Its building right across the Eurozone. No single currency has ever worked before across so many diverse economies and countries. I think it will all depend on how long the politicians try to hold on in the face of the facts.
Greece Vs EU
- Thread starter Stanley Road
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
I believe that the EU needs to be seriously reformed. Its ridiculous that such union relies on a foreign army (NATO is basically US) for protection, it cant control its borders (Libya, Tunisia and Turkey are making millions by shipping immigrants to Europe) and it cant kick out countries which constantly fail to reach the targets they agreed upon. FFS it cant even kick a country who voted to leave the EU out. Today's EU reminds me of a person whose in an abusive relationship for years and that despite being able to live independently (and better) if it shows its partner the door. Soon enough even those who condemn abuse will lose respect towards that person.
The EU needs teeth. It needs to become a group of countries with a similar economy and aims whose plan is to cover each other backs while growing together financially and culturally. This group must respect but be independent from foreign influences (US/USS erm Russia, China etc). Freedom of movement is key however The EU cant be a dumping ground for neither immigrants (irrespective if they are EU or not) nor financial problems. If for example Turkey decides not to give a feck about its borders then it must be reminded that currently there's millions of Turkish people in Europe and they all need a Visa that can expire.
Ultimately I want to see a leaner EU with less countries but also less borders. If the UK cares to rejoin at that point, well and good.
supranational institutions should be the result of shared ideas, not the other way around. The EU should be as big as people in Europe actually share a vision. Countries should be free to join as long as they commit to the established rules. If they change their mind, they can leave any-time. The technocrats in the EU don´t want anyone to leave and do everything in their power to stop that.
We need a multi-speed union, where different parts can pursue different levels of integration. If some integration steps are successful other countries will follow automatically and if not, well, they won´t. Sadly most people in the institutions are highly sceptical and try to force everything under one umbrella.
To stick to your metaphor: It is a relationship where both partners are abusive, but both still struggle to leave each other.
Well Greece is free to leave but it refuse to do so because its great to have someone constantly bailing you out and giving your unemployed horde a job. Please also note that no one forced the country to join the EURO or build that mountain of debt. They applied to enter the EURO (they actually cooked the books) and they built that mountain of debt by themselves. So really, my metaphor makes more sense.
Its time for the EU to have teeth. The Union isn't just about taking but also about responsibilities. If one keeps failing in doing his part then he should be kicked out.
Our armies are good enough for protection. The NATO is a tool to project power into our spheres of interests, i.e. our inofficial de facto colonies
What are we supposed to do? Gun'em down? The US can't control their border to Mexico either. It's the nature of such large gaps in wealth. The desperate will always find a way.
There wouldn't be any EU members left, if that was our modus operandi. Even Germany and France failed to reach targets they've commited themselves to on numerous occasions.
It's not in our interest to see them leave. And it's actually quite hilarious to see our friends on that rainy island haggle around the issue without the slightest clue on how to proceed it.
It's pretty clear that actually no political party sans Farage's loonies really thinks the Brexit as a good idea. And my money is on them trying to find a way to sell their public the inevitable 180. In the end, there won't be a Brexit. You heard it here first.
If the EU want to assert its influence as a global leader then it need to be able to defend its borders. Russia, the UK and the US (who are a confederation of defend states/countries) have their own army. If Russia had to invade Europe today then the EU will go in tilt and we would have to rely on the UK/US to bail us out.
No one is saying that we should gun immigrants down. However for every action there's a consequence. If Turkey cant be a good neighbour with Europe then maybe its time for Europe to stop being a good neighbour with Turkey. Visas to Turkish people can be stopped or limited severely and sanctions can be forced. Lets see what the Turkish tyrant would do when thousands of angry and unemployed Turkish people are deported home
There's a difference between not being able to reach targets and seeing the EU as a cashcow/a way to dump unemployed people and ethnic minorities you do not like elsewhere.
I am against Brexit and so many people can testify that. However there's a lesson to be learnt by it. I strongly believe that the decision taken by the Brits is wrong. However some of the arguments regarding why they left the EU are valid and should be taken under account. Too many countries refuse to carry their weight within the EU and time and time again the EU had proven to be a naive and bureaucratic monster who keeps being duped by everybody (Russia, Turkey, the North African countries, Greece whom we keep bailing out, the Eastern European countries who are so in favour of freedom of movement as long but tend to go incredibly insular in terms of sharing immigrants) That needs to change.
yes and the EU would be free to not subsidies them while breaking its own rules, so whats the point? The EU already has all the teeth it needs. Greece is only still in the EURO, because the monetary institutions choose to break their rules on a regular basis. I am also neither Greek nor do I get bailed out. I pay for these bailouts with my taxes.
The EU had it in their hands. They decided to waste money on all these bailouts; not just for Greece but all those other ones. They have one common denominator: The EU. Once you accept, that the EU institutions will do everything in their power (literately everything they can) to prevent countries to leave, the whole thing makes perfect sense.
I talked to enough of these guys; they are blinded by ideological fury and they´ll do everything to protect their vision. You can´t argue with them, because they don´t accept any argument that doesn´t embrace their ideas. The EU parliament, the commission and the court are full of these people. Sadly there are also enough politicians with similar ideas in the nations itself; especially in Germany, France and the BeNeLux.
Your idea of a smaller core Euro is completely unacceptable for them, because they are so convinced on their "ever closer union" project.
Thats one (of many) reasons why populist right/left wing parties in Europe get so much traction: They are willing to oppose this concept.
Of course politicians in the member states are responsible for the state of their country. I totally agree with that. Not just Greece, but also Spain, Portugal, France, Italy and a couple of other nations are governed incredibly poorly. And the citizens of these countries need to wake up and understand that spending yourself out of debt won´t work. It is a mental concept. They need to reform many of their institutions, if they want to continue on a path of economic growth in a globalized world. Still why don´t they do it? Because the ECB keeps them alive; when the central bank prints money, you are not forced to reform your laws. I talked to the chief economist of the German ministry of economics earlier this year and he openly acknowledged this. When I asked him why the german government doesn´t react differently he just gave a shrug.
So who is to blame? both sides. The EU is very much part of the problem.
I am a strong believer of the EU project ie I can't see Europe remaining relevant in a globalised world if it return to its original fragmented position. Its not good for Europe, its not good for the world (2 world wars are enough) and its certainly not good for its own citizens.
However I am the first to admit that the EU need some serious reform. It needs to become accountable, it need to expect others to become accountable and it need tools to stop countries from abusing the rights as members in the union. Basically if we buy a flat together and I refuse to pay my part of mortgage, I never pay the bills and I keep shitting in your bed then there must be ways and means for you to kick me out. If our neighbours keep making alot of noise then there must be ways for us to react to it (ie which doesn't necessarily mean bribing them)
If needs be lets break this whole project down and rebuild it from scratch. Those who can prove themselves to be committed to the project and have the ways/means to sustain themselves then they should be allowed in. Others could be given a restricted/preferential treatment as a sign of friendship. Freedom of movement should be maintained but only with countries who do not see it as a way to shrug off their responsibilities in providing a good job to their people or as a way to get rid of minority groups. And for god sake let us introduce a way to get rid countries who refuse to carry their own weight.
Dont take me wrong, I am not suggesting a union of rich countries. Believe it or not the EU had contributed in helping countries to get up the financial ladder and that's good because they will soon be able to contribute (Ireland, Poland, Malta etc). It should be a union were we all share the same goal ie to grow financially and culturally together. Too many countries see the EU as the ideal culprit/cash cow/dumping site.
You are vastly overrating Russias actual military and economic power. They are by no means capable to roll over Europe and neither would they be able to financially sustain such an operation, apart from it being an endeavour without benefits for them. And neither is Putin an irrational lunatic.
That "What if the russian bear comes knocking?" is tinfoil hat fearmongering at its best.
I'm certainly not a big fan of Erdogan, but in this case their position is understandable. Those immigrants want to get into Europe, not Turkey. So, if we want Turkey to do the shutting out business for us, we need to pay for this service. They have no reason to cover these expenses by themselves.
I certainly agree that there a lot issues that need improvement, but we shouldn't believe we could ever find something close to perfection. Having to coordinate the interests of over 20 different nations will always spark tensions and disagreements on certain topics.
I however don't buy into that story of the EU being fleeced left and right by everyone in the world, when a look at the actual facts suggest the opposite. The EU by large is a brutally effective tool to force our socioeconmic interests on pretty much everyone else bar the strongest economies like USA, China and Japan.
Its not the point. The EU is so sluggish and so slow that by the time a decision is made, Putin would be drinking coffee in Madrid. Its time we get that in order and committing part of the military to a unified force which isn't lead by a foreign entity is a must.
Oh my sweet summer child. Do you really believe that the immigration phenomenon is not encouraged by those same countries who threaten us with it? Take Libya as an example. There's a big business in human trafficking there from people who convince people in the sub Saharan Africa that Europe is the Eldorado, to those who take them across the desert to Tripoli right to those who take them to Europe.
Prior to Malta's entrance in the EU (something Gheddafi never wanted) we never had a single immigration boat coming to Malta. Once we entered the EU, Gheddafi took that as an act of defiance and Malta started getting boats filled with immigrants. Same thing about Italy who saw a serious reduction of immigration flow once they signed a deal with Gheddafi only to come back with a vengeance once the EU ordered the Italians to pull out of that deal
I am all in favour of helping refugees out. That can and should be done in secure buffer zones inside the war torn countries (hence why an EU army is needed). However we're being incredibly naive in negotiating with these slave traders.
Perfection doesn't exist and I agree that logistics in the EU is a nightmare. Hence why I believe in a leaner and richer EU ie a union which is built around countries sharing pretty much the same aims and mentality
I don´t agree with the language of your metaphors, but I agree with your general sentiment about Europe. I am strongly in favor on European cooperation. Establishing the single market with all its freedoms was a historic step that benefits every country that participates. It is hard to overstate the magnitude of this achievement and that’s why I am still in favor of remaining in the EU. Any country who is willing to give that up (Britain) is imo making a colossal mistake, but countries have to have the freedom to make bad decisions.
So after that’s out of the way, here is where I disagree: You paint a picture where the EU and the Eurozone (both are different entities) are powerless victims of those evil and selfish nations. That is simply not true. It is true that the EU/Eurozone can´t kick anyone out, but Greece would have left the EURO, if the European institutions (+ECB) wouldn´t have funded them. There wouldn´t have been any other option for them. Greece didn´t bully the Eurozone into subsidizing them. How could they? The only leverage they have is the threat of leaving the common currency. That is literarily the only card they have on their hand, but this one trumps everything else. It is their Joker that they can use every single time. Whose fault is this? In my opinion the Greek government makes a huge mistake by using this to maintain the status-quo (the Greek people are suffering horribly). They need to engage in meaningful reforms. At the same time European politicians make a huge mistake by agreeing to this terrible deal to prevent any exit from the Eurozone-club. If I´d be Greek I´d be first and foremost furious with the government for selling out on my economic and political future, but I am not. I am German, so I am furious with my government and the European institutions for allowing this shit to happen, because for them their ideology is more important than the wellbeing of people.
The EU just tightened the SGP (EURO+Pact and Sixpack) and it has all the power to push for more individual responsibility of its member states. Yet it chooses to not do that. Why are we always picking on a (relative) small country like Greece, when the elephant in the room is, that the major powers in Europe break the rules at will. France and Spain won´t get a warning (well, at least as long as a centrist pro-Europe government is in power) for their reckless breaking of the SGP. Why? To quote Junker: “because it’s France.” The same goes for Germany. When they broke the SGP in the past nobody cared and when Merkel publicly broke European law during the refugee debacle, she has the audacity to call other nations selfish.
The problem of the EU is the EU, not its citizens who are fed up with it. To be more precise: A technocratic political elite that is completely out of touch with reality and its citizens. An elite who thinks that just one vision of cooperation in Europe is acceptable: Their own and everything else has to be opposed. An elite that doesn’t shy away from using as much pressure, force or “bribes” to keep their vision alive.
I think the EU has the potential to offer incredible benefits to its members and if cooperation is beneficial, countries will join. Nobody needed to pressure Eastern Europe into joining the EU. Almost all countries desperately wanted to, because they saw the benefits. That is how it should be: The Union should be attractive enough for its members so it doesn´t need force or bribes to convince states to be part of it. At the moment we are reversing this course. The EU is losing its attraction, because of its own horrible policies and it tries to make up for this by using other means to convince countries to stay put.
We need a flexible union that is so attractive that the nations in Europe want to be part of it. That is entirely possible, but only if politicians in the EU learn from their mistakes and change course. Sadly I know that they won´t. It is a bit like asking ISIS to become secular. Probably not going to happen. They´ll only change when some external event forces them to correct their course. That could be another economic crisis or a political shift in its member states. The elections in France and Italy both have the potential to be that trigger.
Of course there are those profiteers. But they are just a symptom, not the root cause
The more likely explanation is that Malta is the closest EU territory to Libya, and that's why those boats suddenly arrived.
Same as with Turkey. We want them to hold these people back, we have to offer something. We don't offer something, they won't hold these people back. Simple.
Helping them out by have them look into gun barrels?
Not sure if a smaller EU would lead to a richer one. Certainly not for those EU nations who are export-oriented. From a german perspective we can't have enough fools who adapt the Euro, as long as they are politically stable
Not really. Lets say I come from a country whose got historical ties with its neighbours and I also got family whose well 'versed' into the politics between these two countries. The least said the better, but trust me, immigration is a highly profitable thing and is pushed from very high places.
Of course there are those profiteers. But they are just a symptom, not the root cause
How come then we were never visited by a single boat prior to our entrance into the EU only to be 'invaded' few months later? Maybe they started using Tomtom instead of Garmin?
I am all in favour by the carrot and stick approach. However currently we're only giving carrots and most are ending up right in our......
1- create safe zones within war torn countries which are agreed upon by the main factions and protected by the EU/NATO/UN army
2- immigrants reaching those safe zones will be fed, kept safe, educated and who knows, in time, allowed entrance in the EU. Those who enter the EU illegally are deported to these safe zones.
3- An attack in those areas will be considered as an attack on the EU/UN/US. No one will be that crazy to do that
Such approach will cut the middle man (Turkey, Libya), it will reduce human trafficking and the many abuses its entitled in, it will cut a potential route for ISIS to ship their terrorists in and it will provide protection not only to those who can afford it (mostly young male adults) but to everybody.
If its made by countries whose keen to pull the same rope then yes, it will be richerNot sure if a smaller EU would lead to a richer one. Certainly not for those EU nations who are export-oriented. From a german perspective we can't have enough fools who adapt the Euro, as long as they are politically stable
I fully agree to that.
Seriously? Do you perceive that as a power? You’ve got a country who lied its way into the Eurozone, who is basically a dead weight and who refuse to make the necessary reforms and no one can do anything about that. We can’t kick them out from the Eurozone. We can’t kick them out from the EU? All we can do is bankrolling them while waiting its economic collapse which will drag all Europe into a second recession. That doesn’t seem power at all.
I am from the Mediterranean area and my country’s history tends to make me more sympathetic towards Greece then towards Germany (basically we were the most bombed country in the WW2 and the German plan to get Malta was to starve it to death). However I’d rather see Greece burning out of the EU and our money being redirected to save the German banks then this crappy situation. The reason being that I have faith that Germany will use our money wisely and will raise to the occasion as they always do. I don’t share the same faith towards the Greeks.
I agree to all that however I stress on the need of an EU with enough teeth to be able to show countries who repeatedly abuse the system the way out.
Well, because EU. Before, Malta was just a small island. Now it's a possible gateway into a better life.
The moment we deploy troops into a warzone, they become part of the conflict. You're naive to think we could set up there unmolested by the parties involved.
Good luck selling dead troops to our public.
There's no denying that Malta's economy improved with its entrance in the single market. However I assure you that it was a prosperous country before that.
From the irregular immigrant perspective things got worse with our entrance in the EU rather then better. Sure Malta had to implement the EU laws which TBF are pretty immigrant friendly. However that also meant that the island had to comply to lose its special clauses within the UN asylum treaty (which took in consideration our small size and allowed us to send immigrants to Europe, the US and Canada) and fully implement the Dublin regulation. That changed the scenario completely since it became illegal for any irregular immigrant to leave the islands and those who fled and
were caught were immediately sent back.
I think you've been watching too many WW2 movies. Sure warzones are horrible. There again, buffer zone do exist and are relatively safe especially in big countries. I had friends who travelled safely within Libya during war. Don't tell me that an army cant keep an area safe especially if a no flight zone is issued.
People don't go to Malta to stay there. It's the gateway to the large industrialized EU economies where these people hope to find jobs. That's not a knock against Malta which is a beautiful place for sure, but when these people leave their poor and/or war ridden home countries they think of the big EU countries as their actual destination.
There is a difference between local forces who are from that country and foreign troops. Ask the US about their experience in Somalia. There is a good reason why nobody in the west wants to deploy troops in Syria right now.
I repeat Malta's entrance in the EU turned the island into an Alcatraz for immigrants. That is what Dublin regulation is all about. The immigrants do not want to come to the islands. They are pushed there.
We're talking about troops defending safe zones in agreement with the major factions on the land. Attacking those troops would be suicidal as it will bring the condemnation (followed by aggressive action) by the EU/US army
The side that controls the money, has the power.
The EU could have decided at any point to not grant subsidies to Greece (= sticking to their own rule!). The result would have been that Greece either engages in a comprehensive reform process or goes bust and drops out of the Eurozone (the first was completely unrealistic, so they would have dropped out). There wouldn´t have been any other alternatives. The Eurozone decided against this option, because European politicians don´t want anyone to leave and will do everything to prevent that from happening.
Yes Greece might have lied their way into the union and all that but after 08/09 everyone who wasn´t living in the ideological euro-bubble knew that the promised reforms in Greece would never happen. Just like everyone who doesn´t live in the same bubble knows that Spain or various other countries will never push for the necessary reforms to get back on track as long as the ECB is funding them.
Some of the promises in these deals are so absurd and out of touch with reality, that nobody could have believed them. For example Greece´s promise to earn 50€bn by privatizing assets. This number is laughable and everybody was scratching his head how any serious person could have accepted that. 90% of all the reform promises have been more or less equally unrealistic.
So why give them money when YOU KNOW that they can’t deliver? There is just one answer: Nobody is allowed to leave. They rather believe in their own lies than face reality. They are completely consumed by their ideology. The EU isn’t even willing to impose penalties on serial offenders, which it should due to its own laws, yet you are talking about them kicking a country out? What the hell are you talking about? The Eurozone and the EU isn´t lacking teeth. The EU is lacking any desire to engage in any policy that could push countries out, because that is the absolute nightmare for the likes of Junker or Schulz.
The EU and Italy are just breaking its newly established rules about bank bailouts (the new rules are not even 1 year old.). Why is the EU going along with it? Because not doing so would probably kill Renzi and bring an anti-euro party (M5S) into power.
If you want to understand the dynamics in the EU after the crisis, you have to understand the core dogma of European ideology: Ever closer union. Everything else is secondary.
Last edited:
Bailout number 4 on the way. Will it ever end?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rs-to-visit-athens-as-greeces-agony-continues
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rs-to-visit-athens-as-greeces-agony-continues
They should give up at this point. Greece will never pay any of this back, and they have no incentive to change as they called the EU's bluff and now everyone knows the EU can't afford to let them fail and will just keep feeding them money. Like everything they do the EU has no teeth when it comes down to it.
The EU will do anything to keep Greece in but want to hardball with the UK, I wonder why.
Oh, I know why
Oh, I know why
Greece had never asked to leave the EU, that's why. Which is a shame really. You can say alot about the Greeks but surely they aren't idiots.
Last edited:
They know Greece don't give a feck. The UK will threaten and bluster but ultimately back down.
The problem with Greece is that there's no law to kick a country out of the EU. Which means, we either finance them or they will VETO everything under the sun
All this talk of kicking Greece out of the EU is rather tedious. Even their worst critics on the continent only want to kick them out of the Euro, not the EU. And the people holding those views hold no political power, so it's all just hot steam.
No one wants Greece out of the EU (that I know of).
No one wants Greece out of the EU (that I know of).
lol
Or let them go bankrupt
Really, it would have been easier for the EU if they can simply cut ties with Greece and let it drift away and turn into a new Argentina. Unfortunately there's no way to kick them either from the EU or from the Eurozone.
And...?
They are still in the EU and in the Eurozone. They can veto any deal (including the one with the UK) in retaliation and make life within the EU impossible. Same thing is happening with Hungary whose talking big despite offering very little to the EU in exchange. FFS the EU can't even kick the UK out and that despite they voted for Brexit.
That's why I believe the EU need some serious reform. There should be some sort of rule were the majority can kick a country out of the EU if they want to.
They'll have to print their own currency as they wont have any euros, then watch the Eurozone fall apart
We've been there ~2 years ago when the Greek banks wouldn't give out more than a set amount of € at a time (Can't remember how much it was). At that point Greek politicians will make new promises and the circle begins from the beginning, just as it happened back then. Greece isn't economically significant enough to bring down the Euro. They're staying inside the Euro for multiple reasons, but one of the main reasons the other € countries accept this is that once they are out the markets will begin to look for a new "weakest link" and that would continue indefinitely until no "links" are left.
Anyways, at this point in time all the criticism of the € can be equally applied to pound sterling. They always say a monetary union won't work without a fiscal union, however there can't be a fiscal union without political unity, which is currently under attack in the sterling area. I know the telegraph is currently trying its best to deflect from this, no one (including all other media) is buying it though.
that is not true regardless of how often it gets repeated.
Yeah I agree. But it is the main critic of the Euro though, isn't it? (Not by me. I've thought long and hard about the Euro and think it will work long term as long as the political will to make it work can be maintained long term).
Well that's no possible. European and American banks have too much at stake with them. Bailing out Greece is essentially bailing out the banks who would lose their money if Greece were to become unable to service the interest they have to pay all their lenders.
It is a narrative paddled by all those who want a "ever closer union" while acknowledging that the Euro isn't functioning particularly well at the moment. It is also a way of hiding what a fiscal union would actually mean, because the citizens in no country of the EU would approve the reality of this concept.
The Euro could work, if everyone would stick to the law. Once you accept that countries breaks the law whenever they fit, law can't be the solution.
That was true in the past (till around 2010), but isn't anymore, because the majority of debt is owned by governments+ECB. The banks got their bailout. Additionally, with all the money that got channelled into Greece, you could have easily just bailed out the banks directly. That would have been a lot cheaper. The reality in Greece is, that even after 6-7 years of on going "reforms", they are still unable to maintain a primary surplus.
Are they still as shockingly bad as ever in terms of collecting the tax that is actually due?
Which is still in large parts due to the fact that 90% the money they get as a bailout still goes almost immediately towards servicing their debt so it's almost impossible for them to invest into their economy and get it going again.
Whomever they owe money to isn't all that important as long as the interest payments eat up the majority of the money they need to invest to get their economy back on track. So the EU and Greece need to find a solution to this fast or Greece will never be able to recover from this.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/greece-crisis-how-has-greece-spent-its-money-and-who-does-it-still-owe-2428bn-to-10355847.html said:
I don't know. I have read very different accounts about their reform effort. I can’t really say what they did and what they didn’t do. All I can do is look at the output of these reforms and they are clearly not working.
Usually after reforming the state successfully, you’d expect a significant influx of FDI, because investment is fairly cheap compared to the potential profits. That happened all over the world – in Africa, in Asia, in the Americas and in Europe. Once you addressed all the big problems, your country becomes extremely attractive for investment and this helps to kick-start the economy. That is why doing all the crucial reforms at once (compared to a slow/gradual process) is much more beneficial for countries that struggle. It hurts a bit more in the beginning, but it shortens the time of extreme pain. Nobody is investing in a country, when they don’t know how it will turn out in the end.
Greece gradually started some reforms, but the institutions are still inefficient and there is still extreme uncertainty about almost everything. How are they going to handle all the debt? How are they are going to be governed in the future?
There is no credible long-term plan. Under these circumstances, nobody is going to invest in their economy.
All the lent money is still a huge subsidy, because it is lent to conditions that are way under the marked-rate. They don’t need state investment to fix their economy. That is completely wrong analysis about their problems.
I have asked the same question a billion times and rarely is anyone ever willing to give an honest answer to this: Why didn’t Greece just default, drop out of the euro-zone and issue their own currency?