I was just reading now on LA times (
McManus: Europe's continental drift), and a phrase really captured my attention; The author, while describing how bad the situation is in Europe (especially the southern countries) goes as far as saying:
"
Southern Europe is experiencing its worst drop in living standards since World War IITo anyone who has been
(
Read more... )
Tell the banks and creditors that they lost out on bad bets and bad investments. Cancel the debt. Withdraw from the euro. Re-nationalize the currency and the central banks for those countries.
This is the only way out of the mess. But it won't happen because:
A)It makes sense, and the technorati refuse to do anything that makes sense, ever, at all, not even once,
B)Too many very powerful people stand lose a lot of money, and they are more important than an entire generation of Europeans lives and livelihoods.
C)People inherently believe that slavery is ok, and enslaving an entire populace into paying off bad debt taken on by foolish banks is morally honorable.
Reply
C) Who is responsible for this debt, the people and governments they elected right? Is it morally honorable to borrow money and spend then blame the people you borrowed the money from? Did the Greeks, Italians, Spaniards and Portuguese really think they could spend and spend without consequences?
Eventually you run out of other people's money.
Reply
The problem isn't that they were overspending. The problem is that they gave up sovereignty to their economies and currencies. They would've been fine. They would've dealt with thing as needed. Quit turning everything into some simplistic pabulum about a morality tale. It just isn't reality.
C) Who is responsible for this debt, the people and governments they elected right?
No, those who take the risks are responsible for it. There is no moral guarantee in lending money. If you lend money and they don't pay it back, tough, that's business. You take that risk. It's called risk in the first place, for a reason. If the financial overlords want guaranteed returns, then they don't get any interest. Them's the rules.
Did the Greeks, Italians, Spaniards and Portuguese really think they could spend and spend without consequences?
No, they didn't think that at all. Do you really think that they thought this? Are you insane?
( ... )
Reply
Let me take an example out of the four countries we are discussing. Greece, are you aware of the level of corruption in Greece? The Greek economy has been struggling way before it joined the Eurozone. Joining the eurozone did harm the Greek economy, not because it lost its sovereignty but because the Greek exports became more expensive and less competitive in the international markets after year 2001 and because Greek Tourism was harmed by the expensive euro vs the old drachma
Reply
If you lend money and they don't pay it back, tough, that's business.
No, your assets can be repossessed, your wages garnished, leans and levies can be laced on your property. Borrowing money is a risk on both parties. Are you saying that the loans giving to these countries are 100% unsecured loans? I didn't know that was how the money was lent to countries. If so, how will that effect their future credit rating? Would any 'sane' financial institution lend them money again? Countries need credit in order to function don't they?
Quit turning everything into some simplistic pabulum about a morality tale. It just isn't reality.
I don't think I'm doing this. Also I don't understand 'pabulum' (comestible: any substance that can be used as food?)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment