Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Greek Government Collapses - Snap General Election Called

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    Essentially, the Syriza party don't want to exit the Euro but are threatening to do so if they win the election but don't get a significant debt reduction deal. Germany don't want any country to exit the Euro either but are calling the Greeks bluff on the matter. It will be a case of who blinks first. Don't take what either side says at face value.


  • Options
    #33
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    dlouth15 wrote: »
    Essentially, the Syriza party don't want to exit the Euro but are threatening to do so if they win the election but don't get a significant debt reduction deal. Germany don't want any country to exit the Euro either but are calling the Greeks bluff on the matter. It will be a case of who blinks first. Don't take what either side says at face value.

    If Greece get another debt write down deal on top of the 53% haircut private debt holders had to take last time, hopefully it will be modest.

    The Troika have bent over backwards for Greece.

    Though they are now back in primary budget surplus, the populace seem keen to revert back to the crazy days from what should be the norm for functioning countries.


  • Options
    #34
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    If Greece get another debt write down deal on top of the 53% haircut private debt holders had to take last time, hopefully it will be modest.

    The Troika have bent over backwards for Greece.

    Though they are now back in primary budget surplus, the populace seem keen to revert back to the crazy days from what should be the norm for functioning countries.
    I'm not trying to defend either side in this. However their debt of over 150% of GDP is probably unsustainable regardless of whatever cuts they make. Either a deal or leave the Euro and default.


  • Options
    #35
    BoJack Horseman
    Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    dlouth15 wrote: »
    I'm not trying to defend either side in this. However their debt of over 150% of GDP is probably unsustainable regardless of whatever cuts they make. Either a deal or leave the Euro and default.

    Yeah, 150% is tough to repay.
    Its just a shame that a generation of feckless mis-governance by the Greek state is effectively rewarded for same.


  • Options
    #36
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    BoJack Horseman wrote: »
    Yeah, 150% is tough to repay.
    Its just a shame that a generation of feckless mis-governance by the Greek state is effectively rewarded for same.


    If the Greeks are rewarded for electing Syriza, electorates all over Europe will be eyeing up their own lunatic fringe to see what's possible.

    Can't see UK, Ireland, France or Spain agreeing to do a deal for Greece because of the potential electoral contagion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    Godge wrote: »
    If the Greeks are rewarded for electing Syriza, electorates all over Europe will be eyeing up their own lunatic fringe to see what's possible.

    Can't see UK, Ireland, France or Spain agreeing to do a deal for Greece because of the potential electoral contagion.
    It may simply be the way things work. We (by this I mean the Irish Government) thought that, by obeying all the rules and fulfilling our various obligations without complaint, we would get a deal on debt. We can now see that this would never have happened. Yet at the time we thought it would work.

    We took the bank losses on our own shoulders when we could have caused contagion throughout the Eurozone by allowing banks to collapse.

    It would therefore be very unfair if the Greeks got a debt deal though threatening to leave the Euro and default. But maybe we're being naive expecting fairness.

    Personally I think the best thing for the Greeks would be to leave the Euro and default on their debts. There would be a lot of short term pain but in the long run they would benefit.

    However the likely scenario, as I've said earlier on this thread, is that a deal will be done on condition that they don't leave the Euro.

    Playing hardball with Europe will yield them results for the same reason that the softly softly approach has not yielded results for us.


  • Options
    #38
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Markcheese wrote: »
    So can the euro zone actually cut Greece adrift - what if they selectively default and refuse to leave the euro ? As well as stay in the eu - can't think why they'd want to leave the eu anyway -it's a cash cow for Greece !
    There is no way pursuant to the treaties that a country can leave the Eurozone without leaving the EU. There is also no method by which a Member State can be expelled from the EU - they can have certain rights suspended and the Council can make binding sanctions against a Member State. Effectively, the position would be that they would either have to make a deal with Greece that they would voluntarily leave, or the EC would need to make life so hard for Greece via suspensions and sanctions that they would have no alternative but to leave.

    Uncharted waters in any case.


  • Options
    #39
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,428 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    There is no way pursuant to the treaties that a country can leave the Eurozone without leaving the EU. There is also no method by which a Member State can be expelled from the EU - they can have certain rights suspended and the Council can make binding sanctions against a Member State. Effectively, the position would be that they would either have to make a deal with Greece that they would voluntarily leave, or the EC would need to make life so hard for Greece via suspensions and sanctions that they would have no alternative but to leave.

    Uncharted waters in any case.

    So you can be in eu and not in the euro - but if you leave the euro you have to leave the eu- weird -
    How much impact would Greece leaving have ? I assume that free trade part Would remain -at least for a while ?

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #40
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Markcheese wrote: »
    So you can be in eu and not in the euro - but if you leave the euro you have to leave the eu- weird -
    How much impact would Greece leaving have ? I assume that free trade part Would remain -at least for a while ?
    Only Denmark and the UK have an opt-out from joining the Eurozone (although Denmark is obliged to be in the Exchange Rate Mechanism which allows only for currency floatation in ±15% of the Euro rate). All other Member States are obliged to join the Eurozone once they have completed their 'probationary' two years in the ERM II (for example Lithuania just joined on 1st Jan).


  • Options
    #41
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Only Denmark and the UK have an opt-out from joining the Eurozone (although Denmark is obliged to be in the Exchange Rate Mechanism which allows only for currency floatation in ±15% of the Euro rate). All other Member States are obliged to join the Eurozone once they have completed their 'probationary' two years in the ERM II (for example Lithuania just joined on 1st Jan).
    You don't really need an opt-out though to avoid joining the Euro. The trick is not joining ERMII in the first place. This is how countries like Poland have been in the EU for 10 years but have successfully avoided the Euro. There's no provision to force them into the ERM so although they are "obliged" to join the Euro they can put it off for as long as they wish.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    dlouth15 wrote: »
    You don't really need an opt-out though to avoid joining the Euro. The trick is not joining ERMII in the first place. This is how countries like Poland have been in the EU for 10 years but have successfully avoided the Euro. There's no provision to force them into the ERM so although they are "obliged" to join the Euro they can put it off for as long as they wish.
    Poland are obliged to join the ERM II pursuant to their 2003 Treaty of Accession. The trick is that they need a Constitutional Amendment to do so and are having an extremely difficult time getting it passed. To appease the EC, they have committed to comply with the Maastricht criteria by 2016 regardless of whether the Amendment is passed.

    The Maastricht criteria including a 'probation' period on ERM II are obligatory (with the exception of the UK). In theory a country could put off joining the ERM II by doing what Poland did, but it would only last so long before the EC basically tells them to put up or shut up.


  • Options
    #43
    kenmccarthy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 160 ✭✭kenmccarthy


    Excuse my ignorance and going off topic here--- so by 2016 Poland HAS to using the Euro??


  • Options
    #44
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Poland are obliged to join the ERM II pursuant to their 2003 Treaty of Accession. The trick is that they need a Constitutional Amendment to do so and are having an extremely difficult time getting it passed. To appease the EC, they have committed to comply with the Maastricht criteria by 2016 regardless of whether the Amendment is passed.

    The Maastricht criteria including a 'probation' period on ERM II are obligatory (with the exception of the UK). In theory a country could put off joining the ERM II by doing what Poland did, but it would only last so long before the EC basically tells them to put up or shut up.
    By what date exactly are they legally obliged under EU law to join ERM? The answer is there's no legal time period by which they have to join. Sure they can be pressurized by other means but if there's no time period specified as part of the legal obligation then that effectively means that they can put it off indefinitely.

    I'm afraid the lack of a time period renders the legal obligation pretty meaningless.

    But yeah, if they decide to join or they are pressurized to do so, then they will join. But it won't be because they are legally obliged to do so within a given period.


  • Options
    #45
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    kenmccarthy wrote: »
    Excuse my ignorance and going off topic here--- so by 2016 Poland HAS to using the Euro??
    No they don't have to join by 2016 and they can't be taken to court if they don't join.


  • Options
    #46
    kenmccarthy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 160 ✭✭kenmccarthy


    Thanks


  • Options
    #47
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    dlouth15 wrote: »
    By what date exactly are they legally obliged under EU law to join ERM? The answer is there's no legal time period by which they have to join. Sure they can be pressurized by other means but if there's no time period specified as part of the legal obligation then that effectively means that they can put it off indefinitely.

    I'm afraid the lack of a time period renders the legal obligation pretty meaningless.

    But yeah, if they decide to join or they are pressurized to do so, then they will join. But it won't be because they are legally obliged to do so within a given period.
    They cannot be full members of the EU without being members of the Eurozone though. All member states must fulfil the 5 criteria (including ERM II membership) to obtain Eurozon membership prior to becoming full EU members. The Ascension Treaty may not impose a time period, but Poland is technically in breach of the TFEU and Maastricht Treaties which could jeopardise their EU membership.

    To answer kenmccarthy's question, the EC has agreed with Poland that by 2016, they will have joined ERM II. I'm not sure it's a formal agreement, but it would mean that Poland couldn't join the Eurozone any earlier than 2 years (minimum) after they have joined ERM II.


  • Options
    #48
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    They cannot be full members of the EU without being members of the Eurozone though. All member states must fulfil the 5 criteria (including ERM II membership) to obtain Eurozon membership prior to becoming full EU members. The Ascension Treaty may not impose a time period, but Poland is technically in breach of the TFEU and Maastricht Treaties which could jeopardise their EU membership.
    I don't think there's such a thing as "full member" of the EU because there's no such thing as partial membership. You are either in the EU or you are not.
    To answer kenmccarthy's question, the EC has agreed with Poland that by 2016, they will have joined ERM II. I'm not sure it's a formal agreement, but it would mean that Poland couldn't join the Eurozone any earlier than 2 years (minimum) after they have joined ERM II.
    The thing is though that they could decide some time between now and 2016 that the time is not right (actually I think they will probably do this) and there's nothing legally the EU could do. Of course there are various other means that could be used to coerce Poland into the ERM but these methods exist regardless of any legal obligation.

    What I don't think will happen is that Poland will officially state that they will never join the Euro as this could bring them into legal conflict and force the issue. However the point stands that Poland are free legally to indefinitely postpone membership of ERM and thus the Euro since there's no timescale associated with joining.


  • Options
    #49
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    dlouth15 wrote: »
    I don't think there's such a thing as "full member" of the EU because there's no such thing as partial membership. You are either in the EU or you are not.
    I think technically Poland is what used to be called an associate member state, although I accept that term has never officially been used.

    My point is that until they comply with the TFEU and Maastricht Treaties, they are in breach of EU law. Eurozone membership is a key to this.
    The thing is though that they could decide some time between now and 2016 that the time is not right (actually I think they will probably do this) and there's nothing legally the EU could do. Of course there are various other means that could be used to coerce Poland into the ERM but these methods exist regardless of any legal obligation.
    The TFEU and Maastricht Treaties are the legal obligation though. I don't know what the consequences are off the top of my head, but there would at least be fines and sanctions.

    [/quote]What I don't think will happen is that Poland will officially state that they will never join the Euro as this could bring them into legal conflict and force the issue. However the point stands that Poland are free legally to indefinitely postpone membership of ERM and thus the Euro since there's no timescale associated with joining.[/QUOTE]
    I don't disagree, my point was merely that they are obliged to join and have indicated that they will join the ERM before 2016. I also don't disagree that this is unlikely to happen given the political atmosphere in Poland.


  • Options
    #50
    dlouth15
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭dlouth15


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    The TFEU and Maastricht Treaties are the legal obligation though. I don't know what the consequences are off the top of my head, but there would at least be fines and sanctions.
    The thing about the treaties is that the emphasis is very much on what countries must do in order to qualify to join the Euro. Thus if Poland wishes to join the Euro, for example, it must meat these criteria. The thought that some countries mightn't particularly want to join didn't really get much consideration.

    Economically, I think the flexibility of a floating currency gives Poland an advantage economically and they should think very carefully before joining.


  • Options
    #51
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,472 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    SpaceTime wrote: »
    I really don't think the Germans are saber rattling at all. It's more like a message to the markets that a Greek exit isn't really that big a deal and might be better for everyone, especially the Eurozone.

    That is a genuine error. The reason that we had/have a Eurozone crisis is down to that view being expressed by the Eurozone big boys (like Merkel and Sarkozy) which is and was a total failure of their leadership.

    The Euro is supposed to be strong currency. Membership is irrevocable. It is supposed to be serious money that a global economy can build on and rely on. By delivering the message that members of the Euro can and will be thrown overboard when the going gets rough, the Eurozone leaders are spreading chaos and *encouraging* the markets to react negatively. A chaos which caused the market to presume that Greece was going to be kicked out, and that weaker member states like Portugal, Ireland, Spain and even Italy could rapidly follow suit. Investors and banks reacted entirely rationally to the insanity going on at Eurozone HQ by pulling all their money *out* of the periphery which was being threatened with expulsion, which turned a minor problem into a huge crisis that threatened to destroy the entire Euro.

    The crisis only abated after the ECB broke with its completely stupid handling of the crisis before that point and underlined that it would defend the Euro to the hilt. That (temporarily) ended the fear of a Euro breakup. But its a height of how crazy the Eurozone leadership is that a central bank vowing to defend the currency to the hilt was seen a gamechanger...

    That Eurozone leaders are now reintroducing the crisis by going back to the same stupid playbook of threatening to drive members out of the currency is stupidity of a truly special kind.

    Already in 2015 the Euro is taking a dive against the dollar. Right on cue to the stupidity being publicly voiced by Eurozone leaders. The Euro is at the weakest it has been against the dollar since 2006. And that in an era of "quantitative easing" that horrifies US fiscal hawks.

    So why is the dollar always seen as a strong global currency? Simples. The US federal government doesn't threaten to drive Idaho out of the US dollar every time the state and federal governments get into a disagreement. It certainly didnt drive New York out of the dollar after the city defaulted.

    But then the US tends to have decent leadership - whereas the Eurozone leadership over the past decade has been awful. As bad as anything seen in the late twenties and early thirties.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    kenmccarthy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 160 ✭✭kenmccarthy


    Well, how's it going to go on sunday????
    If left is elected....what's the next move??interesting few weeks ahead


  • Options
    #53
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,458 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    kenmccarthy wrote: »
    Well, how's it going to go on sunday????
    If left is elected....what's the next move??interesting few weeks ahead

    Syriza have pulled ahead in the polls as we approach the last few hours of campaigning. They stand at around 33.5% in the opinion polls now.


  • Options
    #54
    kenmccarthy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 160 ✭✭kenmccarthy


    Looking like an outright majority for syriza!!!!!!!
    Possibly 151 out of 300 seats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    When our boyos said " frankfurts way or labour's way" they caved in within days of getting elected..............interesting to see what syriza can negotiate......they wont cave to the bankers at the first hurdle


  • Options
    #55
    hmmm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Great news - a free money tree party will be elected, it will be fascinating to see whether they can figure out how to keep paying themselves more than they earn without relying on borrowing.


  • Options
    #56
    Uncle Ben
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,843 ✭✭✭Uncle Ben


    hmmm wrote: »
    Great news - a free money tree party will be elected, it will be fascinating to see whether they can figure out how to keep paying themselves more than they earn without relying on borrowing.

    It's gas. The EU is in the **** for the past 8 years because of right wing Govts.


  • Options
    #57
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Syriza are expected to be two seats short of an absolute majority, according to the BBC.

    Fantastic news for Ireland, and a crushing day for Sinn Fein, now that their policies and their kindred politicians are about to be utterly discredited.


  • Options
    #58
    Good loser
    Registered Users Posts: 3,168 ✭✭✭Good loser


    I see Sinn Fein are trying to piggyback on any Greek deal to get a 'deal' for Irish debt. They urge a debt conference.

    If they feel that generous towards the Greeks (I'm sure any number of countries are worse off) why don't they suggest that Ireland abandon any claims for Debt Relief if the Greeks are bailed out.


  • Options
    #59
    duckcfc
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 616 ✭✭✭duckcfc


    conorh91 wrote: »
    Syriza are expected to be two seats short of an absolute majority, according to the BBC.

    Fantastic news for Ireland, and a crushing day for Sinn Fein, now that their policies and their kindred politicians are about to be utterly discredited.

    How?


  • Options
    #60
    For Reals
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,964 ✭✭✭For Reals


    conorh91 wrote: »
    Syriza are expected to be two seats short of an absolute majority, according to the BBC.

    Fantastic news for Ireland, and a crushing day for Sinn Fein, now that their policies and their kindred politicians are about to be utterly discredited.
    Good loser wrote: »
    I see Sinn Fein are trying to piggyback on any Greek deal to get a 'deal' for Irish debt. They urge a debt conference.

    If they feel that generous towards the Greeks (I'm sure any number of countries are worse off) why don't they suggest that Ireland abandon any claims for Debt Relief if the Greeks are bailed out.

    Now I'm confused. Can some bright spark from Fine Gael/Fianna Fail tell me why I should fear the Shinners today, and which postulating post above is the correct one to stoke the deflection fire from our actual governments, previous or current?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    conorh91
    Registered Users Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    duckcfc wrote: »
    How?
    Because Syriza will either capitulate on their values, or Greece will return to the drachma. Either Syriza are ruined, or Greece is.

    Either way, it discredits the irresponsible, populist parties in European politics.

    Either way, the experiment fails.

    If Irish people see the experiment failing, they'll hopefully avoid repeating the experiment, and this can only be good for economic growth and stability in this country.


Advertisement