Greek debt crisis [update: 3rd Bailout deal reached]

[Crown]

I'm fucking astounded (and perhaps I shouldn't be) that the man that veraciously and vociferously campaigned against Greece joining the Euro back in 2000 and was a whistleblower against the Greek government with their credit swaps with Goldman-Sachs in 2005 is being fingered as 'the problem maker' by the technocrats who insisted on a abysmal "economic policy" (the quotation marks denote derision) on Greece that has further impoverished her, and that sheepeople in this thread are actually cheering his departure.

What. The. Fuck.

[Purple]

And you create this strawman for which reason?

I am not.

I have never stated that a.) is better than b.)! I just pointed out that leaving the Euro does not make everything better, because actually imports will become more expensive. And this does have a negative impact on the standard of living, because people can afford less.

And I am saying that if person A loses some quality of life and has to contend with a lower standard of living that loss is not equal to person B loosing his livelihood. And that thus it is preferable for 75% of the population (to use your statistics) to suffer that loss than to let the other 25% (again, your numbers not mine) suffer starvation. I'll happily give one person bread to eat even if it means 100 can't get their cars repaired. Because one is a luxury and the other is not.

Than again my whole position throughout this thread was and is that the whole thing is a moral abomination on part of the EU countries who value getting their investment back more than the human cost of doing so.

[Crown]

Thomas Piketty dropping elbows all over Germany and 'their moral superiority' when it comes to external debt; in the original German and English translation (if he can get the copyright issues sorted, otherwise use Google). My favourite bits;

Piketty: When I hear the Germans say that they maintain a very moral stance about debt and strongly believe that debts must be repaid, then I think: what a huge joke! Germany is the country that has never repaid its debts. It has no standing to lecture other nations.

…after the war ended in 1945, Germany’s debt amounted to over 200% of its GDP. Ten years later, little of that remained: public debt was less than 20% of GDP. Around the same time, France managed a similarly artful turnaround. We never would have managed this unbelievably fast reduction in debt through the fiscal discipline that we today recommend to Greece… Think about the London Debt Agreement of 1953, where 60% of German foreign debt was cancelled and its internal debts were restructured.

Die Zeit: Many Germans believe that the Greeks still have not recognized their mistakes and want to continue their free-spending ways.

Piketty: If we had told you Germans in the 1950s that you have not properly recognized your failures, you would still be repaying your debts. Luckily, we were more intelligent than that.

Die Zeit: Do you believe that we Germans aren’t generous enough?

Piketty: What are you talking about? Generous? Currently, Germany is profiting from Greece as it extends loans at comparatively high interest rates.

Piketty: We need a conference on all of Europe’s debts, just like after World War II. A restructuring of all debt, not just in Greece but in several European countries, is inevitable. Just now, we’ve lost six months in the completely intransparent negotiations with Athens. The Eurogroup’s notion that Greece will reach a budgetary surplus of 4% of GDP and will pay back its debts within 30 to 40 years is still on the table. Allegedly, they will reach a 1% surplus in 2015, then 2% in 2016, and 3.5% in 2017. Completely ridiculous! This will never happen. Yet we keep postponing the necessary debate until the cows come home.

But remember; lazy Greeks, Varoufuckislier, NOT THE SAME BECAUSE OF REASONS, etc, etc.

[BabelHuber]

And I am saying that if person A loses some quality of life and has to contend with a lower standard of living that loss is not equal to person B loosing his livelihood. And that thus it is preferable for 75% of the population (to use your statistics) to suffer that loss than to let the other 25% (again, your numbers not mine) suffer starvation. I'll happily give one person bread to eat even if it means 100 can't get their cars repaired. Because one is a luxury and the other is not.

I try to explain this slowly again, perhaps it helps:

Both will happen, but not at the same time. Let's say an overindebted country leaves the Euro.

It will run out Of Euro, so it will have to create a new currency NC. What that means is that all prices are in NC instead of Euro now, 1:1.

Problem is that this new currency will immediately lose value after being traded. So within seconds or minutes the new currency falls, perhaps 20%, perhaps 50%.

As a citicen of this country, this will affect you immediately. This goes also for the state - everything that needs to be imported gets suddenly 20% or 50% more expensive. So as smaller your own industry and natural ressources are, as harder you will be hit.

But this does not mean that the unemployed will get a job immediately, too. At the beginning you have only the negative side-effects.

After a few months, production starts to raise because imported goods are so expensive. So e.g. Greece would grow tomatoes in-country instead of importing them from the Netherlands.

But this also does not mean that all the unemployed get a job within a few months, it takes a few months for the unemployment to start sinking. Also, the currency shock could very well lead to a higher unemployment at first anyways.

AFAIK for Greece the IFO institute expects 1-2 years before a Euro-exit could show the first benefits.

So an exit from the Euro is no easy task for a country which is weak anyways, I wouldn't underestimat this.

[BabelHuber]

But show me a nation with a devalued currency that'd be also struggling with massive unemployment like Greece, or Spain for that matter?

Having 25% unemployment is actually terrible: youth unemployment stays at 60%, meaning if you're in the 18-24 cohort, no job for you

Of course. This is not an easy situation. Spain, Portugal and Ireland are recovering, albeit slowly. But at least they have stopped shrinking, which is the first step. I expect them to 'bounce back' a little bit in the next 2 years, so things will get better. Of course it will take longer to get back to the 2008 level again.

Maybe your country should look for alternative suppliers then, who will make the same thing cheaper, or even in-source production. I know some E. European countries make decent buses, and I've seen quite a few Chinese buses rolling around with the same facilities as European ones.

Yes of course, this will also happen. But note that even the cheapest supplier wants to get Euros or Dollars.

For developing an own industry, this usually takes decades.

[K. A. Pital]

Of course. This is not an easy situation. Spain, Portugal and Ireland are recovering, albeit slowly. But at least they have stopped shrinking, which is the first step. I expect them to 'bounce back' a little bit in the next 2 years, so things will get better. Of course it will take longer to get back to the 2008 level again.

Even France and Germany diverged after the crisis. It is unlikely Southern Europe will converge with the developed countries once again, and this is even less likely in the case of Greece.

For developing an own industry, this usually takes decades.

If you never start, it never develops.

[Vendetta]

Of course. This is not an easy situation. Spain, Portugal and Ireland are recovering, albeit slowly. But at least they have stopped shrinking, which is the first step. I expect them to 'bounce back' a little bit in the next 2 years, so things will get better. Of course it will take longer to get back to the 2008 level again.

You know who recovered properly?

Iceland.

You know who didn't do any austerity at all?

Iceland.

You know when the UK started to sort-of-recover?

When they stopped doing austerity so hard.

(Not being in the Euro also helped. See also: Why Finland's GDP has declined 10% since 2008 and shows no sign of recovery, because in the Euro they can't do anything to make their exports competitive)

[Thanas]

It is implied that Latvia and other nations made their own population suffer badly to join the Euro. I sort of wonder, is this currency even worth the human suffering?

You think it would have been any better without the Euro? Honestly asking here, because I can't see how dragging a country with post-soviet-crash economy into the 21st century would have been achieved without either massive subsidies (see DDR) or human pain. I really think the Baltics and Slowakia etc. did the best they could. They made a democratic decision to go that way as well.

I've got some respect for the guy. He was walking without guards in the streets and rode a motoroller. I despise those who are putting themselves above the poor.

This was a show, much like the vaunted "we'll only ride economy class" show. Though unlike the latter, at least Varoufakis kept the show up till the end. Now he can retire to his luxury appartment and his billionaire father-in-law.

Of course he did. He knows that the compromise was already the best offer he could get, and that the people who made it are currently personally pissed off with him over his questionable negotiation tactics.

He wants to leave office on a high note. After the bad negotiations, the end of the programs, and the public vote on no more austerity, all he could do now was run around and polish doorknobs, begging for donations, because no one will give Greece credit now, anymore.

tl;dr - He knews he has run the car against a wall and set it on fire. He will let other people try to save what's left, and proclaim himself "winning".

Agreed. I smell a book deal coming as well.

I'm fucking astounded (and perhaps I shouldn't be) that the man that veraciously and vociferously campaigned against Greece joining the Euro back in 2000 and was a whistleblower against the Greek government with their credit swaps with Goldman-Sachs in 2005 is being fingered as 'the problem maker' by the technocrats who insisted on a abysmal "economic policy" (the quotation marks denote derision) on Greece that has further impoverished her, and that sheepeople in this thread are actually cheering his departure.

What. The. Fuck.

Yeah, couldn't possibly have anything to do with him alienating every other country in the Eurozone, could it? Heck, even Tsipras replaced him as head of negotiations long before this.

Of course. This is not an easy situation. Spain, Portugal and Ireland are recovering, albeit slowly. But at least they have stopped shrinking, which is the first step. I expect them to 'bounce back' a little bit in the next 2 years, so things will get better. Of course it will take longer to get back to the 2008 level again.

You know who recovered properly?

Iceland.

You know who didn't do any austerity at all?

Iceland.

Uh-Huh.

…Iceland’s general government budget ran a surplus equal to 1.8% of GDP in 2014, or a change in fiscal stance since 2009 equal to 11.5% of GDP. This can be found on Table A1 of the April 2015 IMF fiscal Monitor.

…Table A3 shows that Iceland’s general government cyclically adjusted balance rose from a deficit of 10.0% of potential GDP in 2009 to a surplus of 2.7% of potential GDP in 2014, or a change of 12.7% of potential GDP…

But even this tends to understate the amount of fiscal austerity that Iceland has engaged in. This is because it includes the increase in spending attributable to rising interest payments on the national debt. To get a proper idea of the amount of fiscal austerity that Iceland has engaged in (i.e. cuts in direct spending and increases in taxes) one has to look at the general government cyclically adjusted primary balance which can be found in Table A4. Iceland’s general government cyclically adjusted primary balance rose from a deficit of 6.9% of potential GDP in 2009 to a surplus of 6.2% of potential GDP in 2014, or a change of 13.1% of potential GDP.


How does this compare with other countries? The following graph shows the change in general government cyclically adjusted primary balance between 2009 and 2014 for 33 advanced nations, plus the Euro Area as a whole, and the four emerging economies of Croatia, Hungary, Poland and Romania that also happen to be EU members. (It turns out that 2009 is a good base year since the cyclically adjusted primary deficits of most advanced nations peaked that year.)



By this standard Iceland has done about 30% more austerity than Ireland, over double that of the UK, roughly two and a half times as much as the US, and approximately five and a half times as much as Latvia. The only country that has done more fiscal austerity is Greece.

The scope and scale of Iceland’s fiscal consolidation was truly mind boggling. Real primary expenditures were estimated to fall by 12.7% between 2009 and 2012 (Slide 16). This was accomplished by slashing current expenditures, transfers, and maintenance and investment, and by freezing public sector wages and benefits for a period of four years (Slide 13), during a time when inflation soared due to the 50% depreciation of the króna.

On the revenue side the VAT was raised to 25.5%, which at that time was the highest in the world (Slide 14). The top personal income tax rate was increased from 35.7% to 46.2% (Table 2):

The capital income tax rate was doubled from 10% to 20%, the corporate income tax was increased from 15% to 20%, the social security contribution (SSC) was increased from 5.34% to 8.65% and fishing levies (important in Iceland) were increased. In addition a whole slew of new taxes were imposed (e.g. a net wealth tax, an inheritance tax, a financial activities tax (FAT) etc. etc.)

The bottom line is that Krugman’s implied poster child for anti-fiscal austerity is in reality the advanced world’s second leading practitioner of it.

https://thefaintofheart.wordpress.com/2 ... al-policy/

[Crown]

Yeah, couldn't possibly have anything to do with him alienating every other country in the Eurozone, could it? Heck, even Tsipras replaced him as head of negotiations long before this.

Alienated a bunch of cunts who couldn't find a good fiscal policy with a map and compass? I don't see the bad here.

Of course. This is not an easy situation. Spain, Portugal and Ireland are recovering, albeit slowly. But at least they have stopped shrinking, which is the first step. I expect them to 'bounce back' a little bit in the next 2 years, so things will get better. Of course it will take longer to get back to the 2008 level again.

You know who recovered properly?

Iceland.

You know who didn't do any austerity at all?

Iceland.

Uh-Huh.

<snip>

I don't suppose any of those pretty numbers has anything to do with Iceland wiping off 85% of its (bank) debts does it? What am I saying, of course it does!

Jesus-titty-fucking Christ Thanas do you work at being this embarrassingly bad at macroeconomics?

EDIT :: And next time someone says 'Greece hasn't done enough austerity' I'm gonna show them this chart, so thanks man!

EDIT 2 :: Oh, and the chart begins from 2009 ... you know, the year after it wiped out its bank debt and its economy was recovering, fucking hell man, you're comedy GOLD!

[K. A. Pital]

I think Vendetta is wrong in that Iceland had no austerity, but it certainly was a different story, with the burden shifted to the rich and the poor protected?

https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.o ... 913-en.pdf

Or is this paper wrong?

[Crown]

I think Vendetta is wrong in that Iceland had no austerity, but it certainly was a different story, with the burden shifted to the rich and the poor protected?

https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.o ... 913-en.pdf

Or is this paper wrong?

It's the fluid definition of austerity that's the problem. The way it's sold to the clueless sheeple of the middle class is; 'we need to balance the budget, the same way you balance your household income'. And the sheeple nod and think this is a good idea.

The way it's usually implemented however is by slashing social benefits of the poor and middle class, rather than say closing out corporate tax loopholes which drain the economy of billions. Which would both give the same 'balanced budget' result.

So when sheeple look at a 'balanced budget' they assume, 'oh austerity', but fail to understand that Iceland actually protected its middle and poor class by giving it the biggest debt write off in history (I believe relative to Iceland's size at least), and ensuring the welfare state, rather than protecting the bankers.

[Nova Andromeda]

Alexis Tsipras certainly has his work cut out for him, but I wish him the very best. I was surprised the Greek Finance minister resigned and I'd like to know the real reason behind it. Perhaps it's just a political move and he'll still guide policy?? In any event, Tsipras will now have to do two very difficult things: 1. default on the Greek gov. debt (I'd say 100% of it as long as the Troika continues to deal in bad faith) while keeping banks operational, business afloat, the people from starving, and 2. equitably divide up what funds remain after default, 3. stabilize Greek income by going after the oligarchs, enforcing tax laws, stamping out corruption, and generally cleaning house and leveling the playing field. I still think the following is a good course of action and my thoughts seem to be consistent with the reasonable side of this debate.

The EU forced Greek austerity has annoyed me for a while now and I've been hoping Greece finally sets a badly needed example and tells the lenders to go fuck themselves. Along this line of thought, it seems to me that the best strategy for the Greek people as a whole is to let things drag on as long as they can without paying toward their debt so that their people can shift their money out of Greek banks. While things come to a head, simply prepare for Greek default of both their banks and their gov. so that when that default happens the transition is well organized. When the default does happen, impose monetary controls such that no one can move money out of bankrupt Greek institutions. Next, people/corporations lose their money in this order: 1. the foreign lenders that setup this problem with the previous corrupt Greek gov. in the first place (read: IMF, EU, German banks, et alli), 2. foreign corporations (they take a 100% haircut on net profit) & the rich (all money above a certain large amount is lost according to age, net asset value, etc.), 3. Greek corporations (they take a 100% haircut on net profit), 4. everyone that isn't working and the rich again (they take a haircut on all money above a certain middling amount), 5. at this point everyone should have reset to a level playing field and so everyone will take further haircuts as needed on an equal basis. If I understand the scale of Greece's debt accurately, then I don't think you would need to go much past #1 or possibly #2 to make Greece and it's banks solvent going forward.

At this point, Greece is now solvent and generating a surplus while at the same time providing some level of health care and subsistence living for its people. It can stay in the monetary union and just carry on. Many institutions and gov. will be infuriated, but I somehow doubt investment will dry up from everyone (see possibly Russia/China/the pragmatic) ... after all Greece has cleaned up its act and its budget. It is very unlikely going forward that further investment will need to be written off as a loss and in any case all you lost this go around (if you were a productive corporation as opposed to an investor) is your recent net profits.

So appears that after all this back and forth the Troika and it's supporters (e.g., Thanas) has no argument other than "Those dame lazy Greeks must SUFFER! Why? Uh ... MORAL HAZARD!".

Also, Greece may still be screwed even if Tsipras can do all the above as automation may simply cut the average worker out of the global economy and the Greek workforce (especially after years of depression and austerity) is the low man on the totem pole.

[Elfdart]

But remember; lazy Greeks, Varoufuckislier, NOT THE SAME BECAUSE OF REASONS, etc, etc.

It's always a laugh when even right-wing rags like Forbes and The Wall Street Journal debunk a lot of this bullshit. As it turns out, on average Greeks work more hours than the EU average.



Oh, and their "generous" pensions are nothing special either.

So why does the Troika and its groupies have such a raging hard-on for inflicting austerity on Greece? For the same reason every other bully pushes others around: Because they fucking can.

By the way, I did enjoy right-wing scold Peter Hitchens' well-aimed kick in the UK establishment media's nuts (they get all giggly at the thought of making pensioners "take a haircut", i.e. get fucked over) when he pointed out that Britain still owes the USA over $225 billion dollars for WW1. This debt was never written off -Uncle Sam was nice enough to simply stop asking for any more installments.

[Vendetta]

Shit son we only just paid off some debts from 1720 this year give us time!

[Nova Andromeda]

Shit son we only just paid off some debts from 1720 this year give us time!

Sure, no problem. We offer a very attractive time loan at prime + 2% interest. We just need any old oligarch's signature (a good legitimacy veneer for our best rates). Oh, we'll also need some collateral such as ownership of all your state owned assets if you default. We'll take care of the pesky details such as marketing.

[His Divine Shadow]

So why does the Troika and its groupies have such a raging hard-on for inflicting austerity on Greece? For the same reason every other bully pushes others around: Because they fucking can.

Because right wing economics are actively malicious and evil.

[BabelHuber]

So why does the Troika and its groupies have such a raging hard-on for inflicting austerity on Greece? For the same reason every other bully pushes others around: Because they fucking can.

Perhaps you know that the Euro was introduced in Germany with the explicit statement from the politicians that we won't have to subsidize any other European state. This "no-bailout-clause" is also a part of the Maastricht contracts.

Nevertheless, some people think that Nothern Europe should subsidize Greece for all eternity. Because this is exactly what Tsipras wants: To get further money from the EU without any conditions.

But to do so would be a political suicide in countries like Germany - when the second bail-out package for Greece passed the German parliament, 29 MPs of the conservative CDU/CSU voted 'no', and ~180 (IIRC) stated their concerns in written form.

A third bail-out package could very well be the end of the current government - the conservative MPs are already under pressure from their voters because of the last two. They can hardly explain why so much money was spent, but seemingly nothing was achieved at all.

And then add the insults of the Syriza-politicians to this: Being depicted as Nazis doesn't help here. Lots of Germans think that first we gave them a shitload of money to prevent Greece going bancrupt, then they went bancrupt anyways, thereby wasting our money, and now they are insulting us. Perhaps it was a mistake to help in the first place? At least you can keep your money, and you get insulted either way.

So no, this has nothing to do with bullying. The source of this conflict is that the Nothern European voters and the Southern European voters have a completely different view on this topic.

The Northern European voters as a whole don't support subsidizing Greece forever, while the Greece voters seem to think that "democracy" means that Northern Europe pays for them for all eternity.

The results are showing now - Greece won't get any money to burn now anymore. Instead it will likely receive some sort of social welfare, so people don't starve to death or die because tehy cannot afford medicine. But that#s all tehy can expect now, tehy have to stand at their own legs in the end.

[Irbis]

You think it would have been any better without the Euro?

It would certainly be better without Russobpubic neocon policies and adopting neutral stance like Finland did instead of crash and burn they picked instead.

Honestly asking here, because I can't see how dragging a country with post-soviet-crash economy into the 21st century would have been achieved without either massive subsidies (see DDR) or human pain.

Funny that you speak about subsidies. Let's ignore Germany's debt of 1953 and see how Poland's debt in 1990 looked like (link). Poland owed in total 95.5 billion dollars. Out of that sum, 2.5 billion owed to Soviet Union was cancelled on bilateral nullification of all debts. Out of 32.7 billion owed to Paris club, USA agreed to cancel 40% in two tranches as thanks for Operation Simoom. Also, 0.5 billion was agreed to be returned as pro-ecological investment. Out of 11.2 billion owed to London club, 4.7 billion was cancelled as the debt was restructured and changed to Brady Bonds. So, total of 18 billion, nearly 20% of debt, gone to ensure rest of it will be timely paid (and it was, ahead of time in fact). Had West tried to squeeze blood out of the stone, Poland would be second Belarus now, not NATO/EU member. So, yeah, restructuring debts totally doesn't work

By the way, all that debt? It wasn't due to grand banking con and "balancing budgets" like you do these days, it was accrued to modernize and grow economy. Quite a lot of these factories and industrial centres (not included these mindlessly closed and bankrupted in austerity plan of 1990) were later cheaply sold, um, "privatized" for billions of dollars, propping up Polish budget last 25 years, and I suspect sums drawn from that at least equalled if not dwarfed the debt in the end, but would need to double check it.

I really think the Baltics and Slowakia etc. did the best they could. They made a democratic decision to go that way as well.

I like how you know that better than people who, you know, actually lived there the whole period and saw the transformation firsthand. Except, no, every single Eastern European country did major fuckup in transforming the economy, causing up to a decade lost in contraction and stagnation. The thing is, most of these fuck-ups were different, so you could put together Frankenstein plan of correct transformation. Do you know what it doesn't include? Austerity and mindless cuts on very top of the list.

Also, remind me, what part of Troika occupation was democratic, again?

[Lonestar]

Thomas Piketty dropping elbows all over Germany and 'their moral superiority' when it comes to external debt;

(1) I think it's asinine to compare externally-imposed debt to willfully-accepted debt.


(2) Even if the way the debt accumulated between the two was exactly the same, I'd hope you'd be able to tell that the Geopolitical situation of Central Europe circa 1953 was slightly different than Greece 2015. There were some pretty compelling strategic reasons on the part of the Western Allies to keep the FRG as least hobbled as possible from a economic standpoint. Not so for Greece.

[Crown]

(1) I think it's asinine to compare externally-imposed debt to willfully-accepted debt.

You are of course correct; one debt was incurred when successive corrupt governments engaged in completely legal (and yet dishonest) derivative swaps with Goldman-Sachs to hide their deficits and the other debt was incurred by starting a World War that led to upwards of 50 million people dying.

(2) Even if the way the debt accumulated between the two was exactly the same, I'd hope you'd be able to tell that the Geopolitical situation of Central Europe circa 1953 was slightly different than Greece 2015. There were some pretty compelling strategic reasons on the part of the Western Allies to keep the FRG as least hobbled as possible from a economic standpoint. Not so for Greece.

And this invalidates the results of the good economic practice ... how?

Motherfucking dumb cunt wank, why is it every. Single. TIME. We mention that Germany had it's motherfucking debts cancelled we get the same response "DIFFERENT BECAUSE REASONS!!!SHIFT+1!!"?

No shit it was different politics back then! But the economics behind the decision was sound. No economy can be expected to grow with crippling debt repayments, it's fucking lunacy. Which is why the IMF is breaking ranks with the other Troika. Or is it? Is the IMF feeling ... dramatic pause ... political pressure from its biggest shareholder (i.e. the US)?

[Nova Andromeda]

So why does the Troika and its groupies have such a raging hard-on for inflicting austerity on Greece? For the same reason every other bully pushes others around: Because they fucking can.

Perhaps you know that the Euro was introduced in Germany with the explicit statement from the politicians that we won't have to subsidize any other European state. This "no-bailout-clause" is also a part of the Maastricht contracts.

Nevertheless, some people think that Nothern Europe should subsidize Greece for all eternity. Because this is exactly what Tsipras wants: To get further money from the EU without any conditions.

But to do so would be a political suicide in countries like Germany - when the second bail-out package for Greece passed the German parliament, 29 MPs of the conservative CDU/CSU voted 'no', and ~180 (IIRC) stated their concerns in written form.

A third bail-out package could very well be the end of the current government - the conservative MPs are already under pressure from their voters because of the last two. They can hardly explain why so much money was spent, but seemingly nothing was achieved at all.

And then add the insults of the Syriza-politicians to this: Being depicted as Nazis doesn't help here. Lots of Germans think that first we gave them a shitload of money to prevent Greece going bancrupt, then they went bancrupt anyways, thereby wasting our money, and now they are insulting us. Perhaps it was a mistake to help in the first place? At least you can keep your money, and you get insulted either way.

So no, this has nothing to do with bullying. The source of this conflict is that the Nothern European voters and the Southern European voters have a completely different view on this topic.

The Northern European voters as a whole don't support subsidizing Greece forever, while the Greece voters seem to think that "democracy" means that Northern Europe pays for them for all eternity.

The results are showing now - Greece won't get any money to burn now anymore. Instead it will likely receive some sort of social welfare, so people don't starve to death or die because tehy cannot afford medicine. But that#s all tehy can expect now, tehy have to stand at their own legs in the end.

Northern European voters have been sold a bill of goods. The Troika feared 'contagine' and the failure of all the big bank's (read: oligarch's) loans. The bailouts were doomed to fail from the start: Paul Krugman outlines why here. The bailouts accomplished three things relevant to this: 1. transfer that bad debt to the public (i.e., N. Euro. voters), 2. extract as much money out of the indebted nations as possible, and 3. postpone 'contagion' until the bad debt could be transferred to the public.

If you ignore what everyone says and instead just look at what everyone did and the results thereof it is pretty clear what's going on.

[Crown]

Northern European voters have been sold a bill of goods. The Troika feared 'contagine' and the failure of all the big bank's (read: oligarch's) loans. The bailouts were doomed to fail from the start: Paul Krugman outlines why here. The bailouts accomplished three things relevant to this: 1. transfer that bad debt to the public (i.e., N. Euro. voters), 2. extract as much money out of the indebted nations as possible, and 3. postpone 'contagion' until the bad debt could be transferred to the public.

Oh-oh, now you've done it. You've mentioned Krugman. A Keynesian.

If you ignore what everyone says and instead just look at what everyone did and the results thereof it is pretty clear what's going on.

Here's a handy info graphic of the state of affairs at the time of the first Greek bailout;



And the just a small reminder that the current head of the ECB was (most likely) the same guy who signed off on the Greek derivatives swaps with Goldman Sachs if you read between the lines when he blocked Bloomberg's attempt to get their hands on the Greek swap files back in 2012.

But remember; lazy Greeks, Varoufucklies, NOT THE SAME AS WHEN GERMANY GOT ITS DEBT WRITTEN OFF! etc, etc.

[FTeik]

I'm fucking astounded (and perhaps I shouldn't be) that the man that veraciously and vociferously campaigned against Greece joining the Euro back in 2000 and was a whistleblower against the Greek government with their credit swaps with Goldman-Sachs in 2005

If only people had been listening to him, then. But Greece joined the Euro by swapping credits and now its biting them in the ass. Sometimes what goes around comes around.

is being fingered as 'the problem maker' by the technocrats who insisted on a abysmal "economic policy" (the quotation marks denote derision) on Greece that has further impoverished her, and that sheepeople in this thread are actually cheering his departure.

What. The. Fuck.

Well, Tsipras had to reign him in already before the Referendum. My guess is, that he forced Varoufakis to step back, so he can show the creditors, that the Greek side is now (more) serious about the negotiations.

You are of course correct; one debt was incurred when successive corrupt governments engaged in completely legal (and yet dishonest) derivative swaps with Goldman-Sachs to hide their deficits and the other debt was incurred by starting a World War that led to upwards of 50 million people dying.

And Germany paid for that: with twelve million of its people dead, a QUARTER of its former territory lost, its heavy industry, that wasn't destroyed dismanteled for reparations (the Brits were responsible for (not) distributing the greek share), a separation of the remaining country (overcoming that cost 1,000 billion € so far and still isn't complete) in two parts and occupation for four decades, so don't say the country got off easily in 1953.

Greece on the other hand is in trouble, because it has been spending more than it earned for decades (and that long before the introduction of the Euro), because it has been incapable or unwilling to properly collect taxes. If they want to do that, fine. They are a sovereign state with a democratically elected government. But not with the money of other sovereign states, who have to justify their spending to their own citicens.

[Crown]

And Germany paid for that: with twelve million of its people dead, a QUARTER of its former territory lost, its heavy industry, that wasn't destroyed dismanteled for reparations (the Brits were responsible for (not) distributing the greek share), a separation of the remaining country (overcoming that cost 1,000 billion € so far and still isn't complete) in two parts and occupation for four decades, so don't say the country got off easily in 1953.

Greece on the other hand is in trouble, because it has been spending more than it earned for decades (and that long before the introduction of the Euro), because it has been incapable or unwilling to properly collect taxes. If they want to do that, fine. They are a sovereign state with a democratically elected government. But not with the money of other sovereign states, who have to justify their spending to their own citicens.

Cool story bro. Remind me again of how the German economic miracle was sparked? Was it A) crushing and senseless austerity or B) HUGE FUCKING DEBT FORGIVENESS.

Answers on the back of a postcard, ta. o/

[Irbis]

(2) Even if the way the debt accumulated between the two was exactly the same, I'd hope you'd be able to tell that the Geopolitical situation of Central Europe circa 1953 was slightly different than Greece 2015. There were some pretty compelling strategic reasons on the part of the Western Allies to keep the FRG as least hobbled as possible from a economic standpoint. Not so for Greece.

Translation: Economical situation of Europe circa 1953 was slightly different than in 2015. There were some pretty compelling strategic reasons on the part of the Western governments to give the workers some rights and reduce day work to keep the communist influence and revolutions at bay. Not so anymore today.

Which, sorry, is completely rotten and utterly morally bankrupt way of thinking reducing humans to numbers, if honest. If you don't see why this makes the contrarian side side instantly lose all that moral superiority they smugly tout about, sorry, I can't help you.

But then again, thanks for once again demonstrating voices against help to threatened union member pretty much equate to "I hear they buy salmon on food stamps!" or "it's her fault, too short skirt and make-up, the whore". I don't think I heard even single argument against Greece that wasn't the above in nutshell.

Though yes, you're right - biggest tragedy in Greek situation is that it's not neutral country bordering Russia. If Greeks did the shit Ukrainians try with their debts right now you'd already hear calls for military occupation and/or kicking out of EU, but strategic, 'totally not anti-Russian' interests will get you everything short of open genocide ignored.