UKC

As someone who has always been in favour of staying in the EU, I reckon the way Germany has forced Greece into a total capitulation will make a British exit more likely. For one thing it dispels this notion that you retain your sovereignty - Greece has effectively been told democracy is no longer relevant and that it's government must do as it's told. Secondly we have the concept that the EU is there for the benefit of all - yet we have what looks like gunboat diplomacy and 19th century colonialism.

What hope has Cameron got now of getting the changes he wants before the referendum - they were never good, but will anyone be interested in another round of tough negotiations ?

But surely the biggest problem is how people now perceive the EU - the Belgian bureaucrat will be seen as harmless compared to the ruthless German financier. Yes it's crude stereotyping and everyone is trying to avoid mentioning the war, but it is starting to look as if the Eurozone is completely controlled by the Germans and that Greece is being treated so as to be a warning to the other countries to keep them in line. If the big flaw in the euro was monetary union without fiscal union, how long before that is on the table ?

And yes I know there is a difference between the EU and the Eurozone, but again it's a question of perception. And I'm sure many will take the view that Germany is taking over the rest of Europe by stealth.

So is it likely to change your vote ?

In reply to Chris the Tall:

No it will not change my vote. I have little interest in, or understanding of the monetary side of things. My biggest concern is human rights, we have much more chance of them remaining if we stay in the EU.

In reply to Chris the Tall:
That's a given once you enter a formal currency union...

You cant have such a thing and retain all sovereignty, even in the UK's case we have given up some sovereignty, without doing so there is no point in the EU.. you devolve matters to be dealt with at a higher level.

" If the big flaw in the euro was monetary union without fiscal union, how long before that is on the table ?"

I think we'll see that slowly change, this demonstrated how we need to align our economies much better and have rough guidelines, what income taxes should be, business taxes, rough guidelines so we all have aligned economies.. But also be careful how the euro grows. There was a need (a want probably) to grow the euro quickly to give it a mass and that happened too quick.

It worked for some, despite the hits they took, for others it didn't.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Hopefully the yes side can make this "And yes I know there is a difference between the EU and the Eurozone" distinction clear to the public. And no, the current debacle won't stop me voting yes (or stop me sniggering up my sleeve at the people who thought we should have joined the Eurozone).

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Interesting take on the whole situation. I think the thing I take from this is that there are two sides to Europe. When everything is going well, it is one for all and all for one. The bigger states are happy to support smaller states. However when the sh1t hits the fan, it is every man for themselves. Germany may be seen as being the bullies of all this, but at the end of the day they are just trying to get the best deal for German voters. It would seem that at the present, there is no such thing as a European.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Yes, isn't it shocking that a country lends Greece 60 plus billion euros and they expect it paying back.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

No, I remain convinced that the EU is a good thing, and that we should stay in it and support it.

However...

Sir Chasm:

... I now see that people have every right to snigger at me for having thought we should join the Eurozone!

In reply to summo:


It does seem shocking that a country could have lent Greece 60 billion and expected it paid back, yes.

In reply to skog:




a fool and her money are easily parted. But, in this case, once bitten twice shy!

In reply to Chris the Tall:

I think it shows where the power is and always has been in the EU. The other MS will be very keen on the UK remaining in the EU. Imagine how one sided QMV decisions will become. Germany has a massive QMV, but the UK has a lot of power, once we align with Fr and some of the newer MS, such as Poland. I think this is why Fr is quite keen on the UK staying in. I don't think the tactics of Germany will have helped the case of the in campaign though!

I can't see it helping the case for our joining the euro either, or the other MS outside of the eurozone.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Lots of the other EZ members weren't happy with Greece either so it's not just a German coup.

The other point is that the Greek parliament still have to legislate for this bailout / austerity package which could just end the Syriza government and we'd be back near square one.

In reply to skog:



Well yes if you believe that if you interfere in an event, change the past, the future will run the exact same route.. then yes.

Or the UK joined at the start, there was less of a desire to grow the Euro so fast to get it stronger, the UK would have had more of a say and possibly this would have never happened.

We just don't know. Unfortunately you can't just say if X happened Y and Z would have happened.

All we do know is in the past 3-4-5-6 decades as the EU has grown it has brought unprecedented peace and stability to a region.

In reply to Andy Hardy:


No, there were a number of other countries wanting a very hard line. Germany wanted Greece to stay in, I think others would have been more than happy to have seen Greece excluded.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


How do we know this??

In reply to Postmanpat:

Because we've never had a union which has been so stable. We had other attempts but western europe has been war torn for the previous 5 + centuries.

Do you not think it is true?

I think the EU and its predecessors, the coal and steal community, were instrumental in France and Germany working together and in particular in assisting Germany's redevelopment and allowing Germany to grow without being occupied by France as was planned.

Maybe we could have played it out without any supra-nationalisation but the history suggests not. It was the treatment of Germany post WW1 which directly led to WW2.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Correlation isn't causation.

Probably not. I'd have thought two hideous wars in forty years combined with a fear of the Soviet block and a magnanimous settlement for Germany probably did the trick.

In reply to Postmanpat:

I know.. but we have tried to build small communities and alliances with no success, WW2 was the final straw, and realisation that the post WW1 treatment of Germany led to WW2, that was the initiative to build communities which are dependent on each of the member states becoming successful developed nation.

Yet one world war didn't?

Without the European Coal and Steel community Germany may not have had such a good settlement. There was strong support in France that French maintain occupation of the border zones.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Would appear that Italy and France saved Greece, or saved them for the next few days anyway. Not surprising one has a pile of debt, the ther needs the eu to keep bankrolling it and it's pet projects like the Strasbourg eu parliament meetings...

In reply to Postmanpat:

Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Cyprus... ? Peace I what cost, the north bankrolls the south, forever?

In reply to summo:

I heard it was France but I also think Germany did not want them out, they looked at it seriously and even had plans drawn up, had Germany actually wanted them out I think they'd have gone.

However a country being expelled from the Euro is a massive step and no one wants it to happen on their watch.

It has made the greek referendum a totally bogus event though. Their politicians really did handle this spectacularly poorly.

In reply to summo:

I think Yugoslavia may have already gone...

The balkan states are now too important for the security of the EU to let go, plus the constant battle with Russia.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

The Greek referendum might still matter , the politicians there need to pass new rulings before Greece gets anything more than a temporary bridging loan to it's banks, to keep them afloat for a few more days.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

My point was that there hadn't or isn't real peace, plus its been distracted by common enemies elsewhere. The natural divides, differences and bitterness still exists between many nations.

In reply to summo:


Should we blame the borrowers or the lenders for the folly. And even if we blame the Greek govt, for how many years must the Greek people be forced to take collective responsibility for the actions of a previous regime ?

In reply to Chris the Tall:


Primarily we should blame the European elite who designed a system to encourage such borrowing and lending and wilfully turned a blind eye to the manipulation of statistics by the Greek elite to justify such borrowing and lending.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


I say, debt re-structure over 20,30,50 years, but they must reform their finances.

In reply to summo:


Why?

In reply to Skip:

because if you borrow you should re pay, what happens to spain, Italy, Ireland ,Cyprus etc.. if Greece has it's debt written off, do they get a rebate?

Greece knew the Euro rules were fudged when it joined, it thought it could beat the system, it did nothing after joining to make up lost ground. The problem isn't solved yet either, only delayed for a little while.

In reply to Postmanpat:

other countries didn't meet the criteria for the Euro, but they reformed their finances and caught up lost ground. Greece went the other way.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


I don't see why we should give the EU much credit for this, its principally down to NATO and US support.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


Until they sort out their basket case of an economy and show they've grasped reality at last. The post referendum celebrations (what exactly were they celebrating?) suggest they've some grasping yet to do.

In reply to pec:
Of course they played a part but it was the coal and steel community which changed the views on how to treat Germany.. The EU has played a central part in stability.

In reply to pec:


It was a bit of a nothing question though.. There wasn't even an agreement on what the actual question meant.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


So what did they think they were actually celebrating? Anyone with any grasp of the situation (and if anyone should have a grasp of it, its the Greek people) would know they had nothing to celebrate.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


The way Germany was treated after WWII as opposed to after WWI certainly helped but that was the actions taken by the allies, nothing to do with the EU.
It wasn't the EU that stood firm against the Soviet Empire, half the EU was part of that empire at the time, it was NATO given the credibility it needed by US backing.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Why just snigger up your sleeve, when you could vigorously rub their noses in it Sir C ?

In reply to pec:

They didnt know it was a bogus referendum.. it had zero impact on what actually happened.

http://www.businessinsider.com/greece-referendum-totally-pointless-and-puts...

They basically asked the country do you want more austerity.. they said nope.. but they still got further austerity..

Read up on the European Coal and Steal Community, that was very important in France (amongst others) respecting Germany's right to rebuild and not be further occupied or punished.

At the time, the early versions of the EU were just the 6 western european nations..

In reply to pec:



It is not the fact of WHO gave the Germans a debt haircut after the war , and therefore room to breathe and rebuild their economy, it is the principle that a country in debt cannot rebuild their economy quickly if hampered by huge dept in that way.
No one is Saying that Greece were not to blame for the position they are in, but you can say the same thing about the Germans.

Having been the recipient of such debt largess, the Germans went on to become an economic powerhouse, but then soon forgot the lesson that they were taught, that they could not have done it without being given a huge leg up.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Unfortunately stories like this http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/14/greece-crisis-osborne-seeks-to...
will be grist to the mill for NO campaigners.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

“Leaders from across the EU agreed in 2010 that the EFSM would not be used again for those in the euro area and that remains the prime minister’s view,” the spokesman said.

“We have not received a proposal and one is not on the table.”

So hot wind from Osborne, with the Guardian dutifully publishing it. Brill.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:


Meaning?

In reply to Jim C:

"Having been the recipient of such debt largess, the Germans went on to become an economic powerhouse, but then soon forgot the lesson that they were taught, that they could not have done it without being given a huge leg up. "

In fairness the Greeks had half the debt written off 5 years ago (no such luck for the Irish). The original lenders took a massive haircut at the last negotiations and withdrew. Because, following that haircut, no private lender would want to lend money to Greece, the financial institutions of the Eurozone (i.e. its taxpayers) as well as the IMF (i.e. the tax payers of its member states, at least for the democracies) had to step into the breach. They did so in order to stabilise Greece, to avert a national bankrupcy and to prevent further speculation against other states such as Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland or even France. They succeeded in stabilising Greece, but the Greeks did not use the lull prudently (as they had promised as a condition of the bailout) and failed to improve tax collection, stamp out endemic state corruption, improve the business environment and so on. In fact, they have shown time and time again that they'd rather continue the lifestyle that led them to this disaster, and have shown no inclination whatsoever to improve their situation. They have not run a surplus budget in over 40 years. Needless to say after calling your main lenders terrorists and Nazis and utterly failing to implement much needed and promised reforms the German people are getting a bit fed up with the Greek position yet they are being called the bad guys! Weirdly, a clear majority of Greeks still seems to want to stay in the eurozone, even though it (along with their own monumental national profligacy and personal unwillingness to contribute) is one of the chief architects of their current reduced circumstance.

Comparing the current situation with assistance to Germany post WW2 is absurd. The Marshall Plan was devised by the US not to just rebuild war devastated regions and modernise industry in order to make Europe prosperous again but chiefly to prevent the spread of communism which Germany would be very suspectable to if some kind of punitive treaty of Versaille (sp??) was imposed on them.

The Greeks since joining the Euro 16 years ago have had ample chance, to put it bluntly, get their sh*t together and makes moves to becoming the advanced European country they aspired to be but instead ignored the very evident structural problems of their economy and went on cheap debt fueled binge. As I say, comparisons to post war Germany are absurd.

In reply to Postmanpat:


Meaning that Osborne is talking up preventing something that wasn't going to happen anyway.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Perhaps you didn't read the story "Athens faces demands to repay €7bn of debts in July, including €3.5bn due to the European Central Bank on 20 July.
This will require a bridging loan of £10bn-£12bn, as the full bailout will not be agreed in time. All of the other 27 EU nations are expected to be asked to contribute."

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:


Juncker proposed it. Osborne rejected it. That's a story, even if it was convenient that it was leaked.

In reply to Sir Chasm:
I don't see the problem with contributing to a bridging loan, as this will come back when the full bailout is ready, surely?

In reply to Postmanpat:

Admittedly I did miss that story. Is there any meat to it?

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle: It's being widely reported http://news.sky.com/story/1518285/britain-may-face-1bn-bill-for-greek-rescu...
But, in terms of this thread, it's more to do with the way it can be spun by NO - some may suggest that loans to Greece, bridging or other, are unlikely to be repaid.

In reply to Cú Chullain:

>
Agreed. I also think that comparisons with the other PIGS are a bit misleading. The crises in Spain and Ireland were primarily the result of class property bubbles in the private sector which necessitated State bailouts which necessitated excessive fiscal spending. The underlying fiscal balances were not brilliant but the situation could be stabilised by bailouts and "normal" spending cuts.

Greece's crisis, however, was largely a function of long term and deep fiscal imbalances which had been deliberately disguised, and a culture of poor governance and corruption. These problems are not solvable by a few years of austerity and certainly not without a massive will amongst the Greeks to change which, as you point out, was not there.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

Agreed.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Well, I don't know what you mean by "meat". Assuming that it is basically true it is certainly relevant that the ghastly Juncker is trying to move the goalposts to involve the UK and others outside the Eurozone.

In reply to Postmanpat:
Come on, I'm sure we can trust a man who was president of Luxembourg, uninterrupted, for 18 years.

In reply to Jim C:


Some people seem keen to give the EU credit for this, but the correct decisions were first taken in the immediate aftermath of the war by the allies, not the EU which didn't even exist at the time (nor any of its predecessor organisations)


I agree, Greece cannot solve its problems with that level of debt, nor can it ever realistically pay it off, but.....


In the aftermath of WWII the German people accepted full responsibilty for their situation and knuckled down to rebuilding their country in a way which frankly puts the Greeks to shame, they still appear to be living in cloud cuckoo land.


I don't think they've forgotten that lesson at all, they've bent over backwards for decades to bring other nations along with them on their road to economic success, in the case of Greece, at some considerable cost to themselves.

I don't know how long you expect Germany to bear its war guilt but personally I think its time to move on, it was a lifetime ago now. I find the Greek's willingness to invoke Nazi comparisons to the very nation that has done so much to help them pretty disgusting and wouldn't blame Germany if they told the Greeks to piss off and sort their own problems out.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

...... They basically asked the country do you want more austerity.. they said nope.. but they still got further austerity.. >

Which prove my point point that they're living in a dream world.

At the time, the early versions of the EU were just the 6 western european nations.. >

I'm aware of this, but the path to German rehabilitation was first put in place by the allies even if the EU predecessor organisations carried on with it.
I also recall that it was NATO which kept up the pressure on the Soviet Union in the 80's until its final demise, not the EU.

In reply to pec:



Possibly, I think their party lied to them about what could be achieved. Maybe they were dreaming, its pretty tough, someone promised them something that could not be obtained and they went for it.

Either way I dont see the point in punishing the country for the next 2-3-4 decades because of the incompetence of their various governments.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Are you suggesting northern Europe should pay more in tax, or less on public services so it can help those less competent and less prudent in the south? Is that fair?

None of this should be a surprise, Greek has had lower taxes on everything for decades, higher spending for decades. The current situation isn't rocket science, merely common sense.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

You must be joking? He is under investigation by the Eu, despite being president, for the tax deals he negotiated whilst he was PM there.
Plus, Luxembourg is so small, many UK local authorities have bigger budgets and populations. It's like being the ceo of a large council, then running the EU, the two posts simply don't compare in their scale.

In reply to summo:

You might want to check the batteries on your irony-detector.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:
Possibly, or get a mains one!

It's tough as there some here who think the sun shines out of the eu leadership and that Greece is fiscally prudent.

In reply to summo:

I think it was a collective fault between the Eurozone lenders and Greece's government at the time, so I think characterising it as only Greece's problem and enforcing perpetual austerity on the Greeks is morally dubious and will probably be counter-productive.

In reply to summo:



That's the point of the EU, to redistribute wealth and to assist those areas which are poorer, like Ireland, North Wales and other poorer areas of the EU. Irelands road net work has been vastly improved through EU grants. The big wealthy countries are net contributors.

In reply to Roadrunner5: " Irelands road net work has been vastly improved through EU grants.."

and airports..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/spains-ghost-airport-finally...

Getting its first plane this september! opened in 2011 lol!! *

*probably not entirely relevant because I am not 100% sure how it was funded but couldn't resist

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:



Could happen anywhere:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Brandenburg_Airport

In reply to Roadrunner5:
"That's the point of the EU, to redistribute wealth"
Really? I can't see that here http://europa.eu/scadplus/constitution/objectives_en.htm
and probably not even if we go back to the "European Coal and Steal Community".

In reply to Roadrunner5:


No, the point of EU funding towards poorer states is to help reduce regional disparities in income, wealth and opportunities. In short, helping poorer member nations stand on their own two feet economically and become strong trade/research partners. Greece became neither and at best has payed lip service to required reforms and at worse completely ignored them while at the same time borrowing at rates from the international markets it could only have dreamed of under the drachma as those nice Germans were underwriting everything. Now the party is over they still want to retire at 55, not pay tax sort out rampant corruption in its state institutions and expect (mostly) German taxpayers to pick up the tab

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Yes and no, if you want to have funding you have to work towards being a self sufficient country, Greece took the money, wasted it and didn't nothing to improve its long term prospects.

In reply to Cú Chullain:
So why do we designate areas as needing development and poor billions in.

Ireland being the classic example and also much of western Scotland and the isles. It allows communities to be sustainable which wouldn't be without such grants.

In reply to Cú Chullain:

. "Now the party is over they still want to retire at 55"

You do realize that doesn't actually happen.. They may want to retire early but have you, you know, looked at data on mean retirement ages?

They aren't actually that different around Europe.

In reply to Roadrunner5:

Areas are designated for development, not a lifetime of subsidies. Greece wrongly presumed people would keep throwing good money afterbad, their politicians made a massive gamble and it back fired.

So if the Greeks pay lots of tax into an efficient effective government, they don't over spend and they don't retire early etc.... Why are they borrowing in the first place... Their economy hasn't functioned properly, ever, or at least a 1000yrs or more.

In reply to summo: obviously there are issues but when you look at the actual data on retirement age it really doesn't provide the obvious answer people think it is.. It's a lazy stereotype.

I think they do have to get their shot together, obviously reforms are needed, but I fail to see why not helping them is the answer. We'd cast them astray with a poor economy and a weak currency.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


Neither do I, they need to leave the Euro, take the pain in one hit, reform their economy and move on.

In reply to Roadrunner5:


because they been thrown EU money for years and wasted it? They've done nothing to restructure their economy, even now they will arguing about not implementing the changes that will save them. How much more money do you throw? When is enough, enough?

In reply to Roadrunner5:

what about their income tax or vat policies? Public sector staff, pay, holidays, military spending.... they are massively out of kilter with all the country which are funding them.

In reply to summo:


Whatever the past discrepancies, Syriza were elected in to power and immediately saw that the Troika's policies had crushed the economy by 25% and that there was no way that they, Greece, could work their way out of debt. It is one thing to run up a debt, but it is quite another for your creditor to undermine your ability to pay it back whilst demanding you pay it back.

In reply to Roadrunner5:




They are not much different now since some kind of pension reforms have been forced upon the Greeks, however prior to said reforms early retirement did happen all too frequently:

http://greece.greekreporter.com/2014/12/04/75-of-greek-pensioners-enjoy-ear...

“In the public sector, 7.91% of pensioners retire between the ages of 26 and 50, 23.64% between 51 and 55, and 43.53% between 56 and 61. In IKA, 4.44% of pensioners retire between the ages of 26 and 50, 12.83% retire between 51 and 55, and 58.61% retire between 56 and 61. Meanwhile, in the so-called healthy funds, 91.6% of people retire before the national retirement age limit,”

Although the official national retirement age was 59 in 2009 (later moved to 67 in 2015) a succession of weak governments and strong unions allowed p*ss taking on an epic scale to occur. Until the very recently imposed reforms Greece had a remarkable 580 professions deemed hazardous or strenuous enough to qualify for early retirement: firemen, police, construction workers (fair enough you could argue), but also hairdressers (because of the chemicals), wind instrument players (gastric reflux) and radio presenters (microbes in microphones)! So despite what the 'official' state retirement age was the actual average age of retirement was lower as the stats/link above demonstrate.

Add to this the incompetence/corruption of running the pension system we have situations now where The Social Insurance Institute (IKA), which manages pensions for more than 5.5 million people, is seeking to reclaim up to €8 billion paid out in bogus pensions over the past decade. A further pension census ordered in 2012 as part of the country’s bailout conditions turned up more than 90,000 entirely bogus claimants – mostly the relatives of long-dead pensioners – and 350,000 more inconsistent claims.

You can kind of understand why your average German who has to work longer, retire later and receive less than their Greek counterpart might have got a bit miffed when Greeks started to demonstrate in the streets against any changes to their system which was entirely underfunded and unsustainable.

In reply to Shani:

true, but they aren't asking to pay it back, they are asking for it to be written off. If they offered structured reforms and a FULL repayment over a longer period, that would have been a more honest approach.

Greece isn't willing to make the reforms that will ever enable any repayment, they have to take some responsibility.

In reply to summo:


We are back to your poor understanding of macro economics. Greece CANNOT ever hope to pay the debt back - not in a lifetime. This is because the debts are too massive. The Troika killed off 25% of Greece's economy making an impossible repayment even more so. The monetary controls in place over the past week have made this problem more acute.

As for full repayment over a longer period, Greece just agreed to debt-repayment without relief, but it is impossible to fulfill. Prior to this agreement on Monday the IMF said "European Union countries would have to give Greece 30-years to repay all its European debt, including new loans, and a dramatic extension on the maturity of its debts. Without such extensions creditors might have to accept "deep upfront haircuts" on existing loans."


Talking of responsibility for this mess, what about due diligence from the EU prior to accepting Greece to the Euro? What about Goldman Sachs audit of Greece prior to joining? What about the damaging economic impact of the Troika's governance of Greece? You cannot blame Syriza for pointing out the obvious when they came to power in January and you should reflect on the fact that the IMF is increasingly moving in support of Syriza's analysis.

In reply to Shani:

Indeed. The IMF does not have the emotional attachment to the flawed concept of the euro that the ECB and the European Commission have.

In reply to Shani:

that's fine, 30 years it is, why not. It's your money, you've spent it so you should and must repay it. Even if it takes a long time. No one else spent the money that was given to Greece, other than Greeks. Other countries have taken much longer to repay debts, with interest.


Any 18 yr old greek with a basic economic understanding only had to look at balance sheets of all the European countries to realise what a mess Greece was in and didn't comply with the Euro requirements. Greece chose to ignore it failings., their accountants did as requested to get them into the Euro and the ECB had it's own agenda.

Even once in the Euro Greece did nothing to improve it's position. Germany didn't meet the Euro requirements either, it fudged it's way in then made changes to it's fiances after to improve it's outlook, now it bankrolling half of Europe, if not all of it. Greece was lazy and did nothing, other than spend. Even the Olypmics was another financial disaster waiting to happen.

Everything that has happened has been predicted since the Euro started, but Greece was happy to take the money, hoping no one would ever come a knocking.

In reply to summo:


Let's unpack this a little. How is it that the Greek government are being advised to sue Goldman Sachs in an attempt to claw back some of the hundreds of millions of dollars it paid Goldman to secure its position in the single currency?

In reply to Shani:


let's actually see what happens, I imagine that GS only acted on the information it was fed by the previous governments, who were desperate to enter the Euro. There will always be lawyers baying for blood, it's their pay cheque.

Either way, all I hear from you is typical of most of Greece, "Everything is somebody elses fault". If Greece doesn't accept any responsibility for anything and make some changes, it's current internal poverty, unemployment and poor economic outlook will look quite insignificant as it will drift backwards even more.

In reply to summo:

The Euro was a disaster waiting to happen, a supposedly economic project entirely driven by political motives, an political motives composed of hubris, imperial over-stretch, arrogance, micro management and bureaucratic authoritarianism, above all by utter dishonesty with and disdain for, the populations. As William Hague correctly said when the Guardian-BBC Europhiles were saying with their normal dismissive certainty that Britain must join the Euro or die, the Euro would be a burning building with no fire exit, exactly the situation of Greece. This crisis was both predictable and predicted, by those the Guardian-reading bien-pensant love to sneer at as little Englanders, swivel eyed, racists,etc, etc,etc. But the left was entirely and utterly wrong agbout the Euro and the EU, just as it is utterly wrong about mass third world immigration to the UK, Islam, about everything in fact. As the the old joke T-shirt slogan had it :

The Guardian - always certain, always wrong - about everything!


And the insulated, over-paid and cosseted, inward-looking EU apparatchiks were very happy to turn a blind eye to the deliberate and sustained Greek deception.

I suppose it is too much to expect the amende honorable from the Guardianistas, now they have been shown to be so utterly out-argued by those found to be clear sighted and hard headed, where the left where delusional, by those they have spent decades insulting and ridiculing. Like the Bourbons, the left have learnt nothing, unlike them however they have forgotten everything, especially everything inconvenient like reality and history.

In reply to Shani:


Bit like the drunk waking up in a hedge covered in his own p*ss and vomit being advised to sue the barman for his predicament.

In reply to Simon4:

Oh there are some quality U-turns going on at Guardian Towers these days!!

Owen Jones leading the charge!

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/14/left-reject-eu-greece-...

...along with stable mates George

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/10/why-eus-increasing-failu...

...and Suzanne

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/08/i-cant-support-a-europ...

In reply to Simon4:


Yeah, that Mrs Merkel, she's a real leftie, nothing but trouble.

In reply to Cú

Summary of new Grauniad gospel: The undemocratic overweening arrogant EU is great until, er, it doesn't do what we, want.
Muppets

In reply to Cú Chullain:


And if that drunk was your child.....

In reply to Shani:


hopefully the hangover and washing their own clothes, will teach them a lesson and they won't do it again.

In reply to Cú Chullain:

Well, even the IMF think that Greece got screwed on this one. Normally they just cheer and get asset stripping.

In reply to summo:


What - you wouldn't advocate putting a 30 year punishment on him?

In reply to Shani:


Well it was only 1 night of over drinking, Greece have been over spending and under taxing for how many years?

Plus, surely any honest citizen would think they should repay what they borrow and spend?

In reply to Simon4:

I hate to interrupt your rant but you do realise the "left" isnt a single body. If you managed to grasp that then you can move on to the fact that support for the EU doesnt have an obvious left/right bias with people on all sides of the spectrum having differing views. Outside of the frothing nationalists who just dont like johnny foreigner

For example you should be thanking Gordon Brown for his opposition to the Euro. Without him we may well have joined. So three cheers for Gordon (go on Simon you can do it).
Or you could consider the fact that the tories were far keener on what became the EU in the 60,70s and 80s. The referendum in 1972 was by Labour.
Or even that it was Thatchers disagreement with Howe over the Euro that actually triggered the leadership challenge (although obviously that was the straw breaking the back).


says the person busy reinventing both.

In reply to summo:


So the analogy does not work (it wasn't my analogy).


Why do we have laws protecting borrowers and lenders? What happens when a borrower CANNOT physically repay a debt? What happened to the banks when they became over-leveraged?

In reply to Shani:
What happens when a borrower CANNOT physically repay a debt?

Some bright spark gives that dept it a fancy name packages it up and sells it on to unsuspecting investors (that don't know what they are buying

But that trick has been done once, even the the stupid bankers will not fall for that twice.

In reply to summo:

Greece are going to be forced to sell off and privitise the countries assets .
Would now be a good time to offer £50 quid for the Elgin Marbles?
(and stop them asking for them back)

Sadly, although I'm joking, some will exploit this .

In reply to dissonance:

Do you not think this "For example you should be thanking Gordon Brown for his opposition to the Euro. Without him we may well have joined." rather over eggs the pudding? I don't really understand where this idea that "good old Gordon, kept us out of the Euro" came from. I certainly don't remember a huge public clamour to ditch the pound and it certainly wouldn't have been an easy process for either party to have gone through. Perhaps he guessed the mood right.

In reply to Shani:

Greece can pay, it could have a 5 year break. Put in ALL the proper measures it needs to run it's economy with an annual surplus. Then it can pay back, every cent, with interest, over 10,20,30,50 years.

Banks; they are left to crash, Leymans?

Or bailed out, forced to changed, and make a profit again, with the UK banks, northern rock etc..

In reply to Jim C:


Because of the state of Greece and it's previous management, even if they had a fire sale, the shelves would be empty as they have no assets. Only hot air and armpit hair.

In reply to dissonance:


that's because it was a union with a trade agreement, not a fiscal, law making, or leadership union that it's turned into.

In reply to summo:

They must have some assetsSumo , as the money raised(£50 Billion estimated) is to go into a fund that will not be administered by the Greeks apparently.

In reply to Jim C:

mainly ports, a few islands, ruins, little bit of gas & oil,... Varoufakis's motorbike? perhaps an ebay auction.

In reply to Sir Chasm:

It would seem more he was unsure of the benefits/risks.
Could Blair have pushed it through without the Brown or Balls (who was openly against it)? Maybe, maybe not. It was them who ensured it didnt get close to a vote.

In reply to summo:


No it really wasnt. The EEC was always intended to lead to those.

In reply to dissonance:

You should probably add John Major to the list http://www.theguardian.com/politics/wintour-and-watt/2011/nov/24/john-major...

In reply to summo:

Ok, I'm interested. Can you specify more detail on how you came to this conclusion? I would like to see some figures if possible.

This is doubly interesting because of Germany's debt history in Europe. They were given debt relief and you may well have insight as to how they could have avoided this.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


There are plenty in both parties. I was sticking to Labour on the grounds those were the ones Simon4 was ranting and raving about. That said given his rather lunatic views probably a fair few tories fall under the "leftie" category for him.

In reply to dissonance:

Yes, it was your claim that without Gordon we may well have joined was rather ott.

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Not really. Different people at different times ensured we didnt join.
Gordon Brown would appear to be one of them since Blair was very pro Euro and could have pushed it through without an obvious opposition.
Admittedly I went the full hog on the three cheers front on the grounds I thought it most likely to get Simon4 imploding.

In reply to dissonance:

Well, not really, it assumes that even without Gordon we would have had a vote (the obvious opposition being most of the media and public), that it would have been a yes and that we would have met the convergence criteria. But it's rather by the by for a couple of years.

In reply to Cú Chullain:

Surely a better analogy would be that the barman pre-signed a contract saying they would ensure the person drinking was doing so responsibly?

In reply to Simon 4

If you actually read the Guardian rather than constantly ranting about it you will find many opinions are expressed with even the odd conservative minister giving a view. It is no better or worse than any of the few quality publications left in the UK and since Tiny Roland left and it became a trust it has arguably suffered from less ownership interferance than any of the other quality press. Its clear as mud you have a brain behind this journalistic red mist so why don't you just deal with the issues and stop this blanket generalistion nonsense that you are so critical of in others.

In reply to shani

Today:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/14/imf-report-greece-needs-mor...

Bloody trots at the IMF, its a disgrace!

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Hence the use of "may". He ensured it didnt come close so Simon4 should be thanking him. Since otherwise those evil lefties might have rigged it in their war against reality and history.

In reply to Jim C:

Actually it was some of the highly regarded current banks that did that with credit defaults and then hedged agianst their own recommendations of the product to customers. This was the straw that caused the international crash.

"But Goldman and other firms eventually used the C.D.O.’s to place unusually large negative bets that were not mainly for hedging purposes, and investors and industry experts say that put the firms at odds with their own clients’ interests. “The simultaneous selling of securities to customers and shorting them because they believed they were going to default is the most cynical use of credit information that I have ever seen,” said Sylvain R. Raynes, an expert in structured finance at R & R Consulting in New York. “When you buy protection against an event that you have a hand in causing, you are buying fire insurance on someone else’s house and then committing arson.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html?pagewanted=all&am...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ax3yON_uNe7I

But hey the more honest part of the Greek population who helped vote Syriza in partly on an anti-corruption rather than idealistic line take the brunt whilst the bankers, corrupt politicians and the eurocrats too incompetant to spot the false data that was obvious under the most basic forensic accounting methods ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benford%27s_law ) are all off scot free.

In reply to summo:




Lehman Brothers was the canary in the coalmine so is not an apt example. Given i am advocating a bailout for Greece, your example of Lehmans is not really appropriate as the UK banks were saved by a bailout. Now as you're keen to hold up bailed out banks as an example of reform, can you explain away Libor rigging, interest rate hedging products, exchange rate rigging and the several other scandals that have hit banking SINCE 2008?

Truth is we bailed out banks because of creditor power. The banks are no less corrupt now than before the crisis. Taxpayer bailouts saved Europe's banks.

They didn't invite you (and us - Czechs as well) to negotiation with Greece and they ordered us to pay Greece debts. That's how EU works. Vote out and give us chance to leave this overregulated, bureaucratic and undemocratic empire

In reply to dissonance:


Not the 1975 vote on the free trade agreement.

In reply to Shani:
Banks were bailed to prevent collapse. Leymans UK was still in profit at the time, only the us property branch failed.... The UK government can bail out any UK bank it likes, just like the Greek government can bail out its own banks. It's that country's money, their choice.

Anyway, you need to be digging out your drachmas by the look of things.

In reply to summo:
Banks were bailed to prevent collapse. Leymans UK was still in profit at the time, only the us property branch failed.... The UK government can bail out any UK bank it likes, just like the Greek government can bail out its own banks. It's that country's money, their choice.


You claimed at 12:49 that "banks are left to crash". This was blatantly wrong and a gross exaggeration barely applicable to Europe.

You've gone on to claim 'Greece can pay' but failed to back this up with ANY evidence. You are blowing hard but I would like some evidence of your claims please. Otherwise it is all hot air betraying macroeconomic ignorance.

The IMF and Krugman disagree with you.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/krugman/2015/07/15/history-lessons-for-euro...>

In reply to summo:


Do you mean the 1975 referendum on the continued membership of the EEC? Or something else in which case can you please name the treaty in question.
The EEC goal was "foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe".
Now it might not have been sold to the population as such but the EEC was always intended as a gradual process towards the Euro etc.

In reply to dissonance:

of course, that was the only UK vote on it.
yes, but it's a much newer phrase, certainly not mentioned then.
no, you are inferring that something which is recent knowledge, was knowledge then, it wasn't. In 1975 it was a common trade agreement with many of the current Euros countries not even being in the EU, some were still behind the Iron Curtain, so the phrase closer etc.. simply hadn't even been dreamed up then.

In reply to Shani:


No, some were and did, others were saved. Others were merged, some asset stripped. There simply isn't or wasn't a standard rule. None of which is relevant to Greece's current dilemma.

In reply to summo:


Yes it is. The banks were bailed out to a multiple of billions greater than that required by Greece. The vast majority of the initial bailouts to Greece went to pay off private creditors.

When money is required to maintain and protect the current economic model, it can be found.

Now back to YOUR solution. ....evidence please.

In reply to summo:


no it isnt. Its the beginning of the treaty of Rome which is the launch document of the EEC.


It may not have been common knowledge but it was available to any one interested. Indeed it was part of why some members of Labour were opposed to it in the 60s and 70s.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

>Greece has effectively been told democracy is no longer relevant and that it's government must do as it's told.

Twaddle. Democracy doesn't mean that if a country votes not to pay its debts other countries have to write them off.

jcm

In reply to Shani:

But, Greece borrowed the money from those creditors, it was Greece's debt, it still is Greece's debt. Why should someone else cover it for them. Even if it takes a long time to pay it off, it's their debt.


Why can't a country bail out or help business in it's own land. It's their tax payers money. The UK took no gifts from others to bail out the UK banks, start QE and other measures, it has borrowed and will need to pay back the trillion plus it owes eventually.

My solution, is Greece pays the money back it borrows, over the extreme long term, with modest interest. No haircuts etc.. but it must make some changes to their internal finances other wise the problem will never go away. If the Euro nations want to give Greece money, or drop the interest charges to save the Euro, that's fine. But the non Euro nations shouldn't be involved, as they made the wise choice to stay out of it.

In reply to dissonance:

I'll still disagree, even their own descriptions of the treaty of rome, describe it as a philosophical steps toward closer union, but the phrase was never used for decades. There was also no mention of the kind of currency, employment, migration, legislative union that we have today. It was 99% trade and commerce.

Revolting labour MPs!! It was labour that took the UK in further with the more recent treaties.

In reply to summo:

you might disagree but you'd be wrong. And the biggest changes (e.g. Maastricht) were those under the Thatcher governments (who were also amongst the strongest supporters of EU enlargement from 15 to (now) 28 countries) - not Labour

In reply to Doug:
Lisbon?

ps. She also negotiated the rebate, which is better than anyone else has ever managed before or since.

In reply to Doug:


Really?
I think you'll find it was John Major who signed the Maastricht treaty 2 years after Thatcher left office. Thatcher was pro "common market" and anti pretty much everything else about the EU, increasingly so as she spent more time actually having to deal with it first hand and saw how it really was from the inside.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11598879

In reply to summo:

BECAUSE GREECE DOES NOT HAVE ITS OWN INDEPENDENT CURRENCY!

The measures you are talking about such as QE are MACROECONOMIC by nature - this is exactly what I have been telling you!

Greece does not have autonomy over the currency it uses so it cannot 'create' money like the UK does and doesn't even have printing presses for the Euro. And no, the UK will not need to pay back all of 'the trillion plus it owes eventually' from some of these measures.

In reply to pec:



Thatcher signed the SEA in 86 which set the path to Maastricht, including -importantly for this discussion- EPC or European Political Cooperation which would become CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy) after Maastricht, very much not just the classic idea of a common market. Thatcher's later protestations that she was tricked on the SEA seem bizarre in that she seems to suggest she (and her government) didn't understand something so fundamental that she agreed to. Regret more like it.