A really nice troll pic.

Edited July 5, 201511 yr by Shahenshah

Ya know, it isn't until tonight that I realized how seriously depressing this situation really is.... I mean, we've all been aware of the Europe problem for a while but I don't live there, and it wasn't until tonight that I put some serious thought into this issue.... Although I've been convinced the west is slowly falling to the east for a while now, I don't think I ever really thought about what an eastern dominated world would look like until now. It's depressing. If the EU falls, it's going to have a massive impact on the whole world, but the western world in particular. 

In the mean time, the runner ups like China and Russia are gaining more influence, so they wouldn't feel the effects like we would. While China is building a new World Bank under their own influence, the western world is loosing influence and the faith of our own allies. The absolute worst part of this is that the EU, ATM, looks like it will surely collapse. 

 

I hate being the preacher of doom and gloom. I try to look at things optimistically, but I also have a knack for specifically identifying flaws. Perhaps that's just because I also just enjoy challenging my own intellect by trying to find solutions to problems. But there are several serious issues in the world ATM that I find nearly impossible to be optimistic about. This is one of them.

 

As they say, "United We Stand, Divided We Fall." That phrase is understatedly true. 

 

IDK about you all, but an eastern dominated world sounds like a shit hole of demanded conformity. And it also sounds like that's what the future holds.

 

Please Europe, fix this. Whatever it takes, just fix this. 

Yea I don't the whole defense spending thing, not like Turks gonna ever invade and Cyprus conflict is pretty much frozen as it is.

 

 While China is building a new World Bank under their own influence, the western world is loosing influence and the faith of our own allies.

 

 

Not only that, but we're also busy with the New Development Bank under BRICS. It will give a lot of African countries access to finance that they were never able to get in previous years. The majority of it will be funded by China in the future as most other BRICS countries just don't have the finances to do that, but eventually other countries will join in, after all the whole idea is development. There is also talks of Nigeria to join BRICS, and other countries such as Mexico. I think it's fair to say that the US and Europe is completely losing its grip on developing nations and under the influence of Russia and China, these nations collectively will have a big influence on change.

The big European economies are already in on the BRICS.

The big European economies are already in on the BRICS.

 

Germany is showing interest in joining but has not signed a MOU as of yet, neither has any other European country, so unless you're hinting at just conspiracy theories, then no.

1. Paragraphs! Please use paragraphs. Reading that hurt my eyes.

 

Too late...   But,it was good,wasn't it???    And your emoticon with the torches was DAMN GOOD!!!  Where did you find it???

 

 

2. The government of Greece effectively ran out of money in 1974*, long before the Euro. So what did they do? They decided to expand the public sector without the money to back it, falling even deeper and deeper into debt and using borrowed money to do it.

 

I agree.Look,since like ever Greece was in trouble with it's economics,but the BIG trouble started right after the accession of the country in the Eurozone.I mean,it was like a bubble that was growing and growing until this very spot,where it blew off and we're fucked up (sorry about that!  )

 

 

3. Greece is, as a percentage of GDP, the second-biggest defense spender in all of NATO. Surpassed only by the US. (Like WTF?)

 

Like I said,there's a reason why Greece spends,indeed,so much on its military.Please,don't make me elaborate on that,because I might offend someone and no one in here (at least I think so) will actually understand my point! The only thing I can say is,that without military spending,even with minimum military spending,Greece is not safe...

 

 

4. Regardless of their blatant and out of control spending/borrowing, Greece is not the only one to blame here. All of Europe shares blame in this situation for not addressing the issue sooner. Nobody even cared until the global recession in 08, when everyone realized that wealth actually doesn't just fall from trees.

 

Sure,both sides are responsible for the current situation.Both sides with their decisions and moves contributed,more or less,to the current situation not only in Greece,but in the entire Europe.But,the former Greek governments are to blame more for this economic mess in my country.

 

 

5. I have no ill will towards Greece or any EU nation for this. In fact, I want this situation to evolve into an even more united Europe. A United States of Europe. Even though that's highly unlikely, I've always loved that idea. Europe could easily be the world power and surpass the US in such an event. But so far, Europe just seems to be slipping more into division.

 

Ahh,don't worry,I know you don't have any ill will towards Greece or any other European country!!!  But,some comments just weren't that friendly (no offense!!!  ),so I wanted to remind everyone that we're all friends and allies here,and there's no need for anger.  Everyone wants this situation to actually foster bonds between the countries for a more united Europe,and let's hope that the current conflict between European countries will cease and they'll rebuild their relations based on mutual trust and solidarity!

Edited July 8, 201511 yr by Antonio

Yea I don't the whole defense spending thing, not like Turks gonna ever invade and Cyprus conflict is pretty much frozen as it is.

Like I said,Greece can't be safe if it doesn't spend money on its defense.I know no one of you guys can understand this,you find it foolish.But,please believe me,it's not.You really have to come and live in Greece in order to understand what's really happenning here,and of course understand the Greco-Turkish relations (which are,sadly,poor).

As for the Cyprus issue,I think that it will take a lot of years until it's resolved!

I agree with the goals you listed, Antonio, but I have a different view on anger than you do. Anger, when justified, motivates change. While it should not be manifested violently, it's an indicator that something, somewhere in your brain is not happy with the status quo. So anger means you need to try to shakeup what is happening around you, by either expressing it or acting to change it. Greece has elicited anger because its behavior matters, both to Europe and the U.S. "The opposite of love is not hate; it's indifference." If this were a S. American or African country, it would not create the controversy that Greece has.

 

It's sad that Greeks will suffer privation, but they have given no indicator that they want to become a productive member of the euro. You cannot expect someone to invest in a country with no plan to grow. I believe Greece can contribute a lot to Europe, but they need to do so through industry, not through constant panhandling. Sometimes, the best thing a country can get is a kick in the pants to get moving. The world is a harsh place and products come from work, not magical thinking.

So sounds like the rest of Europe is saying accept by Sunday or get tossed from the Eurozone.

 

What's the likelihood that'll actually happen?

It will more be a simple default and restructuring, doubt they would throw them out (doubt anyone even knows how to do that beyond the proverbial "throw Mr Tsipras on the curve")

 

 

I agree with everything on Foxy's list, including paragraph's and use of a space bar. If Europe could actually make a US of E work, it would balance the world power structure quite nicely. The U.S.A. can actually cut back on defense spending and share power with our European allies. I really like the idea.

fat chance thats gonna happen, we enjoy you guys being the cavalry

It's my wife's day off so we just took a jacuzzi bath and drank two bottles of champaign mimosa's... I love the fuck out of you guys!

I'm always very sceptical when it comes to the BRICS, everyone acts like they are destined to succeed. In reality, their economies, internal politics and overall geopolitical situations are very different, and many are actually direct competitors to each other (China-India-Russia for instance), in the long run at least. Sure, cooperation is always possible, but much needs to happen for this bloc to become a solid foundation of the global economy.

Edited July 8, 201511 yr by ccabal86

It's my wife's day off so we just took a jacuzzi bath and drank two bottles of champaign mimosa's... I love the fuck out of you guys!

it's like 3pm in america, you drunk already? lmao

I agree with the goals you listed, Antonio, but I have a different view on anger than you do. Anger, when justified, motivates change. While it should not be manifested violently, it's an indicator that something, somewhere in your brain is not happy with the status quo. So anger means you need to try to shakeup what is happening around you, by either expressing it or acting to change it. Greece has elicited anger because its behavior matters, both to Europe and the U.S. "The opposite of love is not hate; it's indifference." If this were a S. American or African country, it would not create the controversy that Greece has.

 

It's sad that Greeks will suffer privation, but they have given no indicator that they want to become a productive member of the euro. You cannot expect someone to invest in a country with no plan to grow. I believe Greece can contribute a lot to Europe, but they need to do so through industry, not through constant panhandling. Sometimes, the best thing a country can get is a kick in the pants to get moving. The world is a harsh place and products come from work, not magical thinking.

No,no,I know what you mean,Duderonomy.  Besides,if the Greeks hadn't revolted against the Ottoman Empire (which,based on what you said indicated,that they wanted that particular situation to change),there would have been no Greek State.  But,what I said about ''unfriendly comments'',was quite personal.I mean,I know that their content was actually anger and a will for my country to change,but I perceived them to be a little bit ''hostile'',like ''Greece is bankrupt! Die,Greece!'' (this is an example).Maybe I misinterpreted them.So,that's what I said it was quite personal.

And,it's sad,indeed,that in our situation the ones who suffer are the Greek citizens!  Of course there were some Greeks that evaded taxes,had their money ''hidden'' in banks of Switzerland etc.,but some do not represent the whole.And,of course Greece has A LOT to offer,not only to Europe,but to the whole world.However,we were governed by unremarkable politicians who both only cared about their personal gain,and made monstrous mistakes relating to Greece's economy and,of course,industry.They counted on loans and imports,and completely abolished the Greek industries (note that Greek products were and are of great quality  ).That's the main reason that led the country in the brink of bankruptcy and low competitiveness.I won't talk about Tsipras,because he's been in power for only 5 months.As you understand,only time will tell!

It's my wife's day off so we just took a jacuzzi bath and drank two bottles of champaign mimosa's... I love the fuck out of you guys!

Ahh!!! Sounds like you had a really nice time!!! Go for it,man!!!

 

 

And your emoticon with the torches was DAMN GOOD!!!  Where did you find it???

 

It's in the forums emoticon list. Just click the smiley in the text toolbox, then click "show all".

      

 

And your emoticon with the torches was DAMN GOOD!!!  Where did you find it???

 

It's in the forums emoticon list. Just click the smiley in the text toolbox, then click "show all".

      

 

Yay,I found it,and many more emoticons!!!  Thanks!!!    

I'm always very sceptical when it comes to the BRICS, everyone acts like they are destined to succeed. In reality, their economies, internal politics and overall geopolitical situations are very different, and many are actually direct competitors to each other (China-India-Russia for instance), in the long run at least. Sure, cooperation is always possible, but much needs to happen for this bloc to become a solid foundation of the global economy.

 

What you say is true, but the exact same can be said about the European Union. What does all European countries have in common, except the fact that they're all situated in Europe? BRICS is based solely on trade agreements and other small agreements like student exchanges, technical assistance and policing. It's not as politically connected as the EU.

Regarding direct competition - I don't see this as a limitation of the relationship at all, and if you look at trade deals between Russia and China especially, it's skyrocketing. That's what BICS is - it's promoting trade. China buys natural gas, aircraft, naval ships etc. from Russia so there isn't direct competition in all sectors - and for Russia especially this proved vital because of the EU sanctions banning natural gas exports - they had to look for a new market, and they found Asia.

 

The whole idea is to focus on development - and this is why the NDB was launched - to provide smaller developing countries the opportunity to develop. Sure, there is always the question over China's true intentions - but in a global economy this question can be asked about every international transaction. China needs resources in order to expand, and they're more than happy to pay for those resources. If you look back at any country in Central Africa, they had no infrastructure, not even paved roads. Today countries like Zambia, Uganda etc. have massive infrastructure projects underway. Even Jeremy Clarkson commented on one of Top Gear's specials that the roads are some of the best he has ever driven on. There is also many counterarguments saying that, in South Sudan for example, the only infrastructure the Chinese build is the necessary infrastructure to export the oil, which is entirely true - but it still improves the economy of the country and creates employment (in most cases locals are employed, but Chinese companies are known for flying in their own workers to work in Africa).

 

I understand where you're coming from though - and I think in politics you always have to be sceptical, but from my point of view, and especially becuase I am in BRICS, I can see a lot of potential if the political will is there.

 

It's my wife's day off so we just took a jacuzzi bath and drank two bottles of champaign mimosa's... I love the fuck out of you guys!

it's like 3pm in america, you drunk already? lmao

 

Earlier than that! We had to meet a friend for lunch at 2pm where she went Merlot and I had Sangria. Life is so much fun if you let it

 

 

One key difference is USA can always print more money and create its own debt and keep doing that until dollar remains a global reserve currency, which it will for the foreseeable future. Greece cannot do that.

IMF's own report says austerity has failed. Also 80% of the vaik out fund never went to Greek economy, it went to private creditors, tldr the debt was shifted from big corporate banks to different EU govts and they charged a lot higher interest on those loans from Greeks as a price of that transaction, that money bailed out no one.

Off course Greece has itself to blame for most of the mess, but no one here has done them any favors, private lenders gave the money for profit without due delligence, then they told the politicians to get in line and fix only their mistakes and in return they can squeeze higher interests from Greeks via austerity aka bond slavery.

Not really Shah, fir printing to work you need to have a large export sector, i.e. be an export drifen economy, which Greece is not. Exports contribute only about 13% to the GDP. Printing wont do much for its competitive advantage. If youmcan not achieve that, then you can not service the debt via the currency depreciarion re currency of loans.

IMF doesnt say that, it points out three scenarios, bottom line being that Greece didnt follow true on what it commited tomunder them2nd MoU. In addition, the loans given by the member states weremgiven at substantially better (read lower) interest rates than Greece would have to pay had it gotten said loans on the financial markets.

Finally, Greece borrowed the money and spent it ... Thus it must return it. EU member states already proved,t heir solidarity by preventing a Greek default in 2012. Saying that that is somehow tantamount to 'bond slavery' is false and can nit be supported by facts.

The Greece having the biggest pensions? You joking right? Perhaps 5 years ago before they cut them in half. And some more recently >_>

 

I did enjoy the "yes" camp shooting itself in the foot by going around and getting public endorsements from the guys who actually made the pile in the frst place (the former government parties).

Relatively apeaking Betsy, having taken in to account the size of the employees contribution, the retirement age, the size of the pension re received pay etc etc

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2015/06/exposure%20to%20greek%20banks_0.jpg

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/29/where-did-the-greek-bailout-money-go

 

"Only a small fraction of the €240bn (£170bn) total bailout money Greece received in 2010 and 2012 found its way into the government’s coffers to soften the blow of the 2008 financial crash and fund reform programmes.

 

Most of the money went to the banks that lent Greece funds before the crash."

 

Above was the summary of what I mentioned. Private banks gave bad loans to bad customer on high interest rates. However, private banks had their error wiped clean, all the debt was transferred to tax payers, Greeks got peanuts in so called bailout, it was a bailout for the private banks, not Greece. It's unfortunate that Greek government at the time did not have the testicular fortitude to stand up to this blatant robbery.

 

So my point is, if you're a business (bank), you throw away someone else's savings to a bad customer for.l short term gains, but your poor decisions ends up being fucked, which you as a bank knew was obvious. You ought to be party to the downside, that's why in finance there is a term called 'risk'. But here what has happened is that the big private banks got the upside on risk, and transferred the downside to tax payers of Europe, most of it being on Greeks. What is amazing is all this has happened under so called transparent and liberal democracies, astonishing.

 

 

No, those banks mostly bought GGGBBs or GGBs ... they did not per se loan to any "bad customers", unless you meant that the Greek State was said "bad customer".

 

So when the european aid came (see 1 and 2 program), it went towards enabling Greece to service those debts at a much lower cost and with a substantially prolonged maturity. Ergo Greece was helped to pay off its debt, which it owed to the private banks. Saying that is a robbery is blatantly wrong.

 

Why should have Greece gotten anything beyond "peanuts" (as you put it) on top, it didn't spend the money it had borrowed in the past the right way in the first place (see duderonomy's posts).

 

 

 

 

 

Can someone dumb this down for a clueless American please?

 

 

That is a nice video visualizing a simplistic explanation.

 

This is actually a perfect explanation. It also explains why the current global capitalism, debt based system can only ultimately fail. 

 

Not all debt is bad. Debt incurred to create greater returns is actually good. For a person, a loan for a modest car, a professional degree, or even a modest house is not bad. The car & degree can get you a better job; the house allows you to save some of the money you're already spending on rent. Luxury creates bad debt. Unfortunately, some people have a hard time distinguishing luxuries (like a Lexus or liberal arts degree) from necessities, which isn't helped by industries that are determined to make their products look like necessities. I took out a loan for my vehicle (which got me to good jobs in Louisiana and Houston and I paid off early) as well as my house (which has a much lower payment than my last apartment and has a rate so low, I'm better off investing in the stock market).

 

For a country, anything that promotes trade and efficiency can be worth the debt to pay for it. Things like renewable electricity, transportation, and useful education is worthwhile. Indefinite subsidies to workers and industries are not.

 

Yes. And that is the whole idea of capitalism. Unfortunately, the entire system relies on someone, somewhere being in debt. Or exploitation. But to add to that, many of the worlds currencies are still pegged to the US dollar, which in turn is quite literally backed by absolutely nothing but faith in the US Federal Reserve. It's this faith the Fed that has propped up economic expansion across the globe since WW2 and made the US dollar the global reserve currency. Only the Euro really competes these days, and given the disaster in Europe, makes that point kinda meaningless if it is indeed the fate of the EU to collapse.

Now the problem with this is the fact that the Fed has been historically terrible at their job, specifically predicting the future, and the US as a whole still can't get it's debt under control and likely won't in the foreseeable future. If things continue the way they are, faith in the Fed will disappear. And what happens then? 

It almost makes me wonder how we've managed make the world go round on nothing but faith for so long. 

You make it a point that debt is not bad, so long as the debt is used to create growth. Which is the problem. It's blind faith in this idea that everything will just keep growing. But in a finite world, that's physically impossible.

 

 

What disaster in Europe? o.o The current fundamentals Re economy and structural adjustments are much better in Europe/euro area than anywhere else in the world, including but not limited to the States.

 

Euro is not going to collapse because of Greece ... why would it? The euro area States have used the last 2.5 years or so to prepare for potential problems/risks/issues affecting the periphery. Thus the euro area is as prepared as it can be to push forward through a Grexit.

 

 

 

To answer your question, the Greek government until very recently has spent 25% of its GDP on social insurance. One quarter of its GDP was spent on pensions, unemployment benefits, insurance etc. That is what the government is spending money on. If you compare this percentage to other nations, even other smaller nations, then it is way out of proportion.

 

 

Had to reply to this as this sounded odd. Greece is at 24% of GDP expences going to "social part", as seen here. It is 12th in that ranking (even Germany is ahead of it with 25.8%). Obvious winner is France, at 31.9% >_>

 

Belgium is 3rd (30.7%), huzzahi

 

 

Indeed However the bottom line is can you afford to pay for the 24% >__>

 

the loans they get are to pay for the loans of old. Strip all, and I mean ALL, loan payments of Greece bankroll and they will just breeze along at like 2% profit. Its the vicious circle of "loan payed by new loan" thats killing them. And the "personal" way to end that is a default, something they are somewhat doing now.

 

It seems you don't yet grasp the idea of percentage and relative. Heck Greece's 24% on social is there because they just cut pensions in half basically. That is the drop from 26% in 2012 to 24% in 24. It might not seem like alot but also know that there GDP itself dropped 25%! Another thing that austerity did, it hastened the "reality check" Greece needed. You don't stop a car on a brick wall, you softly apply the pedal to keep your dog on the backseat from smashing into the windshield.

 

btw, Belgium is spending over 30% of GDP intake on the social branch

 

No. Why? Greece wants to continue to borrow and spend for (one example only) a bureaucracy that employs between 800k to 900k, costs too much, is based on nepotism and cronyism and entitlements that make absolutely zero sense for a country that cannot service its debts.

 

Their current interest on debt is lower than that of many other euro area States, including those that have healthy economies and went through the program of structural adjustments. How is that vicious? What IS vicious is Greece promising to enact reforms, adjust their deficit, implement structural changes, etc. and than having received (in this case) generous loans decides that it doesn't want to actually implement anything it promised or worse to undo the improvements that it already started.

 

Incidentally the Greek pensions were on average too large, given what the employed population (even if at full employment) could support under the best case scenario (constant growth of 2-3% per annum) ...

 

So sounds like the rest of Europe is saying accept by Sunday or get tossed from the Eurozone.

 

What's the likelihood that'll actually happen?

 

Zero. Greece can not be tossed out under the TEU/TFEU, it may voluntarily leave though.

 

So sounds like the rest of Europe is saying accept by Sunday or get tossed from the Eurozone.

 

What's the likelihood that'll actually happen?

 

Zero. Greece can not be tossed out under the TEU/TFEU, it may voluntarily leave though.

 

^This is the main source of drama, and the main reason I think everyone should strive to resolve the crisis ASAP. The longer Greece remains in the euro without some sort of bailout, the more damage their economy will receive. Time is NOT on the Greeks side, despite their politicians beliefs to the contrary. Dragging this out will not get them a better deal and will implode their own economy for years to come.

 

The following cover page says it all. It roughly translates to "Give me money or I'll shoot myself".

http://i0.wp.com/hellenicinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/20150702_handels1_0.jpg

 

 

Theo, I did mean Greek state being a bad customer, the private banks knew who they were lending money. What you say essentialy is the same thing I said, tax payers money being used to repay the loans of private banks and now it's the tax payers money that's stuck. By robbery I mean, robbery by the big private banks. They got their money, now its the taxpayers and their money that's in the middle of nowhere. 

 

The big European economies are already in on the BRICS.

 

Germany is showing interest in joining but has not signed a MOU as of yet, neither has any other European country, so unless you're hinting at just conspiracy theories, then no.

 

 

I may have confused it with another Chinese led initiative in global finance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank

Edited July 9, 201511 yr by Shahenshah

 

Yea I don't the whole defense spending thing, not like Turks gonna ever invade and Cyprus conflict is pretty much frozen as it is.

Like I said,Greece can't be safe if it doesn't spend money on its defense.I know no one of you guys can understand this,you find it foolish.But,please believe me,it's not.You really have to come and live in Greece in order to understand what's really happenning here,and of course understand the Greco-Turkish relations (which are,sadly,poor).

As for the Cyprus issue,I think that it will take a lot of years until it's resolved!

 

Tell us?

 

I'm sorry regardless of Turk-Greek relations, there is no way Greece and Turkey are going to be in live ammunition shooting in foreseeable future. There is no reason for Turkey to jeopardize it's economy, defense and it's NATO membership to start a fight over a rivalry that appears more and more of a tradition thing rather than actual. I think Turkey will be busy on it's southern border rather than Western, they have other priorities and so does Greece. 

Theo, I did mean Greek state being a bad customer, the private banks knew who they were lending money. What you say essentialy is the same thing I said, tax payers money being used to repay the loans of private banks and now it's the tax payers money that's stuck. By robbery I mean, robbery by the big private banks. They got their money, now its the taxpayers and their money that's in the middle of nowhere.

We are not saying the same thing Shah ... You are talking about robbery, I'm not.

 

Nobody, but nobody forced Greece to borrow. Incidentally, nobody forced Greece to falsify and tweak their accounts either.

 

Had to reply to this as this sounded odd. Greece is at 24% of GDP expences going to "social part", as seen here. It is 12th in that ranking (even Germany is ahead of it with 25.8%). Obvious winner is France, at 31.9% >_>

 

Belgium is 3rd (30.7%), huzzahi

 

Indeed However the bottom line is can you afford to pay for the 24% >__>

 

 .

Well same could be said of the other 76% then no? Cut something there

.

 

the loans they get are to pay for the loans of old. Strip all, and I mean ALL, loan payments of Greece bankroll and they will just breeze along at like 2% profit. Its the vicious circle of "loan payed by new loan" thats killing them. And the "personal" way to end that is a default, something they are somewhat doing now.

 

It seems you don't yet grasp the idea of percentage and relative. Heck Greece's 24% on social is there because they just cut pensions in half basically. That is the drop from 26% in 2012 to 24% in 24. It might not seem like alot but also know that there GDP itself dropped 25%! Another thing that austerity did, it hastened the "reality check" Greece needed. You don't stop a car on a brick wall, you softly apply the pedal to keep your dog on the backseat from smashing into the windshield.

 

btw, Belgium is spending over 30% of GDP intake on the social branch

 

No. Why? Greece wants to continue to borrow and spend for (one example only) a bureaucracy that employs between 800k to 900k, costs too much, is based on nepotism and cronyism and entitlements that make absolutely zero sense for a country that cannot service its debts.

 

Their current interest on debt is lower than that of many other euro area States, including those that have healthy economies and went through the program of structural adjustments. How is that vicious? What IS vicious is Greece promising to enact reforms, adjust their deficit, implement structural changes, etc. and than having received (in this case) generous loans decides that it doesn't want to actually implement anything it promised or worse to undo the improvements that it already started.

 

Incidentally the Greek pensions were on average too large, given what the employed population (even if at full employment) could support under the best case scenario (constant growth of 2-3% per annum) ...

 

.

While accrued interest may be lower, you keep stacking something bigger then 100% on top of it and thus it grows bigger. Never said the vicious circle would kill them overnight

.

 

 

 

learn to cut down quotes, geez...

 

 

Yea I don't the whole defense spending thing, not like Turks gonna ever invade and Cyprus conflict is pretty much frozen as it is.

Like I said,Greece can't be safe if it doesn't spend money on its defense.I know no one of you guys can understand this,you find it foolish.But,please believe me,it's not.You really have to come and live in Greece in order to understand what's really happenning here,and of course understand the Greco-Turkish relations (which are,sadly,poor).

As for the Cyprus issue,I think that it will take a lot of years until it's resolved!

 

Tell us?

 

I'm sorry regardless of Turk-Greek relations, there is no way Greece and Turkey are going to be in live ammunition shooting in foreseeable future. There is no reason for Turkey to jeopardize it's economy, defense and it's NATO membership to start a fight over a rivalry that appears more and more of a tradition thing rather than actual. I think Turkey will be busy on it's southern border rather than Western, they have other priorities and so does Greece. 

 

OK,I'll mention a couple of examples.

First example: Turkish fighters fly over the Aegean and Greek islands,which means they violate Greek airspace,almost on a daily basis.  The past two years,the Aegean was ''quiet'',there were only a few violations,especially last year.However,this year is the ''Greek-airspace-violation spree''! Definitely,this doesn't show will for peace from the Turkish side.

 

Second example: During an exercise of the Hellenic Navy,in which air ''targets''  where being shot,the Turkish bugging ship ÇANDARLI entered the Greek territorial waters and the firing range of the Greek vessels.Although the captain of the Turkish ship was repeatedly warned that it was not safe,and despite the calls it received in order for it to leave (because a military exercise was taking place),he vehemently refused to leave,with the lame excuse that ''the firing range is not recognised'' ! Only when fighter jets of the Hellenic Air Force flew above the ship,a shot from a Greek vessel ''burst'' just 300 yards away from its prow and  a Greek frigate approached it to warn it AGAIN that it was not safe,did it leave!

 

These are happening now,when Greece is focusing on its negotiations with the Eurozone.To add an extra point,the Hellenic Ministry of Defense and all branches of the Hellenic Armed Forces are on alert,because Turkey seems to be ''preparing'' for a military crisis in the Aegean.

 

Anyway,I don't want to talk about this anymore,but I really hope you find these reasons rational.

Edited July 15, 201511 yr by Antonio

 

Theo, I did mean Greek state being a bad customer, the private banks knew who they were lending money. What you say essentialy is the same thing I said, tax payers money being used to repay the loans of private banks and now it's the tax payers money that's stuck. By robbery I mean, robbery by the big private banks. They got their money, now its the taxpayers and their money that's in the middle of nowhere.

We are not saying the same thing Shah ... You are talking about robbery, I'm not.

 

Nobody, but nobody forced Greece to borrow. Incidentally, nobody forced Greece to falsify and tweak their accounts either.

 

And that's the deal between State of Greece and "Private" Banks, The stakeholders and the management of private banks should be held accountable for the poor due diligence just like the Greek state is being held accountable, but what you've had here is the liability of private banks shifted to public entities. The burden has shifted, from private banks to public treasuries. 

 

Nobody forced the private bankers to lend, nobody. Nobody, nobody stopped the banks from doing their due diligence, financial window dressing of Greece's numbers have been open secret for decades. 

Edited July 9, 201511 yr by Shahenshah