|
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. |
On March 18 2015 23:10 Taguchi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2015 15:57 Sub40APM wrote:On March 18 2015 10:09 Taguchi wrote:On March 18 2015 09:54 Sub40APM wrote:On March 18 2015 07:49 Taguchi wrote:
What they should have done, if they thought the government couldn't afford the 200mln to provide food, housing and electricity to tens of thousands of people hit by extreme poverty, would be to ask that the Commission bears the burden of this particular expense as an act of respecting fellow human beings.
. I am pretty sure the EU already provide significant funds as a matter of course -- that is on top of the bailout funds no? Not for the people this particular bill is targetted at they don't. Also, Greece has had a primary surplus for a couple years now - 'bailout' funds go to creditors, not to paying off other state obligations. The current Greek finance minister disagrees: http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2014/04/24/greek-statistics-are-back-primary-deficit-presented-as-surplus-with-eurostats-seal-of-approval/ Right, the surplus is a concoction achieved through internal switcheroos. Doesn't mean any outsider is funding anything, simply means the government owes other state entities money. Bailout funds go to creditors. Simple enough? You dont have a primary surplus and you receive 7 billion in EU aid but outsiders arent funding anything? These words seem contradictory. If EU shuts of Greek access to the ECB it also means the banking system will be bankrupt, which also isnt free.
My point is it seems like on top of the bailout the Greek economy receives many other financial transfers from the EU and that the present Greek government's demagoguery is going to leave it in a position where those things are cut off and things get worse for Greeks -- and the Greeks seem to be rushing into the jaws of that situation because of 8 years of a deep recession.
|
On March 19 2015 02:52 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2015 23:10 Taguchi wrote:On March 18 2015 15:57 Sub40APM wrote:On March 18 2015 10:09 Taguchi wrote:On March 18 2015 09:54 Sub40APM wrote:On March 18 2015 07:49 Taguchi wrote:
What they should have done, if they thought the government couldn't afford the 200mln to provide food, housing and electricity to tens of thousands of people hit by extreme poverty, would be to ask that the Commission bears the burden of this particular expense as an act of respecting fellow human beings.
. I am pretty sure the EU already provide significant funds as a matter of course -- that is on top of the bailout funds no? Not for the people this particular bill is targetted at they don't. Also, Greece has had a primary surplus for a couple years now - 'bailout' funds go to creditors, not to paying off other state obligations. The current Greek finance minister disagrees: http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2014/04/24/greek-statistics-are-back-primary-deficit-presented-as-surplus-with-eurostats-seal-of-approval/ Right, the surplus is a concoction achieved through internal switcheroos. Doesn't mean any outsider is funding anything, simply means the government owes other state entities money. Bailout funds go to creditors. Simple enough? You dont have a primary surplus and you receive 7 billion in EU aid but outsiders arent funding anything? These words seem contradictory. If EU shuts of Greek access to the ECB it also means the banking system will be bankrupt, which also isnt free. My point is it seems like on top of the bailout the Greek economy receives many other financial transfers from the EU and that the present Greek government's demagoguery is going to leave it in a position where those things are cut off and things get worse for Greeks -- and the Greeks seem to be rushing into the jaws of that situation because of 8 years of a deep recession.
You should check about the "help" the greek received. It was mostly an help directed at the banks and it permitted those stupidass (french and german) banks to completly sell all their greek debts to public european institutions.
|
On March 15 2015 18:01 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2015 08:53 RvB wrote:
To be fair the US and China have already done the same thing way earlier. The US via QE and China because they pretty much decide their own exchange rate.
The US have a 4% commercial surplus ? And China's behavior is not an exemple.
Late response but I'll give one anyway.
They don't but they still let the dollar depreciate to record lows via QE. This was actually pretty important in getting their growth going again after the crisis. The ECB could've unlocked a currency war if they wanted but they did not or could not. Ths time it's simply the other way around.
QE is also not the only reason for the strong dollar. The US economy is preparing for a rate hike and has had a higher growth rate for a while now. The USD has been rising against a lot of currency's and some currency's went down even more than the euro compared to the USD.
|
IMF Considers Greece Its Most Unhelpful Client Ever
(Bloomberg) -- International Monetary Fund officials told their euro-area colleagues that Greece is the most unhelpful country the organization has dealt with in its 70-year history, according to two people familiar with the talks.
In a short and bad-tempered conference call on Tuesday, officials from the IMF, the European Central Bank and the European Commission complained that Greek officials aren’t adhering to a bailout extension deal reached in February or cooperating with creditors, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the call was private. The IMF’s press office had no immediate comment on the discussions.
Source
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On March 19 2015 03:35 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2015 18:01 WhiteDog wrote:On March 15 2015 08:53 RvB wrote:
To be fair the US and China have already done the same thing way earlier. The US via QE and China because they pretty much decide their own exchange rate.
The US have a 4% commercial surplus ? And China's behavior is not an exemple. Late response but I'll give one anyway. They don't but they still let the dollar depreciate to record lows via QE. This was actually pretty important in getting their growth going again after the crisis. The ECB could've unlocked a currency war if they wanted but they did not or could not. Ths time it's simply the other way around. QE is also not the only reason for the strong dollar. The US economy is preparing for a rate hike and has had a higher growth rate for a while now. The USD has been rising against a lot of currency's and some currency's went down even more than the euro compared to the USD.
It's false. The US didn't get their growth after the crisis by exports (the US is notably bad at exports, because their strategy revolve around producing directly in the country and not exporting), but by supporting internal demand - the QE was just one of their strategy, but they also increased deficit in the first years of the crisis by massive investment in various field. You cannot really compare the impact of a decrease of the parity of money between a country with a commercial deficit (the USA) and an area with a huge surplus (like Europe) even more if you include the fact that this area is reducing its spending.
![[image loading]](http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/files/us_trade_0409_1.gif)
The USA is NOT very open to the world and function almost like a closed circuit.
|
I'm surprised no discussion about Austrian bank collapse has come up. Ripples already are spreading throughout Europe, including to German banks. Tangled up with weakened Euro and Greece threatening not to repay, one event could spark a serious crisis in the near term.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-01/austria-on-track-to-bail-in-heta-creditors-after-aid-stop
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-15/duesshyp-rescued-a-second-time-as-heta-contagion-bites
DuessHyp, a commercial real-estate lender, is the first German institution threatened with collapse as a result of the actions. At least 11 German banks have disclosed Heta bond-holdings totaling at least 2.3 billion euros ($2.4 billion) since the March 1 decision.
Fitch Ratings estimates Heta losses will erase about 3 billion euros from the German banking industry’s profit this year. The losses facing the German banking industry will probably be “manageable,” Fitch said last week.
DuessHyp refinances itself by issuing Pfandbriefe, a type of covered bond sacrosanct in Germany as being devoid of default risk. In its 2013 annual report, the bank said it held 348 million euros of Heta bonds, which stood against 250 million euros of core capital.
DuessHyp’s Heta exposure “is closely monitored,” the bank said in its first-half report last year. Its net loss in the period widened to 25.9 million euros, compared with 19.5 million euros a year earlier.
|
It is not really a bank collapse now, they are trying to get rid of it in a more or less controlled manner after having made laws to be able to do that. (which is a bit of a fishy behaviour, but what are you gonna do, sit on the debt, while the banks keep making profits on your back, because they expect you to bail them out if they fail?)
Hypo Alpe Adria was nationalized years ago to supposedly save the German BayernLB a lot of trouble, so in a way the collapse already happened, its repercussions where dampened with injections of taxpayer money. (5,5 billion euros, which won't come back)
Noone, especially not the "experts", should be surprised by what is going on.
"On 14 December 2009, BayernLB, Kärntner Landesholding and Grazer Wechselseitige Versicherung sold their stakes in the bank to the Austrian government for 1 Euro each.[3] The bank was nationalised by the Austrian government to avert a bank collapse.[4] It is expected that between 13 and 19 billion Euros of outstanding loans will never be paid back; to avoid bankruptcy, the Austrian taxpayers will have to cover this loss." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypo_Group_Alpe_Adria)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/austria-nationalizes-hypo-group-alpe-adria-2009-12-14
|
You do what Iceland did.
You let the Banks go bankrupt and tell the investors to go fuck themselves.
After that you use the Money you saved by not bailing out the Banks to directly help your People that lost Money.
|
On March 20 2015 19:38 Velr wrote:
You do what Iceland did.
You let the Banks go bankrupt and tell the investors to go fuck themselves.
After that you use the Money you saved by not bailing out the Banks to directly help your People that lost Money. Well, as an EU member you simply can't do that, you would have to get consent from your partners and you wont.
Plus, Iceland has practically free energy and fish galore, which means they are not nearly as dependent as others on foreign investment.
(I am not saying it's impossible. I am saying it is A LOT more complicated than sticking up the finger and 'let it burn'.)
|
In the case of Greece,If they are trying to go through the audit of the debt, they are not even asking to not repay the debt. But to repay the legitimate part of the debt like Ecuador did.
|
There's still hope for Europe after all.
Hope that official who tried to veto the 200mln for alleviating (in a rather small way) the humanitarian crisis got a good scolding from his superiors. Some people really need to learn that there are people behind some numbers.
|
Why do you keep using the word veto? Last time I checked the European Comission didn't have the right to veto national laws
|
On March 20 2015 23:32 Sent. wrote:
Why do you keep using the word veto? Last time I checked the European Comission didn't have the right to veto national laws
You either follow IMF/EU/ECB orders or else threatening begins.
Those three institutions, at least during the previous muppet greek governments, could stop a law making procedure, not even let it get through the parliament for a proper voting.
|
On March 20 2015 23:32 Sent. wrote:
Why do you keep using the word veto? Last time I checked the European Comission didn't have the right to veto national laws
This is how laws were passed in the previous parliament. Governance by troika was a thing, even if not enshrined in any law, treaty and so on. A formal veto process doesn't exist but reality intervenes, sometimes in drastic ways.
|
A joint statement by the EU institutions spoke of a "spirit of mutual trust" and Tsipras said he now felt more optimistic, but it remained uncertain whether he and Merkel were talking about the same reforms, and how far Greece would have to start implementing them before it receives any new cash.
The risk of a continued standoff, exactly a month after Greece secured a last-gasp four-month extension of an EU/IMF bailout, was highlighted by comments from Merkel and Tsipras.
"The agreement of Feb. 20 is still valid in its entirety. Every paragraph of the agreement counts," Merkel told German journalists who questioned whether she was now offering cash for promises.
Tsipras appeared to differ. "It is clear that Greece is not obliged to implement recessionary measures," he told reporters. "Greece will submit its own structural reforms, which it will implement."
Merkel claims the agreed framework remains intact, Tsipras argues it is the sovereign right of Greece to set its own reforms, Hollande argues the same but suggests these reforms would certainly require conformity with the agreed framework (essentially appeasing both sides and saying nothing, classic political banter).
On Thursday, Greek banks reported the largest deposit withdrawals in a month, a sign savers are worried about the outlook for the country's finances and institutions.
During the bailout program the Greek economy has shrunk by25 percent, partly due to austerity measures imposed by the lenders. It risks running out of cash without more aid or permission to issue more short-term debt.
source
|
The latest mini bank run happened because of Dijsselbloem (or Dieselboom, apt nickname considering the result of some of his statements) talking of capital controls all of a sudden.
Ironically, implementation of capital controls is only effective if it's an unexpected event. Not much good implementing those after whoever could have taken their money elsewhere already did. Alas, dear Jeroen doesn't subscribe to this line of thinking, apparently.
Anyway, after last night hopefully we'll see an entire book on reforms from the Greek side and no more talk of austerity measures from the troikastitutions side.
|
Don't you do anything else than blame someone else for your own troubles? The liquidity issues are a consequence of the Greek governments behaviour and their rhetoric. Just look at 'the Varoufakis problem' that guy managed to antagonize a whole load of people in his short term as finance minister and not just because of his hilarious blogs.
source
WhiteDog I'll try to give a good response to you later. Haven't had the time yet to write one.
|
What? I made a factual comment about the very latest round of mini bank run, which was sparked by a Dijsselbloem comment a couple days ago. There was a distinct outflow spike after this comment, would you attribute it to anything other than the comment? Why?
I am not referring to prior developments in any way.
Hilarious Varoufakis blogs, eh. Is economic stagnation also hilarious? The rise of right-wing extremism throughout Europe? These were very predictable events (Varoufakis correctly predicted them too), courtesy of idiotic policies pursued these last few years all over Europe, policies that fly in the face of basic macroeconomic theory - the Americans followed a different set of policies, and even pushed for Europe to do the same, but alas!
The above are all quite distinct from the Greek problem, which is indeed unique. The extent of inefficiency, corruption, bad policies and so on in my country was and still is staggering. The problem was exacerbated by an extremely idiotic macroeconomic adjustment programme that never tried to solve core issues but simply opted for depressing an entire economy wholesale (alongside its ability to repay the very loans attached to such a programme) which brings us to today. I have posted about the huge discrepancy between targets set for growth and unemployment by the programme and reality before.
About Varoufakis himself... I posted a while ago that we are sure to see a great effort expended on discrediting the man, because what he says might be dangerous for the economic elite and the people currently in power. This has happened, to say the least. What I haven't seen, not even once, not in the article you cite either, is any sort of debate about the merits of his core ideas. Everything and anything about the man's lifestyle, public discourse, outspokenness, number of appearances, oratory skills, dress code, not one single commentary about his actual economic ideas/proposals. I find this curious, since his core proposals are extremely easily accessible by everyone and anyone. I also find it interesting that, whenever the press at large does mention some actual economic ideas coming out of a FinMin and don't focus on whether his handshake was sufficiently manly or sth, widespread support suddenly emerges. Yes, you will have to look beyond the lifestyle commentary to find how his speech was received even in this article. Another example. Or you could look at the people who endorse the basic premise of the modest proposal; the list includes economic nobel laureates, (former, naturally, the active ones have interests to protect after all) politicians and so on.
Finally, you can be as right-wing as you want, please do not put words in my mouth. Discourteous at best. I have tried to stick to the facts whenever I post here, kindly do the same. I think you even corrected me (think it was you...) on a point Varoufakis was wrong about concerning the newest Basel rules for banking and I readily conceded since you were correct - I mention this as further proof that I am, at the very least, a reasonable person. Are you?
|
On March 21 2015 04:51 RvB wrote:Don't you do anything else than blame someone else for your own troubles? The liquidity issues are a consequence of the Greek governments behaviour and their rhetoric. Just look at 'the Varoufakis problem' that guy managed to antagonize a whole load of people in his short term as finance minister and not just because of his hilarious blogs. sourceWhiteDog I'll try to give a good response to you later. Haven't had the time yet to write one.
Oh please don't be naive, issues of liquidity started long before Varoufakis gets any position in government, while the previous puppet government was still active with their imminent doomsday if Syriza wins the elections, while your "whole load of people" from EU were already threatening with a grexit.
So the problem with your "whole load of people" is that the greek people should possibly have asked them what sort of greek government we should have, you might have another Bavarian prince to spare for our king? We used to have couple of them 
|
On March 21 2015 05:56 Taguchi wrote:About Varoufakis himself... I posted a while ago that we are sure to see a great effort expended on discrediting the man, because what he says might be dangerous for the economic elite and the people currently in power. This has happened, to say the least. What I haven't seen, not even once, not in the article you cite either, is any sort of debate about the merits of his core ideas. Everything and anything about the man's lifestyle, public discourse, outspokenness, number of appearances, oratory skills, dress code, not one single commentary about his actual economic ideas/proposals. I find this curious, since his core proposals are extremely easily accessible by everyone and anyone.
The problem I see with his proposal is that it doesn't seem that modest at all, if modest means that it's supposed to work within the current legal framework. He pretty much calls for direct ECB financing through some kind of European debit fond if I understand it correctly, which just seems like a technicality to circumvent the principle that direct funding through the ECB isn't supposed to happen. The same seems to be the case for debt management. He seems to propose that the only thing that is supposed to change is the way debt-burden is calculated. Also borrowing for investment is supposed to happen through some European fond which again undermines the idea of not spreading borrowing risk over to other countries.
The whole thing only deals with monetary policy and primarily means to spread Greek risk over the Eurozone. There is not one idea in there how to fix Greece's bureaucracy, corruption, social inequality and structural economic issues and how to get Greece's productivity up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/r8NrHed.png)
