Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Germany warns Greeks it won't be blackmailed in election
Comments
-
Yea trying to give cheap credit to the private sector, when there is already too much private debt - to the point that people just don't want to borrow - has failed.
Pushing on a string.
The only way left to get money into the economy, is through government. Like it or not - whether it aligns with your political/economic views or not - that's the only way left (short of just handing citizens money directly from the central bank).
We either do that, or it's Japanese-style permanent stagnation - leading to multiple lost decades.
It's quite simple really: There are only a handful of ways to get money into the economy, and the two major ones are 1: Bank lending, and 2: Government spending. We've pushed bank lending to its limits - and now that it's reached its limit, we're heading into deflation - and now we are all utterly screwed unless/until massive government spending is deployed, to avoid deflation.0 -
KomradeBishop wrote: »We either do that, or it's Japanese-style permanent stagnation
Seeing as Ireland is both:
- decreasing year on year the debt it needs to raise to pay for the state....
- While at the same time have continent leading levels of GNP/GDP & employment growth, makes your Japanese "stagnation" analogy both moot & innacurate.
When growth is 16 times the rate of inflation, you don't have "stagnation".0 -
Stagflation is something different altogether. Europe is heading into deflation - this is a fact - and this will pull all of Europe down, including Ireland, and settle us into permanent stagnation, unless something is done to prevent deflation.0
-
Kermit.de.frog wrote: »Well if our spoofers on the left could tell us where the magic money tree is planted maybe it wouldn't seem like that. But they can't.
Richard Boyd Barrett is like the Duke of York leading the peasants up the hill over water charges. The problems happen when they reach the top and he is no where to be seen.
Their arguments are irrational and at best infantile and SF is not far away from that either.
So all their arguments are irrational..:D
The answer is to hand everything back to brilliant brains in Fianna Fail as their policies are renowned worldwide as the best way to steer a country's economy, or better still allow Fine Gael/Labour to continue the exact same policies while their friends/cronies in Banking,Development and speculation are rewarded for failure, ironically paid for by the very same people that they unashamedly exploited in the first place.:mad:0 -
-
I think you will find the large banks have the magic money tree, Repackaging debt selling it off effectively debt never gets paid in our current system.0
-
KomradeBishop wrote: »Stagflation is something different altogether. Europe is heading into deflation - this is a fact - and this will pull all of Europe down, including Ireland, and settle us into permanent stagnation, unless something is done to prevent deflation.
no it wont as has been repeatedly shown , Irelands economy is connected to the US and Uk ecumenic cycle and not the euopean union in general
what we are doing in the euro is of course another mess entirely, wed be better off in a dollar or Sterling currency union.0 -
So all their arguments are irrational..:D
The answer is to hand everything back to brilliant brains in Fianna Fail as their policies are renowned worldwide as the best way to steer a country's economy, or better still allow Fine Gael/Labour to continue the exact same policies while their friends/cronies in Banking,Development and speculation are rewarded for failure, ironically paid for by the very same people that they unashamedly exploited in the first place.:mad:
I don't think FG/Lab are doing too bad in the management of the economy, they have made some goof ups recently all right.0 -
darkpagandeath wrote: »I think you will find the large banks have the magic money tree, Repackaging debt selling it off effectively debt never gets paid in our current system.
Banks have no magic money tree, they lend to make a profit.0 -
yeah same here!Sigh, by process of elimination I think I'll have to give Lucinda a vote
"Irish" have had enough of austerity?! Really, well thats what they voted for in their droves by putting Labour in with FG. Kicking the can down the road by several years, Labour actually wanted to extend the austerity budgets. They have gotten out, what they voted in. Cant have your cake and eat it...0 -
Advertisement
-
That's wrong, our exports to Europe exceed both UK and US exports added together:no it wont as has been repeatedly shown , Irelands economy is connected to the US and Uk ecumenic cycle and not the euopean union in general
what we are doing in the euro is of course another mess entirely, wed be better off in a dollar or Sterling currency union.
http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/externaltrade/maintradingpartners-2011m/
Deflation in Europe will have a direct effect on us. Ireland itself, is already close to deflation:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ireland/inflation-cpi
There was never any economic recovery - the stagnation we are entering into now was always inevitable, because the EU never really did anything to recover from the crisis - QE just delayed the inevitable, and here we are now, heading into deflation/stagnation.0 -
In a way they do - banks create money from nothing when they give out loans (that's a link from the Bank of England - the UK central bank - confirming that), banks don't actually lend out from savings; that's just a common myth.Banks have no magic money tree, they lend to make a profit.0 -
KomradeBishop wrote: »In a way they do - banks create money from nothing when they give out loans (that's a link from the Bank of England - the UK central bank - confirming that), banks don't actually lend out from savings; that's just a common myth.
No they don't, banks get money from a number of sources including interbank lending and lending from the central bank, in the eurozone , the ECB, via the national central banks.
Banks have to put up specific capital and or assets to back this loans, The money is created by the central bank out of thin air, and when its paid back its destroyed into thin air. Central banks have , technically an unlimited supply of funds, commercial banks mostly certainly do not, because they do not have a unlimited supply of collateral. The banking crash was caused by banks doubting the collateral values and halting interbank loans, to borrow from the central bank requires a higher form of collateral which is limited , hence the banks ran out of money = crash
yes re savings they don't in fact lend that0 -
True, there are limits on their loans (based on capital requirements), but they don't actually seek funds from banks/central-banks first: They lend first (creating money in the process), and then use the interbank market to shore up their reserves afterwards. Effectively, reserve requirements don't actually limit them at all, but capital requirements do.No they don't, banks get money from a number of sources including interbank lending and lending from the central bank, in the eurozone , the ECB, via the national central banks.
Banks have to put up specific capital and or assets to back this loans, The money is created by the central bank out of thin air, and when its paid back its destroyed into thin air. Central banks have , technically an unlimited supply of funds, commercial banks mostly certainly do not, because they do not have a unlimited supply of collateral.
yes re savings they don't in fact lend that
It's actually the banks that create the money from thin-air, and the central banks that back it ex-post-facto.0 -
KomradeBishop wrote: »True, there are limits on their loans (based on capital requirements), but they don't actually seek funds from banks/central-banks first: They lend first (creating money in the process), and then use the interbank market to shore up their reserves afterwards. Effectively, reserve requirements don't actually limit them at all, but capital requirements do.
It's actually the banks that create the money from thin-air, and the central banks that back it ex-post-facto.
well yes, but that ex-post facto is done as a function of their license and controlled by the central bank, The actual creation of money is merely a piece of software .but the control of the money supply rest with the central bank as its a key source of fail safe liquidity ( broad money begging generally controlled by capital adequacy ratios)0 -
Highflyer13 wrote: »Tough decision at the polls next election. Either go with the usual elitest pigs in the trough gombeens who have literally destroyed our healthcare system and many parts of Irish society while inviting their friends into the feeding frenzy or go into the unknowns with SF, Independents and the likes. Sigh, by process of elimination I think I'll have to give Lucinda a vote:o
Also using the word peasants is kind of patronizing don't you think to the many hard pressed voters who simply have had enough of austerity?
I'm not sure you can destroy the Irish healthcare system. It's NEVER worked properly to begin with so, all they've actually done is fail to reform and fix it.
The worst aspect or the health system here is that even with money sloshing around during the Celtic Tiger the health system was in chaos. It's a management and organisational issue, much more so than a financaial one.0 -
Some are saying Greece gave Europe nothing but they did give Father Ted one of it's best lines. A hint perhaps of what was to come.
0 -
Highflyer13 wrote: »The Greeks situation is very different to ours. They contributed sweet fook all to Europe and their taxation systems are all over the place. They have done very little to rectify their economy and have missed a few bailout targets. They deserve the talking down they get off Europe. Meanwhile good old Ireland does everything right, we have admitted our faults, taken the medicine, showing the highest level of growth in Europe and still we get treated like sh!t by our European masters. Also more austerity is being imposed on us under the cover of ............ well I wont say it. I fear we will be made pay further for the debts of other nations since we seem to have quite a spineless political class.
This isn't the fault of the Greek people anymore than the current situation in Ireland is the fault of the Irish.0 -
Actually can't decide if destroying the Eurozone is worth rubbing it in the face of my lefty friends online. It's a tough one to call.0
-
Advertisement
-
"An electorate gets the leaders they deserve"mollymosfet wrote: »This isn't the fault of the Greek people anymore than the current situation in Ireland is the fault of the Irish.0 -
-
I have to laugh , heres the right hand shouting at the left hand attitude again
" literally destroyed our healthcare system", perhaps if you and others would pay more tax, we could pour even more in. Name a country that isntg in turmoil over the cost of its health system ??
The gov merely mirrors the nonsense we want,
So this is acceptable to you?
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/health/terminallyill-patients-left-on-trolleys-as-crisis-grips-aes-30884885.html
Its not an issue of pouring more money into it. Its an issue of reforming the HSE and cutting the waste and driving efficiency within the public service. Full reform needs to take place as FG promised. But eh, as long as the growth numbers are good who gives a sh1t about anything else? And I pay enough tax as it is.0 -
Mr.McLovin wrote: »the germans should just declare war and get it over with
It didn't work out that well the last time they tried it.KomradeBishop wrote: »...
If this party gets voted in, Greece will finally be showing some balls. The economic policies forced upon them, have destroyed their country - and by exiting Europe, they can regain the control needed, to start the (long and slow) effort towards true recovery.
They destroyed their own country.
They have had wholesale tax evasion, they had public servants on 13 month salaries, they cooked their own books.
And when time was called they still refuse to fix their own mess.
Hell they tried to throw a journalist in jail that was publishing lists of tax evaders.
So please less of the shyte about how the bad EU/ECB/IMF/etc wrecked their country by imposing economic policies on them.
The way Greece was run was insane.
And trust me I am no fan of any of the above.KomradeBishop wrote: »No, Greece would redenominate its debts in 'New Drachma' - if they allowed their debts to stay denominated in Euro, you'd likely get Weimar-style hyperinflation, as they'd be forced to print-and-exchange once reserves of Euro ran out.
Once Greece has its own currency, it has no need for external credit - though it does have a need for external trade.
I dispair and so does christ on his bike.
No wonder the looney spendthrift eejits like "people before profit", etc get so many votes in this country.
A few basic tenants of economics and business.
Debts don't just disappear, someone has to cover them somewhere and the debtor can't just redenominate their debts into some other thing they dream up.
Have you ever thought how the Greeks will pay for imports like fuel, food, drugs, etc ?
Nah you think they can do the old sinn fein and tell everyone to fook off and then sell them stuff for New Drachmas which have the same euro value as a sheet of Andrex.I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
Highflyer13 wrote: »So this is acceptable to you?
http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/health/terminallyill-patients-left-on-trolleys-as-crisis-grips-aes-30884885.html
Its not an issue of pouring more money into it. Its an issue of reforming the HSE and cutting the waste and driving efficiency within the public service. Full reform needs to take place as FG promised. But eh, as long as the growth numbers are good who gives a sh1t about anything else? And I pay enough tax as it is.
Putting an efficient and cost effective socialised health system in place has deified better and richer countries that Ireland. Its not simply " reforming the HSE and cutting the waste and driving efficiency" Thats just a sound bite
You have many issues in the health service
( a) Legacy management issues , from HSE back to county councils
(b) Salaries in the medical service , consultants
(c) The use of trauma hospital beds for long term palliative care( this is a big one) in the absence of hospice or resourced home care solutions
(d) The interaction between public and private activities in public hospitals
(e) The proliferation of small hospitals with inadequate facilities in a small country
These are not simple to resolve and simply adopting a bull in a china shop approach risks destabilising the system. Merely parroting " management efficiency" is to ignore the difficult systemic issues.0 -
It didn't work out that well the last time they tried it.
They destroyed their own country.
They have had wholesale tax evasion, they had public servants on 13 month salaries, they cooked their own books.
And when time was called they still refuse to fix their own mess.
Hell they tried to throw a journalist in jail that was publishing lists of tax evaders.
So please less of the shyte about how the bad EU/ECB/IMF/etc wrecked their country by imposing economic policies on them.
The way Greece was run was insane.
And trust me I am no fan of any of the above.
I dispair and so does christ on his bike.
No wonder the looney spendthrift eejits like "people before profit", etc get so many votes in this country.
A few basic tenants of economics and business.
Debts don't just disappear, someone has to cover them somewhere and the debtor can't just redenominate their debts into some other thing they dream up.
Have you ever thought how the Greeks will pay for imports like fuel, food, drugs, etc ?
Nah you think they can do the old sinn fein and tell everyone to fook off and then sell them stuff for New Drachmas which have the same euro value as a sheet of Andrex.
couldn't put it better myself, I agree, and despair with you, how people argue this can all be fixed if they just " wiped this out" or invented new magic rules of finance.0 -
Advertisement
-
Putting an efficient and cost effective socialised health system in place has deified better and richer countries that Ireland. Its not simply " reforming the HSE and cutting the waste and driving efficiency" Thats just a sound bite
You have many issues in the health service
( a) Legacy management issues , from HSE back to county councils
(b) Salaries in the medical service , consultants
(c) The use of trauma hospital beds for long term palliative care( this is a big one) in the absence of hospice or resourced home care solutions
(d) The interaction between public and private activities in public hospitals
(e) The proliferation of small hospitals with inadequate facilities in a small country
These are not simple to resolve and simply adopting a bull in a china shop approach risks destabilising the system. Merely parroting " management efficiency" is to ignore the difficult systemic issues.
And whose has failed to resolve to issues if not management - there is truth in what you say but the main problem is the lack of political will in the face of an intransigent service run at the behest of its employees and not its patients.0 -
Their country was badly run before the crisis - with widescale tax evasion - and even worse afterwards: The economic policies forced on the country afterwards, cratered their economy into the ground.They destroyed their own country.
They have had wholesale tax evasion, they had public servants on 13 month salaries, they cooked their own books.
And when time was called they still refuse to fix their own mess.
Hell they tried to throw a journalist in jail that was publishing lists of tax evaders.
So please less of the shyte about how the bad EU/ECB/IMF/etc wrecked their country by imposing economic policies on them.
The way Greece was run was insane.
And trust me I am no fan of any of the above.
It is simply not possible for any EU country - Greece, Ireland, any country - to 'fix' their problem by themselves, because their problem is the Euro; the only way to fix that problem while staying in the EU, is to collectively negotiate a centralized spending boost aided by centralized EU institutions (and this is pretty much impossible, due to Germany).
Fluffing up your statements with hyperbole and condescension - the latter which is not conducive to a good discussion, as it heats up threads and fast turns them into trainwrecks (this thread has miraculously avoided this so far, so lets keep it that way...) - while claiming to talk about "basic tenants of economics and business", just highlights that you're trying to cover-up your lack of knowledge about economics, and are trying to force-through your own view.I dispair and so does christ on his bike.
No wonder the looney spendthrift eejits like "people before profit", etc get so many votes in this country.
A few basic tenants of economics and business.
Debts don't just disappear, someone has to cover them somewhere and the debtor can't just redenominate their debts into some other thing they dream up.
Greece redenominating their debt after leaving the EU, is called defaulting (redenominating debt is known as a 'technical default'). Defaulting is a basic concept that pretty much everybody knows.
Here are a few articles proving my point - redenomination of debt is a universally well known outcome, of an EU/Euro exit - it requires a severe lack of knowledge about economics, to not know this:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/andrewlilico/100010653/greece-is-going-to-be-kicked-out-of-the-eurozone-whatever-happens/Telegraph wrote:There are two claims I hear repeated about Greece that I'd like to take this opportunity to knock down. The first myth is that Greece would gain nothing from leaving the euro because its debts are denominated in euros. But that claim misses the point. Leaving the euro would take the form of the government passing a law to redenominate all Greek debts (at least all government and banking sector debt, but quite possibly all private sector debts) into "New Drachmas" (or whatever the new currency would be called). Such a redenomination of debts is, of course, a default. Indeed, it is one of the classical forms of sovereign default.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18193962BBC wrote:The government should redenominate its debt in the new national currency and make clear its intention to renegotiate the terms of this debt.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/33a77448-0611-11e1-a079-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=intlFinancial Times wrote:Following an emergency cabinet meeting, the Greek government announces the new drachma. Capital controls are imposed and border patrols dispatched to enforce them. Public sector debt is redenominated in local currency. The value of the drachma plunges. Greek inflation soars.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/may/13/greece-leave-eurozone-five-difficult-stepsGuardian wrote:Holders of Greek government debt would undoubtedly suffer, as they risk having their assets redenominated into a rapidly falling new Greek currency – as would holders of Greek corporate debt.
Read my post again. I'm not advocating an exit, and I've stated repeatedly that an exit would be a massively damaging event.Have you ever thought how the Greeks will pay for imports like fuel, food, drugs, etc ?
Nah you think they can do the old sinn fein and tell everyone to fook off and then sell them stuff for New Drachmas which have the same euro value as a sheet of Andrex.0 -
Just on this point. 13 month salaries are not uncommon throughout Europe, especially in countries that have a tradition of measuring salary level monthly, rather than annually and the 13th month is often seen as a bonus.they had public servants on 13 month salaries
Switzerland still retains this in many jobs, it is commonly seen as the money you pay your annual income tax with, and I don't think anyone would accuse them of being fiscally irresponsible.
Problem with Greece was not so much that they had 13 month salaries, but that they often had 17 and 18 month salaries for many public sector jobs. How this developed, I'm not sure, but from what I have read it was as a means of getting round wage freezes - one could not increase the monthly salary, so they just increased the number of months.0 -
They destroyed their own country.
They have had wholesale tax evasion, they had public servants on 13 month salaries, they cooked their own books.
And when time was called they still refuse to fix their own mess.
Hell they tried to throw a journalist in jail that was publishing lists of tax evaders.
So please less of the shyte about how the bad EU/ECB/IMF/etc wrecked their country by imposing economic policies on them.
The way Greece was run was insane.
Exactly. And the people who allowed and encouraged and facilitated this are the Greek people. They knew what they were voting for, they knew the could not afford the optional tax system and the early retirement costs. They knew everything.
If Greece wants to stay in the EU and Euro then they need to get a grip and pay their debts, like everyone else. If they screw the rest of the EU then screw them !0 -
It matters not how you phrase the terms,
Its clear that a significant Greek default would cause tremendous damage , both inside Greece and in the general Eurozone, it could be argued one way or another that remaining or exiting the Euro for Greece , both would result in catastrophic economic conditions in the event of a default.
Personally I think time is the issue, The strength of the Eurozone can buy Greece time, " Austerity" will work in reducing the overall level of Greek public spending and force changes in revenue collection and rule bending ( I have a good friend who works there). In time and yes with certain suffering ( arguably there is suffering in every case for Greece) Greek balance of payments and hence normal funding can be restored and Greece can slowly rebuild, this time with a proper fiscal base.
Those arguing for a short sharp shock , i.e. default , exit etc, is all very fine, but you could in effect kill the patient in the process.
Iceland, rather like Ireland, had a banking issue rather then a sovereign debt issue . Greece has a fundamental sovereign fiscal issue that it must address. Thats a lot harder to fix than Ireland ( in reality all we needed was capital), Greece has to undertake primary social reforms to place its economy on a stable base. IN the past it dodged this bullet by significant devaluations of the Drachma, a process that benefited lager louts across Europe, but did little to raise the standard of living for the ordinary Greek.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well, it's hard to say. As we all know, Ireland didn't come up with this "solution" unilaterally,
But we did come up with it unilaterally. Lenihan announced it after David McWilliams came up with it a few months earlier, and the whole thing came to a head on the Guarantee night, because they feared the collapse of Anglo and maybe more banks. The reaction from the UK and Europe was scathing to the guarantee, exactly because Ireland did its own thing. There was even an initial run of people putting deposits in Irish banks abroad, much to the annoyance of the Brits.
I think people get the guarantee and the bail out mixed up, which is dangerous, we very much acted unilaterally on that night, reports at the time said Lenihan could not be copntacted by Europe on that night and he was purposely avoiding them.so if Biffo's government had refused to turn bank debt into sovereign debt, I suspect the ECB would have waded in to prop up the banks with the same kind of mechanisms but on a European scale.
A collapse in the Irish banks had far wider implications than the Irish economy, to Europe, an Irish default was a secondary concern.
The ECB eventually funded Irish banks to the tune of about €150 Billion IIRC, so it wasn't would have, they did, it went on for months and months, eventually the ECB called and wanted their money back, because nobody was paying anything back or had any plan on how to either.That said, there's a fair argument that the "hit" Ireland took on our banks led to the Troika's eagerness to dig us out of our economic hole, and the subsequent improvement in the overall bailout deal. Had we been more bullish about the bank problem, we could have found ourselves getting a colder reception from the Troika.
I do think the head of the ICB is on record as saying Lenihan and the Irish Government hardly raised the issue of bondholders and bank debt at all!
As for Greece, they've suffered huge cuts through austerity to basic services and standards of living, stuff that would blow the mind of the usual whingers here, who have been largely cossetted from anything on the Greek scale of things.
The problem with Greece and Portugal, not so sure on Spain, is it's a very different economy to us. We have some selling points even if most of it is to do with lax tax rules and regulation and some easily swallowed PR about education etc., they don't have much to sell to multinationals at all.
I've lost count of how many times the bailout was renegotiated for Greece, there comes a time when you have to wonder, what's the point in doing it again?Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
"An electorate gets the leaders they deserve"
To be honest i do hate blanket statements such as this. There is nothing that can prevent Leaders performing uturn on pre election promises what so ever. They are not legally binding and many a time we have had wool pulled over our own eyes.
As Pat Rabbitte aptly put "Sure isnt that what do you to get into power"
So tbh Seamus I for one am a bit miffed by your quite frankly arduous statement the electorate has little to no say once the government is in power.0 -
Originally Posted by mollymosfet View Post
This isn't the fault of the Greek people anymore than the current situation in Ireland is the fault of the Irish.
This is what is so scary about Ireland, this perspective that somebody else is to blame and the conclusion that someone else is therefore responsible for fixing it.0 -
He was saying a redenomination like that wasn't possible - which is just bonkers really, as pretty much every single newspaper/news-outlet, is saying that is a very likely possibility if they exit - so it wasn't anything to do with a definition of terms.It matters not how you phrase the terms,
Its clear that a significant Greek default would cause tremendous damage , both inside Greece and in the general Eurozone, it could be argued one way or another that remaining or exiting the Euro for Greece , both would result in catastrophic economic conditions in the event of a default.
Personally I think time is the issue, The strength of the Eurozone can buy Greece time, " Austerity" will work in reducing the overall level of Greek public spending and force changes in revenue collection and rule bending ( I have a good friend who works there). In time and yes with certain suffering ( arguably there is suffering in every case for Greece) Greek balance of payments and hence normal funding can be restored and Greece can slowly rebuild, this time with a proper fiscal base.
Those arguing for a short sharp shock , i.e. default , exit etc, is all very fine, but you could in effect kill the patient in the process.
Iceland, rather like Ireland, had a banking issue rather then a sovereign debt issue . Greece has a fundamental sovereign fiscal issue that it must address. Thats a lot harder to fix than Ireland ( in reality all we needed was capital), Greece has to undertake primary social reforms to place its economy on a stable base. IN the past it dodged this bullet by significant devaluations of the Drachma, a process that benefited lager louts across Europe, but did little to raise the standard of living for the ordinary Greek.
The Eurozone isn't strong, it is heading into deflation - the EU should be massively increasing all countries budget deficits, using central EU institutions to pump money into countries, as that is the only way left to avoid deflation (as trying to get banks to lend more, through QE, has completely failed); this is impossible because of Germany.
Austerity removes money from economies when they need it most, and QE puts money into commodities (because that's what banks do with it, when they are unable to lend it out), where the wealthy have gained enormously by commodity speculation; austerity combined with QE, is actually a massive redistribution of wealth, away from the general economy and towards the wealthy.
It's austerity that is killing Greece. Now that the EU is headed into deflation, there is no possible way to defend austerity anymore - deflation means a recovery is now impossible, even for Ireland, unless a huge amount of money is injected into economies (which QE can no longer do), through government spending (as that's the only way left - short of the ECB just handing EU citizens money).0 -
listermint wrote: »To be honest i do hate blanket statements such as this. There is nothing that can prevent Leaders performing uturn on pre election promises what so ever. They are not legally binding and many a time we have had wool pulled over our own eyes.
As Pat Rabbitte aptly put "Sure isnt that what do you to get into power"
So tbh Seamus I for one am a bit miffed by your quite frankly arduous statement the electorate has little to no say once the government is in power.
Th system of voting in this country is specifically designed to reduce political canvasing to the level of the person, TDs fight not only the other party , but there own party to try and present themselves to the electorate
Thats tends to promote auction politics, you can see all the independents and of many leftists at it again. Well do this for you , well do that for you, with no real understanding of how all this will be paid for.
The sad thing is the electorate just buy this "song" time and time again.
So its true, we get the governments we deserve.0 -
Th system of voting in this country is specifically designed to reduce political canvasing to the level of the person, TDs fight not only the other party , but there own party to try and present themselves to the electorate
Thats tends to promote auction politics, you can see all the independents and of many leftists at it again. Well do this for you , well do that for you, with no real understanding of how all this will be paid for.
The sad thing is the electorate just buy this "song" time and time again.
So its true, we get the governments we deserve.
Based on what you wrote above, Then your last statement is untrue.
Dont you think ?0 -
But we did come up with it unilaterally. Lenihan announced it after David McWilliams came up with it a few months earlier, and the whole thing came to a head on the Guarantee night, because they feared the collapse of Anglo and maybe more banks. The reaction from the UK and Europe was scathing to the guarantee, exactly because Ireland did its own thing. There was even an initial run of people putting deposits in Irish banks abroad, much to the annoyance of the Brits.Originally Posted by seamus View Post
Well, it's hard to say. As we all know, Ireland didn't come up with this "solution" unilaterally,
Yes, that the disastrous decision that prompted the whole cascade. We could have had a selective guarantee ( like Germany) or even a partial public bank bailout like the US. But we dug this damm whole out by our selves. Brian Lenehans poisoned legacy.
Very trueI think people get the guarantee and the bail out mixed up, which is dangerous, we very much acted unilaterally on that night, reports at the time said Lenihan could not be copntacted by Europe on that night and he was purposely avoiding them.
The ECB eventually funded Irish banks to the tune of about €150 Billion IIRC, so it wasn't would have, they did, it went on for months and months, eventually the ECB called and wanted their money back, because nobody was paying anything back or had any plan on how to either.so if Biffo's government had refused to turn bank debt into sovereign debt, I suspect the ECB would have waded in to prop up the banks with the same kind of mechanisms but on a European scale.
A collapse in the Irish banks had far wider implications than the Irish economy, to Europe, an Irish default was a secondary concern.
Yes but of course the situation was with the bank guarantee in place the ECB could force the Gov to "soverign-ise" the resulting debt. The ECB only ever provided liquidity. Had we not had the guarantee, this issue would have become a EU wide bank issue, not a soverign one. This was the hardball the Spanish played ( and won)
I do think the head of the ICB is on record as saying Lenihan and the Irish Government hardly raised the issue of bondholders and bank debt at all!That said, there's a fair argument that the "hit" Ireland took on our banks led to the Troika's eagerness to dig us out of our economic hole, and the subsequent improvement in the overall bailout deal. Had we been more bullish about the bank problem, we could have found ourselves getting a colder reception from the Troika.
As for Greece, they've suffered huge cuts through austerity to basic services and standards of living, stuff that would blow the mind of the usual whingers here, who have been largely cossetted from anything on the Greek scale of things.
The problem with Greece and Portugal, not so sure on Spain, is it's a very different economy to us. We have some selling points even if most of it is to do with lax tax rules and regulation and some easily swallowed PR about education etc., they don't have much to sell to multinationals at all.
I've lost count of how many times the bailout was renegotiated for Greece, there comes a time when you have to wonder, what's the point in doing it again?
The hit Ireland took, was similar to all those personal guarantees that developers signed, which then came back to bite them personally, we took on a debt we had no hope of meeting. That forced the state into the arms of the Troika. Looking for money in extremis is the worst possible way to borrow0 -
Not really. If I go to a market place and buy some 'magic beans' because the man selling them told me they were magic, do I hold no responsibility for my credulity?listermint wrote: »Based on what you wrote above, Then your last statement is untrue.
Caveat emptor does not just apply to consumerism, but to pretty much all social interaction, including politics, and to absolve ourselves of all responsibility simply is not tenable in any mature society. It's 'victim culture' at its worst, TBH.0 -
Th system of voting in this country is specifically designed to reduce political canvasing to the level of the person, TDs fight not only the other party , but there own party to try and present themselves to the electorate
All democratic politics is like this. And it is the responsibility of the electorate to make their choice.0 -
Which is why it's beholden unto voters to choose wisely and take responsibility for the poor choices they've made. Picking people because they're "different" or because they make fancy looking promises is a bad way to choose.listermint wrote: »To be honest i do hate blanket statements such as this. There is nothing that can prevent Leaders performing uturn on pre election promises what so ever. They are not legally binding and many a time we have had wool pulled over our own eyes.
If you're hiring someone for a job, you review their CV, you grill them on what they can and cannot do and you look at their past performance. If you hire a lemon because they talked the talk and made grandiose promises, you will blame yourself for making a poor decision.
So it should be for voting in politicians.
This "legally binding promises" discussion has been had here before and in reality it's unworkable rhetoric. You may as well govern entirely by plebiscite.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, that the disastrous decision that prompted the whole cascade. We could have had a selective guarantee ( like Germany) or even a partial public bank bailout like the US. But we dug this damm whole out by our selves. Brian Lenehans poisoned legacy.
Very true
Yes but of course the situation was with the bank guarantee in place the ECB could force the Gov to "soverign-ise" the resulting debt. The ECB only ever provided liquidity. Had we not had the guarantee, this issue would have become a EU wide bank issue, not a soverign one. This was the hardball the Spanish played ( and won)
That's what happens when politicians go on solo runs based on pop economist articles in the Indo, with no preparation and little knowledge of what they are getting into. It would appear Finance did consider the non Anglo approach to solving it, but Lehihan and Cowen ignored it.
Not that Finance or the ICB gets off lightly either, they didn't have a clue of how fecked the banks were and swallowed the banks "liquidity" problem spiel.The hit Ireland took, was similar to all those personal guarantees that developers signed, which then came back to bite them personally, we took on a debt we had no hope of meeting. That forced the state into the arms of the Troika. Looking for money in extremis is the worst possible way to borrow
That's a good comparison, a blank cheque in a way. Once we'd made the "bold" decision to unilaterally guarantee all that debt it was going to be difficult to get out of it. We aren't Greece, we are basically the tax haven of the EU and actively court financial multinationals because of our "business friendly" regulation.Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
All democratic politics is like this. And it is the responsibility of the electorate to make their choice.
in many countries, with first past the post or other modifications or even single seat PR you tend to get canvassing on a party political level. A TD under that system is only interested in beating the other party not his running mate.
That tends to reduce , not eliminate , the auction politics.
Our system, has the worst possible construction in that regard. We don't elect governments, we elect people to " get things for us"
It would for example be a far better system if alternative Governments were placed before the electorate rather then parties , where coalition makes a mess of the electorates views.0 -
Which is why it's beholden unto voters to choose wisely and take responsibility for the poor choices they've made. Picking people because they're "different" or because they make fancy looking promises is a bad way to choose.
If you're hiring someone for a job, you review their CV, you grill them on what they can and cannot do and you look at their past performance. If you hire a lemon because they talked the talk and made grandiose promises, you will blame yourself for making a poor decision.
So it should be for voting in politicians.
This "legally binding promises" discussion has been had here before and in reality it's unworkable rhetoric. You may as well govern entirely by plebiscite.
"We need to move away from Civil War politics, lets vote Sinn Fein".Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
That's just another version of victim blaming really - if someone buys a product that was faulty or falsely advertised, we don't just tell them "tough luck", that's why we have consumer protection laws.The Corinthian wrote: »Not really. If I go to a market place and buy some 'magic beans' because the man selling them told me they were magic, do I hold no responsibility for my credulity?
Caveat emptor does not just apply to consumerism, but to pretty much all social interaction, including politics, and to absolve ourselves of all responsibility simply is not tenable in any mature society. It's 'victim culture' at its worst, TBH.
By that logic, it's pretty easy to turn around every single harmful decision any politician ever makes, by just saying "well, why did you vote for them then? It's your fault!" - as if people are supposed to predict in advance, what a politician is likely to do.
'Responsibility', when applied like this, is almost always used to try and portray the general public as being responsible, and to minimize the responsibility of politicians, and in other debates (about onerous bank debt) minimize the responsibility of bankers.
The whole idea of 'victim culture' and rhetorical use of the (usually used in a way that is not clearly defined) term 'responsibility', is typically just a rhetorical tool to engage in victim blaming, and in trying to shift blame away from people who actually broke their promises, or even (in some cases) who broke the law.
Usually the only justification provided for it, is implying that the victims were stupid in some form, or "should have known better" - when it was impossible for them to know better - and trying to portray that as a justification for the victims punishment, even when there is no logic in that punishment (just simplistic moral reasoning). I've never seen it used in any other way.0 -
That's what happens when politicians go on solo runs based on pop economist articles in the Indo, with no preparation and little knowledge of what they are getting into. It would appear Finance did consider the non Anglo approach to solving it, but Lehihan and Cowen ignored it.
Not that Finance or the ICB gets off lightly either, they didn't have a clue of how fecked the banks were and swallowed the banks "liquidity" problem spiel.
That's a good comparison, a blank cheque in a way. Once we'd made the "bold" decision to unilaterally guarantee all that debt it was going to be difficult to get out of it. We aren't Greece, we are basically the tax haven of the EU and actively court financial multinationals because of our "business friendly" regulation.
The great thing about this country, you have to admit, is that we are a wealthy export driven one, One has to hand it to the Dept of Finance, aide by NTMA and NAMA, we pulled a few good tricks out of the book to kick the debt down the road. The reality is that the bank capital will when netted back in many years time be down to have little real impact on the state
The same could not have been said had we had the punt ( mind you the crisis couldn't have happened at all then )0 -
-
Would you ever take that PC shìte and shove it where the sun don't shine.KomradeBishop wrote: »That's just another version of victim blaming really
Straw man. There's a difference between being the victim of fraud and being someone who has chosen irresponsibly. What I rejected was the logic used that would lump everyone as the former, even if they were the latter.if someone buys a product that was faulty or falsely advertised, we don't just tell them "tough luck", that's why we have consumer protection laws.
And no I'm not going to explain the difference to you. As much as you enjoy wasting my time in such debates, I'm not going to start explaining basic common sense to you.0 -
Straw man. There's a difference between being the victim of fraud and being someone who has chosen irresponsibly. What I rejected was the logic used that would lump everyone as the former, even if they were the former.
where was " fraud " involved , I see no court cases.0 -
Indeed I didn't mention fraud, but what I was making the comparison to, was this:where was " fraud " involved , I see no court cases.
"If I go to a market place and buy some 'magic beans' because the man selling them told me they were magic, do I hold no responsibility for my credulity?"
We don't just tell a person who bought such a product, "tough luck" because they were stupid, we have laws that protect the buyer/victim, and the seller here will have broken the law and is the one that deserves the punishment, not the victim/buyer.0 -
Advertisement
-
in many countries, with first past the post or other modifications or even single seat PR you tend to get canvassing on a party political level. A TD under that system is only interested in beating the other party not his running mate.
That tends to reduce , not eliminate , the auction politics.
Our system, has the worst possible construction in that regard. We don't elect governments, we elect people to " get things for us"
It would for example be a far better system if alternative Governments were placed before the electorate rather then parties , where coalition makes a mess of the electorates views.
I don't see any persuasive point in your argument. All politicians have manifestos and things they promise to do or deliver, and have political viewpoints. Whether they are independents or in a party makes no difference. First past the post or PR, makes no difference whatsoever. It happens everywhere there is democratic election.0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDg07hd0BhQ
Advertisement