Eurozone Sovereign Debt Crisis part 2 - Ireland

as it is for allready 2 years and no one would wonder if its really happen.
also it would have no effects on the economy, cause every one is prepared.
who???

easy trick of the press... you ask do you have a plan? (shure they have, it would be stupid if they wouldnt) - then they publish it as a dramatic news...

since allready 2.5 years

do you wonder? 70% of zyprus economy is connected to greece
so they did 8 month ago... so what?
im not willing to search for every post you already declared the soon end of the euro... but i guess every one can imagen how many quotes would show up, should someone really search

Yes I thought Greece would leave a couple of years ago and even four or five years ago I thought the euro could not survive. And I agree it hasn't happened ... yet. What we have seen at every stage is that politicians have doubled the stakes. No one thought Greece would burn through 300bn+ euro, ten times the bailout originally considered. And no one could comprehend a trillion euro firewall. Yet even with this level of intervention we're still moving ever closer to a crash. I do not see any possible scenario which would prevent collapse.

at the end the whole system itself is stable. just single parts of it are in trouble. so it would be easy to prevent a collapse at any time, even one day befor dooms day. would it be clear that italy spain portugal and ireland collapse on monday, it would be a political desition to start on sunday eurobonds or not.
by this, the economical data in some areas of europe can be as worst as imanginable, but you still couldnt say its the end of the euro, till its really the end. politicans arent calculatable... thats why we saw in the last 2 years a up and down on the stocks. as soon as there is one bad news to many, everything will go down rapitly. one good news to many and the sky is the limit... just cause no one knows what will happen in the next 3 month. (best example is how greece acted the last 12 monst)

as i allready sayd last fall. we will see a recession by march 2012. so i doesnt wonder that the economical data look bad atm.
but i also sayd, we can see also if we will make it for the next 3 years. and for this i can say, the data looks cood enough to say, yes we can. no one is shrinking mutch stronger as expected and ez in total has a 0 this year.
but we have to take a close look on the clubmed banks.

Photos (11)

I was looking at the FT100 index yesterday. Best I can make out it is now at about the same level it was in the early 1990s. Twenty years of zero growth.

Indeed. Perhaps that is not unrelated to twenty years of zero growth yet twenty years of rising expenditure?

There seems to have been an almight screwup, but it predates the euro.

that reminds me on a chart, my prof showed me once.
it showed the growth of germany and other states between 1950 and 2000.

every chart shoed the growth of the country. also a straight line in the same angle of the growth line. the growth was "dancing" around the straight line. some times a but up some times a bit below. but never far away. till the 1980, from this year on the growth line was falling in rate to the straight line... it looks like the growht was slowing down and this fundamentaly. - till 1990, after the end of the comunism... everyone thought the capitalism has won and radical ideas became dogmen. - in special "no rules for the finance industry".
this forced a growth nearly only by finance industry.
on the chart you could see that the growth line got fast closer to the straight line and finaly was above it again around 2000...
so we could say the growth of the last 20 years is a finance industry growth. they doesnt produce, so at the end its a fiction growth and the markets are correcting these right now. (debt forced growth)

also quite intresting...
a different chart showed the growth of germany in rate and in euro (without inflation)
you could see that the growth in rate was shrinking over the decads from 8% in 1960´s to a bit over 1% around 2000...
but the growth in euro was a flat line, every year around 27 billion euro. no matter if it was in the 60´s or 90´s. cant really say if this also counts for other countrys, cuase couldnt ever found similar charts and was till today to lasy to search for all data.
but it would be plausible, cause of the explained chart above

Then why spending money on elections for a HoS that dont have no power???

In my point of view the best kind regime that serves better a country is a Monarchy or a Presidencialism (like USA, Brazil).People votes for who have power, in this case is a President. In Uk, Spain, Japan, people vote for who have power and in this case is a Prime Minister, then why voting for twice? usually in semi-presidencialism which you have to vote for a president that dont have power and for a prime miniter that have.

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship."

the german parliament elects the president... so on one has to spend money.

really? then how can the republicans use the universal suffrage as their main advantage against a Monarchy?

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship."

the differenc is, that we vote for him. on one votes for the king.
also the president has only 2 x 5 years and not a life time.

also its quite unlikely that his son will become next president, right after him.

and cause our president is powerless, its okay for us, when a choosen group (parialment plus same number of citizen) elects the president. - at the last election we had a discussion to erase the president, cause at the end he is useless and costs money.
just in pension he gets 200.000 € a year, a car, an office, 2 secretaries and a driver.
in germany the president is called "winkeonkel" - "beckon uncle". cause thats the only thing he has to do.


different to the france, where the president has power and gets elected by the people... thats why the republicans can ;)

While a Monarch doesnt thats why I see Monarchy less expensive, and even it creates more wealth than what it spends.

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship."

thats a joke, isnt it?
its hard to go in pension for the queen, but she could. but okay in her case, england propably wount have to pay a ension. but they did for her mother, they pay for her children and grand-children. also for her death sister they payed.
they payd for the marriage last year and the diamont jubilee today, they will pay for her funiral.
i guess, just to run buckingham is more expansive as every german president could ever get...

and what do they create on wealth?

Photos (4)

I thought that the German President was voted for by the members of the Bundestag and an equal number of representatives from the Lander? The German people "entrust" the choice of President to around 1000 people.

To be fair, you have changed the system every time it has failed, as have the British, just ours was over three hundred years ago. I suppose we adhere to the old adage, if it isn't broken, don't fix it.

Euro, at the heart of your bigotry regarding the UK seems to be your perception that we think ourselves "special". For sure we have a "special" history, but thank whoever, we don't think ourselves superior.

As my Grandfather used to say, "If you are going to have a woman, why not have a beautiful one who wants to fuck you."

That's roughly true.
It depends on what you mean by "representatives from the Lander."
If you mean representatives who sit in a state legislature, that's not necessarily true. Some will be members of a legislature, but others will be distinguished members of the public chosen, in a one-off situation, to help choose a new president.

"Conan! What is best in life?"

"To crush your enemies -- see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

That's barbaric, kidz.

Don't try this at home.

~ ConanTheBarber (but you can call me Connie)

Photos (4)

Yes - Perados seems to say at one point that the German people vote for the president and then that the Parliament do, whereas in fact, neither is correct.

The Royal Family are much better entertainment than any German President you never heard of.

As my Grandfather used to say, "If you are going to have a woman, why not have a beautiful one who wants to fuck you."