EU discussion / and other European countries

I still don't understand what the disagreement is here?

That somehow the EU treated other countries in the Eurozone really well and shafted the Portuguese? That somehow Portugal was made to suffer but that the other Eurozone countries got away with not having to undertake austerity? I'm very lost.


https://www.france24.com/en/2010061...nouncing-austerity-plan-fillon-public-deficit

https://www.dw.com/en/german-government-unveils-unprecedented-austerity-plan/a-5658604

https://www.bbc.com/news/10134734

https://www.bbc.com/news/10157432

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/nov/24/ireland-austerity-plans-unveiled

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17811509

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15978423

The separate Dutch- and French-speaking wings of the Socialists, Christian Democrats and Liberals completed the last major hurdle, an austerity budget, on Saturday.
Click to expand...

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2010/11/aust-n09.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/08/estonia-latvia-eurozone-champions-austerity

https://www.intereconomics.eu/conte...tates-during-the-global-financial-crisis.html

I've left Greece out for pretty obvious reasons.

Heck, every single country in the Eurozone had to go through Austerity - faced the same hardships and the same brutality. Even none Eurozone countries had to do so.

How was Portugal treated differently? I really do not understand.
 
That's not my argument at all. I keep mentioning portugal because I'm portuguese, that's all.
 
AfonsoAlves said:
I still don't understand what the disagreement is here?

That somehow the EU treated other countries in the Eurozone really well and shafted the Portuguese? That somehow Portugal was made to suffer but that the other Eurozone countries got away with not having to undertake austerity? I'm very lost.


https://www.france24.com/en/2010061...nouncing-austerity-plan-fillon-public-deficit

https://www.dw.com/en/german-government-unveils-unprecedented-austerity-plan/a-5658604

https://www.bbc.com/news/10134734

https://www.bbc.com/news/10157432

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/nov/24/ireland-austerity-plans-unveiled

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17811509

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15978423



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2010/11/aust-n09.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/08/estonia-latvia-eurozone-champions-austerity

https://www.intereconomics.eu/conte...tates-during-the-global-financial-crisis.html

I've left Greece out for pretty obvious reasons.

Heck, every single country in the Eurozone had to go through Austerity - faced the same hardships and the same brutality. Even none Eurozone countries had to do so.

How was Portugal treated differently? I really do not understand.
Click to expand...
The ECB set interest rates and a lot of other fiscal rules. Its a widely held view that they protected French / German industry and economy to the cost of others. Which would be rational to be honest as they're economies are so much bigger - but it makes the lectures about Mediterranean states mismanaging their economy a bitter pill to swallow, when they were handcuffed by EU policy. Similarly I doubt the reference to bailouts (loans at a pretty poor interest rate) like it was some benevolent act of charity are appreciated. Everyone had austerity - the scale and damage of austerity wasn't equal though.
You'd question the willingness of the EU to impose on german and french citizens the poverty and misery they imposed on others (like Portugal)
 
maniak said:
That's not my argument at all. I keep mentioning portugal because I'm portuguese, that's all.
Click to expand...

The context of this conversation was around European solidarity - which you cited as bullshit due to your experiences as a Portugese person during austerity times and measures, which implies you felt that other European nations fecked Portugal over in this regard and there was no "solidarity".

My argument is that every single country went through similar measures, that there was a cohesive, albeit wrong, economic policy choice implemented across the entire Eurozone.

What's your argument as to why Portuguese austerity is a sign that European solidarity doesn't exist?
 
caid said:
The ECB set interest rates and a lot of other fiscal rules. Its a widely held view that they protected French / German industry and economy to the cost of others. Which would be rational to be honest as they're economies are so much bigger - but it makes the lectures about Mediterranean states mismanaging their economy a bitter pill to swallow, when they were handcuffed by EU policy. Similarly I doubt the reference to bailouts (loans at a pretty poor interest rate) like it was some benevolent act of charity are appreciated. Everyone had austerity - the scale and damage of austerity wasn't equal though.
You'd question the willingness of the EU to impose and german and french citizens the poverty and misery they imposed on others (like Portugal)
Click to expand...

A few things here:

The ECB rates weren't designed to protect French and German industry, it was designed to keep capital markets moving with as much velocity as it could, during a time of crisis where actual capital was needed, and needed quickly. Of course, given that Germany and France were the two richest Eurozone countries, with the largest capital markets, in absolute terms it benefitted those the most.

It's shouldn't be a bitter pill to swallow when the past decade prior to the Eurozone crisis saw very good Economic management from certain countries, and very poor economic management by others. If we use Portugal as an example, it spent most of the 00's weaving in and out of various economic recessions, depressions, liquidity issues and deficit issues before the final straw in 2011. It broke the EU 3% budget deficit rule multiple times, and because there was no political willpower from the EU/ECB to actually rectify this problem, it peaked at around 10% by the time the final crisis hit. This wasn't a sudden issue, it was a decade in the making.

The bailouts were not at a poor interest rate. Portuguese Bonds had reached over 10%, hit 11% at one point, and the ECB gave them rates at 5.5%. One ratings agency gave Portuguese debt bonds a JUNK rating. The fact that the Troika gave Portugal bailouts at half the interest rate that the capital markets would have given them is pretty good. Portugal had no other option at that point. 11% Bonds simply means you no longer had access to financing options on the standard markets. No other private institution was going to lend Portugal any money and the fact is that the EU/ECB gave a country, in the most desperate of situations, a lifeline at half the interest rate of the markets when they had no other options. I don't see how that can be viewed negatively. A none EU country with Junk rated bonds with a private valuation of 11% interest wouldn't even get ANY cash.

Of course austerity hit people differently. But how can people expect a country with a 50k GDP/c to suffer more than a country with 20k GDP/c when they're both undercutting a similar amount of public finance shedding. A 10% cut to Germany would hit lesser than a 3% cut to Portugal.

The ECB/EU didn't need to impose such measures on Germany and France but I would have no doubt they would have done so. Remember this was the era of ideological austerity - from Merkel, Osbourne, skarkozy etc all were aligned on this. These countries didn't have central bank pressure to undergo heavy cuts and austerity - but they went ahead and did it anyway. People forget just how bad austerity was in the UK too - the Osbourne years were absolutely grim for anyone in the working class. Many, many people died due to it. That was without any foreign pressure to do so.
 
AfonsoAlves said:
The context of this conversation was around European solidarity - which you cited as bullshit due to your experiences as a Portugese person during austerity times and measures, which implies you felt that other European nations fecked Portugal over in this regard and there was no "solidarity".

My argument is that every single country went through similar measures, that there was a cohesive, albeit wrong, economic policy choice implemented across the entire Eurozone.

What's your argument as to why Portuguese austerity is a sign that European solidarity doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you know what solidarity means.

Portugal was in the shit. Mismanagement of public finances? No doubt. The solidarity we got was a loan (not a gift like you said) with the obligation of cutting wages, gutting public services, record firings in public sector, wage cuts across the board, record number of poor and malnourished children, selling profitable public companies and the cherry on top being treated like children by fecking pos like schauble and his gang or being outright called lazy bums like the dutch finance minister.

On what planet is this solidarity?
 
If you want a good example of how Troika treated EU members vs how it treats none EU members just look at the terms of the recent IMF bailout of Pakistan.

The interest yields on their bonds (Pakistan vs Portugal) were similar, but look at the stuff that Pakistan had to cede.

-Complete loss of its monetary policy to what is essentially a private institution.
-Tax rates and Fiscal policy had to be completely restructured.
-Artificial devaluation of its own currency
-All industrial subsidies cut
- It even forced Pakistan to privatize many of its key infrastructure holdings.
 
AfonsoAlves said:
If you want a good example of how Troika treated EU members vs how it treats none EU members just look at the terms of the recent IMF bailout of Pakistan.

The interest yields on their bonds (Pakistan vs Portugal) were similar, but look at the stuff that Pakistan had to cede.

-Complete loss of its monetary policy to what is essentially a private institution.
-Tax rates and Fiscal policy had to be completely restructured.
-Artificial devaluation of its own currency
-All industrial subsidies cut
- It even forced Pakistan to privatize many of its key infrastructure holdings.
Click to expand...

I'm not the kind of person who is happy being treated like shit as long as some other poor bastard is treated even worse.
 
maniak said:
I'm not sure you know what solidarity means.

Portugal was in the shit. Mismanagement of public finances? No doubt. The solidarity we got was a loan (not a gift like you said) with the obligation of cutting wages, gutting public services, record firings in public sector, wage cuts across the board, record number of poor and malnourished children, selling profitable public companies and the cherry on top being treated like children by fecking pos like schauble and his gang or being outright called lazy bums like the dutch finance minister.

On what planet is this solidarity?
Click to expand...

It's solidarity because every single country did the exact same thing. It was unified, it was a case (albeit very misguided) of "We're all going to have to do this."

Portugal had to do this to get the bailouts - Other Eurozone countries did this without even needing a bailout.

How is that not solidarity?
 
AfonsoAlves said:
It's solidarity because every single country did the exact same thing. It was unified, it was a case (albeit very misguided) of "We're all going to have to do this."

Portugal had to do this to get the bailouts - Other Eurozone countries did this without even needing a bailout.

How is that not solidarity?
Click to expand...

Can you name the members of the troika who imposed brutal measures on germany, france and england?
 
maniak said:
Can you name the members of the troika who imposed brutal measures on germany, france and england?
Click to expand...

No (mainly because they didn't need bailouts), but they went ahead and did it to themselves anyway.

Isn't that what solidarity is?

What's the bitterness here? That you got a bailout/loan and had to go through austerity and Germany/France/UK never got a loan but had to go through austerity anyway?

The bailout terms was pretty much, "If you want us to help you, you have to do what everyone else is having to do."

Why is that not solidarity?
 
AfonsoAlves said:
No (mainly because they didn't need bailouts), but they went ahead and did it to themselves anyway.

Isn't that what solidarity is?

What's the bitterness here? That you got a bailout/loan and had to go through austerity and Germany/France/UK never got a loan but had to go through austerity anyway?
Click to expand...

So, the big 3 economies didn't have anyone from the outside controlling their internal policies, with many of the suggestions being so outlandish and punitive they had to be denied by the supreme court.

It wasn't the same everywhere, thanks for confirming.
 
maniak said:
So, the big 3 economies didn't have anyone from the outside controlling their internal policies, with many of the suggestions being so outlandish and punitive they had to be denied by the supreme court.

It wasn't the same everywhere, thanks for confirming.
Click to expand...

UK isn't part of the Eurozone so of course it didn't.

France and Germany didn't require a bailout so of course there were no ECB terms.

Troika's demand for Portugal was it followed the same economic policies as the rest of the Eurozone. Did you lose some pride? Yeah - but that's the consequence of needing a bailout. It comes with terms and stipulations attached, and it's interesting that the source of bitterness for you, that you feel is immensely unfair and that the big European economies screwed Portugal over is it, "We have to do the exact same stuff that everyone else is doing."

What do you think solidarity is? Taking a bailout and then continuing the same fiscal spend that had ruined Portugal the decade prior whilst the rest of the Eurozone suffers?
 
AfonsoAlves said:
UK isn't part of the Eurozone so of course it didn't.

France and Germany didn't require a bailout so of course there were no ECB terms.

Troika's demand for Portugal was it followed the same economic policies as the rest of the Eurozone. Did you lose some pride? Yeah - but that's the consequence of needing a bailout. It comes with terms and stipulations attached, and it's interesting that the source of bitterness for you, that you feel is immensely unfair and that the big European economies screwed Portugal over is it, "We have to do the exact same stuff that everyone else is doing."

What do you think solidarity is? Taking a bailout and then continuing the same fiscal spend that had ruined Portugal the decade prior whilst the rest of the Eurozone suffers?
Click to expand...

Calm down, dr. freud.

History is being rewritten and people like you are falling for it. Portugal, greece and spain saw little money enter their economy. The public sector was devastated to pay a debt to private banks, most from germany, to keep them afloat. It was probably the greatest transfer of wealth from the citizens to finantial institutions in european history.

The decisions were wrong, unecessary and probably sacrificed a generation. And people were saying it at the time. They were ignored because of course the imf and the ecb couldn't possibly be wrong.

I know you see yourself as some sort of redcafe expert on pretty much everything, but be a little humble and read some nobel prize winners and what they think.

Joseph Stiglitz

We should be clear: almost none of the huge amount of money loaned to Greece has actually gone there. It has gone to pay out private-sector creditors – including German and French banks. Greece has gotten but a pittance, but it has paid a high price to preserve these countries’ banking systems.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...litz-how-i-would-vote-in-the-greek-referendum

ESMT President Jörg Rocholl

"Most of the money was used to actually transfer risks from private creditors to public creditors," Rocholl said. "This means money was used to repay the private creditors by taking on more debts that were taken by private creditors."

https://www.dw.com/en/most-of-greek-bailout-money-went-to-banks-study/a-19234391

If you want to bury your head in the sand and see this absolute crime as a proof of european solidarity, then go ahead. But if I read someone saying that portugal is now sabotaging help to ukraine and not showing solidarity, I'm going to tell that person to go feck themselves.
 
maniak said:
Calm down, dr. freud.

History is being rewritten and people like you are falling for it. Portugal, greece and spain saw little money enter their economy. The public sector was devastated to pay a debt to private banks, most from germany, to keep them afloat. It was probably the greatest transfer of wealth from the citizens to finantial institutions in european history.

The decisions were wrong, unecessary and probably sacrificed a generation. And people were saying it at the time. They were ignored because of course the imf and the ecb couldn't possibly be wrong.

I know you see yourself as some sort of redcafe expert on pretty much everything, but be a little humble and read some nobel prize winners and what they think.

Joseph Stiglitz

We should be clear: almost none of the huge amount of money loaned to Greece has actually gone there. It has gone to pay out private-sector creditors – including German and French banks. Greece has gotten but a pittance, but it has paid a high price to preserve these countries’ banking systems.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...litz-how-i-would-vote-in-the-greek-referendum

ESMT President Jörg Rocholl

"Most of the money was used to actually transfer risks from private creditors to public creditors," Rocholl said. "This means money was used to repay the private creditors by taking on more debts that were taken by private creditors."

https://www.dw.com/en/most-of-greek-bailout-money-went-to-banks-study/a-19234391

If you want to bury your head in the sand and see this absolute crime as a proof of european solidarity, then go ahead. But if I read someone saying that portugal is now sabotaging help to ukraine and not showing solidarity, I'm going to tell that person to go feck themselves.
Click to expand...

First of all, I don't.
If you notice I hardly post anything outside of Geopolitics/Military Matters and very occasionally, football (But discussing Man Utd right now is hard because the fanbase is very riled and therefore, toxic).

You're right that the money went to pay off private sector creditors. That's how capital markets generally work.

But, that's what caused Portugal's economic crisis in the first place.
By giving Portugal the means to pay their creditors, it is a twofold solution

1) The Banks are still liquid
2) Portugal actual has future capital facilitations.


Let's say the bailout didn't happen and let's say Portugal defaulted on its debt. Do you think that would have resulted in a better outcome?

ECB/EU/Germany/France would bail out its institutions anyway, with a similar structure to how the Americans/British did it. Just rather than a loan to a country, it becomes a loan to a bank. Or just a partial equity buyout with a future buyback.
Regardless the damage to those institutions wouldn't be anyway near as devastating as it would to the country itself.

Portugal would default, have no credit facilitations for decades, and ultimately be kicked from the Eurozone for being unable to meet monetary standards. It would result in something that would make Japan's lost decade a complete breeze. Is that what you wanted?

I'd be interested in knowing what you think the actual solution was here.
 
Let me give you an interesting tidbit actually, on what even a small partial default looks like for a country:

It happened in mine in 2014 after Crimea was invaded by Russia. Just a 3.6 billion USD default. A very small number when it comes to international state finances.

- -20% GDP depression 2 years following the default
- Horrific Terms and Conditions for monetary assistance from any creditors
- 3 years of complete lockout of the global capital markets.
- Government couldn't borrow money to sustain public spending at all
- 50% inflation
- All FX reserves expended
- 30% of all hospitals closed, 20% of all schools closed, thousands and thousands of public sector workers lost their jobs.

Makes austerity look good to be honest.
 
Spain italy portugal and all countries should row in the same direction if they want the EU to work out. Not only in military expenditure, but fiscal harmonization and many more areas

Now, lots of people still remember how they call them PIGS
 
AfonsoAlves said:
A few things here:

The ECB rates weren't designed to protect French and German industry, it was designed to keep capital markets moving with as much velocity as it could, during a time of crisis where actual capital was needed, and needed quickly. Of course, given that Germany and France were the two richest Eurozone countries, with the largest capital markets, in absolute terms it benefitted those the most.

It's shouldn't be a bitter pill to swallow when the past decade prior to the Eurozone crisis saw very good Economic management from certain countries, and very poor economic management by others. If we use Portugal as an example, it spent most of the 00's weaving in and out of various economic recessions, depressions, liquidity issues and deficit issues before the final straw in 2011. It broke the EU 3% budget deficit rule multiple times, and because there was no political willpower from the EU/ECB to actually rectify this problem, it peaked at around 10% by the time the final crisis hit. This wasn't a sudden issue, it was a decade in the making.

The bailouts were not at a poor interest rate. Portuguese Bonds had reached over 10%, hit 11% at one point, and the ECB gave them rates at 5.5%. One ratings agency gave Portuguese debt bonds a JUNK rating. The fact that the Troika gave Portugal bailouts at half the interest rate that the capital markets would have given them is pretty good. Portugal had no other option at that point. 11% Bonds simply means you no longer had access to financing options on the standard markets. No other private institution was going to lend Portugal any money and the fact is that the EU/ECB gave a country, in the most desperate of situations, a lifeline at half the interest rate of the markets when they had no other options. I don't see how that can be viewed negatively. A none EU country with Junk rated bonds with a private valuation of 11% interest wouldn't even get ANY cash.

Of course austerity hit people differently. But how can people expect a country with a 50k GDP/c to suffer more than a country with 20k GDP/c when they're both undercutting a similar amount of public finance shedding. A 10% cut to Germany would hit lesser than a 3% cut to Portugal.

The ECB/EU didn't need to impose such measures on Germany and France but I would have no doubt they would have done so. Remember this was the era of ideological austerity - from Merkel, Osbourne, skarkozy etc all were aligned on this. These countries didn't have central bank pressure to undergo heavy cuts and austerity - but they went ahead and did it anyway. People forget just how bad austerity was in the UK too - the Osbourne years were absolutely grim for anyone in the working class. Many, many people died due to it. That was without any foreign pressure to do so.
Click to expand...

Like they did with the Stability and Growth pact rules?

Or the trade surplus rules.

Next up we will see what happens if the new German Govt goes through with its proposed border controls re the free movement rules.
 
On the wider point about the lack of cohesion on the EU funding of Ukraine's defence. I think it shows why an EU defence force would flounder.

The US is one executive making a decision to commit forces or not. It leads NATO as its the senior partner. Europe doesn't have that type of decision making ability and probably never will.
 
I
maniak said:
I'm not sure you know what solidarity means.

Portugal was in the shit. Mismanagement of public finances? No doubt. The solidarity we got was a loan (not a gift like you said) with the obligation of cutting wages, gutting public services, record firings in public sector, wage cuts across the board, record number of poor and malnourished children, selling profitable public companies and the cherry on top being treated like children by fecking pos like schauble and his gang or being outright called lazy bums like the dutch finance minister.

On what planet is this solidarity?
Click to expand...
it's the ultimate problem with the EU. I like a lot of what it stands for and achieves, but economically, it's neoliberally oriented, and that what is its relfect in those days. Austerity was entirely inappropriate for long-term welfare and prosperity for Portugal and Greece (same when the WHO imposes (or used to, anyway) neoliberal measures on poor countries), but it's all they knew.
 
France's Marine Le Pen has been found guilty of misappropriating European funds to finance her far-right National Rally (RN) party, in a case which could lead to her being barred from standing in the 2027 presidential election.

The judge has not yet said what the sentence will be.

Prosecutors last year said Le Pen's punishment should be not just a €300,000 (£250,000) fine and prison term, but also ineligibility from running for public office for five years.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyq40yz70qo

Finally some decent news!
 
G3079 said:
I'm not celebrating until they also announce the punishment. If she gets away with just a monetary fine or probationary sentence then this does nothing.

Was that the highest court this case can go to, or could le Pen still appeal to higher instances?
Click to expand...

It says in the article that she is expected to appeal the verdict.
 
I wonder if this could backfire stupendously and she gets to run anyway and win on sympathy from contrarian voters.

You can bet your last pennies that MAGA will use it as an example of "lack of freedom in Europe "
 
JPRouve said:
It's not accurate, we know the sanction. 4 years imprisonment with two to be served, 300k fine and 5 years of ineligibility.
Click to expand...
And she's ineligible to stand from now.

Whereas the other two penalties - the fine and the jail sentence are paused until after any appeals are heard.

Judiciary have opted for the row now rather than during the election.
 
If not overturned on appeal then do we have reason to believe she will spend time in prison? The BBC seem to be suggesting she may just be out on tag for the two years.
 
RoyH1 said:
I wonder if this could backfire stupendously and she gets to run anyway and win on sympathy from contrarian voters.

You can bet your last pennies that MAGA will use it as an example of "lack of freedom in Europe "
Click to expand...
Let’s hope that the French aren’t as stupid as we are.

The “system” so far is working, just like it generally worked before. She got her sentence immediately, not delayed and delayed until it became irrelevant like with Trump. Americans have a lot to learn.

Putin deplores a “violation of democratic norms,” and Viktor Orban tweets “Je suis Marine.” If these are the people defending you…
 
Last edited:
jojojo said:
And she's ineligible to stand from now.

Whereas the other two penalties - the fine and the jail sentence are paused until after any appeals are heard.

Judiciary have opted for the row now rather than during the election.
Click to expand...

It's also in line with what other politicians got in recent years, depending on whether you are a repeat offender or the scale of the offence they all got between 1.5 to 4 years of imprisonment and 2 to 10 years of ineligibility.

On a side note it hasn't been mentioned but for Sarkozy the request is 7 years imprisonment, 300k and 5 years ineligibility. In his corruption case.
 
DOTA said:
If not overturned on appeal then do we have reason to believe she will spend time in prison? The BBC seem to be suggesting she may just be out on tag for the two years.
Click to expand...

Currently she would spend two years behind bars and two years outside.
 
ManUtd1999 said:
And 5 years of ineligibility. Even if the sentence is reduced by a half, she won’t be a candidate in Spring 2027.
Click to expand...

I already mentioned it, I answering the question about the prison sentence. At the moment it's without arrangement but it could be different after the appeal.
 
Kinsella said:
It could backfire big time.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this phrasing, RN committed fraud and they are repeat offenders. There is no other option than sanction them and they aren't the first nor the last party to get similar sentences.
 
Kinsella said:
It could backfire big time.
Click to expand...
If she can’t run in 2027, then I don’t know how that will backfire.

Unless of course you think Jordan Bardella can win the presidency, which I doubt.

We will wait for the appeal. But finally some good news, at least for now. She committed a fraud, she is a lawyer and should have know that.
 
From what I read le Pen would be keeping her current seat in the parliament until the end of its current election period, but be ineligible to run in elections during the time she'd been sentenced to. Is that correct? Feels a bit halfarsed to allow somebody to remain in an existing office who has been sentenced to ineligibility.
 
JPRouve said:
I don't understand this phrasing, RN committed fraud and they are repeat offenders. There is no other option than sanction them and they aren't the first nor the last party to get similar sentences.
Click to expand...
Backfire in the sense that it may increase their support.
 
Kinsella said:
Backfire in the sense that it may increase their support.
Click to expand...

That's why I said that the phrasing is off because backfire implies that the judgement is meant to have a political effect. Also there is no particular reason for the support to increase due to this, it didn't help PS, LR, UDI or any other party, on the contrary when these parties got punished some used it as an excuse to vote for fringe movements like RN/FN as a "protest" against these mainstream politicians even though the latter were repeat offenders.
 
By the way, this is what functional institutions look like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.