The obvious flaw here is that a single currency and a single interest rate rob member states of some of the tools they would normally use to deal with their slowing economies, and the union never implemented any other mechanism to replace them.

Earlier in the crisis I heard it suggested that perhaps the southern states would leave the euro and form a "euro south" union, and from what I've heard of negotiations in Brussels it might actually be easier than a better fix! I've never heard anyone suggesting that Germany should go it alone though, even if your statement seemed to suggest the idea Perhaps a less radical reading would suggest a New Deutsche Mark rather than a complete break with the EU... but there are still major problems with the idea.

@radx

The liquidity/insolvency line is just a fancy way of asking for more money than is being provided. As I said, I expect once structural reform is fully implemented, the ECB (tacitly instructed by Germany et al) will take a much more active role in buying the debt of these countries but it's not at that stage yet. The problem is they've been slow to sell off assets, reform government and reduce public employment to levels demanded.

Again what you propose is easing that eliminates the pressure to reform, which is the intent of the troika/Germany as I see it. I just don't see any of those things happening. As I mentioned before, Greece's debt has largely stopped rising and GDP has been edging upwards since 2010 and is now positive:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/government-budget-value
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/gdp-growth

As far as running surpluses, I would argue if everyone was nearly as zealous as Germany, then the deficit/surplus gap between countries would narrow - which would be the best outcome globally. As you'd probably know Germany's attitude towards fiscal stability and inflation is fairly hawkish given its history with hyperinflation. But it has clearly served them well when their bond yields didn't spike during the euro crisis because of a shortage of funds.

I wouldn't characterise it as beggar thy neighbour, that's generally reserved for active measures to prevent trade from other countries (such as through tariffs or subsidies). Instead Germany from what I've read, has carved out a competitive niche for itself with it's Mittelstand. I don't know Germany history particularly here, but I assume it led to companies in industries like retail which can't compete globally reducing or being bought out.

I would compare it to what happened here in Australia with the car industry when government support for it vanished. In our case at least, the only reason the industry existed for the past couple of decades is because of that support and it should never have been propped up by the government in the first place. I don't see that really being any different to typewriters being replaced by computerisation, whale oil being replaced by fossil fuels or US manufacturing going to China (and now leaving to other areas of Asia).

Coming back to trade surpluses, for similar reasons to Germany, most Asian countries also run large trade surpluses because of their history with capital flight in the Asian financial crisis of 97. This is despite many of them developmentally being far behind Greece let alone Germany or France. There has been no Asian crisis this time around and investment into these countries (like Malaysia, the Phillippines, Vietnam and China) has hardly been low over the past 10 years.

I'm not a huge fan of QE as a policy either. Part of the problem is central banks like the ECB weren't designed with the intent of using QE, merely adjusting interest rates, let alone any direct purchases of bonds. I was a big fan of what they did here in Australia where they just gave a one off wad of money to everyone who is earning an income. We ended up avoiding a recession entirely, although our economy was doing quite well at the time.

In effect that's more fiscal policy and I can imagine it being difficult to implement in the EU across countries in an even way. Merkel is certainly too hawkish overall. Policy along those lines, unbiased investment via the EIB or let alone just implementing QE earlier (like the US did) would have helped everyone.

Nothing is good about this situation and there is no reason to think this will end in anything but Greek default.

Greece's government, elected by its citizens ran up a large and unsustainable debt which was masked by easy credit before the GFC and fraudulent accounting.

There were many contributors. Corruption, hugely wasteful state owned enterprises, joining the euro zone before they were ready to lose the ability to devalue their currency and lower interest rates, and flagrant tax evasion.

But as a country they're collectively responsible for not demanding the necessary reforms of their politicians to ensure they were not vulnerable to a credit crisis when the GFC hit and lenders began to look more scrupulously at individual European countries rather than Europe as a whole. Equally, Italy is responsible for voting Berlusconi into power for every year their economy recorded negative growth under his government. Spain is responsible for not providing sufficient oversight to bad bank lending leading a huge indebting bailout package.

Some of Syriza's reforms are reasonable. Tackling corruption and trying to break up oligopolies are worthy ideas, but they are unlikely to be easy and yield any immediate benefit. Raising the minimum wage and planning to hire back state workers as they have already promised will almost guarantee they will cease to receive EU funding/ECB assistance and later IMF funding.

The simple truth from the point of view of Germany and other austerity backing Nordic countries is if they buy their loans (and in effect transfer money to Greece) without austerity stipulations, there will be no pressure or guarantee that structural reforms that allow Greece to function independently will ever be implemented. These lender government and by extension its people have no interest in transferring wealth to Greece if it stalls its reforms.

Yes fire sales of state owned enterprises suck but the likely alternative at this point if the Troika lending is stopped is that all other lending stops and Greece defaults. At that point there would be mass loss of state sector jobs and sky-rocketing unemployment relative to what is now being experienced. It would take years of reform for the Greek government to be lend-worthy again. There is simply no trust for any alternative to austerity on the part of north Europe.

Currently Greece has reported positive growth in the past quarter and excluding debt repayments is running a budget surplus. Realistically, yes they cannot pay back the 180% of GDP. The likely way forward is after several more years of real reform they (+ Spain & Portugal) would get better terms from the EU as politically, leaders in Germany and elsewhere will be able to make the case that their objective has been achieved.

The ECB's QE package is in some ways already part of this. What I guarantee won't happen is electing Syriza to oppose bailout terms helping to secure that. Germany et al will quite rightly see that if they acquiesce to Greece they will encourage other populist parties in Spain, Portugal, Italy and France and stall reforms.

Could Germany and others in theory provide a huge cash infusion to Greece, Spain and Portugal now? Sure. And those parties would be voted out in the next election and the terms reversed. Even with the relative stinginess of current loan terms, the likes of UKIP and the National Front with their anti-EU stance, have gained political standing in the EU parliament and will likely see huge boosts in upcoming domestic elections.

Things were great under Regan and under Clinton. I would say Clinton era went strong because of the internet The internet bubble burst and then Bush got in. Bush did not blame Clinton ( like OBAMA) for the mess he inherited.

Kennedy, It was post war every thing was going gang busters, Democrat or Republican did not matter who was in charge. This lasted up through Johnson then came the oil crisis which drag the economy down and 15%+ interest rates, Carter got caught up in this and became the worst president to that date. (Obama is now the worst).

Regan policies turn this around. Trickle down worked and still does.

But you still cant change the fact..

You are living in a opposite world. Everything you believe Democrat leadership stand for, they have delivered the opposite.


We can thank the disappearing middle class and the poor being worse off from 6 years of the failed leadership.
But on the bright side the rich are richer, Thank to Democrat leadership.

Well if you like the disappearing middle class keep voting Democrat.

OK, had a chance to watch the start of the video again to remind me of the context, and thought of some other ways to look at it.

1. You could, if you were particularly heartless, look at it as the individual failures of the people who borrowed money they had no hope of repaying. That I consider this a rather unfair way of looking at it is unlikely to stop the usual suspects from actually voicing this opinion.

2. You could look at it as a failure of risk management. Each individual player understood that there were risks involved, but each thought that passing the risk along to the next person would avoid the risk being their own! Nobody understood that they were creating a risk to the entire system.

3. You could also look at it as a failure of regulation. I am quite astounded that, amidst the sea of fraudulent activity by banks and their agents, there were no charges laid against anybody for the activities that brought about the GFC. The regulations also, in some cases, prevented banks from taking sensible steps to avoid default. Once the loans were bundled together, rules 'protecting' investors by preventing discounting were actually what caused the investors to lose their shirts.

4. You could look at it as a failure of business: In many cases, the folks who had been encouraged to take out these dodgy loans were actually going along just fine until the banks increased the interest rates. There was, therefore, a huge missed opportunity for someone to buy these loans in default at a discount, and let the homeowners keep paying the introductory rates that they quite clearly had been managing quite well.

Economically, it'd be really counter-productive for them to leave.

They currently receive more in revenue that they pay in taxes and receive more generous social programs than England. Like mentioned, they'll get full control over their oil reserves just as output begins to decline. Also their banking sector (relative to their economy/tax take) is huge and will have to shrink as investors will see it as a risk and divest otherwise.

They'll most likely retain the pound as the currency by default (at least in the short term), but lose control over interest rates. If the economy sours they will have the same problem that indebted Mediterranean countries had, in that all the pressure will fall on wages and job cuts rather than being eased by lower rates or currency depreciation. If they join the euro, they will of course have same issue.

Speaking of which, an interesting point is that with a large liberal wing of the UK leaving, this will strengthen conservative arguments to leave the EU.

@Lawdeedaw

If you're studying something like engineering, there is a high likelihood that you will retain employment that will pay off a student loan over the next 10-20 years. Even if it's not your first preference, you will be employed somewhere with a reasonable income with such technical skills.

The government can play a useful role in amortizing your income. There's really no reason to be frugal and Starbucks aside, policy that forces you to work long hours in a dead-end job while studying to make ends meet is counter-productive as it reduces your long-term income. Not being able to even enrol because you're too poor, despite how smart you may be is also hugely destructive. This is why study assistance subsidies are such good policy. Them aside, you still have to clothe, house and feed yourself anyway.

Even if you say that there will be dropouts, fails, people who complete degrees with no job demand, you simply adjust up the interest rate you charge everyone for student debt to account for that loss. Then you have a mandatory contribution from any income you make above X amount that the student has to repay after they conclude their study. This way students can't simply retain a large debt with a low interest rate forever and subsidise everyone else by paying theirs off.

Also to incentivise correct course choice, you subsidise courses with skills in short supply/in demand more than those with good job prospects and a generally high expected income.

This is pretty much what we have in Australia under the HECS system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_education_fees_in_Australia#HECS

It would be great if the US had something similar (because designed well it pays for itself), but the cultural obsession much of the country seems to have with total laissez faire, 'pull yourself up by your own bootstraps', even when it's not good policy makes it impossible.

Considering right now US Treasury bond rates (government borrowing rates) are at 60 year lows, it's doubly stupid.

If you don't plan then you wont have dick.
IF you plan of winning the lottery then shame on you.
Granted some plan, and save and now end up loosing due to policies, such as we have now with zero % interest rates and the dumping of 85 billion/month from the fed into the economy adding to the current inflation .

But waiting for some hand out to leveling the playing field will never happen. Don't wait on others do you own thing.

@enoch

I'd agree Friedman wasn't directly responsible, but served more as an academic influence and a proponent of a particular approach because many of the Chilean economists who influenced policy had studies in Chicago.

As far as exploiting a crisis, arguably the crisis itself warranted dramatic action. High levels of inflation caused by Allende's money printing to support wholesale nationalisation of industries pretty much required this.

As inflation is self perpetuation by its continuous expectation and can continue even after the original stimulus is gone, there was little choice here. After all it took Volker nearly half a decade of high interest rates to tame it in the US in the early 80s, to do that after an economic and political crisis in a undeveloped country was an entirely different scale of difficult.

Successive governments likely reversed some of the economic policies enacted under his regime, but the foundation I meant was particularly the budgetary position, free trade, and a competitive cadre of private sector exporters. The welfare, health and educational spending were all made possible by this. Without a credible tax base, trying to enact spending on this level while also raising the tax rises would have just precipitated another crisis.

Coming back to inflation and economics, I believe policies against inflation especially, are generally misunderstood in the short term and their benefits unrecognised in the long term. I would probably say the reverse of what you said, economic policy rarely shows tangible results in the short term but almost always in the long term.

It's certainly not perfect. After all economics has the unfavourable position of being the combination of social science, lacking the ability to test results in clinical conditions isolating a single factor and yet requiring highly specific answers to solve its questions. At its best, it offers answers based on the cumulative knowledge accrued from iterative policies, at each point being based on the 'best available knowledge at the time'.

But it has worked, as I like to often mention, with independent central banks, essentially the most technocratic and pure application of economic theory, inflation has become a thing of the past in those countries that have adopted it.

Then again I'm biased as I majored in it at uni

Payday loans EDB, in the United States: Fast-money strip-center locations have been popping-up all over in every city now like warts on a leper, for the past 25 years, operating in a regulatory blind spot. They loan you money at an exorbitant, unfair interest rate fully expecting and banking on the person loaned not being able to pay back the loan according to contract then penalize with fines when the debt can't be repaid. Criminal organizations have relied upon USURY as a means of extracting money from helpless or uneducated and desperate people for centuries. Mafia organizations the world over have relied on this practice since they began. I don't expect the federal government to do anything much different as much of their activity has been criminal for quite some time.

Inhumane, predatory, sick.

SO it looks perfectly reasonable at face value??I call bullshit when I see it before it happens usually... Cenk here sees it as a wonderful way to create revenue out of thin air by taking the model of the payday loan places that already exist over, not unlike a mafia organization takes over territory of another criminal's organization.

If you think I'm skeptical you are correct, if you think I am wrong that is your prerogative. If you choose to block my comments or 'ignore' them, I don't care at all-It simply proves the point I make continually here, that those who chose to place their hands over their ears, or their heads in a sand-bucket are minion, and the few dissenting opinions are met with torch and pitchfork, either because of the language used to do so is too caustic, or perhaps that the truths in my babble that are too horrible and painful to consider are much easier to deride and deny or to even consider, to damaged sensibilities combined with an ego the size of Asia.

I also consider that your stance on guns and gun ownership as equally skewed, as is much of your political rhetoric. But hey, there are a lot of folks here who think the way you do. I happen to be one of the other people.

And again, Cenk, yer a pompous git whose ego is also bloated beyond fat, and your smarmy, smug delivery makes me want to hack-up my lunch.

He explains why Republicans are against it in the beginning of the video--they're looking to bankrupt the Postal Service (thanks, lobbyists) and this plan will save it instead.

As to your next point, no true capitalist is going to accept less profit. These places charge that much because they can. They're located in inner city or other low income areas where, if people don't have bank accounts, they also aren't likely to have transportation to shop around for the best interest rate. Which is why this plan is brilliant, because not only are the post offices already conveniently located, they're not running on a purely capitalist agenda (i.e. they're not seeking to maximize profit as their primary motive for being in business).

As to the last point, yeah, there would probably have to be modifications made to post offices so that they can store larger sums of money. But robbing a post office (or just messing with postal workers in general) is a federal offense, meaning you would get the FBI coming looking for you, not some keystone cops.

"Rich Man's World (1%)"

[Arthur Jensen:]
"You get up and howl about america and democracy.
There is no america there is no democracy,
We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies.
The world is a college of corporations... inexorably
Determined by the... immutable bylaws of business.
The world is a business.
And I have chosen you to preach this evangel"

[Immortal Technqiue:]
For all my free market, healthcare robbing, stock stealing, retirement fund
Fucking with niggas. Fuck your little credit card scammin, jewlery stealing,
Crack selling, liquor store robbing mother fuckers (Its a rich mans world)
Hahahaha. Shout to the homies, Carnegie, OG, Willie Randolf Hearst,
Rockefeller, the real Rockefeller, my main bitch Leona, pour out a little Louie the
Thirteenth, Jack Abramoff, hold ya head, my Rothschild niggas, LET'S
GET THIS MONEY

[Verse 1: Immortal Technique]
I spend my day repping america overseas
Pensions for the workers? nigga please
Embezzlement etiquette private settlement
I'm better with confederate rhetoric from my mansion in connecticut
Foreclose and evict homes at the tenement
I twist words like a speech inpedIment
I hope you got good credit bitch
If not better get a new job with benefits
When I play golf with niggasii get cheddar with
New money buys brand new karats
My old money bought your great grand parents
You got grills in ya mouth I ain't mad at ya
I own every gold mine in South Africa
Thanks baby you made me a billion
Plus I own a building for each one of my children's children
That's the shit, snort coke in the whip miss USA sucking my dick
Yea what fuck the law 'cus real jail is for suckas
I go to country club prison you dumb mother fuckers
(I am the 1% fucking bitch)

[Hook]
You know my CEO corporate steeez please
Overthrow governments overseas in a breeze
Politicians in my pocket for a few hundred Gs
So if I'm never in court my assets a never freeze

[Verse 2: Immortal Technique]
I got a job and house and a bank account
When I'm out I doubt that's something you could say
And if not then I fake death like Kenneth Lay
Make money every day the world burns
Wanna tax us while y'all struggle to pay taxes
I'm getting my money the fastest
Memos and faxes shredded up documents
Slush funds through the corrupt continents
But they don't want me indicted
'Cause they don't want my dirty laundry aired when I fight it
Don't get my lawyers excited
'Cause what good is a law if you can't rewrite it
I got CIA traders, dictators so fuck y'all whistleblowers and haters
(Its a rich mans world) Shiiieeeaaat
I'll invest money from Al Qaeda
In the bank 911 widows go to later
Capitalism so I pray to fuck the state of the world
Money talks so what the fuck I need to say to ya girl
(I don't pay em to fuck, I pay em to leave)

[Hook]
You know my CEO corporate steeez greed
I'll treat countries like the IMF down on your knees
Real gangsters run the world fuck what you believe
I'll cut down the forest while y'all niggas burning some trees
I'll get your family murdered for a couple of Gs
'Cause your working class money ain't fucking with me
You think rappers are rich 'cause of songs you heard?
My labels make the money and haven't rapped a fucking word

[Verse 3: Immortal Technique]
Y'all in the ocean coastin' with the sails out
Hey America thanks for the bailouts
I made off at the banco ambrosiano
Got away scott free like el Vaticano
Acitvists activist get mad at me
'Cause I'm a tax free charity
80% to the staff and company
And 20% to the homeless and hungry
The country gotta pay the fed reserve
Kick back to the banksters haven't you learned
You protest cops or patrols on the street
But I bought city hall so I own the police
Email facebook and the shit you tweet
On the phone companies so I heard you speaking
My suggestion is no correction no elections, sex with no affection
No invention would benefit the world of man
Will exist till I got the money in my hand
World bank, interest rate damn rape on the spot
But I'm a gangster you gon' take my money like it or not, nigga
(I got your country in my pocket, motherfucker!)

[Hook]
You know my CEO masonic steeez cheese
Only little people pay all these taxes and fees
Since you were born we controlled what you watch and you read
And pretty soon were gonna own the fucking air that you breathe
I take what I want fucker I don't have to say please
I'll convince you that it's good for you, take it and leave
You think presidents are the face of a nation
I put em all where they are, end of the conversation

Hahaha

Arm yourself with knowledge, people, or succomb to ignorance found in conspiracies..

Facts: Yes, the Federal Reserve banks are privately owned, but they are controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors. The Federal Reserve banks merely execute the monetary policy choices made by the Board. In addition, nearly all the interest the Federal Reserve collects on government bonds is rebated to the Treasury each year, so the government does not pay any net interest to the Fed.

Facts: No foreigners own any part of the Fed. Each Federal Reserve bank is owned exclusively by the participating commercial banks and S&Ls operating within the Federal Reserve bank's district. Individuals and non-bank firms, be they foreign or domestic, are not permitted by law to own any shares of a Federal Reserve bank. Moreover, monetary policy is controlled by the publically-appointed Board of Governors, not by the Federal Reserve banks.

Fact: Independent accounting firms conduct full financial audits of the Federal Reserve banks and the Board of Governors every year. The Fed is also subject to certain types of audits from the Government Accounting Office.

Facts: The Federal Reserve rebates its net earnings to the Treasury every year. Consequently, the interest the Treasury pays to the Fed is returned, so the money borrowed from the Fed has no net interest obligation for the Treasury. The government could print its own currency independent of the Fed, but there would be no effective safeguards against abuse of this power for political gain.

Facts: The Federal Reserve banks have only a small share of the total national debt (about 7%). Therefore, only a small share of the interest on the debt goes to the Fed. Regardless, the Fed rebates that interest to the Treasury every year, so the debt held by the Fed carries no net interest obligation for the government. In addition, it is Congress, not the Federal Reserve, who is responsible for the federal budget and the national debt.

Facts: Kennedy wrote E.O. 11,110 to phase out silver certificate currency, not to issue more of it. Records show Kennedy and the Federal Reserve were almost always in agreement on policy matters. He even signed legislation to give the Fed more authority to issue currency.

Facts: McFadden was incorrect regarding the Fed costing the government money. However, later economic analysis agrees with him that Federal Reserve policy blunders had a substantial role in causing the Depression. However, his implication that this was done deliberately has no basis in fact. Moreover, for a dozen years prior to his rant, McFadden had been the chairman of the House subcommittee that oversaw the Federal Reserve. Why didn't he do anything to reform or abolish the Fed while he had the chance?

Facts: The banking system is indeed able to create money with a mere computer keystroke. However, a bank's ability to create money is tied directly to the amount of reserves customers have deposited there. A bank must pay a competitive interest rate on those deposits to keep them from leaving to other banks. This interest expense alone is a substantial portion of a bank's operating costs and is de facto proof a bank cannot costlessly create money.

Fact: The term 'lawful money' does not refer to gold or silver coin, but to types of money which the government would permit banks to use when tabulating their reserves. These types of money included, but were not limited to, gold and silver coin.

>> ^Fairbs:

Something most Republicans can't grasp is our country is better off when the rich are taxed more. 40 years ago, taxes on capital gains were 80%, but now Romney feels he's taxed too much at 15.


And 100 years ago the income tax and capital gains tax was 0... for everyone. And the rate of growth during that period of time has never been equaled since. So here we have a clear point in history where rich people were not being taxed at all and poor immigrants got much wealthier in short order.

The main difference then was that government was much smaller. It didn't divert resources from productive places to unproductive places. It wasn't able to run huge deficits because of the gold standard, so the interest on the national debt never became a burden. Today, the national debt is so large and short term that interest rates can't go up without causing unpayable interest. Without healthy interest rates, there are no savings. Without savings, there is no real investment to upgrade those shovels to bulldozers. And when the government borrows from other countries, 99% of it is spent on welfare and warfare rather than something that increases future returns to make the debt repayable.

That being said, Romney isn't the solution. This guy is just like GWB, will say anything to get into office. The point is, using class envy is a political game that needs to be ignored. Raising taxes on anyone doesn't come close to stopping the coming currency collapse. You guys are doing the economic equivalent of playing with your dicks. And it's going to become painfully obvious in the next 10 years regardless of which one of these clowns you elect.

She was not tricked. She did not pay attention.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^kevingrr:
Tricked by credit cards? Fooled by student loans? Cheated on mortgages?
Seriously?
The only trick is that people want what they can't afford. Good consumers, bad savers.

So very, very wrong.
My mother was tricked by a credit card company. She thought she had an 18% interest rate--until I looked into it and found she actually had 30% interest because they tricked her by changing it.