Letter from GERMANY FINLAND NETHERLANDS all bailout fundsremain a part of public debt

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

Markets fell all ove Europe reacting to violence on the streets in Spain and Greece.

AND

Markets were also reacting to a letter from Germany, Finland and the Netherlands on Tuesday that implied that any rescue funds Spain receives for its banks will remain part of its public debt - a decision which would also affect Ireland.


So all fantasy aside finally now....when will they be honest and admit hee that the austeity will be here for at least 30 yrs

I am sorry but considering the EU crisis and our efforts and progress we need to ask ourselves is it worth it for the next 30 yrs...or more..

The GOVT needs to come up with new options.

SO NO DEAL....it's clear...it's in the open....it is going to get worse....and stay that way for the next thirty years?

Can we get some rope yet???

johnnyskeleton

What markets fell? Do you have a source?

Any dip in European equities (and indeed non Japanese Asian equities) could also be attributed to the rises in US equities Market due to their qe3 (or is it 4?).

Other explantions could include reduced consumer demand, poor investment opportunities, thr randomness of Market forces, a general seasonal slump etc.

So I'm not quite sure that Spanish riots over cuts and a europewide dip in equities are necessarily linked. Generally, as well, there is generally a favourable recation by investors to any country that appears to be tackling it's problems.

antoobrien

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy wrote: »

So all fantasy aside finally now....when will they be honest and admit hee that the austeity will be here for at least 30 yrs

Austerity will be here until we get the current & structural deficits sorted, which we are on track to do by 2015.

[Jackass]

Regarding the statement from the Finnish, German and Dutch finance ministers, it has been reiterated in the Dail and has been confirmed by the E.U. commission, that this statement is merely conjecture and that the agreement made by all heads of state at the E.U. summit back in June stays valid.

It is agreed upon and thus very unlikely to be revoked. I think this was perhaps a tantrum that wasn't supposed to make international headlines.

Good loser

[Jackass] wrote: »

Regarding the statement from the Finnish, German and Dutch finance ministers, it has been reiterated in the Dail and has been confirmed by the E.U. commission, that this statement is merely conjecture and that the agreement made by all heads of state at the E.U. summit back in June stays valid.

It is agreed upon and thus very unlikely to be revoked. I think this was perhaps a tantrum that wasn't supposed to make international headlines.

On the contrary it's a dose of hard reality.

Batten down the wagons and circle the hatches.

im invisible

Burn the bondholders!!!

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

Good loser wrote: »

On the contrary it's a dose of hard reality.

Batten down the wagons and circle the hatches.

The truth is you both would be reasonable in your positions. As it is European politics is not consistant and I think it is this instability that has people on edge.

It is true..it could be harsh reality. Or a tantrum.

The comission cannot make sovreign nations do anything. And the German position has always been against it consistantly.

I think we need a contignency plan.Juuuust incase.

Sand

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy wrote: »

SO NO DEAL....it's clear...it's in the open....it is going to get worse....and stay that way for the next thirty years?

I do recall all the ecstatic talk from back in June and July being of an "Irish deal" and I do recall being confused as to who exactly had agreed to pay off the Irish debt, which was confusing because no one had.

One of the most amusing insights from that thread was nameless someones (and I'm just saying "nameless" to be kind - there's a search function on the forum and the thread titled "Irish yields collapse following deal" is returned) stating that those who weren't excited about the "Irish deal" simply didn't understand the "Irish deal" that had been secured. Irony. Its a great word, isn't it?

[Jackass]

Do you understand the difference between an agreement between every E.U. head of state at an E.U. summit designed to make policy decisions and a couple of finance ministers talking complete and utter garbage to the media? (of which they have zero power of decision making on the matter and as has been confirmed by the E.U. Commission that nothing has changed from the previous agreement between all member states).

As soon as anything has changed, let us know. In the mean time, work on understanding the difference between gossip and policy.

Good loser

[Jackass] wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between an agreement between every E.U. head of state at an E.U. summit designed to make policy decisions and a couple of finance ministers talking complete and utter garbage to the media? (of which they have zero power of decision making on the matter and as has been confirmed by the E.U. Commission that nothing has changed from the previous agreement between all member states).

As soon as anything has changed, let us know. In the mean time, work on understanding the difference between gossip and policy.

You're misleading yourself there Jackass if you think that's only 'gossip'.

Those three are the guys with the money that we are hoping to snaffle.

It's a lot more serious than loose talk - since June all the signals have been negative.

Many now believe the BEST we'll get is that they will take the equity in the banks at market value which is only an exchange/trade, and is virtually no concession.

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/0929/1224324600211.html
GREAT ARTICLE
More on this

The bailout runs out next year....we are then on our own with no incentive to keep up payments..there will be no bailout no two

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

Sand wrote: »

I do recall all the ecstatic talk from back in June and July being of an "Irish deal" and I do recall being confused as to who exactly had agreed to pay off the Irish debt, which was confusing because no one had.

One of the most amusing insights from that thread was nameless someones (and I'm just saying "nameless" to be kind - there's a search function on the forum and the thread titled "Irish yields collapse following deal" is returned) stating that those who weren't excited about the "Irish deal" simply didn't understand the "Irish deal" that had been secured. Irony. Its a great word, isn't it?

The situation between Irish bond yields and a Debt deal is not connected in the way you think.

The markets reacted well to the reforms in our economy and the news regarding a deal. It was still good news.

It was still a good sign for Ireland.

But you are correct in that there were never any concrete details. That was the issue Germany never actually set out a concrete deal.

But the bond collapse was still hugely positive. And it indicated that the markets themselves were confident in a potential deal.

The trouble for Germany and co is that once our bailout goes we have little incentive to play ball without promise of a deal. There will be no second bailout....

If we can keep our deficit down ..hhhmmmm2014-2015 shall be interesting.

[Jackass]

Good loser wrote: »

You're misleading yourself there Jackass if you think that's only 'gossip'.

Well, we'll have to wait and see. I think people are looking for the negative in this. It's an awkward comment, but then, literally nothing has changed.

There's a lot of negotiating to do, but don't forget, we're on the coat tales of Spain, and it has been agreed that we will be considered in the same light as Spain for whatever deal, and no matter how much Germant et al try to ignore Ireland or hope we play ball, they can't ignore Spain, and our bailout terms expire very soon. They don't want to take on our soverign debt, but ineviatably, imo they will or at least a major portion of it.

Sand

[Jackass] wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between an agreement between every E.U. head of state at an E.U. summit designed to make policy decisions and a couple of finance ministers talking complete and utter garbage to the media? (of which they have zero power of decision making on the matter and as has been confirmed by the E.U. Commission that nothing has changed from the previous agreement between all member states).

As soon as anything has changed, let us know. In the mean time, work on understanding the difference between gossip and policy.

Those ministers making a planned and deliberate statement is policy. Official Ireland doing handstands and high fiving each other about an "Irish deal" that no one else can find any evidence of is gossip.

The thing is the Germans aren't backing away from the agreement between all member states in June 29th. Its very clear that the Germans committed to maybe doing something at some point in the future, perhaps, if a certain set of long term, difficult and very ambitious targets were met. Maybe. Official Ireland chose to spin that into being the Germans agreeing to bail us out. Basically, the cute whoors of Official Ireland got played by Merkel and they're now caught out badly. Just like the deal on the promissory notes back in March (remember Enda Kenny patronizingly telling the Dail that a silent mouth is golden?) when they got slapped about like a red headed stepchild by the ECB, they've again been punched in the face and left with nothing.

Germany ( as predicted...) has happily accepted Official Ireland's assurances that Irish debt is manageable, Germany got everything it wanted, and it has no reason at all to give Ireland anything. Ireland got played - the "long game" strategy of doing what we were told in exchange for some grand bargain coming down the tracks has failed.

ardmacha

Some very welcome support from the President of the European Parliament Martin Schulz

......................

Martin Schulz told the Dail the EU must stick to the commitment it gave Taoiseach Enda Kenny back in June that some of the bail out cash should be given to Ireland to fund its bank rescue programme.

Praising the Irish commitment to its austerity programme, the EU president said: “You took the burden on your shoulders to avoid the crash of the system of all the other countries, also my country."

Schulz called on Germans and other Europeans to show "solidarity" with the Irish government and its people.

Earlier this autumn the three foreign ministers of Germany, Holland and Finland had cast doubts on Enda Kenny's claim that the EU bail out programme would include cash to help Ireland shore up its banks.

Today's address in the Dail is a significant boost for Kenny as he battles domestic opponents at home who had charged that he had exaggerated European offers of support regarding bank debt.

Speaking outside government buildings in Dublin this afternoon Kenny said the bank deal for Ireland was back on although he admitted it was not clear if it could be done before the Irish budget in December, which is expected to herald a fresh round of unpopular spending cuts in areas like health and welfare.

recedite

ardmacha wrote: »

Schulz called on Germans and other Europeans to show "solidarity" with the Irish government and its people.

Talk is cheap.
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
When the Irish deficit is eliminated, things will change. The threat of default becomes real.

lmimmfn

recedite wrote: »

When the Irish deficit is eliminated, things will change. The threat of default becomes real.

Thats most likely the plan.

Sand

I found Enda Kennys reported comments in the Irish Times ["Barroso calls for EU to abide by June deal"] to be quite amusing.

Although Mr Kenny had said it was always his understanding that the June deal embraced existing “legacy” debts in the banking system, Mr Barroso declined two opportunities to say whether that was his sense too. “I’m not now going to enter in any kind of discussion on semantics about the interpretation of the conclusions of the European Council,” he said.

Poor old Enda needs to learn to be a little more decisive in his claims. Either the "legacy" debts was specifically part of the deal (it wasn't) or it wasnt (again, it wasnt). By saying it was his understanding hes sowing doubt in his own claim.

Even in a story where Barroso was apparently supporting Kenny, he refused to agree with Kenny's recollection of this imaginary deal. That's how weak the Irish strategy is - even our supposed friends are far from wholehearted in their support of our claims and views.

@recedite

When the Irish deficit is eliminated, things will change. The threat of default becomes real.

Official Ireland don't have the courage to even consider default. Even it was unquestionably in Ireland's interest to default, proven by all measures, they would be unable to even conceive of it. The EU might get angry - someone might raise their voice at them! Once the deficit is eliminated (by about 2020 or so at current speed) the logic will then be "Ah, shure we'd be mad to default now that the deficit is gone. Its taken us 12 years to get here, lets not throw it all away now!"

recedite

Still, the threat would be real. We could offer them a writedown of the bank debt and a repayment of the "genuine" sovereign debt.
And besides, who knows who will be in government then. Not necessarily Enda and the current version of "official Ireland".

Good loser

recedite wrote: »

Still, the threat would be real. We could offer them a writedown of the bank debt and a repayment of the "genuine" sovereign debt.
And besides, who knows who will be in government then. Not necessarily Enda and the current version of "official Ireland".

No and no. You realise you're referring to 2020 at least -for getting rid of the deficit.

Also by now the 'bank debt' is a €5 bn play at most.

While the Central Bank gets up to €100 bn at 1% per annum from the ECB.

recedite

Good loser wrote: »

While the Central Bank gets up to €100 bn at 1% per annum from the ECB.

Extending credit at favourable terms where under normal market conditions it would not be given, is a type of bailout.
Indefinite buying of Irish govt. bonds (lending) from the ECB, at below market rates, would in itself be a concession. The only reason for the concession, is because the alternative is default. So the greater the reality of the default risk, the more generous the concession.
Nothing to do with the opinions of Irish, Finnish, or even German ministers.

Good loser

recedite wrote: »

Extending credit at favourable terms where under normal market conditions it would not be given, is a type of bailout.
Indefinite buying of Irish govt. bonds (lending) from the ECB, at below market rates, would in itself be a concession. The only reason for the concession, is because the alternative is default. So the greater the reality of the default risk, the more generous the concession.
Nothing to do with the opinions of Irish, Finnish, or even German ministers.

My point is that Ireland is already getting huge subsidies from the EU through the ECB.

Much more than the outlays on the repayment of the bonds.

The ECB acts by unanimous agreement so the Germans and Finns have consented to these payouts.

We may get no more but we're already getting a lot.