If you think having the same GDP at a level 10-15 years ago is an economic success/reversion to the mean and that all debt downturns end the same way--you haven't studied economic history at all. I've addressed your argument, several times in fact. I directly replied above. The IMF papers cited took into account Greece's situation pre-2008: in fact they were quite a bit more comprehensive then you (but of course, what can one expect from somebody who glosses over systematic reforms already conducted into "Greece continues to look for handouts without doing anything"). We're not even arguing over whether or not Greece f**ked up--it did. We're arguing whether austerity works. You say I'm cherry picking 2008-2015, do you understand the argument we're having is about the effect of austerity? Now, you have never addressed the fact that austerity, given all the troika knew about Greece in 2008, still failed miserably beyond all accounts. You also haven't given a crack at other nations even if there are one or two cases in your favor: instead you've turned this into your personal wheelhouse on Syriza, ignoring economic literature on the devastating over-impact of austerity not only on Greece but other nations. You've failed to address the main point of this graph: the devastating misstated projections on austerity the troika employs time and again. You know, something relevant to "does austerity work?".
Spain should hold a referendum on their decrease in youth unemployment from 53% to 49% from a local 2007 minima of 17% and their 300% increase in debt/GDP over the last 3 years. "Have we turned the corner because of fiscal reforms?". oh no wait, they spent money on hookers, they don't deserve s**t.
I disagree - I think it's a completely rational approach from their perspective because they really have very little to lose. The relative downside for them for a "no" is much lower than the upside. The bank should care because of realism. They are the ones that screwed up by giving the person all this money to spend on hookers and cocaine, and shouldn't be terribly surprised that they can't pay it back. If that's all there were to the issue, it would be a done deal. But the bank stupidly loaned so much money that they now may go under if it's not paid back. So their self-interest is to figure out the best way to recover as much as of the money as possible. They tried to bully Greece onto their terms, but it takes two parties to agree to something - and everyone can see that the proposed terms only benefited one party. After years of conceding to Europe's terms and only seeing negative results, Greece finally said this is pointless - no more. So now the bank can choose to be angry and walk away and risk destroying themselves, or they can try to find a compromise solution that's acceptable to everyone. Sure - if their leaders think it's appropriate. I'm sure the answer would be no if the referendum was "should we give Greece more money?". But if it was "Should we give Greece more money so they can pay it all right back to us and avoid our risking a meltdown in our own economy", I'm not so sure you'd get your no. Europe was telling the Greek leadership that their people didn't agree with their government and that they should take the deal or alienate their people. Greece has now very clearly said "Tsipras speaks for us". Whether us outsiders agree with his decisions or not, he now has a firm mandate of his people to fight for a better deal. Where he was negotiating from a position of uncertainty and a gun to his head, he's now negotiating from strength - he has his own gun to the head of Europe. Ultimately, in poker terms, Europe made a bet and dared Greece to stay in. Greece not only called it, but went all-in. Now the moment of truth will to see if Europe was bluffing or not. If Europe's has the cards, Greece is dead (in the short term). If Europe doesn't, then Greece just won big.
Nope. I never said that. Someone like that pensioner whose photo I posted did not get what he deserves (the particular guy in question is actually getting his pension from Germany, where he worked, but because of the policies of his extremist government, he cannot get to his money). So first of all, you put words in my mouth, then you describe those words as "sadistic". Nothing new from you. I'm saying that the fiscal consolidation actually started to have a positive effect. If you look at the real GDP curve, you can actually see that it had bottomed out at a certain level and was starting to recover - just before Syriza was voted into power. That despite your constant assertion that "austerity" was the path to doom. Address the fact that whatever you describe as "austerity" HAD TO BE DONE because Greece's debt level in relation to their government spending was simply unsustainable. You still have not addressed that. I'm not saying that the governments before Syriza were great. What I am saying is that at least, they initiated reforms, and those were clearly showing some effect. Then why would you want to argue that unsustainable debt levels and government spending should be sustained? You are confusing cause and effect. The reason that there had to be a correction in fiscal policy and government spending was simply that Greece's level of government spending was and is in no way sustainable in relation to their economic output. It's as simple as that. They were affording themselves welfare luxuries that much richer countries in the EU weren't affording their own citizens. What exactly do you think should have been done? Your constant "AUSTERITY BAD", what does that even mean? Do you think that they should constantly raise pensions, lower (actual, not theoretical) pension age, etc., when their economy simply cannot sustain that? And then the rest of the EU should foot the bill for it, when the other countries are not even affording their own citizens the same level of freebies? It's not the so-called "austerity" that caused Greece's economic downturn. It's simply a necessary cutdown in government spending when a country has been spending much more than it could afford. Also, your argument that fiscal corrections are wrong when a country is f**ked simply does not hold water. When you cannot afford a certain level of handouts, then you must cut down on the handouts. Simple. Are you saying Greece has been doing better since Syriza took over than Spain? Once again, look at the chart from 1996 to 2014 rather than just from 2008 to 2014. GDP per capita almost tripled since 1996, then it went down a bit. They certainly accepted the enormous increase in GDP per capita - then you are saying nobody would have accepted a decrease. Even you should realize that it's not about "what one would have accepted" but what a country's economic output can sustain? Nevermind, I think you don't. And - as you can see from looking at the real GDP curve - the necessary corrections were starting to have a positive effect. Then Syriza came and, for ideological reasons and out of sheer ignorance, dialed back many of the reforms and has been trying to blackmail the rest of Europe. It's 18 countries against 1 government. They are NOT going to win this. The tragedy is that they are fighting an ideological fight at the expense of their own poorest people. That just shows that they are bad people - they don't actually care about their poorest. They are like Stalinists. It's all about their clique's power and their ideology. Neither was an argument I made, so whatever you argue against your own made up statements must be ignored.
ATW-- If you think what has happened in Eurozone nations is "turning a corner" after 6 years, you've missed how other countries turned the corner faster without the burden of an exploding debt/GDP and unemployment rates. You also miss alternatives that should have been on the table much earlier. https://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/cigi_paper_no.61web.pdf No. As early as 2010, people who were rational were proposing massive debt restructuring for Greece because it was always unsustainable. Austerity conditions chained to bailout loans have just been about transferring private to public risk and milking blood from a stone. It has been a massive failure. Perhaps it bought some time, but the time it bought was very very dear for the Greek people.
I disagree with that. Varoufakis and Tsipras think they have "won" - maybe from a personal perspective, they feel like winners. But Europe must not budge now, because that would only lead to leftist and right-wing extremists in other countries trying similar tactics as these two clowns. The ones that will suffer will be the poorest in Greece. I still think the EU should help those people; the problem is that Varoufakis and Tsipras will claim that help as their success. The EU will not go under if Greece doesn't pay back its loans. Everyone knows they will never pay them back. EU politicians should just be honest and realize that they won't recover money. How is it "bullying" to expect that someone respects the terms of a contract they entered into? Isn't the "bully" the one that defrauded the lender in order to get the money, when they never really had an honest intention to pay it back? Who is the "bully" here? How about the one party that blew the money on hookers and cocaine? Are you saying that they didn't benefit, and the bank benefited from the borrower blowing all their money? The bank is not risking destroying themselves. Greece is way too small for that. You are basically reciting Varoufakis' tactics. What he is doing is very transparent. He thinks he is outsmarting everyone. And who knows - he might get away with it, if Europe's politicians turn out to be weak. But it would be a shame if he got away with it. The dilemma now is that either he gets away with it and feels like his blackmail tactics paid off and even becomes a hero for it in Greece - or the poorest of the poor in Greece will suffer terribly. So what Varoufakis is really doing: He is using the poorest of the poor in Greece as hostages. Again, Greece is too small. Also, please explain how it is logical to expect Greece to pay back more money if you give them more money? Have they shown themselves - especially under this new extremist government - to be in ANY WAY a credible borrower? Please explain. I am fairly sure that this vote was rigged. The whole thing was for show. Varoufakis and Tsipras were just way too sure that the vote outcome they would announce would be exactly what they thought they needed. I would not put anything past them. They are crooks. Nope. That's their illusion. They can celebrate themselves until tomorrow, and then they will wake up and will see that this "referendum" has not changed anything whatsoever. How do you suddenly negotiate from a position of strength with your bank, just because your family has also said you should not repay the loan you blew on hookers and cocaine? That's right - your position has actually not changed at all. Europe has the cards. And it's Greece's extremist government's fault that their people will suffer. I am in favor of humanitarian aid to the poorest, though. Just make clear that that aid comes despite the extremists Tsipras and Varoufakis - not because of them.
Yes. You have a nationalist minister who says Greece is "at war". You have a finance minister who calls those who have been keeping Greece alive with tons of money "terrorists". Enough is enough. Either your country voted against Europe or your government rigged the vote to make it seem like your country voted against Europe. See how you will do without Europe's help, then.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Greeks cannot tap cash in safe deposit boxes under capital controls: <a href="http://t.co/QWEF7rI0Xk" title="http://reut.rs/1G1HTuM" org_href="http://reut.rs/1G1HTuM">reut.rs/1G1HTuM</a> <a class="hashtag" action="hash" title="#GreekCrisis">#GreekCrisis</a> <a href="http://t.co/9hvqBgK6kn" title="http://twitter.com/Reuters/status/617779000564424704/photo/1" org_href="http://twitter.com/Reuters/status/617779000564424704/photo/1">pic.twitter.com/9hvqBgK6kn</a></p>— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) <a href="https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/617779000564424704" data-datetime="2015-07-05T14:36:06+00:00">July 5, 2015</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Greece was faced with an obligation to foreign lenders or its own citizens. Looks like they made the right choice. The one thing you can't ignore is just how painful this decision is going to be. It's going to decimate the Greek economy and people are going to have to struggle to recover from this with a long term view on things. Really shows you just how opportunistically the Eurozone treated Greece and how the big players in the zone were willing to let an entire country languish in debt forever so that they could reap the benefits forever. Shows that Greek people are willing to tear it all down and tolerate the painstaking rebuilding process rather than take the easy, slow-bleeding route and vote to extend bailout funds or push for liquidity assistance. Greece has decided to not honor its contract and deal with the consequences of that decision. It's filthy to see people framing this as though it's criminal behavior. This is simply a choice that the government presented to its people and since there is so little to lose, they accepted the scenario with the highest potential to build a country they can be proud of and where they dictate their own future. Hopefully their relationship with the EU will be repaired in 5-10 years when their economy is repaired and perhaps by then the EU will have focused a bit more on creating equal domestic partners, rather than a conglomerate of domestic and foreign giants dictating terms for the little people. I wish them luck.
The greek government is not extremist. Maybe they are by macarthian standards or tea party standards as one poster here seems to have. Also nationalist doesn't seem extremist. The onlly extremist is the Golden Dawn whose leader and many members are IN JAIL. So gtfo with the smearing campaign. Democracy means to have the right to make your own decisions.
Here are the arguments that stick out after your point that "austerity was the only way" was debunked (basically 80% of that block of text in post #104) and your constant "the necessary (wrong) corrections were starting to have a positive effect." primer of hey, GDP will probably take another 10 years to get to 2008 levels if we don't misinterpret the damage austerity will cause AGAIN and ignore systematic debt and unemployment problems. Fun fact: Greek long-term unemployment is now 19% after it was about 5% in 2010. That's one way to implement systematic reform of employment markets--ensure a base of stagnant, long-term unemployed with decaying skills and a permenant underclass of the unemployed and underemployed. Swell. But we're turning a corner! It was 20% just a year ago. 1) If the troika had admitted debt levels were unsustainable in 2010, this whole issue would not have come up. As it is, austerity conditions have come with bailout loans chained to them which has ballooned Greek debt to even more unsustainable levels. You're arguing for the side that accelerated rather than forgave/restructured unsustainable debt levels so I'd like to see you answer that question. 2) I'm saying both countries have taken a s**tbeating as opposed to others that adapted more expansionary fiscal policy (and were able to adapt even more expansionary monetary policy) in the face of the greatest crisis facing Western markets in a half-century, but you're obsessed with making this about Syriza for some reason.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">€547,772 folks, fantastic. Pic shows detail of where most funders are from (last updated 19 hrs ago) <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/crowdfundgreece?src=hash">#crowdfundgreece</a> <a href="http://t.co/dSjmBZWMk8">pic.twitter.com/dSjmBZWMk8</a></p>— Thom Feeney (@ThomFeeney) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThomFeeney/status/616123287366672385">July 1, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
good post. just so you know it wasn't slow bleeding. It was already heavily bleeding and it was going to get worse. Many people couldn't take this farce anymore after already having made so many sacrifices. But ofcourse you can say we don't work or waste our times and want just free money. Whatever. When a country decides to make its own decisions that don't agree with the big powers like Germany then they have to deal with the consequences like ridicule extorsion black mailing and smearing campaigns. Anyone who has been in the country knows that we are hard workers. Maybe not like americans or japanese but one of the most hard working of europe.
You don't think it is extremist to be nationalist? Part of your problem. And which got 7 % in the Greek election, and voted alongside Syriza and its nationalist coalition partner to hold the referendum. Correct. It also means the right and obligation to live with the consequences of these decisions. I am not even blaming you. Looking at coverage of the reactions of some Greek people, it is painfully obvious that many if not most of you guys are in some kind of collective mode of having been brainwashed - you don't even understand or realize what the reported outcome of the vote today means for you guys. I feel sorry for you and for the poor people in your country.
