EVEN in a grouping as fractious as the euro zone, tonight's falling-out was remarkable. Jean-Claude Juncker, who presides over the zone's finance ministers, lashed out at the many figures who have more or less openly threatened Greece with expulsion from the euro if it does not abide by its programme of economic reforms and austerity measures.
With Greece in deep political turmoil (some are even talking apocalyptically of civil war) after voters backed an incoherent constellation of anti-austerity parties, European central bankers and finance ministers have been warning it that its departure from the euro is inevitable if it does not abide by the terms of its bail-out.
One of the bluntest warnings came from the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, who told Italy's SkyTG24: “If a member of a club does not respect the rules, it's better that it leaves the club—and this is true for any organisation or institution or any project.”
Mr Juncker, who is also Luxembourg's prime minister, was having none of this. Speaking at the official press conference at the end of a five-hour meeting of euro-zone finance ministers (the "euro group"), he let rip:
I made it perfectly clear that nobody was mentioning an exit of Greece from the euro area. I am strongly against. We are 17 member-states being co-owners of our common currency. I don't envisage, not even for one second, Greece leaving the euro area. This is nonsense, this is propaganda.
We have to respect Greek democracy. I'm against this way of dealing with Greece, [which consists] in provoking the Greek public opinion and giving advice and indications to the Greek sovereign. Greece has voted, we have to take into account the result. We do hope that a government will be formed in the next coming days or weeks and then we have to deal with that government. We don't have to lecture Greece.
But the Greek public, the Greek citizens, have to know that we agreed on a programme and this programme has to be implemented. But I don't like the way of dealing with Greece, those that are threatening Greece day after day. This is not the way of dealing with partners, colleagues and friends and citizens in the European Union.
Mr Juncker's comments are all the more striking given that, just next to him, Olli Rehn, the Finnish commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, delivered the now-standard warning to Greece about the danger of rejecting the bail-out conditions set by the EU and IMF:
The EU-IMF programme is a very substantial expression of solidarity and support for Greece by the other 16 euro-area member-states. It is in fact a solidarity pact between the other 16 euro-area member-states and Greece, between the 16 parliaments and the Greek parliament. This is what Europe is about. But solidarity is a two-way street. It is a fact that calls for respect of commitments both by the 16 euro-area member-states and also by Greece and its government and parliament. Without a Greek commitment this solidarity pact won't work, and this is the responsibility of Greek politicians in this very critical juncture. Hence the future of Greece and the welfare of its citizens lie more than ever on the shoulders of Greek politicians to keep their part of the solidarity pact.
One might conclude that Mr Juncker and Mr Rehn were playing good-cop, bad-cop with Greece. More likely, their comments reflect two factors. The first is that Mr Juncker feels free to speak out because he will soon step down as the group's president (he recently criticised the behaviour of France and Germany). The second is that the euro zone is deeply divided over how to deal with the insubordination of Greek voters—and whether it can withstand the shock of a Greek departure from the currency union. Mr Juncker left open the possibility of renegotiating the Greek package “in exceptional circumstances”, but only once a new Greek government had been formed and had accepted the reform programme.
Officials such as Mr Rehn argue that, two years into the debt crisis, the euro zone is more prepared than ever for what is now known as “Grexit”, having raised its firewalls and started recapitalising vulnerable banks. The manifest fear in the markets, though, suggests that investors are far from convinced about the robustness of the system.
The signs are that nobody really wants a bust-up. Greek opinion polls suggest three-quarters of Greeks want to remain in the euro. And the euro zone can hardly relish the prospect of a Greek default and exit so soon after it agreed to a second bail-out for the country in March. Klaus Regling, head of the euro zone's rescue fund, the European Financial Stability Facility, said the euro zone has lent Greece €108 billion ($139 billion) in the past two months alone.
At the very least, euro-zone countries will want to avoid a break-up before July 1st, when the more powerful permanent rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism, comes into force. German sources said this could be used to recapitalise fragile Spanish banks as a means of preventing the spread of contagion. Intriguingly, last night Mr Juncker said that €1 billion that had been withheld from the latest tranche of bail-out money to Greece in recent days would, after all, be paid out.
Greek politicians seem to have convinced themselves that the euro zone is bluffing about ejecting their country. But Germany and others are determined to disabuse them. The recent menaces seem designed to achieve two goals: to exert pressure on Greeks to support more mainstream parties in a likely second election, and to prepare markets for the likelihood of Greece's departure if radicals are returned.
For now, attention turns to tonight's much-awaited meeting in Berlin between the new French president, François Hollande, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor. The discussion will focus on Mr Hollande's call for a greater emphasis on stimulating growth (see my columns, here and here). But against a sharpening tone, his precise demands remain unclear. German ministers are worried he will press for a big stimulus, as well as for the mutualisation of debt through Eurobonds—as endorsed by a committee of the European Parliament.
Despite much talk of growth, on substance Mr Hollande did not seem to get much support from the euro group; if anything, he may have to embark on austerity himself. Though Mr Juncker said Europe needs a thorough debate on growth, he read out a statement from ministers declaring that the current strategy for fiscal consolidation (ie, austerity) “remains appropriate”. Ministers praised two other rescued countries, Ireland and Portugal, for remaining “on track” with their adjustment programmes. And they were particularly effusive towards the Netherlands, whose parliament adopted a belt-tightening budget even after the government had fallen.
There was no sign of expected proposals from the European Commission to extend deadlines for some countries to reach their deficit targets. Nor did there seem to be much support for an Italian idea of excluding from the calculation of deficit targets some spending on “investment”.
One issue Mr Hollande and Mrs Merkel will have to discuss is who should replace Mr Juncker as head of the euro group. The frontrunner is Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister. But Mr Hollande may have misgivings about having a prominent German take over the job. After his performance tonight, Mr Juncker seems to have killed off the idea, favoured by some, that he would be asked to stay on.
(Picture credit: AFP)



Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Whole Mellande inspect German honor guard,
Greek tradegy deepens, and
Spanish inquisition unfolds!
THE ONLY EURO-STATE, Within the jolly old EU that I can sympathise with is poor old Germany...Villified for working hard, Ridiculed for being financially prudent,& Screwed for being wealthy by many of the pariahs in it`s unelected Community. It`s damned if it does, & knackered if it doesnt concede to the incessant Blackmail. If any Member SHOULD leave this worthless`Gang-Show`it`s the good ole BundesReich(plus Holland&Belgium),taking their large shiney Toys with them,& leaving the continually hopeless wasters to get on with it.
Why are we not surprised since you're obviously not British at all (ie youre one of the bulldogs in disguise) as sherry pointed out earlier.. For once I agree with her. We alreadiy got a hold of you , no need to continue with this farce.
Show your true colours now.
Come on
"German ministers are worried he (Hollande) will press for a big stimulus, as well as for the mutualisation of debt through Eurobonds"
Also here, many are advocating the debt-mutualization of the euro-using countries through Eurobonds; situated among them is Charlemagne.
The unanswered question investors are asking about this Eurobond concept (and I have spoken to many institutional investors both sides of the pond) is: Why should such “Eurobonds” receive a better rating, and, hence, enjoy lower interest rates in the long view, than profligate countries currently are paying, especially when the ‘guarantors’ for these joint bonds consists of (mainly) exactly those countries that ran their own creditability already against the wall, and when, additionally, the goal of issuing these Eurobonds is, to be allowed continuing a life beyond the de facto productivity, by means of piling up even more debt?
I’m sizable enough an investor to claim that my opinion on this issue isn’t a minority view among market participants. E.g., I invest, as do many successful investors, according to the principle of “identifying the weakest link” in a potential investment. This is part of my risk assessment, which again is a step of my further risk management procedures. Because a majority of investors do their risk assessment similar to mine, the market has dried up for those Eurozone countries that don’t pass the risk test, as simple as that.
Until the abolition of the gold standard "spending beyond the treasury's means" was hardly possible, unless the general level of public debt was relatively low and the borrowing demand resulted from a transient need (e.g. in form of 'patriotic' war bonds).
Thus, the concept of running debt up to the amount (and beyond) a nation's yearly economic output is a pretty new one. No governance in human history could pile up debt -without proper collateral- as governments in the West are currently doing.
And this method obviously doesn't work at present - nowhere. It doesn’t even work anymore in the USA, in a currency-realm with the ‘firepower’ of a Fed, which is still lucky enough being able to issue (and dilute) the world reserve-currency No.1).
But how should this scheme work in 'limited' countries like Greece or Italy - or even Germany? If they take the route the U.S. took in the past, any prudent investor can easily predict that he will lose his wager sooner or later when betting on such ‘horses’.
He will lose his investment in two possible ways, either through inflation of his investment's denomination, resulting in bottomless devaluation of its face value or through a debt-default of the issuing country. Why should an investor then give them his good money in the first place if they, on top of it, announce as loudly as foolishly that ‘austerity is crap’?
The method of financing debt with ever more debt has all the typical symptoms of a 'classical' Ponzi scheme. Even the best-wrapped Ponzi scheme has a ‘life-span’, since it can only for a certain period of time rely on the mistaken belief in a nonexistent financial reality, including the hope of finding always enough fools to keep the scheme going.
The ‘sovereign’ ponzi scheme works by way of putting the payback liability on future generations. This might work as long as the burden of servicing the scheme is relatively low; and this is also why IMF and the Eurozone’s Maastricht treaty set the threshold of sovereign debt-sustainability at a maximum of 60 percent of the yearly domestic economic output of a given country. This is, because beyond this margin, sovereign indebtedness becomes increasingly an aforementioned Ponzi pyramid.
Why is this so? - Because if the debt service becomes too burdensome for the current generation, it might very well not be willing (or able) to fulfill the obligations piled-up over generations. When this happens, the Ponzi pyramid collapses. This is, IMO, currently the case in Greece.
Debt bonds are ‘promissory notes’. The young Greeks are not willing to fulfill the promises of the old generation; paying back gone assets the ‘old’ had already ‘lived up’. By doing so, the ‘old’ negligently drove the subsequent generations into an unjust bond serfdom via a fraudulent debt-pyramid. The today young Greeks were thus victimized by the old.
These biggest of all Ponzi schemes in human history, the current sovereign debt pyramids, might just come -generally- to an end now . . . and the current generation is the unlucky one that got ‘screwed’.
Goodness LV, You must be the fittest person in Europe! You`d have to be to get that far up yourself on platitudes, & bull-shit, without the aid of a Yoga,Modesty,or Safety-net. My Hat is off for You but not my Trousers.
You sound like another doppelganger of sherryblack.
IF ONLY! HEARD TONIGHT...That Spain is greasing it`s elbows to follow Greece around the terminal U-bend into the dark unknown of EU recycling. Are we witnessing a birth of the Nuevo-Peseta? or just one more thinly-veiled threat to the EU`s future or else? If it happens, what are the possibilities for the Lire, currently trying to keep their head down but not escaping close scrutiny from Europe`s grudging debt-settlers.
...you'd like that, eh, perra?
That'd be the beginning of your end since a euronetcontributor that size cannot be bailed out.
Er, WHO WANTS TO BAIL THEM OUT?????
If you truly are a crime watcher than this man belongs in jail. Hate crimes ARE crimes.
I would say he belongs in a zoo, rather, but will let you be the judge of that
Issuing Eurobonds should be made by the ECB, and restricted by strict criteria. There is no reason to believe Eurobonds would have interest rates anywhere close those of Greece. Not even Spain's or Italy's. But of course, Germany would end up paying more than the ridiculously low rates it is paying right now.
In the end it's not about issuing or not issuing more debt, but about balancing Europe. It is not possible to continue like this while Germany keeps it's salaries frozen for over a decade, just like it's internal consumption (forget about the "European engine" hoax), and keeping the rest of the Eurozone as a captive market, which has to indebt itself to buy German products. The PIGS have to cut back unnecessary expenses, but above all, invest wisely to improve efficiency and competitivity, and Germany needs to boost its internal consumption, even if this means higher inflation, to allow it's European colleagues grow out of the hole. Eurobonds will be key to this, but they are just a tool in a much larger strategy that needs to be properly designed.
When the investor asks higher interest rates from the GIIPS than, e.g., from Germany, Holland or Finland then this is not because he wants to 'punish' the GIIPS governments, but because he doesn't trust that the voters in these countries are willing to accept the appropriate measures it will take to pay back their existing piles of debt. While, e.g., the German or Finnish voters have shown in the past that they are intelligent and responsible enough 'to bite the bullet' if necessary; to do whatever it takes to
1.) stay competitive on the world markets; only this really counts these days (and not the EU market) for being able to buy the necessary and essential commodities) and
2.) to make the required spending cuts, so that their debt becomes sustainable and open to scrutiny.
Eurobonds wouldn't change the general perception of the prudent "investor" that neither the GIIPS populace nor their governments will be willing or ‘allowed’ to spend only what is taken in. Only prudent investors count in this context, since only they will accept less than 4 percent of return on investment in exchange for a 'secure' portfolio).
Hence they (the GIIPS) would need either 'unlimited' money supply by operating their own printing presses or, if money supply is limited as you say, they will very quick 'test the limits' of these limits.
In the moment, when this happens, the whole debt situation is back at square one . . . only this time with 'joint' debt obligations of 2 trillion Euro more . . . bringing down the prudent countries Finland, Germany, Holland with them as well.
Because of this consideration, I would ask for 10-year Eurobonds at least as much risk-surcharge as for the weakest weighty link within the bond area, which would be either Italy or Spain.
BTW, I didn’t quite understand your notion the “ridiculously low rates” Germany is paying. I think, from an investor’s point of view, that an interest rate for bunds of below 2% is appropriate.
Both, Finland and Holland, are asked to pay less than 2% on their sovereign borrowings. If Holland wouldn’t have solved her budget quarrels so quickly, it would surely be asked today to pay 2.5% and more.
And: A country with a similar ‘discipline’ as Germany – and not even being in the Eurozone - Switzerland, is currently only paying 0.63%.
Thus, I am certain, if Germany would not be a Eurozone member, not having to carry the down-pulling forces of EFSF, ECB and other bailouts, her interest would be near Switzerland’s as well.
F R O Y, here is a post of mine to somebody else, concerning EFSM/ESM and Eurobonds.
xxx wrote: "Obviously Germany being the largest economy by far backs up most of the risk (in theory) and collects most of the profit (of the EFSM/ESM)."
Germany doesn't lend under the EFSM scheme. She merely guarantees her share within the facility. The EFSM and its successor the ESM borrow from the market in their own right based on the joint guarantee by EZ members and the EU.
Since these facilities issue jointly guaranteed bonds, they are as close to the issuance of 'proper Eurobonds' as it can get.
Also Eurobonds would not be 'unlimited', but would need a ceiling as well. Also in the case of Eurobonds, Germany would/could only guarantee a limited quota, since even Germany would break down at the attempt to guarantee the debt of an economy of €9.2 trillion GDP with a population of 332 million.
Under current conditions, for the EFSF, a margin of 208 basis points, as well as the costs from its cash buffers, is added to the EFSF cost of funding. As a consequence, the exact rates are known only after the ESM and EFSF have raised the money.
Germany, France etc. merely 'guarantee' for the EFSM/ESM without charge. E.g., Jan 5, 2012, the European Financial Stability Facility was selling on the market 3 billion euros ($3.9 billion) of bonds at a yield spread of almost seven times (!!!) its first issue a year ago after euro-region sentiment worsened. And this in spite of the fact that it owes its still top credit ratings to guarantees from nations like France and Germany.
Because of the risk-surcharge the market is asking currently, the bailout fund priced its February 2015 notes to yield 40 basis points more than the benchmark swap rate at issuance day. That compares with the six basis-point spread it paid to sell 5 billion euros of July 2016 bonds on Jan. 25, 2011.
What does this mean? The market realizes that even the combined economic strength of nations like France and Germany won't be enough to 'guarantee' the facility’s bonds if countries like Spain or Italy failed and needed massive bailout.
This proves that, if Germany would "dare" to 'guarantee' the debt of e.g. Italy or Spain in form of 'Eurobonds', the market wouldn't charge for such bonds 'German rates', but rather Spanish and Italian rates since Germany a) only guarantees 27% of these bonds and b) anyway couldn't prevent a default of countries with comparable economy sizes to that of Germany, if it would guaranteed more.
Instead of being an appropriate debt instrument, Eurobonds rather have the potential to drag the remaining AAA countries Germany, Finland and the Netherlands over the abyss as well.
to la.výritý on Eurobonds and their "mechanics"
No need, and even less important, to tell you I'm fully with you on your position against Eurobonds.
(To be fair, I must say that a couple of years ago, I was hesitatingly weighing in their advantages and disadvantages. I then became firmly against them, until eventual changes of circumstances, which are not probable whether within a short or medium period).
Despite this agreement, I would add that measuring investors willingness to buy eventual Eurobonds by just looking at the debt/GDP ratio is neither very rational nor even the reality of the last few years.
A couple of years ago, Germany, Portugal, France (by that order) had very similar debt to GDP ratios.
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland (to confine ourselves to S initials) had a far better ratio.
To be absurd, Algeria, Angola, Yemen and Zambia have always had an even far better ratio.
Japan, with Zimbabwe and a few minions, have the worst ratios there are.
Singapore, Iceland and Italy are in the same close bracket.
And nowadays the USA, Portugal and Ireland are very closely together.
Yet, investors rate all of them very differently: sometimes rationally enough; on many cases, as stupidly as doorknobs discussing Aristotle.
Many other indices are at play; as some are unavailable, a lot of "intuition" or "gut feelings" are at play.
All that leads me to my boringly permanent saying: "humankind is to economics today as we used to be Astronomy in the 17th century: we know by now that the Earth circles the Sun (markets are more efficient than planned economies) but that's all we know".
We have to keep studying, studying, studying before we know enough to avoid the silly mistakes we keep making every three generations as we have done now beginning 2003.
Or last time beginning 29th October 1929.
Remember what happened afterwards?
"Remember what happened afterwards (29th October 1929)?"
Yes I remember. If all play by the rules the EU has mechanisms in place to prevent this which the Weimar Republic didn't have, but what the EU can't provide is a guarantee that people can continue the lifestyles they became used to in times of plenty. Even relatively successful societies, as e.g. Germany's or Finland's currently are, can't even make sure within their own borders that this will be always the case, even less so outside of the borders of their governments' influence.
We live in a in a world of globalized production and trade. If this is the best approach organizing world's economies remains to be seen. But when judging it with our past experiences, I tend to answer this in a slight modification of Churchill's famous statement about democracy:
Many systems of trade have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that globally free trade is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that globalization of free trade is the worst form except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
If countries, regions or market associations decide to take part in a free trade world order, then they have, as an indispensable premise, the duty to make the entrusted societies fit for it. For this very reason, the EU implemented the so called 'Lisbon Agenda 2010'.
When the heads of states met at the Lisbon summit in March 2000, EU leaders set out a new strategy to cope with the economic woes resulting from globalization. Based on a consensus among member states, it was decided to make EU economies more dynamic and competitive.
The initiative became also known as the “Lisbon Strategy” and came to cover a very wide range of policies. The Agenda was trimmed-down and relaunched in Spring 2005 after the 'follow up' has shown less than moderate results in implementing the initial Agenda in many EU countries. As a matter of fact there were only three Eurozone countries about to do their "job" according to the rules, and these were, unsurprisingly, the Netherlands, Germany and Finland.
One can complain that the 'Northerners', especially the Germans, are annoyingly rule-abiding people. But in this case this often 'boring trait' was used to their advantage. The Netherlands had reformed their welfare system and the public funding of research, according to the Lisbon Strategy; so had Finland, especially in reorganizing their school system by turning it into a "youth' launching pad" for the 21st century.
German chancellor Schroeder had derived his famous 'Agenda 2010' from the 'Lisbon Agenda 2010', in order to make Germany fit for the challenges of global competitiveness. But these were rather exceptions. Most others, especially the now troubled countries, had spent the EU funds not wisely.
Instead of investing in the future of their nations, they had wasted the resources with satisfying their voters' short-term demands, which often ended in delivery of 'cheap' pre-election promises that were only made to win an election . . . disregarding totally the long-term well-being of their nations by disregarding the aim of the Lisbon Strategy, which was to make the EU countries "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion" by 2010. (Lisbon European Council 23 and 24 March 2000 Presidency Conclusion).
In 2009, when the financial crisis had swept already to Europe, shrewd auditor Fredrik Reinfeldt, then PM of Sweden, stated: "Even if progress has been made it must be staid that the Lisbon Agenda, with only a year remaining before it is to be evaluated, has been a failure".
Most of the Lisbon Strategy's goals, set out by the European Council in Lisbon in March 2000, were generally not achieved by 2010.
Official appraisal of the Lisbon Strategy took place in March 2010 at a European Summit, where -disenchanted- a new Europe 2020 strategy was also launched.
The failure of the Lisbon Strategy was widely commented-on in the news and by member states leaders. Spain's PM José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero pointed out that the non-binding character of the Lisbon Strategy contributed to the failure, and this lesson needed to be taken into account by the new Europe 2020 strategy. "Spain calls for binding EU economic goals - and penalties, 2010".
Resume: Keeping the current gravy train accessible, this time again without imposing parallel 'brutal punishments' for non-compliance, will buy Europe some time, but will eventually lead to the 'lemmings syndrome': It will even those that did their job pull into the abyss . . . if they fail to disconnect from the 'unwilling' in time.
This is why Europeans have this time finally no alternative left than making the needed reforms while living within their means . . . or the downfall into the abyss for those who again put present over future.
to la.výritý
who wrote:
"Yes. I remember...This is why Europeans have this time finally no alternative left than making the needed reforms while living within their means . . . or the downfall into the abyss for those who again put present over future."
Not unusually I'm fully with you.
To the point of having used before the Churchill analogy in the abridged form.
My inclination for simple applied maths leads me to add a couple of points:
• Washington University (state, not DC for non cognoscenti of USA habits) has a devoted bunch of researchers going further than Kondratieff to determine the existence of a three generation wave that tends to repeat the tragedies of 7 to 8 decades before as living memory of them fades away.
• Looking just at the four latest "waves": ... French/ American revolutions(~1790); American Civil war/Franco Prussian war (~1860); WW2 (~1940); now; may indicate they are onto something. Obviously, we should be cautious of coincidences or, worse, "fabricated" coincidences but Wash.Uni. efforts should be studied.
• Ever since Homo Sapiens made its appearance, productivity has been increasing in leaps and bounds meaning we can produce more things with less effort. So we need less people to make the same quantity of things; make more things with the same people, ergo population increases rapidly, people employed to make things in proportion to consumers is reduced.
As we know, all have been happening full steam ahead.
• This is no problem except for a small detail: natural resources consumed increase also exponentially.
• We live in a limited planet. So we have only three solutions in a not very distant future: i) a natural or artificial disaster reduces very substantially human population; ii) we de-link employment from economic growth iii) sci-fi wise we emigrate to other planets.
Being an occasional dreamer I'm rooting for the latter.
Just one more point.
I repeat my belief that the European Union is probably the most daring experiment in governance History has ever tried.
At least since the USA was created.
Like all experiments it may succeed, it may fail.
Judging by the number of both outside and inside difficulties it has come across, it looks now as if it will succeed if Toynbee's theory is correct.
Yet, in hindsight, it looks as if it would have been far better if some twenty to thirty years ago we had accepted the "variable geometry" concept for joining the EU: countries would join only partially au four et à mesure of their meeting the rules of the club.
We would have been spared the debt crisis, the Greek close call to tragedy, British (or at least English) obnoxiousness, severe "austerity" in the South, recession in Holland, maybe Denmark, high tech difficulties in Finland; and a lot of silly and unfair name calling to Germans.
Naturally, we would not have seen the brilliant efforts of Ireland to readjust, either but, hot verdomme!, I suspect they would have given that up happily.
In plain applied maths, you cannot have a scale that is simultaneously used as an exchange tool: money.
But that'll take a couple of centuries to tackle and meanwhile economists will blast me to smithereens for not knowing the theories of money, particularly the non commodity ones.
And in short, markets are the least bad tools to manage the economy but casinos are the worst.
Selling is selling and betting is betting and the twain shall never mix.
With full apologies to Kipling, of course.
The situation as it appears to Berlin is such, that 'special interest groups' pushing for an unlimited bailout of Greece - of course at the same time denouncing budget discipline as "German-imposed austerity", thus feeding hatred between the nations. It would create a precedent when giving in, leading to a breakdown of all still existing restraint. Why should Spaniards, Italians etc. tighten their belts if the Greeks get away with murder?
If this happens, which surely would in this case, then Germany couldn't handle it anyway anymore. Better showing the Greeks their limits now.
The Epoch Times wrote yesterday:
(Quote): "Germany’s top political team is fully aware that German voters will not agree to bailouts of any other country than Greece, such as Spain or Portugal, given that Germany already pays the largest portion of the bailout funds.
This is why Germany has decided to play hardball with Greece. It’s also why Germany has put into place a contingency plan that would permit it to leave the euro if it had to,” said an article on the Zero Hedge website.
According to Zero Hedge and Snyder, Germany already has in place a plan that would facilitate the dumping of the euro.
In October 2011, starting with Dr. Philippa Malmgren, a former economics adviser to George W. Bush, the rumors that Germany’s Central Bank had ordered the printing presses to print the German Deutsche mark, the former currency, spread like wildfire. No denial or concurrence to that issue can be found inside or outside of Germany.
Also, during the past six months, Germany has put legislation into place that would allow it to opt out of the euro without losing its membership in the European Union. Then, German legislation allows German banks to get rid of any government bond based on the euro.
What has great importance is that Germany restructured the Special Financial Market Stabilization Fund (SOFFIN), which would be used if large banks, considered too big to fail, were on the verge of going bankrupt. SOFFIN will receive 400 billion euros ($521 billion), of which 80 billion euros ($104.2 billion) are to be used to recapitalize German banks if needed, something that might be necessary if Germany should dump the euro.
Lastly, “Germany has put a 480 billion euro ($625.2) firewall around its banks. It can literally pull out of the euro any time it wants to. … Germany could very easily leave the euro. …
This is the black swan no one is talking about. If Germany bails on the euro, the EU will collapse. It will be Lehman Brothers times 10 if not worse,” according to the Zero Hedge article. (end quote).
There is not more to add.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/business/euro-at-risk-of-survival-237670...
To la výritý
on German bailing out Greece and zerohedge
a) Greece full bail out
i) I am strongly against Germany providing an unlimited bail out to Greece. For that matter, I am against any country, group of countries or international organizations giving unlimited assistance, of whatever kind, to other countries. Possible exceptions would be catastrophic acts of God or to victims of unprovoked aggression. But even then recovery from disasters should always be mostly led by the sufferers unless there is total destruction of the victim's capacity to react.
ii) Having said that, I think we cannot generalize the reactions of other countries in difficult financial situations.
Let's do a “General Lee” (guessing realistically how they would react) on them:
• Hungary. If Hungary belonged to the Eurozone, my guess is that she would ask for identical terms given to Greece.
• Italy. Northern Italy would not ask for conditions given to Greece; the left in Southern Italy might. The organized crime in the South would do whatever possible to get them as they are specialists in “penetrating” any form of official aid. I'm sure Italy will never need terms offered to Greece; it's pure lack of realism to imagine that.
• Spain. Opinions in Spain would split according to autonomies and political colour. A few might force in that direction, right wing if in central government might ask for it too; left wing with difficulty. It is not realistic to imagine Spain in similar conditions to those of Greece. Not even banks. Don't imagine pink or yellow scenarios.
• Portugal. The Portuguese government of whatever colour would not accept special conditions if they were given to Greece. The opposition, of whatever colour, would say the government had made a mistake and that would be all.Portugal refused the offered Marshal Plan. After the 1929 Wall St. crash that strongly affected Portugal, the country flatly refused international assistance and recovered faster than the rest of the world. As far as I can remember it was the only country to do both.
So practical consequences of moral hazard seem a bit far fetched.
Having said all that I'm still strongly against any unlimited bailout being provided to Greece, Borduria or Lusitania.
Provided by Germany, Lichtenstein, Sierra Leone or all of them together.
As you say,Better showing the Greeks their limits now.
Even if the price is the demise of the Euro of which I have always been a moderate supporter, and the possible disastrous consequences of that demise. Particularly in the big financial centres, mostly forex exchanges.
There are moments in life when principle is more important than inconveniences.
b) zerohedge
i)zerohedge is a puzzling publication. Generally well informed, sometimes down to what one would guess is privileged info.
ii) Yet it definitely suffers from lack of moderation. Probably because of its excellent wit, sometimes clear caricature. Caricature, however much we enjoy them, have to be exaggerated otherwise they have no effect.
iii) zerohedge is the only publication I have seen that worries far more about British finances than I do. Maybe they are right but I hope they are wrong. My worries are bad enough, no need for theirs.
Strongly hope all the above will laughable in six months' time.
Rereading by chance one of my posts above I've noticed a disastrous misspelling:
au four et à mesure that means at the oven and with measure...
Obviously it should have read au fur et à mesure which means at the right rate and measure.
Or in proper English: gradually.
Well, it serves me right not to try to look very highbrow.
But thinking better it probably was a freudian slip: What I was trying to say might have been "throw all the stuff I wrote into an oven where it can roast at our hearts' content..."
Hi sanmartinian.
thanks for the input … and for your analysis on the different attitudes/reactions of other countries in these difficult financial situations. I know you are right since I am very much aware too that nations have "character traits" just like people. But in this case I rather referred to general human attitude toward equal treatment. Even little doggies watch jealously that the other doesn't get the 'bigger bone'.
This is what I was talking about. However, Greece will be dealt with; it will automatically create a precedent. This has apriori nothing to do with a country's politicians' uptake of this situation. With other words Greece's handling will - directly or indirectly - become the "bench-mark procedure" for all other eurozone countries in difficult financial situations. This is just 'normal' and part of a general human trait.
Greece could easily be dealt with like just 'another' German state, receiving laenderausgleich forever. Germany could shoulder this, maybe even shoulder additionally a country of the size of Portugal, but then the end of the flagpole is surely reached.
And I am certain that populist politicians in all EZ countries will point to a 'fully bailed out Greece' when under 'austerity pressure' in order to channel voters' anger away from themselves. Also this is a 'normal' politicians' trait - wherever this may be - because all of them receive power ONLY through popular approval ... and they most likely will react to those 'popular' pressures by pointing at the Greek precedent and ask: Greece got away with murder, why not us too (again, in the moment of public pressure)?
On zero hedge I agree that it is not a 100% reliable source if information. But is an editorial anywhere in the world? However, when it comes to statistics and concrete figures, then I found zerohedge as good a source then any (except for official eurostat and worldbank data maybe).
However, even zerohedge differs normally between a factual report and editorials which go by conjecture.
Whether Germany has printed 'deutschmarks' already is pure speculation, the domestic firewalls erected against a possible Greek fall-out, on the other hand, are not. They were confirmed by Schäuble’s office as well.
Good morning, la.výritý
Delving a little deeper into this matter, you are quite right that in the world at large the way Greece will be treated will become the benchmark as in my eldest son's peculiar DEA and MOLP complicated maths.
That's one reason why a sizeable chunk (clear majority?) of German voters are quite right in resisting any unconditional bail out.
Fully with them myself and, I'm sure, a lot of thinking voters in other countries I know well.
As you say, countries like people have traits and that's what conditions politicians.
Take, for instance, Spain, one of the most diverse countries I know that normally escapes that perception except by very cultivated outsiders.
I am a good friend and keep regular contact with a number of them. Besides, I still visit the place reasonably often.
Result of an obviously very unscientific poll:
Ivan and his wife, Catalan and catalanist who also shows the opinion of his friends: If Greece gets a soft treatment we certainly want it too.
Alfredo, his wife and son, madrileño, retired diplomat expressing the feelings of his millieu: Spain has nothing to do with Greece.
We are not comparable; they are just lazy blackmailers who bargain to the very end and even after all the others have decided negotiations are over. We are against any special concessions to Greece and we would never accept similar conditions even if they got them.
disclaimer: the above are not my opinions and I would never use them ; just conveying somebody else's views
Jesus and his friends. Jesus is an independentist Basque, a bit left of centre, living in NW Spain: poor Greeks; we should do everything we can to help them.
We are not like them at all and probably they are taking advantage of us all but, who knows, we may one day find ourselves in need of help.
But now we don't need it and would not accept conditions offered them.
I could go on but don't want to bother you.
For those used to Common Law, a precedent is a precedent is a precedent.
For others who have lived for 2000 plus years with what passes for codified Roman law, a precedent is only a precedent if decided by a court.
They may grumble but other considerations may be more important.
You'll find it comical but I've known lots of people, otherwise very cultivated in their fields, who find it quite a novelty that in bankruptcy proceedings all creditors must receive the same share of their credits...
As the British say, it takes all sorts to make a world.
I may be very wrong but my perception is that the general feeling in nations with undoubted financial difficulties is a mix of condemnation of Greeks tactics with a little (not much) sympathy for their plight.
Soon enough countries with perceived financial difficulties will be all of us. Just in the EU there are 9 or more now whether they admit to it or not. If you add Japan and USA you'll see the picture is not pretty.
Well, just to end my boring comments: if I were now in government I'd be pushing for non-Euro banknotes and coins to be produced just in case.
If it wasn't too expensive, I should add...
That's perhaps why one peculiar country I know has not destroyed old banknotes and coins and has recently launched a quiet campaign with the help of some private organizations to recover those still thought to be in private hands.
Ready to launch them? At the drop of a hat, I'll bet.
Maybe zerohedge would enjoy finding more...
In a nutshell, I am not over worried about the moral hazard of offering soft terms to Greece but, mainly for other reasons, I am strongly against it.
I hope common sense will prevail and I'm pretty sure it will.
At a certain point we cannot be held hostage to fear of consequences. Everybody knows the German proverb: better a terrible end than a terrible time without end. Sorry for the sloppy translation. You know what I mean.
in the pre-angela merkel era, the germans had to swallon bitter pills for austerity,,,historic cuts in welfare and jobloss benefits, opening of non-taxable mini jobs of 400 euros, etc. it saw the era of germans taking 2-3 jobs to meet ends meet. the sacrifices for austerity has led to growth. simple economics, do not spend what you do not have. compare a train driver in greece who earns a net pay of 5,000 euros to a german train driver who earns a net pay of less than 2,000 euros. before the greek crises, i was in athens and saw how the greeks gobble up signature clothes etc. their shopping mile are so crowded with local consumers. it made my jaw literally dropped. no german shopping mile would be awashed with local consumers! who is to be blamed? and still a good number of germans helping its neighbors is a hgh social responsibility.
SAM, Germany has nothing to reproach itself for, it has done everything correctly. Angie M. is the Neu-Thatcher, but without the nauseous condescension of that original`Euro-Disciplinarian`
To attain Re-unification,Germany bled itself white for years, now it is being asked to do the same (& to a lesser extent so is Britain) for a bunch of financially-incontinent Wasters.
There is only one message a rational-thinking Nation can give to the laggards in Europe = `Shape Up,or Ship the Hell Out!`
German (and to a lesser extent, French) exporters are enjoying unprecedented growth on the back of the Euro crisis (and its drop in value) so much that they want this to keep on going forever, without ever having to spread their ill-gotten gains with other Eurozone members. This will not be allowed to continue.
Windfall tax on the guilty exporters to finance PIIGS writeoffs, plus common Eurozone bonds to secure future borrowing, are minimum price that the Greek could negotiate from their brinksmanship.
No Eurobonds. Ever. Period. We will not pay more so Club Med can pay less.
Get lost Club Med.
Give us our crown jewels back, and everything else you've stolen from us in the past 400 years.
Or get lost.
THIEVES
Spain needs to pay reparations to us for their bloody occupation of our land, and the mass murders they committed. Pay up!
I spit on the grave of Phillip II.
No need to be so dramatic. I'm not particularly fond of the habsburgs, and in fact, I am Portuguese not Spanish. Anyway they 'didn't' occupy your land, they owned it by dynastic right, which is somewhat different.
Homework for you. Write down in a piece of paper a list of all the things the Netherlands took from Portugal since the 16th century till the 21st.
The last item on your long list should be 'theft of 6 items of the Portuguese crown jewels From a museum in the Hague'
Cheerio
As I have pointed out many times, Eurozone bond <> Eurobond. Eurozone bond can be denominated in non-Euro currency. How many times do I have to repeat this to get through some German skulls? Maybe they are all armour-plated with Krupp steel.. :P
We don't want any kind of bond. We don't want any kind of debt mutualization or anything that looks like it.
How do we get through to thieving bankers/southern European skulls so they understand that NO = NO = NO.
Maybe you can ask Spain to redirect some of the reparations to you (to me dynastic right = occupation, especially where it concerns foreign dynasties).
Oh, and as for 'taking things from Portugal', would that refer to colonies that the Portuguese took from the original inhabitants? In other words, things that weren't even Portuguese to begin with? Why don't you make us pay reparations?
Hey Pedro! Stick your hand down the front of your trousers & have a good feel around, that`s probably as close as you`re going to get to recovering your Crown Jewels, pretty miserable compensation isnt it?
Greece could withdraw from the Euro (and maybe should/will) but what would or could be done if Greece wouldn't withdraw but also wouldn't do what the other member states want? From what I have read no procedure exists to expell a state from the Eurozone.
Commonsense implies that at some point a member could be expelled for bad behavior. Who could do this and how? I have seen a comment somewhere that the other 16 Eurozone countries could do so by unanimous consent. What if 1 or more don't agree? How bad would the behavior have to be? I don't think that refusal to accept austerity should be enough. Printing a trillion unathorized Euros ought to be enough. I don't know about actions between these two examples, what about paying Greeks first and foreigners later (if ever) or issuing too many Euros but not as extreem as the trillion example?
This is bad economic news but sure creates a lot of interesting legal political and diplomatic questions.
Greece cannot be expelled. An exit is not included in the treaty.
Therefore no one is really able to kick out any country of the Eurozone against the will of the country concerned.
But if Greece informs the other that it will departure, no country will insist that Greece must stay within the currency. By the way through which means should we force Greece to keep joining the single currency? So the procedure will go hand in hand.
Greece will not accept agreements signed by governments-then, the EU, IMF...are going to stop to remit money to Greece, afterwards it will default and under these circumstances the new elected government declares it will leave the Euro and does not feel itself to be bound to the agreements made before.
Greece have no other choice as to leave the Euro. Within the Euro it will not regain its competitiveness and repay their debts. Against all statements politics have made - it is economically impossible. And everybody who say something different lies.
@Wilhelm Röpke, this is exactly the scenario. If Greece decides to abandon the austerity measures, the bailers will withdraw their commitment, forcing Greece to default.
To Rollo: Greece can only mint euro coins, no bills. The latter is the privilege of the ECB in Frankfurt.
This is my impression as well. It's manifest the preferred option by all governments and institutions concerned is that Greece stay in the euro, but the cricumstances are developing in a direction which makes it materially less and less sustainable. If Greek politics cannot deliver the reforms and the conditions which are necessary to give any bailout effort some sense, then the default becomes inevitabl, and that's what will create the economic (not political) pressures that could force Greece out of the euro system. And in truth it's a pretty horrendous scenario, because people in Greece will lose their savings (hence the mass withdrawals from the banks these last few days); as for people outside Greece, they will feel the bite of the interest rates, the flight of capital, the diffuclty to borrow, etc. few of the protagonists of this crisis are to be left unscathed by a Greek default.
Thanks for the responses. In short Greece could withdraw but not be expelled from the Euro and doing so might help their economy. Thanks for informing me about coins vs bills. I've never been to Europe but I believe a 1 Euro coin is the highest one. Is that right?
Obviously it wouldn't be practial to mint a trillion coins (this would be a little less than 200 coins per person on earth).
What would happen if Greece decided to try to fund their economy by minting lots of 1 Euro coins? Maybe not a trillion but what if it was 50,000,000,000. What if they tryed to settle their international debts with trainloads of Euro coins? In short Greece could do a lot of things which might be funny in both an economic and a humor sense but probably couldn't really destroy the Euro.
They have a 2 Euro coin as well. But its a 'double-minting process', quite costly to make, and additionally all coins have a country-specific national side. Thus, it could easily be banned outside of Greece.
Wikipedia: 1 euro coins (€1) are made of two alloys: the inner part of cupronickel, the outer part of nickel brass. All coins have a common reverse side and country-specific national sides.
Thanks for informing me of this fact.
The idea of minting huge numbers of 1 Euro coins and paying debts off with trainloads or shiploads of metal 1 Euro coins is actually rather funny.
It would also create a lot of jobs at the mint.
Does anyone on this site know enough about the technology of minting coins to say how quickly this could be done? How much would 1,000,000,000 1 Euro coins weigh? How many would fit in a large oil tanker? What is the cost of minting a 1 Euro coin?
Poor Charlemagne, he does not get what the European Union is about. He compounds his lack of understanding by criticising the Euro and the Euro group of countries.
Instead of continuing to call for the break-up he should concentrate his tirades on the UK and its continued membership of the EU. Please leave and let the rest find solutions to the hard task of the continued integration of the European Union.
As for Greece, two thirds of the population are in favour of keeping the Euro, because they seem to know on which side their bread is buttered. Not a word from Charlemagne about the disastrous effects on Greece and its population if they would be so foolish to declare bankruptcy and actually do what this article seems to like.
There is no Drachma and any new currency's value would plummet. Borrowing would be impossible and Greece would be submerged in massive inflation. The Greeks, who feel the pinch of correcting the irresponsible actions of previous governments would feel a pain far in excess of the pain inflicted on them by the Euro group. All imports, including food would have to be paid for in cash, which they won't have. Factories would have to close for lack of funds. It would take more than a decade to achieve some measure of normalcy.
Anyone who thinks that Greece would really leave the Euro should have their heads examined and that includes Charlemagne.
Exactly!
The Bank of Greece runs now a negative TARGET2 account of EUR 105 billion and it's rapidly increasing. This is another reason why Greece wants to keep the Euro: The TARGET2 credit is free of interest and only called when Greece leaves the Euro club.
This also shows, that's not imports from the EZ giving Greeks the 'trouble' (since they anyway don't pay for it) but rather the incapability to pay their towering gas- and crude-imports. This is crucial since crude and gas are meanwhile by far Greece's largest import positions:
mindfulmoney.co.uk wrote February 24, 2012:
(Quote): “For example this week I have been reviewing again Greece’s Balance of Payments figures and take a look at this from the Bank of Greece. The trade deficit grew by €499 million, as a result of a substantial increase by €660 million in the net oil import bill, compared with the exceptionally low level of December 2010. Okay so that is one possibly exceptional month. But here is the figure for the year as a whole. By contrast, the net oil import bill rose by €2.5 billion. This opens up a few issues. Firstly Greece is hit by something outside her control when she is struggling to present improved trade figures and has to cope with ever rising energy costs. We are back to Shakespeare’s “Sorrows come in battalions” I think. But also we are back to Greece’s statistics as her agency is producing trade figures numbers without oil. I think why is now rather clear (to make them appear more favorable to the EU commission) and we are back to a problem we had hoped had gone away.” / End quote. (Shaun Richards is an independent economist. His specialty is monetary economics).
This is the reason why Greece's political establishment fears to go back to Drachma, because the nation would most likely need to ration gasoline and exercise in energy “black outs” during winter, similar to the Ukraine, Bulgaria and Romania two years ago, when it can't rely on 'hard Euros' anymore.
But I believe that a country which cheated against its partners and broke the Maastricht rules as often as Greece did should be stripped of its voting privilege. Maybe such clause exists. Austria was stripped of voting rights in the EU for less than that.
Greece can continue using the Euro as means of domestic payment (or as a 'parallel-used' legal tender) if it really wants. But it surely must discontinue to be granted voting rights and having access to the eurozone's 'honey pot', the real-time gross settlement system, TARGET2, which is owned and operated by the members' Central Banks in order to smoothen and stabilize the Eurosystem, not to abuse it for extended credit.
Maybe Charlemagne should consider changing its generic signature to Black Prince or William Pitt. Its views on European politics are closer to theirs than to Karl der Grosse's.
Of course you'll remember that Charlemagne's views on "Europe" (in fact a very ill-defined concept in his time) were shaped by the advice and ideas of the monk Alcuin of York, one of the first notable English intellectuals. In fact one tends to forget that Charlemagne was surrounded by a number of Anglo-Saxon churchmen. Coming from the westernmost outposts of what was then referred to as "Christendom", they also played a role in severing links to the east, represented by the Byzantine Empire and Orthodox Christianity.
Maybe what's happening with Greece is a sort of (unfortunate, in my feeling) repeat of 1054 And All That...
We in Netherlands do not want more integration because it means we have to pay more. We refuse! Referendum now.
The Euro is the ordinary peoples misfortune and the bankers/politicians are the only ones to benefit. Not a word from Europhiles about the millions already driven into poverty and unemployment on account of the wealth-destroying Euro. Not a word of how banksters are enriched at taxpayers expense.
Greece would be better off and the only ones who disagree are bankers and enemies of democracy (= supporters of the EU) who want to centralize power in Brussels in the hands of the EuroSoviet Politburo (Commission).
You should replace the "we in The Netherlands" with some.
As to your last paragraph, it is riddled with propagandist mistakes. Two thirds of the Greeks who want to keep the Euro are not bankers and enemies of democracy.
The EU commission does not make laws and is certainly no EuroSoviet Politburo. It's function is to propose laws which then have to be accepted by the democratically appointed council of ministers. For the proposals to become law they have to be voted on and accepted by the democratically elected parliaments in your and every country.
Yes, banking has to be reformed, but that requires international action and acceptance. Reform on a national level would prove to be ineffective and only encourages bankers to do their evil deeds abroad at the expense of tax authorities and the economy of the country that has taken the unilateral way.
@Wilhelm Röpke
Here are some hard cold facts
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/07/02/worse-than-wall-street....
RUROPEAN BANKS WORSE THAN WALL STREET
"German banks were among the world’s biggest gamblers in toxic assets, yet they continue to operate behind a veil.
Some of the Landesbanken—public banks run or supervised by politicians—essentially operated as taxpayer-guaranteed hedge funds, accumulating toxic assets with abandon, as regulators looked the other way.
No one knows the scale of their losses, but analysts suspect that most would be insolvent without their guarantees.
Incredibly, none of them have been shut down except tiny Sachsen LB, a Dresden-based outfit that ran a toxic-asset operation nearly 11 times the size of its equity. To this day, they are shielded from effective regulation by their political patrons.
Europe’s dirty secret is that its banking sector is sicker than Wall Street. European banks’ losses from the last financial crisis will hit $1.3 trillion by the end of this year, according to the International Monetary Fund’s latest forecast—35 percent more than the U.S. total.
After the 2008 financial crisis, U.S. and British regulators ran public “stress tests” to separate good banks from bad ones, and then forced unviable ones to restructure and recapitalize. Since then, confidence in the functioning of banks has largely returned.
In much of continental Europe, however, bank balance sheets remain shrouded in secrecy. European countries have protected virtually all their banks, allowing them to keep bad debt hidden in their books in the hope that they might one day grow out of it. These “zombie” banks, stuffed full of bad debt, continue to operate and pay out dividends and bonuses. Because no one knows the true health of Europe’s banks, the crisis festers."
I do not comment your statements. All the best.
Of course you are a propagandist so you cannot comment on facts.
Now go back to your desperate propaganda. Has it ever occurred to you that in this day and age of the globalized media lies and propaganda don't work?
"I do not comment your statements. All the best".
So why write to say you don't wish to comment? Is it that you wish to be desired?
"Jean-Claude Juncker, who presides over the zone's finance ministers, lashed out at the many figures who have more or less openly threatened Greece with expulsion from the euro if it does not abide by its programme of economic reforms and austerity measures."
Those figures who threatened Greece looks remarkably like those French ministers who threatened (and then executed) occupation of the Ruhr to Germany for their non-payment of the Reparations back in 1922.
Readers in the UK may be suprised to know that this terrible 'Euro crisis' is mostly happening in the UK media: in France and Germany it is on page 2 or 3 of the serious papers.
The 'Euro crisis' is all about how much money the banks will loose in the Greek default, (Greece has already defaulted) and how big a bailout the German taxpayer will give the banks.
So the City of London which wrote a lot of 'value adding' CDS insurance of going down for the second time...
What Germany needs to do is what all buyers of bust businesses need to do: tell the previous owners to take a hike, save the best bits of the business and put them on a solid footing.
Maybe I am misinformed. AIG holds a huge amount of CDS which would be affected if Greece would default - and not only the City of London.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/18/us-how-aig-fell-apart-idUSMAR8...
It is all about money. Therefore Mr. Obama and Mr. Cameron together with Mr. Sarkozy urged Germany to bailout the banks. So why all these attacks against Germany? The UK and the US cannot afford to rescue their banks (once more). In accordance with these facts you may understand why Germany is so heavily criticized.
right, the world is on the verge to make the big bang
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2012/02/16/cashin-heres-the-real-risk-if...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/707568901000000-how-and-why-banks-increase...
Exactly. This whole Greek drama has been about the wretched banks, and their losses, and not about Greece at all.
When, and I say when, a year after it should have happened, Greece finally legally defaults, and the banks have finally lost their money,including those who have written those CDS, the sun will come from out behind the clouds, and the Greeks will be left solve their own problems. All that fear-mongering will stop.
Default, Drachma, Devalue, and Inflate. That is the mantra, and that is the only way out for Greece.
At the moment the Greek people are in fear and panic, induced by the publicity campaign of the banks, and desperately want to stay in the Euro - but want others to pay. Sorry, this can't continue.
So, this mess will contimue until the banks give up on screwing more money out of Germany and the IMF.
Foolish Merkel. It is only a loss. It is the banks' money they are losing. It is not the job or responsibility of governments in the capitalist system to repay losses of private companies, even banks. Your East German upbringing has convinced you that governments are responsible for everything. No they are not.
But they are responible for SAVING THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM. That does NOT mean preventing banks making losses, but providing them with LIQUIDITY when required.
My concern now is that if Greece does not default in the near future, FRANCE will go down the tubes. Along with of course Portugal, Spain and Ireland. That will totally wreck the world financial economy.
Serious decisions have to be made now. And that does not include saving a few banks and insurance companies from losses. Tough. But that is what shareholders are for. Paying for foolish decisions.
Things really haven't changed that much in Germany have they?
1) German banks held the 2nd most amount of Greek debt after French banks.
2) German banks held the 2nd most amount of Irish debt after British banks.
2) The USA has already bailed out American banks - does TARP ring a bell? Than google it before you tell lies about the USA.
'Maybe I am misinformed. AIG holds a huge amount of CDS which would be affected if Greece would default '
Unfortunately you are. Greece formally defaulted on 9th March (e.g. ISDA notified markets of a credit event).
The auction took place on 19th March and all CDS contracts were settled in an orderly manner. Total payout was ~$3.2 bn.
And anyone thinking that the euro crisis is solely a creation of UK and US media is mired in denial.
As I understood this was just a partial of the actual costs.
You just mentioned the covered CDS.
However, there are many uncovered CDS.
Once we talked about and we were informed of a amount around 75 bn USD.
Just take a breath think of the difference to 3,2 bn USD.
Thought the credit event would have occurred in 2010 just after the US government bailed out AIG. So there has been enough time for preparing.
Do you know who decided on the issue if Greece defaulted?
For me, I am sorry, I do not share your optimism nor do I share your view that
the ISDA made transparent decisions. This all is suspect - there were to many banks in the UK which made profit with this "event".
Uncovered CDS? I do not understand, do you mean CDS used to create a risky position instead of hedge an existing risk? If so, it is irrelevant - the credit event covers all contracts, regardless of whether they are hedged or not.
Careful with the 75 billion number. That was the total size of all contracts, but they mostly offset each other.
The decision is made by ISDA, a committee of banks and buy side investors. The rules for defining a default (or other credit event) are quite strict and are available online. The decision was, if anything, unnecessarily delayed (IMO) rather than hastily pushed through.
"Readers in the UK may be suprised to know that this terrible 'Euro crisis' is mostly happening in the UK media: in France and Germany it is on page 2 or 3 of the serious papers".
Thank God for that! That means there is no euro crisis then.
No. I am just surprised because the total amount of debts of Greece is much higher. It seems to be that a lot of the Greece's government bonds were not backed by CDS.
My point is - it was enough time to prepare for the trigger.
The ISDA itself denied that it would be a credit event - just days before March 9.
However, I am unsure about the point if ALL Greece's bonds were included in the auction. Maybe you are better informed about it.
In 2010 the menace was much higher than around March 2012.
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/03/16/926981/net-notional-outstandi...
And this was I referred to.
If Greece would not have been bailed-out in May 2010 the default had happened in 2010. Therefore the amount of CDS would have been much higher. And this event was to happen just after the big banks e.g. AIG were bailed-out by the governments.
Therefore Germany was urged to accept bailing out Greece because the time was inappropriate - for all. In 2010 the amount to be triggered would not have been just 2.3 bn. In the end I would not conclude that it was so easy going as you wrote, if the default had happened in 2010.
YOU`RE HAVING A LAUGH,PAL! If it`s all a figment of UK Press, why are currencies & markets diving all around the World....Down to one point...The most meaningless Entity in the EU is crashing out, & all the neurotic financial `Experts` are trying to justify their idiotic salaries by boosting it to International Armageddon. Only the Brothers Grimm could be excused for such a fairy-tale hype over a piss-pot `Storm in a Tea-cup` scenario, but most of their followers are actually believing it!!!!!
Draghi and his ECB cronies must either have a death wish or not believe in the Euro. Their jobs depend on this. With national politics in the Euro zone in paralysis, they are the only ones who can do anything to save themselves (by buying bonds).
The ECB should buy trillions in Euro zone government bonds with freshly created Euros, with the offer of buying new debt. Give the whole zone 1 year to deregulate large swaths of their economies that impede competition, and more importantly their rigid labour markets. Especially Italy and France, where it is so critical. Whenever a country doesn't press on with their reforms, the ECB should start dropping their bonds to keep them on their toes - and to show they're serious. Allow Greece to have a [still larger] default if they need to. If any country refuses to follow the ECB reform outline, it should start dropping their bonds immediately.
The ECB should then stimulate the EU economy with the offer to buy bonds from infrastructure development banks (infrastructure only!) and some bonds in the private sector (maybe mortgages, etc). This stimulus should be conditional on dramatic public sector budget cuts and loan guarantees by banks, and will act to make up for the loss in demand.
Central banks are not supposed to get mixed up in politics. Their independence is supposed to keep the currency credible. But look at the big picture, and look at how things are right now. I ask, is the Euro a more credible currency as-is?
The end of the beans for all the banksters is coming:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9270884/Debt-crisis-G...
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article33140.html
Somebody ought to tell Comrade Juncker that the '70s called. They wanted their rhetoric back.
ME PERSONALLY? I SPENT A LIFETIME WORKING MY NUTS OFF TO ACCRUE A FEW SAVINGS & INVESTMENTS FOR MY RETIREMENT & MY KID`S FUTURES. SO IF I REGISTER MYSELF AS SICK TO DEATH OF THIS WHOLE `EURO/EU/PHUKUP`DEBACLE, PLEASE DONT BE OFFENDED WITH MY LACK OF PATIENCE OVER EUROPE & THE FINER POINTS OF IT`S SELF-INFLICTED DEMISE...I REALLY DONT GIVE A `COMMUNITY-BASED`CREPE CONCERNING THE OUTCOME,I WOULD ONLY WISH TO CONSERVE WHAT IS MINE BY WORTH & EFFORT WITHOUT SPREADING IT ALL OVER EUROPE ON CHARITABLE BAIL-OUTS & NEUROTICALLY PLUNGING MARKET LOSSES.
Take another pill. Two a day and you'll be fine
Pedro, the article states that Portugal is praised "for remaining on track”. Congrats if this is true.
But how do you guys manage this without whining, while others (the Greeks and Italians) raise a hue and cry.
This must be, as sanmartinian always claims, due to the rough Atlantic climate . . . which you share with the Irish and which is in contrast to the "spoiled and thus whiny" Mediterranean climate.
Pedro, I just read a comment on another blog:
http://www.economist.com/comment/1420968#comment-1420968
Voxtrot May 16th, 09:27
Interesting how Portugal, supposedly in the death throes of Euro asphyxiation and next in line for the chop, actually performed better than either Britain, which has its own currency, or even the Netherlands which is supposedly at the core of the Euro.
I wonder what we can read into that. Perhaps they are doing something right.
Recommended 13 (one is from me, though).
Wow, Sanmartinian the Wise was right after all.
SO, DRUG-ABUSE IS YOUR SOLUTION TO EVERY CHALLENGE. ARE THOSE PILLS YOU`RE ON `E`s?
Hi Lv!
In my opinion the 'vast' majority of the Portuguese understands the deep hole we're in and we are just doing our best to cope. I had this debate before outside this forum, with a gibraltarian friend of mine.
This country has gone through rough times before, it's not the first time... This is, and I apologise if this may hurt people's feelings just peanuts compared to colonial wars (my dad was bombed by Russian-sponsored Biafrian fighters in Sao Tome and Principe!!) just an odd 30 years ago, the hot summer as it was known of 76 etc etc... Not to mention all the previous crises... I was going to share something my great great great grandfather wrote at the end of the 19th century... The monarchy was falling...
I might be romanticising a bit but international analysers completely underestimated this country when they thought it'd be a second Greece. The people gave a clear mandate to tis government last year to keep us in the euro and take us out of this whole through austerity. It can be criticised, but that's their mandate. So they must work. If they fail they know the price.
Regards.
-:D
I meant anti-biafrian of course.
There are some worrying things like unemployment, which is probably what I think worries the Portuguese the most. But these people will just go to Brazil, Angola, Denmark, Germany... It's not the first time either.
A crisis is also a time for opportunity. Perhaps our economy truly needed this, especially the balance of trade, which will be positive by end year if exports keep behaving the way they did.
It's a small country so it's not too hard. There are indeed things that are beyond Portugal's control like whatever happens everywhere else in europe, but that's not something we can control . The vast majority of analysts here thinks the best we can do is work things our end.
Thanks LV,
It's good to see someone with your knowledge of Economics, which I admire to read, and from whom I also learn things, acknowledging the efforts our country is making.
There's no need to shout, we're not deaf!
I took it that you belonged to one or other of the FAILED Med.Economies by the size of the chip on your shoulder. Historically,the national traits of your region are the profound inabilities to Save, Invest or Spend wisely, just to hold out your hands repeatedly for charitable hand-outs following imprudent & idiotic financial cock-ups. Germany, Holland,Britain,Belgium & a large part of France have had enough of bailing-out a bunch of `two-bob` Holiday Resorts who halucinate by pretending to approach Importance, now fill my glass, grill my sardines & know your place, like a good Portugese Waiter.
As you might have noticed, I always excluded Portugal when writing about unsustainable profligacy (which I hate).
I also strongly support that Portugal should be helped in a more direct way by Germany if it stays on target, through an 'unofficial' preferential treatment maybe, in way of privileged procurement.
Frostya1, Pedro is Portuguese. I don't think that his country really belongs in that category you described 50 mins ago.
LV, He`s Portuguesa you say?, Well in that case he most definitely does belong within the portent of my description.
Ho Hum, at least they`re `Trying`, but not very hard. Unlike the veritably impenetrable `smoke-screen` being erected by the French to cover the dissolution of Le Grande Scheme Europ.
I`m BRITISH,& therefore I have more important matters to concern me @ present & possibly in the Future.
So Bon Voyage mon Petit Shoo.
Hey no new to hide in fright,,
I know you have just realised your ignorance will not be accepted here.
Let me put this straight to you , just in the same tone with which you started posting on this board:
I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO BULLY ME OR ANY ONE OF MY FELLOW COUNTRYMEN JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK YOUR NATION IS SUPERIOR TO OURS. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE FROM BUT I WILL NOT LET YOU GET AWAY WITH IT.
Got it now?
Good now go see a dentist or something
THE END OF THE EURO...SO WHAT, THE END OF THE EU...SO WHAT. THERE`S A LOT TO BE SAID FOR CONTROL OVER ONE`S OWN AFFAIRS,SOVEREIGNTY,& FINANCE.
IT WILL COST US ALL A FAIR FEW QUID TO BE RID OF FRANCE`S IDIOTIC `GRAND PLAN`. BUT BY CHRIST IT WILL BE BLOODY WELL WORTH IT!
Oh just take a pill for chrissake
I don't think for a moment that those who pay the piper are bluffing even if the ever feckless Greeks seem to have convinced themselves they can have their cake and eat it. I'm sure they would prefer Greece to live up to it's committments but if they don't then regrettably their departure will be accepted or probably welcomed. It's only politics that's delaying matters now. No one wants to seen as actually pulling the plug on Greece. The rest of the zone has been building its defenses for this eventuality for at least six months and despite the usual media hype they'll probably be able to deal with the volatility. As for Mr Hollande I suspect he's going to pursue much the same set of policies as his predecessor. There is no way the fiscal pact is going to be renegotiated although it might get the addition of some sort of stimulative measures.
The defaulting EZ nations are no different from individuals who have maxed their credit cards, in debt to their eyeballs & unable to make the minimum payments. All living, way beyond their means for decades, of credit on tomorrow's suspect/non-existent earnings. The rest of the EU nations ain't much better off, either.
Way to self-destruct, Europe. Denial, only works for so long..
completely whatevs. You do realise the entire West is in a similar situation not just what you describe as 'Europe' which I suppose you mean as the 'eurozone'
So, yeah
totes W-H-A-T-E-V-S
Of course I agree. But as the article was on the EZ, is why I mentioned only Europe in my comments..
pedrolx2: "You do realise the entire West is in a similar situation".
Well, all of Europe is in similar situation, except for one small country of the indomitable Portuguese that still holds out against the perils of the world.
http://www.economist.com/comment/1420968#comment-1420968
www.fiscalwars.wordpress.com
Greece wants a pony and their sponsors simply cannot afford one.
Hollande was struck by lightning on his way to Berlin.
This is a good omen - from the gods themselves.
Uh, good for whom?... And, for the sake of completeness, it was Hollande's plane that was struck by lightning, and not Hollande himself. Was that a Freudian slip?...
potato, pot/a/to. If he was inside the plane and the plane was struck by lightnight, then by simple logic, he was also struck by lightning - he was just 'protected'.
This means Donar, the Teutonic god of thunder, likes Hollande, and was merely showing him his appreciation.
" This means Donar, the Teutonic god of thunder, likes Hollande, and was merely showing him his appreciation."
That's one interpretation... we'll know, in due time, the real meaning of this sign...
since the beginning of his Campain, Hollande benefitted of luck
Yes, extraordinary luck: the DSK affair, etc.,etc.
M.Hollande had better keep in mind the ancient observation about too much good luck: " Those whom the gods would destroy, they first grant their wishes"...
The actual saying as I recall it is "quos Jupiter vult perdere, stultifiat". "Those that Jupiter wants to destroy, he makes them stupid".
(or "crazy" according to some scholars).
Well, the observation has been around for quite a while that relates to that sort of behavior. They come in many shapes and forms. The two Latin ones I recall are : " Quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat" and " Quos vult perdere Iovis prius dementat". For the record, "Iovi" is the Latin for "Jupiter". There was no letter "J" in the Latin script. "Iupiter" would be the spelling if you insist on calling Iovi in the non-classic form. Anyway, the phrasing I used has been around for a very long time, too, but is unattributed. The one you might have been thinking of was attributed to a few classical figures.
"When falls on man the anger of the gods, first from his mind they banish understanding."
-Lycurgus
"When divine power plans evil for a man, it first injures his mind."
-Sophocles
"Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first deprives of their senses."
-Euripides
"Whom God wishes to destroy he first makes mad."
-Seneca
I am guessing you were thinking of Seneca's saying; maybe not...
P.S. I do not for a second think that M.Hollande has lost his mind, at all. So, I would not use any of the "injured mind" quotes; but the "granted wishes" quote is more apposite. We'll see what the future has in store for M.Hollande, won't we? In due time... No matter what, he will have to tread very carefully for everyone's sake...
I guess I was indeed thinking of Seneca, who may have been thinking of himself and his choice of career. Mr Guaino may feel fortunate.
French schools always kept the "j" in Latin words, no doubt to make it a bit easier to their students; after all we might also write it like it was, in uppercase without spaces between words...
And "Jovis" sounds like the genitive form of Jupiter to me.
Still, I am happy to bow to superior erudition, and to join you in your (implied) well-wishing for a contemporary pol in much need of it.
My greek friend told me that the reason they dont like paying taxes goes back to the ottoman empire. If you were the only greek person in the village paying taxes you were thought of as a wimp!
Your Greek friend has no knowledge of history.
Promoting and cultivating social stereotypes of the worst kind is dangerous.
I wonder if you would have said that in a panel of real compatriots of yours, a panel of educated European citizens, and not hidden in the anonymity of the internet, what the would have been their reactions. You know the answer..
The result of such actions is the comment which IIV has written as a reply.. a few more and the thread will be transformed to a mob.
It's rather the Greeks that were deported and that fled the Turks slaughterings at the beginning of the 20th century (~1,5 million) that brought the use of corruption and bribing into the new independant Greece, that was commonly practiced in the Ottoman empire
No.. It is not this either which in any case is not accurate.
Presenting corruption as phenomenon that goes back for hundreds of years and comparing different historical periods is a classic case of anachronism.. a common mistake in the study of history.
Political corruption in Greece as the deep phenomenon which I have described in other comments of mine, and which is the same in Italy, and is definitely not the common perception of brown envelopes, started during the early 80s.. around 1985.
Thank you for the relief, I had been wondering for days, who voted for these Golden Dawn guys. Heil!
OK, everyone, please take your next vacation in Greece. Though it may not export much, it is a beautiful country with a potential to grow its tourist industry.
Greek culture and tourism Minister Pavlos Geroulanos: "German tourists afraid to come to Greece"
Mar 12, 2012: German tourists are ‘afraid’ to come to Greece due to constant headlines in Greek media depicting Germans as 'Nazis' because of the widespread anger at EU-mandated austerity, the Greek culture minister said on Monday.
"There are many Germans who are justifiably afraid to come to Greece”, Pavlos Geroulanos told Greece's head of state President Carolos Papoulias, after a visit last week to Berlin for the world's largest travel fair.
"They feel that, after Greek media vilifies Germans as 'saluting Nazis', they have no business spending their most precious time of the year in a country which hates them.
This is a climate that we must change," Geroulanos said.
It will take years of good will from future Greek politicians to persuade German tourists otherwise.
It seems the Greeks are making one gaffe after the other.
TIME TO THROW GERMANY OUT OF EURO NOW
The crisis in euro zone will affect all countries in the world. Euro cannot be allowed to die quickly and fast. The proposal to kick Greece out of Euro is very dangerous. It is like asking a citizen of a country to leave the country for not paying credit card bills. Which new country will take him? If you allow this idea then lender can force one by one outside the zone. The position of Spain, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, even France is more in line with Greece.
So the solution is to throw Germany out of Euro now and immediately. The outcome is best for all concerned except Germany, in fact to the world. The sequence is as below.
1. Germany leaves Euro and issues Mark. The mark will settle at say one mark at 2 Euros.
2. With euro depreciated only against mark the European nations can start exporting bringing back the jobs and business.
3. The WORLD cannot complain since euro is existing and trading. If the market forces devalue euro no one is answerable / need not answer.
4. The Tax on German exports to Europe will bring revenue to LOCAL Governments.
5. China cannot / need not complain since China will be better placed to trade against Germany. Euro reserves exist as a currency.
6. Germany will become like china a large holder of exchange reserves.
7. Germany can restrain Mark from international trade like China Yuan / Indian Rupee and do external trade only in euro / US$.
8. France will emerge as European leader, which France never achieved till date.
9. Europe will have Little leader Britain, Crude Leader Russia , disciplined leader Germany, Free for all leader France. In short Europe will stop meddling in other country affairs, busy with their own problems.
10. USA should be happy Germany cannot raise now uncontrollably , and concentrate on China / India
11. China can be happy Euro reserves will last as a currency and can be utilized. With Germany on par with China in legal terms for Euro trade China can do what it did to US. Koreans Can move in with their factories.
12. Germany can attach itself to Euro Zone like Nepal, Bhutan, Sri lanka, Bangladesh to India.
Germany is like to Europe what Mumbai, Delhi is to India. In China the common race made developments along the coast, In India the different races acquired skills and industrialization is all across India.
Similarly Europe will change in a decade and Germany will be Just another state in Europe.
SO TIME TO THROW GERMANY OUT OF EURO NOW HAS ARRIVED
Please, daffa, do not drink or smoke too much before posting, so you have missed the golden opportunity to write a real satire. :-)
Intriguing idea - unfortunately daffa108 seems to ignore some subtle facts, one of them very important:
- Eurozone is not equal to EU (European Union)
So a German exit of the common currency would not generate tax revenue (as in duty / toll / tariffs) for other European governments.
What would happen is a strong rise in the new German currency analogous what Switzerland experienced in recent years, leading to similar actions by Bundesbank. It would completely starve off weak German growth and send Germany into recession.
At the same time markets can be expected to devalue Euro, helping the competitivity of the ClubMed countries in relation to other countries (as the relatively weak Euro is currently helping German exports to non-Euro countries). Nevertheless in the short run, a tightening of credit would ensure the region would be in deeper recession than before.
Whether this construct would help anyone remains to be seen (hopefully not...). In the end, globalization made competition global and the Eurozone countries are not able to free themselves of trouble by making the more competitive countries slack, because then China, India, USA, and other EU [non-Eurozone] countries would take the market share. This is not about redistribution among Eurozone countries but about competition with the rest of the world.
In the end for the people it doesn't matter whether they earn less Euros (called austerity) or they can buy less with the same amount of Euros (called inflation or depreciation). It's just the numbers...
Good luck, old Europe!
Your technical points should be food for thought in Germany.
Your call to 'throw out Germany from the Eurozone' only shows how little you know about the EU and the Eurozone. Your comparisons with Asia are off topic and their wording is offensive.
You comment is just bull.... If Germany leaves the EU and other vital countries do follow, than noone is going to buy those crappy Euro Bonds and things will only get worse for the rest. And i mean really bad because there wouldn´t be no german payments at all.
And if Germany leaves the Euro they would not have to pay any special taxes because they are part of EU.
But i support your plan anyways beacause it would be great for Germany.
Excellent points.
About the ability to "free themselves of trouble by making the more competitive countries slack", let me observe that steaming in convoy implies keeping to the speed of the slowest ships. A free-for-all race leads to an U-Boote fest.
Um, Europe needs Germany far more than Germany needs Europe. Keep in mind this whole EU/Euro fantasy started before China became a viable market for goods. Germany can sell far more now to China and the rest of Asia than they ever could in Europe. If I were another European country, I'd start being very nice to Germany.
"- Eurozone is not equal to EU (European Union)"
But net contibutions are for the EU, not for EZ
http://ec.europa.eu/budget/figures/2011/2011_en.cfm
"“There is a danger that Germany pursues its economic interests rather than Europe’s strategic interests,” said Mr. Kundnani."
http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/germany-and-china-a-speci...
yet the german exports still depend on EZ/EU, much more than on Asia, which can slow whenever chinese communist goverment would call for its end
http://euro-crise.over-blog.com/article-le-commerce-exterieur-allemand-e...
". . . to throw Germany out of Euro now and immediately"
Actually, I believe that a majority of Germany's taxpayers could acquire a taste for this idea. Many are hoping for an annotation from someone weighty in the Eurozone to get the ball rolling. But so far 'zero', just from some feeble-minded insignificant posters on blogs like this … but this doesn't count.
Of course, it’s an illusion to think that currency-devaluation is a major factor in the export business. If this would be so, Zimbabwe would be the 'export-king' of the world.
Even if you print the naked Greek Aphrodite on the front of your brand new 1 billion euro bill, you won't sell more olives and feta cheese to the world, even if you would carry them to Egypt. They would, probably, take it for nothing . . . but in ways of receiving 'hard' dollars for it? I doubt it.
When I spoke to a guy from Dallas, who was harvesting walnut wood on my property in the Ozarks, USA, and who owns a veneer-plant in Texas, he showed me photos from a brand-new machine he was very excited about.
It was what he described as "double laser veneer guillotine" and he gave me numbers about how many hundreds of square feet his 'baby' cuts in a minute and in which precise μ-thickness. I wanted to know how much his 'baby' had cost. He said close to USD 5 million. But the price was secondary he said, since he can't get such a machine anywhere in the US. He’d ordered it from Germany, and with its high output and low failure rate, he said, the laser cutting veneer robot pays for itself in a couple of years.
When I had a check-up at a diagnostic clinic near where I live in Midwest USA, all precision tech equipment in the diagnostic room was labeled 'Siemens', a German brand name.
What I want to say is that German high-tech equipment and capital goods aren't bought because they’re 'cheap' (the guy with the 5-million-dollar 'baby' didn't even care about the price), but because they are often 'simply the best' money can buy.
This is the same with Swiss products; they don't sell because they 'cheapen the price', but rather because they don't compromise quality and technology.
With other words: you can't conquer the world markets by just printing nice looking money, no matter how imaginative you call it.
The world wants goods . . . and if Europeans ain't fated to do compete with Bangladesh, then they have to be so much better than the rest of the pack - no matter what kinda money they print.
Germany is naturally keen to retain the Euro because it keeps its exports extremely strong, but to the detriment of everyone else. If by some chance the Euro did collapse and Germany had to revert to the Deutschmark the currency would be very highly valued and Germany would not have anywhere near the export record it currently enjoys. Exports would heavily slip because they would be too expensive for others to buy.
One has to wonder how Germany became ever export champion before the Euro, suffering a highly valued D-Mark.
Did you ever ask yourself that question? ;)
Yes, please throw us out!
More and more Germans totally agree.