short to medium term. If we use Iceland as a model since it's the most recent example of a debt default in a modern nation, we're looking at a couple years of utter suckiness followed by strong growth in subsequent years.

Ireland had far better starting positions. Besides, if Greece wants to default, let them try it. Fact is they have refused that option every time, because they full well know that default is worse than reform. But hey, if they want to default, they should feel free to do so. But they don't want to. They want to have their cake and eat it too, by leaving the risks to Germany, not reforming and continuing on as before.

Ireland is the country next to Britain that grows potatoes. Iceland is the country in the middle of the Atlantic with volcanoes. Also, do you know what Iceland's economy consists of? Of course you don't, but you'll still tell everyone that they're better than Greece, because that's part of the official EU narrative.

Which means if most of the debt is written off, Greece will actually be a productive country which contributes to the EU.
But we can't allow that into the official narrative since that would get in the way of the EU's agenda.

And if the debt of all nations are written off, they too will be productive members.

Actually, you are wrong. Again. Let's take Portugal for example. Their budget deficit exceeds the interest payments on their debts, which means they would still run a deficit and be utterly bankrupt even if all their debts were removed.

[J]

Oh. One more thing. I believe Starglider and Stas Bush know this one quite well.

http://www.express.be/business/nl/econo ... 155828.htm
There's an interesting chart from the above link, which I'll post below:




So, who are those non Greek financials? Why mostly the German & French banks of course. The Greek bailout is essentially a money laundering scheme to benefit foreign financial interests. It takes in funds from the people of Europe and launders them through Greece to guarantee & prop up failed debts held by German, French, and Greek banks. Over 80% of the bailout funds & loans went right back into the coffers of various banks, leaving precious little for the people of Greece.

But, of course, the official narrative is that Greece squandered all the loans which were generously provided by the EU. Truth is less than half those loans made it into Greece in the first place.

[jwl]

Do you think there is a chance that the UK of UKIP and Cameron will ever agree to such changes? If so, show me one poll that says so. There is no such realistic chance.

I can imagine the British public supporting further integration of Eurozone countries as long as it also includes reduced integration of non-Eurozone countries.

[Vympel]

Welcome to the backlash era, Europe

“Yes We Can” may be a stale slogan in Obama’s America, but in crisis-hit Spain it is the rallying cry of a year-old radical-left party that is taking the country by storm. In a show of strength, more than 100,000 supporters of Podemos (the party’s name means “We Can” in Spanish) filled the streets of Madrid on Jan. 31 to protest against austerity, crushing debts, and the country’s corrupt political system — and demand change. The demonstrators don’t represent a fringe group, either. Podemos is leading in the polls, ahead of both the mainstream center-left and center-right parties in elections that will be held by the end of the year.

The election of a radical-left Syriza-led government in Greece on Jan. 25 has electrified European politics. After years of being told that there is no alternative to bowing to German demands for crushing austerity and wage cuts, the plucky Greeks have dared to stand up to Angela Merkel’s government in Berlin — and other Europeans have stood up and noticed. While the immediate focus is on the showdown between the new Greek government and eurozone authorities over demands for debt relief — and the (unlikely) possibility that Greece could end up ejected from the currency union — Athenian defiance is already having wider political repercussions.

Long accustomed to treating Greece as an unruly but ultimately submissive colony, horrified German policymakers and their eurozone minions can scarcely believe that it is in outright insurrection. (Just look at the body language of Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the bespectacled Dutch finance minister and head of the Eurogroup of his eurozone counterparts, at a press conference with his new Greek counterpart, Yanis Varoufakis, in this video clip.) Debtor-country governments that have obediently complied with the German diktat — notably Spain, Portugal, and Ireland — suddenly feel very exposed politically. Governments that have mounted a mild challenge to Merkel (think France and Italy) are in a delicate position: They spy an opportunity to advance their own agenda, while fearing that they may be outflanked by those with a more radical one. And not without reason; anti-establishment parties of various stripes have the wind in their sails.

Now that voters are no longer terrified by the financial panic that almost destroyed the euro in 2012, they are venting their fury at establishment parties and EU technocrats who have failed to resolve the crisis and whom they no longer trust to have their best interests at heart.

Can you blame them? After all, rich bankers and their creditors have been bailed out with taxpayers’ money, while poor schoolchildren and other essential services have suffered budget cuts. Nobody at the European Commission in Brussels has lost a job or even suffered a salary cut for imposing premature, excessive, across-the-board austerity, which unnecessarily cost 10 percent of the eurozone GDP — nigh on 1 trillion euros! — according to a study by a European Commission official who used the commission’s own economic model.

Whenever voters throw out a government, as they have done in nearly every election since the crisis began in 2008, officials from Berlin, Brussels, and Frankfurt — whom they did not elect and cannot hold to account — loudly insist that the incoming administration must stick to the failed policies of the outgoing one.

Since voting for establishment parties of the center-left or center-right makes little difference, it’s hardly surprising that voters are seeking a genuine alternative. And for the moment this exists only on the extremes.

Sometimes, as in Greece and Spain, the insurgents are on the radical left. In Ireland, which is not due to vote until next year, Sinn Féin, a left-wing party that was formerly the political wing of the Irish Republican Army, has a narrow lead in the polls. In other cases, the upstarts are on the far right. In France, Marine Le Pen’s racist National Front is out in front, winning by-elections and pulling ahead in polls for the 2017 presidential election. In Italy, where reformist Prime Minister Matteo Renzi remains popular, all three main opposition parties — the far-right Northern League, the anti-establishment Five Star Movement, and former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s center-right Forza Italia — are now anti-euro.

Much of what the radical left proposes would be harmful, while Le Pen’s xenophobic and protectionist nationalism is loathsome. But the likes of Podemos are also right about important things. At a time when households, companies, and banks are all trying to reduce their debts at once, austerity leads to stagnation and suffering, not “stability,” as eurozone leaders claim. Budget cuts and tax increases have often fallen on the poor and vulnerable, not the politically connected rich. The political class in many countries is corrupt and in the pockets of vested interests, not least the banks.

More broadly, it is neither feasible nor fair for debtors to bear the full costs of the financial crisis. For every reckless borrower there is a reckless lender. In the eurozone’s case, those were primarily German and French banks, which lent vast sums to southern Europe, both directly and via local banks. While the bailouts of Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain are portrayed as gestures of EU solidarity, they were in fact covert bailouts of those foreign banks that would otherwise have suffered huge losses on their reckless lending. Southern Europe’s huge debt burden — primarily private in Spain, mostly public in Greece — is stifling the economy and is unpayable in full.

Driving down wages depresses domestic demand and makes debt burdens even harder to bear. And the eurozone as a whole is too big and global demand too weak for everyone to follow Germany’s beggar-thy-neighbor strategy of suppressing wages to subsidize exports.

Nor is it politically sustainable for the eurozone to be run, in effect, by a German hegemon that acts in its narrow interests as a creditor rather than in the broader interests of the monetary union as a whole. If countries are to share a currency, they must do so as equals, with EU institutions representing the common interest, rather than acting as instruments for creditors to impose their will on debtors. Denying people basic democratic choices over how much governments can tax and spend is bound to lead to a backlash — especially when EU fiscal rules are economically harmful. “No taxation without representation” is the stuff of revolutions.

None of this is radical or extreme, let alone anti-European. Outside the eurozone, many sensible people of all stripes would agree with it. The tragedy of the eurozone is that the policy establishment in Brussels and national elites are destroying political support for the European project by advancing Germany’s selfish and destructive agenda as a creditor. With luck, they will change course before it is too late. After all, while Syriza and Podemos want to make the eurozone fairer, the far right wants to destroy the EU altogether. Europe urgently needs mainstream alternatives to Merkelism — or it risks a President Le Pen.

[jwl]

So is Podemos an established party in spain or has it just appeared from nowhere?

[mr friendly guy]

Looks like someone just upped the ante

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-05/e ... n=business

Greek debt crisis: European Central Bank rejects Greek bonds as collateral for loans
Updated earlier today at 6:44am

The European Central Bank (ECB) has cut off Greek banks' access to a key source of much-needed cash, piling fresh pressure on the country's new government to reach a deal with international creditors.

In a decision that rattled financial markets, the ECB said it would no longer allow Greek banks to use government debt, which has a junk rating, as collateral for loans.

The Greek finance ministry was quick to insist that the country's banking system remained "adequately capitalised and fully protected", with other liquidity channels still available.

The ECB announcement came just hours after new Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis held his first talks with ECB chief Mario Draghi as part of his push to renegotiate his country's 240-billion-euro ($350 billion) European Union-International Monetary Fund bailout.

The unexpected ECB move follows an appeal from Greece's new leftist government to the ECB to keep its banks afloat, as it seeks to negotiate debt relief with its eurozone partners.

The ECB has now effectively refused that request, adding to Greece's problems. Germany rejected any roll-back of agreed austerity policies.

The ECB move was a setback for Mr Varoufakis, who had earlier pledged speedy talks with international lenders on setting up a new program of reform, after abandoning its earlier aid plan.

It puts Greek banks in a difficult position.

Two Greek banks had reportedly already begun to tap emergency liquidity assistance from the Bank of Greece after an outflow of deposits accelerated after the victory of the hard left Syriza party in a general election on January 25.

The health of Greece's big banks is central to keeping the country afloat.

Debt moves to feature in Greece-Germany talks

The ECB move will likely feature heavily in Mr Varoufakis's first talks with German finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble, whose country is seen as the strongest opponent of any easing, in the terms of the massive debts Greece has built up.

Both prime minister Alexis Tsipras and Mr Varoufakis - whose left-wing Syriza party stormed to victory in elections on January 25 - have been touring Europe in recent days to build support for a new debt agreement with creditors.

Elected on a pledge to end austerity policies imposed on Greece as part of its bailout, Mr Tsipras faces the delicate task of persuading his European partners to reverse course, while ensuring Athens still gets the aid required to avoid a default.

The new government has blamed its fiscal problems mainly on the austerity shackles fixed by Germany. Mr Varoufakis could face a testing time when he meets Mr Schaeuble.

Greece said these restrictions had choked growth in an economy that has shrunk by a quarter, failed to cut unemployment that stands at over 25 per cent, and made it impossible to service a mountain of debt worth 1.75 times its annual economic output.

But German chancellor Angela Merkel tried to squash talk that Syriza could play on divisions within Europe, insisting that there were no substantial differences between major eurozone nations.

"I don't think that the positions of the member states of the eurozone with regard to Greece differ, at least in terms of substance," she said.

In a bid to quell Western worries over the new Greek government's closeness to Russia at a time of Cold War-style tensions, Mr Varoufakis said that Athens would "never" seek loans from Moscow.

After talks in Brussels with European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker and EU president Donald Tusk, Mr Tsipras said he was optimistic of a "viable and mutually acceptable solution".

A Greek government source said Mr Tsipras and Mr Juncker discussed plans to "jointly" create a four-year reform plan for Greece, as well as a bridging deal to give Athens time to draw up plans for reforms including on corruption and tax evasion.

But Mr Tusk said resolving the showdown over Greece's debt was likely to be "difficult" and needed "cooperation and dialogue as well as determined efforts by Greece".

[Murazor]

So is Podemos an established party in spain or has it just appeared from nowhere?

Literally appeared out of fucking nowhere in the last year.

[Guardsman Bass]

Hats off to them, too. I don't think they'll be able to or want to change as much as they would like, but anything that shakes up the austerians and forces them to either go for tighter fiscal/monetary integration or separate currencies again is a good thing in my book.

[Thanas]

So as predicted, Greece's "we're not paying, btw, please loan us money so we can explain why we're not paying" tour got them entirely nowhere, as every Government in Europe pretty much told them that treaties have to be kept. The real master class was delivered by Schäuble, who pointedly remembered the Greek Government that Germany still was offering 500 tax auditors free of charge and that the offer had not been taken up. The press conference was a work of art - if watching somebody slam repeatedly into a wall would be an art form. Meanwhile, other nations like Portugal balked at the idea of Greece being allowed even further special considerations.

Tsipras response? To demand war reparations from Germany. (BTW, whoever was it that said this was just palliative for domestic consumption? Doesn't look like that now). When it became clear the Greek Government wasn't joking, they were reminded of the 2+4 treaty signed 25 years ago.

The demand for compensation, revived by a previous Greek government in 2013 but not pursued, was rejected outright by Sigmar Gabriel, Germany's vice chancellor and economy minister.

"The probability is zero," said Gabriel, when asked if Germany would make such payments to Greece, adding a treaty signed 25 years ago had wrapped up all such claims.
[...]
Gabriel referred to the "Treaty on the Final Settlement with respect to Germany", also known as the "Two plus Four Treaty" signed in September 1990, by the former West and East Germanys and the four World War Two allies just before German reunification.

Under its terms, the four powers renounced all rights they formerly held in Germany. For Berlin, the document, also approved by Greece among other states, effectively drew a line under possible future claims for war reparations.

Germany thus denies owing anything more to Greece for World War Two after the 115 million deutsche marks it paid in 1960, one of 12 war compensation deals it signed with Western nations.

But wait, what of the forced loan Germany got from Greece in WWII? Well, it was at 0% interest, so the 475 million is all they would get - if the loan was valid.

But as you can see, even that is problematic. There’s rather a Catch-22 situation there. If they can show that the money was stolen then it doesn’t have to be paid back. If it’s a normal credit then, well, inflation of a zero interest loan has been such that Germany could pay it all back tomorrow without breaking a sweat and without improving the Greek situation more than only the tiniest amount. That’s a tough needle to thread in a legal sense: proving that it was a simple commercial transaction but then arguing that it was under duress which is why no interest was charged.

So where are the two sides now? Locked in a giant mexican standoff, apparently., with even critical left-wing papers saying Greece will back down soon enough or exit the Euro.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... poker-game

The upshot is that Greece is back where it started in the poker contest with Germany and Europe. The new government has shown its best cards too early and has no credibility left if it wants to try bluffing.

So what will happen next? The most likely outcome is that Syriza will soon admit defeat, like every other eurozone government supposedly elected on a reform mandate, and revert to a troika-style programme, sweetened only by dropping the name “troika”. Another possibility, while Greek banks are still open for business, might be for the government to unilaterally implement some of its radical plans on wages and public spending, defying protests from Brussels, Frankfurt, and Berlin.

If Greece tries such unilateral defiance, the ECB will almost certainly vote to stop its emergency funding to the Greek banking system after the troika programme expires on 28 February. As this self-inflicted deadline approaches, the Greek government will probably back down, just as Ireland and Cyprus capitulated when faced with similar threats.

Such last-minute capitulation could mean resignation for the new Greek government and its replacement by EU-approved technocrats, as in the constitutional putsch against Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi in 2012. In a less extreme scenario, Varoufakis might be replaced as finance minister, while the rest of the government survives. The only other possibility, if and when Greek banks start collapsing, would be an exit from the euro.

However, keep in mind that nothing of importance has happened yet. Germany is only one country. Greece could in theory muster enough votes to vote Germany down at the next meeting. Whatever happens, it certainly will not be boring. I suppose one got to thank Greece for that.

[Vendetta]

So as predicted, Greece's "we're not paying, btw, please loan us money so we can explain why we're not paying" tour got them entirely nowhere,

The offer that Greece was making is basically the only one in which its creditors come out with anything.

Really.

A Euro exit would be disastrous for the entire Eurozone because it torpedoes the idea that the currency itself is stable and reliable, if one country can exit, others could, and when they do the value of the Euro, and of anything tied to it, plummets each time.

So why would anyone buy Euros or secure any other currencies on the value of the Euro?

Answer: They wouldn't, because the US Dollar will not have that problem.

And it's not like the Syriza government is going to be looking for plum eurocrat/ecb jobs after leaving office, they have absolutely no reason to toe the line in order to keep potential future job opportunities open, those opportunities wouldn't be there for a hard leftist anyway. So their political capital rests wholly within Greece.

In short, Tsiparas and Varoufakis actually can pull the trigger in this mexican standoff. Germany can't, because they're aiming at their own left bollock, the stability of the Euro as a currency and as a project.

[Thanas]

Not really, because Germany doesn't care about a weak Euro that much.

[K. A. Pital]

Not really, because Germany doesn't care about a weak Euro that much.

It benefits from the weak Euro massively. Of course it cares.

[Thanas]

Not really, because Germany doesn't care about a weak Euro that much.

It benefits from the weak Euro massively. Of course it cares.

Yes. It cares about the Euro being:
a) a functioning currency and
b) having low value.

Vendetta, who I was replying to, thought Germany should care that the Euro is strong or not weak.

[Terralthra]

He actually said that Germany cares that the Euro is stable, which it presumably does.

[Tribble]

If Greece leaves the euro there's a chance it may have a domino effect and other countries such as Spain may end up leaving as well. And it will certainly give the UK more of the incentive it needs to leave the EU entirely.

Is that necessarily a bad thing in the long run? Canada, the USA and Mexico have managed to do quite well for themselves without having to resort to a single economic, monetary and political union.

[K. A. Pital]

Monetary union is unnecessary. It leaves the states with fewer policy options and requires states to follow some single policy which does not take their particular conditions into account.

[Thanas]

Without a monetary union there would be no political union and without a monetary union the smaller nations of Europe would not be at the level they are now, considering the massive transfer of money for developmental aid they got.