• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Greece, what the fuck?

They have not taken their money and left.

They are first in line to get paid back.

And there has been no Keynesian spending going on so forcing the Greeks to pay back lenders first is just a recipe for collapse, as we have seen.

The Greeks have done everything required of them for years.

And it destroyed their economy as people like Stiglitz and Krugman predicted long ago. If only we had listened to them from the beginning. We should start listening to them now and not the so-called leaders in Europe that don't have a clue.

LOL @ your version of reality.

If there are plenty of willing lenders why doesn't Greece go all Keynsey wid it?

What do you imagine is stopping them?

They have had years of anti-Keynsian lending where they were forced to engage in activities people like Stiglitz and Krugman fully understood would destroy their economy.

Where they can get money to do some Keynesian spending now is unknown.

What is known is that is the best course.
 
Insane lending as has been happening should be avoided. And the banks that did the lending with no real plan for economic growth, instead a plan for economic collapse, should pay the price for their bad lending, not Greece.
How are banks suppose to create "a plan for economic growth"?

They attached all kinds of destructive conditions to their lending in the past.

They can attach productive Keynesian policies if they want.

They actually have to enter the 20th Century first though.
 
Insane lending as has been happening should be avoided. And the banks that did the lending with no real plan for economic growth, instead a plan for economic collapse, should pay the price for their bad lending, not Greece.
How are banks suppose to create "a plan for economic growth"?

Obviously not very well.

- - - Updated - - -

They have not taken their money and left. They are first in line to get paid back. And there has been no Keynesian spending going on so forcing the Greeks to pay back lenders first is just a recipe for collapse, as we have seen. The Greeks have done everything required of them for years. And it destroyed their economy as people like Stiglitz and Krugman predicted long ago. If only we had listened to them from the beginning. We should start listening to them now and not the so-called leaders in Europe that don't have a clue.
Its not that the entire world is against Stig and Krugman. It's more that no one is willing to finance Greece's "kensian spending". Regardless, everyone knew that Greece would eventually default.

Which Keynesian spending was that?
 
They attached all kinds of destructive conditions to their lending in the past. They can attach productive Keynesian policies if they want. They actually have to enter the 20th Century first though.
Sounds to me that you want banks to make grants to Greece rather than loans.
 
Obviously not very well. - - - Updated - - - Which Keynesian spending was that?
Wat?

Can anyone here envision a country taking care of its own needs? This seems to be beyond the thinking of most modern people. Empires work like we expect modern governments to work....the booty of conquest is sent back to Rome, where every Roman know full well it belongs. People in Rome begin to think of the exotic outputs of their provinces as a birthright. Greece has been a cipher in the empire game for quite awhile now. They don't have a right to any automatic inflow of goods and money like a normal empire. As these loans became more and more onerous, a greater and greater portion of them were spent on repaying previous debt and very little of the loan money made the physical economy of the country. A simple extension of the IMF proposals lead the Greeks right back to where they are today. They voted to free themselves of this debt which is in reality onerous beyond reason. Of course the European and American bankers involved in this fiasco will want to punish the government of Greece for such audacity, but they clearly have left the Greeks no alternative...just continuing austerity and no recovery possible. Krugman and Stiglitz know what they are talking about.
 
They attached all kinds of destructive conditions to their lending in the past. They can attach productive Keynesian policies if they want. They actually have to enter the 20th Century first though.
Sounds to me that you want banks to make grants to Greece rather than loans.

I want the banks to attach conditions that will cause the Greek economy to grow so it can better pay it's debts as opposed to the destructive conditions that the banks have attached in the past that have driven the Greek economy to ruin.
 
Sounds to me that you want banks to make grants to Greece rather than loans.

I want the banks to attach conditions that will cause the Greek economy to grow so it can better pay it's debts as opposed to the destructive conditions that the banks have attached in the past that have driven the Greek economy to ruin.

Greece led itself to ruin through reckless fiscal policies. The role the banks played were incidental. You blame them for not giving Greece unlimited loans that would supposedly allow them to spend their way out (while others, in pure contradictory fashion, blame the banks for giving Greece too many loans).

The conditions attached essentially limited the amount of loans that would come to Greece. Without them, Greece would've defaulted anyway unless they could continue to borrow unlimited amounts.

You also seem to be confusing the troika for "banks". The banks already took their haircut in 2010.
 
Anyone care to speculate on significance of Varoufakis's resignation? He did say before the referendum that he'd resign if Yes votes win, so it is a bit surprising that he quit regardless.
 
Anyone care to speculate on significance of Varoufakis's resignation? He did say before the referendum that he'd resign if Yes votes win, so it is a bit surprising that he quit regardless.

It's an olive branch to the Eurozone.

Now Varoufakis can go back to his better paying job at Valve.
 
Anyone care to speculate on significance of Varoufakis's resignation? He did say before the referendum that he'd resign if Yes votes win, so it is a bit surprising that he quit regardless.

He has a book deal he needs to get after.
 
Given that the current Greek depression is a direct result of bank imposed "plan for economic growth" then I'm saying the banks don't have a very good prescription for economic growth.

- - - Updated - - - Which Keynesian spending was that?
Wat?

wat

You blame the banks for not giving Greece unlimited amounts of loans

Nice try.

so that they could spend their way out of the depression?

What other way is there to get out of a depression?
 
Anyone care to speculate on significance of Varoufakis's resignation? He did say before the referendum that he'd resign if Yes votes win, so it is a bit surprising that he quit regardless.

Well, his explanation was that all the ECB guys hate him so there's a better chance of a better deal for Greece if they're dealing with someone who's not him.

The real reason is likely more along the lines that Greece will have to accept something. That may or may not work and it may or may not produce a lot of anger amongst the Greeks with the results. If it's good, he can still take credit for it because he's the one who forced the situation. If it's bad, he can talk about how the negotiations were going in Greece's favour before he bowed out for the sake of getting a better deal for Greece and then the next guy fucked up all his good work. If they just elect him PM, he can get the country back on track again.
 
You blame the banks for not giving Greece unlimited amounts of loans so that they could spend their way out of the depression?

It doesn't take unlimited funds. It takes sufficient funds. And it takes actual Keynesian spending. And tax increases on those most able to pay.

It is the best way to get the money back.
 
You blame the banks for not giving Greece unlimited amounts of loans so that they could spend their way out of the depression?

It doesn't take unlimited funds. It takes sufficient funds. And it takes actual Keynesian spending. And tax increases on those most able to pay.

It is the best way to get the money back.

How much funds? How many billions more are required? How much should they be allowed to increase pensions and public service salaries? How many people should the government be able to keep on payroll until the depression suddenly ends?

Are you willing to contribute some of your own funds to help Greece spend its way out of the depression?

Also, you do realize that tax increases are anti-Keynesian? They are expected to make the depression deeper under standard Keynesian analysis.
 
You blame the banks for not giving Greece unlimited amounts of loans so that they could spend their way out of the depression?

It doesn't take unlimited funds. It takes sufficient funds. And it takes actual Keynesian spending. And tax increases on those most able to pay.

It is the best way to get the money back.

Actual Keynesianism would call for more government spending and tax cuts during downtimes to be offset by less government spending and tax increases during uptimes.
 
Given that the current Greek depression is a direct result of bank imposed "plan for economic growth" then I'm saying the banks don't have a very good prescription for economic growth.

- - - Updated - - - Which Keynesian spending was that?
Wat?

wat

You blame the banks for not giving Greece unlimited amounts of loans so that they could spend their way out of the depression?

Repeating for effect: banks took their haircuts and are gone. It's governments now. He blames the people of places like Ireland and Spain for not sending their money to Greece so Greece can borrow their way out of the massive debts they rang up with their excessive borrowing.
 
Back
Top Bottom