Germany Says ‘Nein’ to Greece Bailout Request

[Axulus]

Those evil creditors, wanting to be paid back and not wanting to lend more. Don't they know it is the duty of lenders to continue to lend, no matter how much they lose out, because otherwise they are evil and don't care about people?

It's not like banks actually have the money to start with. They just create, then "advance" it. You and I on the other hand have to actually have the money in the first place. Then we can "lend" it, rather than "advance" it.

But why did these banks "advance" Greece more than they were supposed to anyway.
Why shouldn't the banks take responsibility for advancing money they knew could never be repaid?

What you've written above is white noise, not a word of it makes any sense.

 

[arkirk]

It's not like banks actually have the money to start with. They just create, then "advance" it. You and I on the other hand have to actually have the money in the first place. Then we can "lend" it, rather than "advance" it.

But why did these banks "advance" Greece more than they were supposed to anyway.
Why shouldn't the banks take responsibility for advancing money they knew could never be repaid?

What you've written above is white noise, not a word of it makes any sense.

By "white noise" do you mean you don't want to answer the questions? Your answers to questions like the above is the actual WHITE noise.

 

[Axulus]

What you've written above is white noise, not a word of it makes any sense.

By "white noise" do you mean you don't want to answer the questions? Your answers to questions like the above is the actual WHITE noise.

What is the question? What banks? Are we talking about the Troika? It's also a leading question - what makes one believe they didn't think they would be repaid? Furthermore, they were willing to take that risk to prevent a Greek default and the feared "domino" effect that potentially would've reverberated to Spain and Portugal. It was a very distressed time for the European financial system in 2010.

Using clear and concise language is required to be understood, and what tupac wrote wasn't anything close to it.

 

[tupac chopra]

Using clear and concise language is required to be understood, and what tupac wrote wasn't anything close to it.

The answer was a match for the question

 

[tupac chopra]

By "white noise" do you mean you don't want to answer the questions? Your answers to questions like the above is the actual WHITE noise.

What is the question? What banks? Are we talking about the Troika? It's also a leading question - what makes one believe they didn't think they would be repaid?

No one would have loaned Greece money. Not their own money anyway

Furthermore, they were willing to take that risk to prevent a Greek default and the feared "domino" effect that potentially would've reverberated to Spain and Portugal.

So they "loaned" (advanced) money that anyone who could do basic maths knew could never be repaid, because of the systemic risk.
Mind you none (or barely any) of the money ever got to Greece, it went to the banks, lest they had to be responsible.

If you don't understand you can always ask.
Just because we have disagreed in other threads doesn't mean you have to carry it into this thread. Just ask.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

What you've written above is white noise, not a word of it makes any sense.

By "white noise" do you mean you don't want to answer the questions? Your answers to questions like the above is the actual WHITE noise.

No. I think he is stating categorically and evasively that creditors never err.

 

[arkirk]

By "white noise" do you mean you don't want to answer the questions? Your answers to questions like the above is the actual WHITE noise.

No. I think he is stating categorically and evasively that creditors never err.

Big guys and little guys are held to different standards. Big guys "create" money, loan it out, then expect to be paid back. If little guys "create" money they are considered counterfeiters. They are also supposed to keep track of the big guy's "creations", regardless of how unrealistic they are. I think what is lacking in this discussion and indeed in the actual world financial situation is a uniformly applied moral imperative. You cannot expect genuine cooperation if the basis on both sides of the line is not altruism. In a financial sense, the Greek economy was taken over by outside "sponsors" and nourished much in the same way as a rancher nourishes his stock never considering the ultimate welfare of that stock, knowing it is meant to be eaten at some point.

Somehow, the word that keeps coming to the surface in my mind regarding this whole fiasco is BAMBOOZLE.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Those evil creditors, wanting to be paid back and not wanting to lend more. Don't they know it is the duty of lenders to continue to lend, no matter how much they lose out, because otherwise they are evil and don't care about people?

It's not like banks actually have the money to start with. They just create, then "advance" it. You and I on the other hand have to actually have the money in the first place. Then we can "lend" it, rather than "advance" it.

But why did these banks "advance" Greece more than they were supposed to anyway.
Why shouldn't the banks take responsibility for advancing money they knew could never be repaid?

This is no more accurate than your posts on the Ukraine situation.

 

[laughing dog]

Well, Greece now has 4 months of grace. I wonder if the real point of that is to work out some real deal in private based on some observable changes in Greek policy, because 4 months is meaningless in terms of an observable improvement in the longer-run Greek economic recovery.

 

[arkirk]

It's not like banks actually have the money to start with. They just create, then "advance" it. You and I on the other hand have to actually have the money in the first place. Then we can "lend" it, rather than "advance" it.

But why did these banks "advance" Greece more than they were supposed to anyway.
Why shouldn't the banks take responsibility for advancing money they knew could never be repaid?

This is no more accurate than your posts on the Ukraine situation.

Do tell us more, Loren. How about you plot a way out of this nasty hole instead of just pointing fingers? Your solutions always seem to involve the poorer people making sacrifices for the rich. Your solutions seem to always involve lots of death and suffering for disadvantaged people. What's with this sort of thinking that attracts you and makes you at least seem so damned mean?

Your reply to Tupac did not even address his question. Instead it accused him of being "inaccurate," when indeed he was right on the mark. When banks advance money they know cannot ever be repaid, why should they not take serious haircuts for issuing liars credit? Quit this ad hom and answer the friggin question!

 

[tupac chopra]

Well, Greece now has 4 months of grace. I wonder if the real point of that is to work out some real deal in private based on some observable changes in Greek policy, because 4 months is meaningless in terms of an observable improvement in the longer-run Greek economic recovery.

They don't have the 4 months yet.
It's 4 months as they takes some up until some important payments are due

- - - Updated - - -

Your reply to Tupac did not even address his question.

Loren gets paid on the number of replies not the substance.

 

[Harry Bosch]

This is no more accurate than your posts on the Ukraine situation.

Do tell us more, Loren. How about you plot a way out of this nasty hole instead of just pointing fingers? Your solutions always seem to involve the poorer people making sacrifices for the rich. Your solutions seem to always involve lots of death and suffering for disadvantaged people. What's with this sort of thinking that attracts you and makes you at least seem so damned mean?

Your reply to Tupac did not even address his question. Instead it accused him of being "inaccurate," when indeed he was right on the mark. When banks advance money they know cannot ever be repaid, why should they not take serious haircuts for issuing liars credit? Quit this ad hom and answer the friggin question!

I don't think that you understand the issue. Lenders take "haircuts" all the time. The issue here is that lenders will only lend additional funds to Greece if Greece demonstrates that they have the capacity to repay it. If they can't (won't) meet terms today, why should lenders assume that they'll meet terms in the future.

 

[laughing dog]

Do tell us more, Loren. How about you plot a way out of this nasty hole instead of just pointing fingers? Your solutions always seem to involve the poorer people making sacrifices for the rich. Your solutions seem to always involve lots of death and suffering for disadvantaged people. What's with this sort of thinking that attracts you and makes you at least seem so damned mean?

Your reply to Tupac did not even address his question. Instead it accused him of being "inaccurate," when indeed he was right on the mark. When banks advance money they know cannot ever be repaid, why should they not take serious haircuts for issuing liars credit? Quit this ad hom and answer the friggin question!

I don't think that you understand the issue. Lenders take "haircuts" all the time. The issue here is that lenders will only lend additional funds to Greece if Greece demonstrates that they have the capacity to repay it. If they can't (won't) meet terms today, why should lenders assume that they'll meet terms in the future.

History shows that lenders tend to have short memories when countries default. After a couple of years on average, bond rates return to normal.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I don't think that you understand the issue. Lenders take "haircuts" all the time. The issue here is that lenders will only lend additional funds to Greece if Greece demonstrates that they have the capacity to repay it. If they can't (won't) meet terms today, why should lenders assume that they'll meet terms in the future.

History shows that lenders tend to have short memories when countries default. After a couple of years on average, bond rates return to normal.

I totally agree. But in this case, German lenders are being asked to take a haircut and then immediately lend additional funds. If Greece defaults now, I doubt there will be many lenders willing to trust them again for awhile.

 

[tupac chopra]

If Greece defaults now, I doubt there will be many lenders willing to trust them again for awhile.

I'd rather loan them money if they defaulted and cleared the debt than now.
They have little chance of paying back the debts they have.

 

[Harry Bosch]

If Greece defaults now, I doubt there will be many lenders willing to trust them again for awhile.

I'd rather loan them money if they defaulted and cleared the debt than now.
They have little chance of paying back the debts they have.

?? We all agree that they have too much debt now. So the solution is..... Give them more debt? How does a German politician sell that to their tax payers?

 

[tupac chopra]

?? We all agree that they have too much debt now. So the solution is..... Give them more debt? How does a German politician sell that to their tax payers?

I doubt they could.
And the other question is how do the Syriza not keep the promises that got them elected?

 

[Harry Bosch]

I doubt they could. And the other question is how do the Syriza not keep the promises that got them elected?

Well the Greeks have much more to lose than the Germans. The Greeks need outside help to support their lifestyle. Whereas more and more Euros are believing that a smaller and stronger EU may be preferred.

 

[laughing dog]

History shows that lenders tend to have short memories when countries default. After a couple of years on average, bond rates return to normal.

I totally agree. But in this case, German lenders are being asked to take a haircut and then immediately lend additional funds. If Greece defaults now, I doubt there will be many lenders willing to trust them again for awhile.

Most of the Greek debt is held by gov'ts. I saw statistics in last week's economist that put total Greek gov't debt at around 315 trillion euros, with only 70 million held by private sector. If Greece defaults, it is Eurozone taxpayers who will end up eating most of the losses, not the private sector. The Greek proposal had some good ideas such as indexing debt repayments to Greek GDP growth (more growth, the larger the repayments, the lower the growth, the lower the repayments). The EU rejected it, and it is cutting off its nose to spite its face in doing so.

- - - Updated - - -

I doubt they could. And the other question is how do the Syriza not keep the promises that got them elected?

Well the Greeks have much more to lose than the Germans. The Greeks need outside help to support their lifestyle. Whereas more and more Euros are believing that a smaller and stronger EU may be preferred.

I disagree. If the Greeks leave the EU, they will endure a short but deep recession, and regain control over their money supply. On the other hand, the Eurozone loses over 250 trillion euros in repayments, prestige, and stability without addressing any of the underlying systemic imbalances within the Eurozone.

 

[tupac chopra]

I doubt they could. And the other question is how do the Syriza not keep the promises that got them elected?

Well the Greeks have much more to lose than the Germans.

The Greeks have a lot to gain. Their independence. Otherwise they remain slaves and probably lose assets.

Whereas more and more Euros are believing that a smaller and stronger EU may be preferred.

German industry wont be so keen