Should the Greek government have continued lying?

[Gustaf]

I agree - the German people have good reason to be against this. They have been subsidizing the likes of Greece apart from the current fiasco for years anyway. The Greek government should really have pushed through deeper cuts. They still should, as should the Iberians.

If Germany is anything like the US Fed & Treasury they'll bail everyone out, except for one.

Well, if Germany wants to call the shots in the E.U. then one of its obligations is to "subsidize" the poorest countries.
Just like in the U.S. where Texas, New York and California subsidize through the federal government states like Alaska, North Dakota and Mississippi.

What do you mean "wants to call the shots". They have to push up with so  much BS from the other euro countries I'm amazed they're not letting them rot.

I mean, Greece even played the Nazi card a like a couple of months ago. Poland does it all the time. Germany had to give up the D-mark and settle for reduced influence (compared to population) and they keep financing everyone else's bad economic policies.

If I were Germany I'd exit the whole thing and tell all those parasite countries to fend for themselves.

[Gustaf]

I agree - the German people have good reason to be against this. They have been subsidizing the likes of Greece apart from the current fiasco for years anyway. The Greek government should really have pushed through deeper cuts. They still should, as should the Iberians.

If Germany is anything like the US Fed & Treasury they'll bail everyone out, except for one.

Well, if Germany wants to call the shots in the E.U. then one of its obligations is to "subsidize" the poorest countries.
Just like in the U.S. where Texas, New York and California subsidize through the federal government states like Alaska, North Dakota and Mississippi.

What do you mean "wants to call the shots". They have to push up with so  much BS from the other euro countries I'm amazed they're not letting them rot.

I mean, Greece even played the Nazi card a like a couple of months ago. Poland does it all the time. Germany had to give up the D-mark and settle for reduced influence (compared to population) and they keep financing everyone else's bad economic policies.

If I were Germany I'd exit the whole thing and tell all those parasite countries to fend for themselves.

Germany and France are the only countries with REAL veto power in the EU. If Greece, Portugal or Poland disagrees with something, the Union will find a way to go around them. But if Germany or France does, then it's finished.

The Nazi card as you say was played by some populists in the media in response to a string of insulting comments by German commentators and politicians. Even so the criticism was founded on the fact that Germany owes us billions of Euros from WWII when they looted our treasury during occupation and used thousands of Greeks in forced labor camps. These are money that have been adjudicated to us by the courts and Germany refuses to pay, threatening with deterioration of our bilateral relationship if we continue to press the matter. So if they want us to lower our debt perhaps it would be a good idea to help us by paying their debts to us.

And most economists agree that Germany was the greatest beneficiary of the Euro. It was due the common currency that they managed to dominate the European markets and have built such a lopsided export/import imbalance as to threat the european economic stability.
And if we weren't locked in the Euro, we could have dealt with the crisis much easier by devaluing our currency, much like Canada did in the 80's. It's the euro that strangles our competitiveness and most of the other Mediterranean countries.

No one benefitted from the euro, imo. Germany certainly is not benefitting now when they have to pay for everyone else.

Granted, it is worse for weaker economies, but Greece and all those other countries semi-forced their way into the euro despite being too weak because they thought they could leech off of Germany's stronger economy. That didn't work of course.

But, seriously, the war crimes committed are really irrelevant and is a good example of why the EU is bad for European integration. It isn't as if Germany is getting repaid for the horrible atrocities committed by the Red Army towards the end of WWII. They've paid their debt and the Germany of today shouldn't have to bear the guilt of that war anymore.

It certainly has nothing to do with Greece's current economic woes.

[Gustaf]

No one benefitted from the euro, imo. Germany certainly is not benefitting now when they have to pay for everyone else.

Granted, it is worse for weaker economies, but Greece and all those other countries semi-forced their way into the euro despite being too weak because they thought they could leech off of Germany's stronger economy. That didn't work of course.

But, seriously, the war crimes committed are really irrelevant and is a good example of why the EU is bad for European integration. It isn't as if Germany is getting repaid for the horrible atrocities committed by the Red Army towards the end of WWII. They've paid their debt and the Germany of today shouldn't have to bear the guilt of that war anymore.

It certainly has nothing to do with Greece's current economic woes.

Germany has not benefited from the Euro? Is that supposed to be funny?
Even Christine Lagarde chastised the Germans about a month ago, saying that they used the common currency to dominate over european markets (like Greece and Portugal) and now they refuse to help the members of the Eurozone who are in crisis.

We are not talking about war crimes here. We are talking about forcible loans to the German state by the Bank of Greece and wages for the Greeks who provided forced labor. The money were adjudicated to our government by the european courts less than a decade ago. Germany acknowledges the debt but simply refuses to pay. 

Of course it won't solve our fiscal woes. But you can't demand from someone to balance his budget while at the same time you aren't fulfilling your obligations to that person.

1. Germany entered the euro with a too strong real exchange rate. Unless most other euro countries they took the responsible course of holding back wage increases thus increasing their competitiveness.

2. Who is Christine Lagarde and why should I care about her opinion?

3. How did they use the common currency to dominate markets? What does that mean?

4. It is odd to hold the Germans of today responsible for what the Nazis did 60 years ago. The Germans have suffered a lot from WWII and its aftermath and it is time to let it go. It is irrelevant and doesn't help anything.

5. I still don't see why Germany should pay for other countries who have mismanaged their economies. Over the last half-century Germany is, more or less, the only country in Western Europe to consistently look after their economy in a competent fashion. That shouldn't be rewarded by ridding them with the debts of other countries.

[Gustaf]

1. Germany entered the euro with a too strong real exchange rate. Unless most other euro countries they took the responsible course of holding back wage increases thus increasing their competitiveness.

2. Who is Christine Lagarde and why should I care about her opinion?

3. How did they use the common currency to dominate markets? What does that mean?

4. It is odd to hold the Germans of today responsible for what the Nazis did 60 years ago. The Germans have suffered a lot from WWII and its aftermath and it is time to let it go. It is irrelevant and doesn't help anything.

5. I still don't see why Germany should pay for other countries who have mismanaged their economies. Over the last half-century Germany is, more or less, the only country in Western Europe to consistently look after their economy in a competent fashion. That shouldn't be rewarded by ridding them with the debts of other countries.

I don't have time now but I'll respond to one of your questions.

Christine Lagarde is the French Minister of Finance. So I guess that even you will concede that her opinion is somewhat important in EU.

No, I'm sorry...her opinion may be important for predicting what the EU will decide to do or what Germany will be forced to do. But it holds almost no value at all when it comes to analyzing whether Germany has actually gained from the euro or not. She is a politician, of course she will attack Germany. That's what everyone is doing right now.

[Gustaf]

1. Germany entered the euro with a too strong real exchange rate. Unless most other euro countries they took the responsible course of holding back wage increases thus increasing their competitiveness.

2. Who is Christine Lagarde and why should I care about her opinion?

3. How did they use the common currency to dominate markets? What does that mean?

4. It is odd to hold the Germans of today responsible for what the Nazis did 60 years ago. The Germans have suffered a lot from WWII and its aftermath and it is time to let it go. It is irrelevant and doesn't help anything.

5. I still don't see why Germany should pay for other countries who have mismanaged their economies. Over the last half-century Germany is, more or less, the only country in Western Europe to consistently look after their economy in a competent fashion. That shouldn't be rewarded by ridding them with the debts of other countries.

I don't have time now but I'll respond to one of your questions.

Christine Lagarde is the French Minister of Finance. So I guess that even you will concede that her opinion is somewhat important in EU.

No, I'm sorry...her opinion may be important for predicting what the EU will decide to do or what Germany will be forced to do. But it holds almost no value at all when it comes to analyzing whether Germany has actually gained from the euro or not. She is a politician, of course she will attack Germany. That's what everyone is doing right now.

Oh really? Perhaps then you could enlighten us why Germany hasn't benefitted from the Euro.
Util then here as an article that explains what you can't seem to understand:

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15829876

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As for your other points...

4)Excuse me but you are showing willful ignorance here. Nobody talked about war reparations. We are not asking money for the damages they inflicted on our country during WWII.
We are talking about the Germans repaying a loan they forcibly took from the Bank of Greece during the occupation and paying the wages they owe to the Greeks who were taken to camps and provided forced labor.
The european courts vindicated us, so it's not a matter of politics or playing the Nazi card as you continue to falsely claim.   

5)Nobody asked Germany, or any other country, to pay our debts. We are asking them to loan us in reasonable rates. Whatever money we take from Germany, we will return them with 5% interest.

If the european countries can't even do that to help a fellow member in distress, then the EU and the Eurozone really aren't worth a bucket of warm piss.

Someone asked me a while back why I wasn't intending to stay in Germany (or Europe) permanently....

Well.....you know, being forced to pay Greek debt.....doesn't exactly make you want to stay somewhere.

Thank God for the wonderful European Union that makes us all equal.....although some more equal than others!

I hope you understand now that you weren't going to pay our debt.
But again, in the US didn't the federal government bail out states like California, Illinois, Alaska, South Carolina and New York with the Stimulus?

If you want to be king, like Germany does, then you have to take care of your subjects. 

You didn't actually respond to all my points, but ok...the article you cite say basically what I did. Again, it doesn't explicitly say that Germany is to blame, it merely cites other countries attacking Germany. It also points out what I did - that Gemany entered with a high exchange rate and has done its best to compensate.

In fact, the euro was created against Germany's will because other countries like Greece wanted to piggy-back off of Germany's success. Blaming Germany for it now is rather irresponsible, imo.

What you say about WWII does not contradict any of the things I said so I take it you didn't really have a counter there.

Finally, if the deal of lending money to Greece is as good as you claim, then how come you cannot broker that deal on the market? Obviously, the expected value of lending money at that interest rate is too low, so it is a freebie.

And Germany is, understandably, sick of giving out freebies.

[Gustaf]

You didn't actually respond to all my points, but ok...the article you cite say basically what I did. Again, it doesn't explicitly say that Germany is to blame, it merely cites other countries attacking Germany. It also points out what I did - that Gemany entered with a high exchange rate and has done its best to compensate.

In fact, the euro was created against Germany's will because other countries like Greece wanted to piggy-back off of Germany's success. Blaming Germany for it now is rather irresponsible, imo.

What you say about WWII does not contradict any of the things I said so I take it you didn't really have a counter there.

Finally, if the deal of lending money to Greece is as good as you claim, then how come you cannot broker that deal on the market? Obviously, the expected value of lending money at that interest rate is too low, so it is a freebie.

And Germany is, understandably, sick of giving out freebies.

Whatever dude. I think whoever reads our posts can see who's the one that speaks in platitudes and aphorisms without really addressing the other person's points.

I stop here because I don't want to follow Einzinge's footsteps.

P.S. Your point about our lending shows a special kind of ignorance about our situation. Sorry but there was no nicer way to say it.

That is, indeed, a strong argument. I feel stupid now for not having thought about those issues that you just brought to light. I'm sorry, next time I will refrain from using vague aphorisms like "wanting to be King" "taking care of subjects" "seeking hegemony" etc.

I do apologize. Next time I will be more specific and explicitly state why I think Germany did not benefit from the euro, say, via a too high real exchange rate. 

And if you think Einzige was banned because I disliked him, then you have a very shallow understanding of that whole situation.

P.S. Your point about lending shows that you don't understand basic economics at all. There was a nicer way of saying it, namely my previous post, but I don't feel like being nice to you now, since you're being such an ass.

[Gustaf]

I do apologize. Next time I will be more specific and explicitly state why I think Germany did not benefit from the euro, say, via a too high real exchange rate. 

Apology accepted (as your Nemesis would say).

P.S. Your point about lending shows that you don't understand basic economics at all. There was a nicer way of saying it, namely my previous post, but I don't feel like being nice to you now, since you're being such an ass.

Basic Economics
Lending someone with 5% interest rate=Giving him a freebie

Ok, I will oblige you with a little basic economic theory. Here is how it works.

I lend a person a sum "X" now, in return for a sum "X+r" in the future, where r represents the interest I get. There are several reasons for r>0. One is that people typically prefer consumption now over consumption in the future, so you reward a lender for giving up present consumption. Linked to this is of course inflation compensation.

Then there is another reason, namely the risk of me not getting my money back. The most obvious reason for this happening is due to default risk of some kind.

So, let us assume that we have a situation where the lender has no discount rate as regards future consumption (that is, he is indifferent between future and present consumption) and let us furthermore assume that he is risk-neutral.

Let's say he can lend 100 to a country (let's call it Greece). In a year there is a 50% chance that they don't pay back. If they do pay back they pay him back X+r. In order to break even it must hold for the lender that (X+r)/2=100. Since X=100 we can solve for r, which turns out to be 100.

So, in this case the borrower would have to pay a 100% interest rate and in this case offering a 5% interest rate would be a freebie since the lender is taking enormous risk.

You cannot seriously be so dense as to think that lending money at rates well below market rates is not doing someone a favour? Do you know anything about economics? Risk-adjusted returns? Does it ring a bell at all? 

[Gustaf]

I believe Sweden has not ruled out taking part in the bail-out, even though we're not a euro country and demands were raised before for all EU nations to take part in the bail-out, so Px75 is almost as clueless about European politics as he is regarding economics.

[Gustaf]

I believe Sweden has not ruled out taking part in the bail-out, even though we're not a euro country and demands were raised before for all EU nations to take part in the bail-out, so Px75 is almost as clueless about European politics as he is regarding economics.

There is a world of difference between having not ruled out something and actually doing it.
Obama didn't rule out the public option and appointing Wood at SCOTUS but we all saw what happened in the end.

But again, thanks for the nice words. It's good to see Einzinge vindicated.

You're not very bright, are you? You claimed that it was a truism to say that a non-euro country would not take part in the bail-out. I pointed out that this was not the case. I just don't think you should treat people like idiots when you're wrong. Either you weren't sure that you were right (since you were wrong) and then you should pick your words more carefully. Or you are certain that you are right when you're not, in which case you should start questioning your assumptions more often. In this thread you have repeatedly acted condescendingly towards people even though they were right and you were not (which you have yet to acknowledge).

I really don't know what Einzige has to do with it either, but your attitude towards others is slightly reminiscient of his, I suppose.

[Gustaf]

I believe Sweden has not ruled out taking part in the bail-out, even though we're not a euro country and demands were raised before for all EU nations to take part in the bail-out, so Px75 is almost as clueless about European politics as he is regarding economics.

There is a world of difference between having not ruled out something and actually doing it.
Obama didn't rule out the public option and appointing Wood at SCOTUS but we all saw what happened in the end.

But again, thanks for the nice words. It's good to see Einzinge vindicated.

You're not very bright, are you? You claimed that it was a truism to say that a non-euro country would not take part in the bail-out. I pointed out that this was not the case. I just don't think you should treat people like idiots when you're wrong. Either you weren't sure that you were right (since you were wrong) and then you should pick your words more carefully. Or you are certain that you are right when you're not, in which case you should start questioning your assumptions more often. In this thread you have repeatedly acted condescendingly towards people even though they were right and you were not (which you have yet to acknowledge).

I really don't know what Einzige has to do with it either, but your attitude towards others is slightly reminiscient of his, I suppose.

Well, when a non-Eurozone country gives money to save a Eurozone country you're free to call me. But I have a hunch that you will wait for a looooooong time.
And shouldn't a mod like you show more maturity than a member of the unwashed masses like me?

As for me being like Einzinge, I'll let the other members judge the wisdom of your comment.

Gosh. I'm just about to give up on you. Are you trying to annoy me or do you really not understand the point I'm making? The point is not that it will happen but that it was suggested and discussed seriously. Anyway, after having looked it up it seems that Sweden has promised to take part in the guarantees, so it seems the time period I had to wait wasn't all that long.

The argument that it is ok for you to be immature, but not for me is very mature of you, but no. My behaviour is not like yours. I haven't rolled my eyes at someone who was right, for instance.

And I still don't get what Einzige has to do with anything. As I said, your hostility even when you're wrong is a trait you share with him, but other than that I don't really see any connection he could have to you being wrong and lashing out at people.