Greece on a Death spiral?

[Empathizer]

You mean Robin Hood isn't real...? Next you'll be telling me that all the world's scientific knowledge does not come from Atlantis/Mu/Lemuria/John Cleves Symmes's "inner Earth."/Vril

 

[Drifterwood]

If we don't have the EU (Merkel's "If the euro fails, Europe fails") what are we left with other than the nation states?

This is the big question.

What is the Nation State today?

The UK is a younger Nation than the US, Germany is a Federal Republic, France has 26 distinct regions, Spain and Italy are highly regional; Nederlands and Belgium? Greece is an infant Nation State. The Balkans, OMG :wink:, we even call Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland, Scandinavia, the Baltic States, Czech Republic now excluding Slovakia; the Osterreich ?

The imposition of Nation Statehood has been a right fucking mess. Politically a federalist Europe makes more sense, democratically it gives back a more regional, and thereby realistic, representation, economically and militarily it is the only show in the Global town.

There are a lot of vested interests doing very well out of the old system of nations, and they happen to be in power, so don't hold your breath waiting for them to open up.

Federalist Europe is the completely logical choice for the 21stC and beyond.

 

[eurotop40]

Nation states have been a construction made in the interest of few powerful people and ultimately based on (at least cultural) oppression: See for instance the French language imposed onto the whole territory of the French empire by Napoleon etc.

 

[eurotop40]

You mean Robin Hood isn't real...? Next you'll be telling me that all the world's scientific knowledge does not come from Atlantis/Mu/Lemuria/John Cleves Symmes's "inner Earth."/Vril

You are funny...

 

[Freddie36]

Unbalanced demography kills the economy. The only thing that could save Europe's economy and Greece in the longer term is to have more babies. And I don't see it happening. It is just the very beginning of Europe's decline...

 

[Jason]

Federalist Europe is the completely logical choice for the 21stC and beyond.

Of course. its logical. But it isn't democratic.

The structure of the EU should be based on the consent of the people who live within it. If Lisbon had been put to a referendum of the EU's half billion people it would most probably have been rejected EU-wide, just as it was in those countries that actually held a referendum. It would surely have been rejected by a UK referendum (which was a manifesto committment of the last government). Iceland is likely to be the first EU candidate nation to vote not to join the EU. If the people of Greece were given a vote on austerity or leaving the EU (and giving their debts a severe haircut) there is little doubt what the outcome would be.

What we have at the moment is a political class imposing what they see as a logical and correct choice despite the will of the people. Lets not kid ourselves - the EU that is emerging is far removed from democracy as understood by the nation states of western Europe.

 

[eurotop40]

I don't think the UK is so-o-o-o democratic either...

 

[Jason]

I don't think the UK is so-o-o-o democratic either...

The EU is actively going against the will of the people of the EU by denying a democratic process, basically a referendum. This point stands, however good or bad the democracy of the UK or any state of the EU may be.

For reference there is a Democracy Index which examines the state of democracy in most countries in the world. Like all indexes I'm sure it has its flaws, but interesting nonetheless. At least it quantifies the state of democracy in the UK (as a full democracy) rather than leaving it up to a view point. This index does not look at democracy in the EU as the methodology applies to nation states. However in view of the EU "democratic deficit" (of which there has been extensive discussion both in the EU and elsewhere, eg national courts in Germany) it is hard to see how on a comparable methodology the EU could rank any higher than a "hybrid regime" - lower than any of the EU member states.

One idea is that democracy in the EU should be increased, and if that means that decisions of the people go against what the Eurocrats think is right well tough, that's democracy. However there is also the persuasive idea that the EU's democratic deficit is structural, ie it cannot be reformed within the existing EU framework. If we do increase the power of the EU, perhaps by moving to a federal state, we have to accept that the country that comes into existence will not be a true democracy. It won't be authoritarian either, but will fall somewhere in the middle.

On this thesis a supporter of democracy must actively seek the unravelling of the EU. The fate of Greece is the touchstone. Here we have people being hurt by a supra-national organisation with a structural democratic deficit - in effect hurt by faceless Eurocrats. The answer to the question in this thread is yes, Greece is on a death spiral. And the killing is being done by the EU.

 

[Drifterwood]

I imagine that you realise that it is very difficult for Europeans to vote for Federalism. All they see at the moment is what they get, their governments aren't that bad and do deliver on some levels. So it is difficult given people's conservative nature to vote for the unknown especially when there are doom mongers with vested interests to protect on every street corner.

It is about getting people to see the bigger picture. That's not easy, clearly.

 

[Jason]

I imagine that you realise that it is very difficult for Europeans to vote for Federalism. All they see at the moment is what they get, their governments aren't that bad and do deliver on some levels. So it is difficult given people's conservative nature to vote for the unknown especially when there are doom mongers with vested interests to protect on every street corner.

It is about getting people to see the bigger picture. That's not easy, clearly.

To some extent politicians should lead public opinion. If it were simply a case of moving from (flawed) nation states to mutually beneficial federalism then yours would be an argument (though I still think democracy requires consent through a vote). The problem is around the democratic deficit which is structural, ie it is built into the institutions of the EU as we have them. If we move to a federal EU as a sovereign state then we will create a country which would certainly not be a full democracy and on current showing would not even rank as a flawed democracy. Rather we are looking at the creation of a European political class controlled by the European political class for the benefit of the European political class.

Right now the treatment of people in the periphery nations by the EU is intolerable. Look at the misery for people in Greece or the sky high youth unemployment in Spain. Are we justifying this suffering by lots of individuals in the name of some higher ideal of building the Eurocrats' Utopia? Is the breakdown of Greek society and the lost generation in Spain a price worth paying for the EU dream? How many people's lives are to be sacrificed on the altar of the EU ideal? Greece now has strikes, unemployment, plummeting living standards, society under strain - it is the sort of mess Greece was in just after the 2ndWW. It is beyond justification. Similarly 40% youth unemployment in Spain is not some statistically oddity - it is many individual youths in Spain having a truly miserable time. In both these cases the EU has crossed a line. The price the EU is demanding is unacceptable. It is a moral wrong. IMO the end does not justify the means.

 

[eurotop40]

And as you see the UK ranks 21st of 30 full democracies, after Ireland, Spain, the Czech Republic and Germany...

The EU is actively going against the will of the people of the EU by denying a democratic process, basically a referendum. This point stands, however good or bad the democracy of the UK or any state of the EU may be.

For reference there is a Democracy Index which examines the state of democracy in most countries in the world. Like all indexes I'm sure it has its flaws, but interesting nonetheless. At least it quantifies the state of democracy in the UK (as a full democracy) rather than leaving it up to a view point. This index does not look at democracy in the EU as the methodology applies to nation states. However in view of the EU "democratic deficit" (of which there has been extensive discussion both in the EU and elsewhere, eg national courts in Germany) it is hard to see how on a comparable methodology the EU could rank any higher than a "hybrid regime" - lower than any of the EU member states.

One idea is that democracy in the EU should be increased, and if that means that decisions of the people go against what the Eurocrats think is right well tough, that's democracy. However there is also the persuasive idea that the EU's democratic deficit is structural, ie it cannot be reformed within the existing EU framework. If we do increase the power of the EU, perhaps by moving to a federal state, we have to accept that the country that comes into existence will not be a true democracy. It won't be authoritarian either, but will fall somewhere in the middle.

On this thesis a supporter of democracy must actively seek the unravelling of the EU. The fate of Greece is the touchstone. Here we have people being hurt by a supra-national organisation with a structural democratic deficit - in effect hurt by faceless Eurocrats. The answer to the question in this thread is yes, Greece is on a death spiral. And the killing is being done by the EU.

 

[B_Uni79]

I've also worked in Greece, though not for a while.

I was about to jump on Uni79 and say that his post is wrong in presenting a negative caricature of a people. Many Greeks do work very hard. But on reflection there is a statistical measure of truth in his post also. Greece does not have the GNP per capita of many other EU countries and it is hard to escape the view that one of the main reasons is that the work just isn't happening. Compare Germany (all those jokes about boring Germans who work hard and long - well they are true). Compare the City of London - the hours some people work are shockingly long.

Greece had a miserable second world war and was broke in the late 1940s. By the late 1970s and early 1980s there were real improvements. Then the EU and later the euro led Greece into a fools' paradise. The supposed prosperity of the last decade or so has been built on a mirage. It hasn't been real. And the bust is ghastly.

I feel that there is some truth in the idea that Greeks are not working - but I don't blame the Greeks. I blame the EU. Without the EU Greece would have been forced to pursue real economics and would now have a solid economy with people doing real work. And in the case of Portugal and Ireland I also blame the EU. And Spain with unemployment at 20% and youth unemployment at 40% - I blame the EU. And Italy pulling itself apart - its the EU's fault.

Received wisdom is that the EU is wonderful and has made Europe rich. Can anyone prove this? Or is the EU a dangerous Euro-socialist economic delusion that can create only poverty? Just as the collapse of the USSR was an economic inevitability because its economic model was flawed, is the collapse of the EU also inevitable? Would we all be richer and happier without the nightmare that the EU is becoming?

You can blame the EU...but you can also blame the upbringing of the younger generation that do not want to do anything with their life. I have seen it first hand!

The baby boomer generation did work hard in Greece and abroad as successful immigrants in small businesses e.t.c.

 

[Drifterwood]

Emotive soap-boxing, Jase? Surely not.

If the only problem is the democratic system, how about this? Organise yourselves into the regions that you democratically decide as representative, have local government at this level and send one MP per million people to the EU parliament.

North Wales has roughly one million people, one MEP. London has already effectively prepared for this. The European Parliament would have 600 MPs, sound familiar?

Do you need the National Assemblies? Probably not and this remarkably is why they won't promote the idea. IMO, it is the National Assemblies that are now undemocratic.

 

[dandelion]

The EU is actively going against the will of the people of the EU by denying a democratic process, basically a referendum. This point stands, however good or bad the democracy of the UK or any state of the EU may be.

Ho hum. I see we are back arguing the merits of the EU again. The EU has denied no one a referendum on anything. British governments of both sides have systematically refused to allow referenda in Britain. It is all part of the lack of democracy in Britain. We are not allowed to vote on anything where there might be a chance of disagreeing with the government, and we are not allowed to vote in any election where anyone other than representatives of the two main political parties has even a remote chance of winning. Sound like a well organised banana republic? All that imperial experience wasnt wasted. Is either of the main parties yet supporting electoral reform in Britain? The chosen method of government in britain is benign dictatorship.

it is hard to see how on a comparable methodology the EU could rank any higher than a "hybrid regime" - lower than any of the EU member states.

The EU was never designed as a democracy. It was designed to do the bidding of the member state governments and that is exactly what it does.

One idea is that democracy in the EU should be increased, and if that means that decisions of the people go against what the Eurocrats think is right well tough, that's democracy.

As I said, do you honestly think the British government will support democracy in europe when it does not support democracy in the UK?

On this thesis a supporter of democracy must actively seek the unravelling of the EU.

No. You have it backwards. It is the member states which must first reform because the Eu only mirrors its creators.

The only thing that could save Europe's economy and Greece in the longer term is to have more babies. And I don't see it happening. It is just the very beginning of Europe's decline...

The only thing which in the longer term can save the worlds economy is to have fewer babies. A lot fewer. I still cannot understand how economists do not see the flaw in arguing that more people is the solution to anything.

The UK certainly wants growth (and has some). Presumably it will accept some inflation and some devaluation of the currency (itself a form of inflation).

Devaluation is all very well except that at best it automatically causes price inflation. But it is also impractical. Every country in the world decides at the same time to devalue? How does that work, exactly? It doesnt. As to inflation, I remember inflation. It destroyed the credibility of several UK governments and did not help the economy. It became public enemy number 1. It solves nothing. It is just a backdoor way to impose taxation and wage cuts. People see through it and it just makes them less cooperative. If you want cooperation on a wages policy then what you need is fairness. Which brings us back to the problem of the financial sector. The stranglehold they have on every single financial transaction means they have no difficulty paying themselves whatever they please. The part of the economy excluded from this gravy train has noticed, and sees no reason why it does not deserve just as much. So trouble ahead until this is resolved, which means coming down hard on banks.

Oh, and doing something to cut the price of housing would obviously help since that is what most people spend most on.

Portugal could be propped up, but Spain is too big.

The truth ultimately is that if the EU cannot afford to prop up a country, then nothing can. The banking system is bust, not Spain. Time to call the bankers bluff and nationalise them.

 

[Jason]

Devaluation is all very well except that at best it automatically causes price inflation. But it is also impractical. Every country in the world decides at the same time to devalue? How does that work, exactly? It doesnt. As to inflation, I remember inflation. It destroyed the credibility of several UK governments and did not help the economy. It became public enemy number 1. It solves nothing. It is just a backdoor way to impose taxation and wage cuts. People see through it and it just makes them less cooperative. If you want cooperation on a wages policy then what you need is fairness. Which brings us back to the problem of the financial sector. The stranglehold they have on every single financial transaction means they have no difficulty paying themselves whatever they please. The part of the economy excluded from this gravy train has noticed, and sees no reason why it does not deserve just as much. So trouble ahead until this is resolved, which means coming down hard on banks.

Oh, and doing something to cut the price of housing would obviously help since that is what most people spend most on.

The truth ultimately is that if the EU cannot afford to prop up a country, then nothing can. The banking system is bust, not Spain. Time to call the bankers bluff and nationalise them.

Don't get me wrong, inflation is a bad thing. But it can be a least bad thing. It is a way of bringing down wages and bringing down debts. Getting agreement from workers to take a pay cut is difficult, but inflation does the job. When economies are in a mess (as most in Europe) in the short term a measure of inflation prevents unemployment getting out of hand.

Nationalising the banks is a high risk policy as this means nationalising their debts also. Ireland is reeling under nationalised bank debt which really could sink the country. Iceland was sunk by its banks' debts. There is now a popular mantra around "make the bankers pay". This cannot mean make the banks pay - basically we are propping up their debts and they don't have the money. What we are left with is tax the bankers' bonuses. Well maybe we should but the sums are miniscule and will have almost zero impact in reducing the deficit (and might drive some wealth creators abroad).

Property prices are largely out of the control of governments - in the end we have a right to own property and a right to sell it at the market price.

 

[dandelion]

To start at the end about property: that is nonsense. There is no free market in property in the UK. There is a free market in cars. Big companies make cars. Tiny companies make cars. You can get a kit and build it yourself in your garden. People buy and sell them in an hour. But make houses? Its a government monopoly! no one is allowed to build a house without government permission and this is severely rationed. Just try building a house in your garden and see what happens. As to the buying and selling? How about six months typical to complete it? The housing market is completely rigged by the government which although it manipulates the supply (steadily downwards), refuses to control demand. If you are going to ration the supply then for fairness you have to distrubute that ration by some means other than rich man takes all. It is not like diamonds or gold or antiques. We can live without these. We need houses.

Banks? who said anything about nationalising their debts? If a company goes bust, then someone picks up the pieces which work and leaves the shareholders to take the hit. In this case obviously we would not be so brutal for the good reason it would be counter productive. But that is absolutely no reason to put the self surving bankers back in the same position they were in before they bankrupted themselves. There is no downside to risky banking, not for the bankers anyway.

Inflation? Did not do the job in Britain. I remember inflation and unemployment skyrocketing together. Time was, 100,000 unemployed nationally was considered stunningly high and the number has never returned to these levels. What is it now, 10,000,000?

And then we have people muttering about skill shortages. Sorry, did someone say education was getting better?