EPTIn other words, predatory lending.
European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 559
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
In other words, predatory lending. | ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
On September 28 2016 23:58 bardtown wrote: Do you find the current system effective? In the UK we have plenty of people who successfully abuse the benefits system. And if they are eventually forced into work it tends to be in the least productive roles possible. More a punishment than actually adding to the workforce. I think it will be fascinating to see how the ideological root of UBI translates into reality. Will people exploit it to live in slovenly subsistence, or will they embrace their newfound freedom from jobsearching pressures and redirect efforts into things they care about? If they do, their productivity is likely to be much higher than if they're forced into some artificial internship just for the sake of it. As with current welfare systems, I think we'd see both. Though I have to say, based on what I've seen here I'm quite skeptical it would be a good use of resources. A shocking number of people seem perfectly content to live a meager existence collecting checks and sitting around the house doing nothing all day. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9229 Posts
| ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On September 29 2016 01:03 forsooth wrote: As with current welfare systems, I think we'd see both. Though I have to say, based on what I've seen here I'm quite skeptical it would be a good use of resources. A shocking number of people seem perfectly content to live a meager existence collecting checks and sitting around the house doing nothing all day. No doubt we'd see both, but when people can do it anyway with the current benefits system I'm not sure it's a downside. Depends if the number of people doing that increases, but even though it seems intuitive that that would happen, I'm not so sure. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9229 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
On September 29 2016 00:38 LegalLord wrote: There are also people (troika etc) who loan out money to governments which are obviously incapable of using that money responsibly, see that money evaporate without ever being used for its intended purpose (government-funded economic development), and then use that debt as leverage to force said government to create structural adjustments (which damage the population) to restructure the country around debt repayments. In other words, predatory lending. The money was loaned out to prevent bankruptcy. And the whole point of the structural adjustments is that it makes the country able to service the debt in the future and makes it economically stronger in the long term. It would have happened that way if not for the inability to to implement the reforms and all the political fighting. It has worked in other countries so no it's not predatory lending. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10776 Posts
So credits were spoken to save greeces creditors (germam/french/english/swiss/././. Banks). It was never about greek recovery, it was about limiting the damage greece could do to the EU. The people? Reality check, you lived for 20+ years like the richest countries in the world whiteout the income to afford it. Is this nice/good/fair for "average joe"? No, it isn't. But if your national hobby is tax evasion, you'll get the bill sooner or later. Btw: tax morality among swiss people is VERY high, we just made a business out of your hatred for goverment. 《-- im not fond of this in the least. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
On September 29 2016 01:07 Sent. wrote: Choosing the "small government" route is the easiest way to lose elections in a country like Ukraine. Do that and you can be sure some "people's party" will steal all those juicy votes of clerks, nurses, miners, railwaymen and teachers from you. Good idea, but, who gonna let this happen? We got deputies in our parliament that using cocaine before working sessions, 450 persons overall and I can hardly name ten of them, but they are deciding what to do or not to do That's just a parliament, not mentioning prosecutors, lawyers, ministers and so on. Some financial and corrupted schemas are just amazing and counts for millions of USD. Mostly all the polititians and government officials has roots back in USSR communist party. The scale is not so big as it is in Russia recently, but still, generations must change to make a difference, besides, we still got ppl that remembers USSR from best angle possible - such combination of government and administrative vertical makes it harder to change anything. Education and healthcare in a bad spot, when teachers and doctors are not interested at all in doing their primary job due to lack of financials, simply very low salaries - that's a bad sign. And monopoly for those parts of production that gives the most money income. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10776 Posts
So, i don't see the problem. Half of the swiss parlament is probably a slight alcoholic... | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
| ||
|
stilt
France2751 Posts
On September 29 2016 01:37 Velr wrote: In short: greece fucked up ROYALLY So credits were spoken to save greeces creditors (germam/french/english/swiss/././. Banks). It was never about greek recovery, it was about limiting the damage greece could do to the EU. The people? Reality check, you lived for 20+ years like the richest countries in the world whiteout the income to afford it. Is this nice/good/fair for "average joe"? No, it isn't. But if your national hobby is tax evasion, you'll get the bill sooner or later. Btw: tax morality among swiss people is VERY high, we just made a business out of your hatred for goverment. 《-- im not fond of this in the least. Considering that your country sucks most of taxes from other countries, I found your comment on Greece pretty funny. Or disgusting, I guess it is a matter of perspective. Oh, I could argue that every corporation, entreprises and rich individuals practise in a pro level fiscal evasion and so, weakened their own nation but these ones seem to beneficit a strong immunity in the occidental world. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 29 2016 01:24 RvB wrote: The money was loaned out to prevent bankruptcy. And the whole point of the structural adjustments is that it makes the country able to service the debt in the future and makes it economically stronger in the long term. It would have happened that way if not for the inability to to implement the reforms and all the political fighting. It has worked in other countries so no it's not predatory lending. The criticism I mentioned was actually originally applied to IMF loans in Africa, though Greece isn't a bad example either. Structural adjustments are about making nations more able to service the debt, though the long term economic benefits are disputable. Lending to a country with an unstable political situation is a bad risk that no honest profit-driven entity would ever approve. Greece was not a good risk, that much is clear now. Ukraine was an obvious terrible risk and it was plain to see for anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of its political situation (a basket case the magnitude of Greece, but the size of Italy). The international lenders may be obtuse at times but they are not complete idiots, so I'm sure they knew. This suggests ulterior motives, i.e. predatory lending. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On September 29 2016 01:10 bardtown wrote: No doubt we'd see both, but when people can do it anyway with the current benefits system I'm not sure it's a downside. Depends if the number of people doing that increases, but even though it seems intuitive that that would happen, I'm not so sure. I'm skeptical. I doubt we'll see a decrease as those who are currently gaming the system are not really doing it for the fortune they can acquire (they can't), but rather due to the lifestyle they get (no work). I doubt this group is going to be motivated by the option of earning more - as they likely could earn more than they receive already by working (they might not at the outset, but over time they would). In the end I think we won't see any big difference, except the government now has an extra money-sink. | ||
|
Yurie
11897 Posts
On September 29 2016 03:06 Ghostcom wrote: I'm skeptical. I doubt we'll see a decrease as those who are currently gaming the system are not really doing it for the fortune they can acquire (they can't), but rather due to the lifestyle they get (no work). I doubt this group is going to be motivated by the option of earning more - as they likely could earn more than they receive already by working (they might not at the outset, but over time they would). In the end I think we won't see any big difference, except the government now has an extra money-sink. Biggest argument for universal income is that not all people need to work for society to function well. As time progresses this will become more and more true until an unemployment rate of 30%+ will be the standard. Hiring a tenth of those people into intern ships and so on does nothing when there is no jobs, just waste money and resources. If you think there is work for everybody and will continue to be so for the next few decades then universal income is a bad idea. The alternative is to hire all of them, since you will be paying a minimum salary anyway. Then put them/us to work doing gardening and cleaning/sweeping. Making the cities and parks pretty places by virtue of masses of people. Fostering caring of the areas as people living there take care of them in their daily work. Secondly creating teams where people of different backgrounds get to meet and socialise, making for better adapted citizens. You could hire them as anything, the idea is the same. Have a private tutor for each student, have a house keeper in each house. Whatever can contribute but isn't economically sound currently. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
On September 29 2016 03:01 LegalLord wrote: The criticism I mentioned was actually originally applied to IMF loans in Africa, though Greece isn't a bad example either. Structural adjustments are about making nations more able to service the debt, though the long term economic benefits are disputable. Lending to a country with an unstable political situation is a bad risk that no honest profit-driven entity would ever approve. Greece was not a good risk, that much is clear now. Ukraine was an obvious terrible risk and it was plain to see for anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of its political situation (a basket case the magnitude of Greece, but the size of Italy). The international lenders may be obtuse at times but they are not complete idiots, so I'm sure they knew. This suggests ulterior motives, i.e. predatory lending. You were saying the Troika which only acted in Greece. The IMF is supposed to be a lender of last resort for near bankrupt countries. That's their role. So no not predatory lending but yes extremely risky. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9229 Posts
| ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On September 29 2016 04:07 Sent. wrote: Do you guys think universal income can bring back housewives? Yes. Not sure if you're joking but I think this is another legitimate justification for it, too. Parents and (even more importantly as they tend to have no choice in the matter) carers perform a societal function with no compensation. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 29 2016 03:59 RvB wrote: You were saying the Troika which only acted in Greece. The IMF is supposed to be a lender of last resort for near bankrupt countries. That's their role. So no not predatory lending but yes extremely risky. A wiki search says that's not quite true, that all of the PIIGS countries use that term to refer to their creditors. Nevertheless, I would agree that perhaps I used too specific a term, and I really should have spelled out that I referred to the financial institutions that make up the troika, rather than the collective itself. I think the IMF has certainly done what could qualify as predatory lending. Unviable loans to win control of governments and public assets. Predatory in a government sense, which is not necessarily analogous to the civilian equivalent of the term. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On September 29 2016 04:07 Sent. wrote: Do you guys think universal income can bring back housewives? Since you seem to be Polish, what's happening with the anti-abortion law in your country? Where does it come from and what are the reactions in the society? | ||
| ||
