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.

"Seismic shift" in EU policy following latest summit, & a better deal for Ireland

135

Comments

  • #62
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    MrReynholm wrote: »
    What my question is, is what is the ramifications for the ownership of the now nationalised banks? If, for example, the move is implemented retrospectively and the money put into the banks is taken out and replaced with ESM/ESF money, do the government retain control of the banks in question?

    If the banks are then legally made repay the ESF funds, will the government be allowed to continue to control them?

    Because personally I would absolutely hate to see this as a victory for AIB and co in terms of becoming polluted private entities again.

    Whoever ends up controlling the banks, the price to be paid for direct aid from the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) is centralised ECB (European Central Bank) supervision authority for banks. Interesting article on this issue in today's Irish Independent: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/noah-barkin-euro-defeat-for-merkel-only-time-will-tell-3154939.html.

    The “seismic shift” in policy is, in reality, as much a move towards closer integration of banking supervision (and ultimately of Europe, as being sold to German policy makers) as it is towards direct recapitalization of banks (as being sold in Ireland, France, etc.).

    I guess it's a case of “the way ye tell ‘em”.


  • #63
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    Duiske wrote: »
    Oil prices soar 9 percent as Europe moves to tackle crisis.

    The USD price is almost irrelevant as the price of oil fluctuates more on the euro/usd exchange rate than on any supply or geopolitcal issues. Watch over the next week or so (go back into the data if you can find it) the price of oil will rise as the euro strengthens against the dollar.

    Take a look at these three charts: USD price, euro/dollar exchange rate & euro price.


    211233.png

    211234.png

    211235.png
    MrReynholm wrote: »
    Have the pump owners put up the prices yet?

    Contrary to popular mythology based on a criminal lack of understanding of the workings of any supply chain (not least the petrol ones) the garages don't jerk up prices on a whim, their margins are fairly tight - less than 5c/l.

    Looking at the raw materials costs for the past few months I'm wondering if they charging as much margin as they normally would because raw materials costs should have had prices about 5c/l greater than can be explained with a 10c/l margin (between distributor & garage).


  • #64
    Aidan1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 624 ✭✭✭Aidan1


    It’s difficult to envisage a situation where Ireland returns to the low levels of unemployment experienced over the last 5-10 years, given the very large numbers of unemployed construction workers present.

    Entirely true. Moreover, the spatial distribution of these unemployed workers is just as much of a problem. In the cities and larger towns it is more likely that suitable alternative employment will be found (in manufacturing or services), or that some construction activity will return. In rural areas, and particularly those distant from cities, this is much less likely to be the case, and so this 'rump' of unemployed celtic tigerites will remain. Some of them can leave, and either emigrate or move elsewhere in Ireland, but for those with children and/or mortgages it is much less easy. Add to that the fact that the same regions that have a surplus of labour also have an aging population (high 'old' dependency ratios), a massive surplus of housing (and thus no demand likely in the future) and some of the least productive agricultural land in the State, and it's clear that the geography of this mess will have a profound role in the political and economic life of this State for decades to come. It has ramifications for every field of public policy, from social welfare to planning to education.
    Our bargaining power as the 'model' programme country shouldn't be underestimated
    Whatever about being seen as capable of implementing the programme in full (which is obviously a factor), there are also benefits to being seen as good team players - the Govt has not been grandstanding, or table thumping, or shouting about what they want in public, or trying to embarrass anyone. Instead, they played their cards politely and privately - a previous generation would probably have termed it 'acting in a gentlemanly way'. Probably not very politically successful at home, but very definitely the wise choice in Brussels.


  • #65
    daltonmd
    Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    [Jackass] wrote: »
    Well I'm not saying that Merkel was never going to move until Enda Kenny stood up and demanded it, and then she decided she couldn't cope with the potential wrath of Ireland (worth under 2% of EU GDP) and conceded. You have to remember, if it was a shareholder meeting, our votes would be more or less worthless, regardless of our Economics situation.

    The point is that we DON'T have that negotiating power, but because of our conduct and handling of the crisis, we, Ireland specificly, have been pointed out as a country who will be given great attention to help recover our situation and shore up our financial sector, and we have been put on level pegging with the absolute powerhouses of Spain and Italy.

    The only reason we got there is because of our handling of this crisis, and we are now on the coat tails of the power house Economies and are more or less promised what concessions are made to them, will be made to us. That is a massive change in circumstances, and are bargaining powers have just jumped through the roof.

    This is not something that has been afforded to bigger Economies than ours, such as Portugal, who haven't negotiated as strong a position, and less so countries like Greece or Cyprus.

    This is the reason that the cost of borrowing (in terms of bond market value) collapsed on the back of this announcement, with our bond yield falling below the critical 7% mark over night, and about a 20% drop in the cost of borrowing to our Government, and in theory, we could afford to go back to the markets within a matter of days, thus regaining our Economic soverignty. i.e. not living off handouts from Germany.



    Well it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. Whilst the income of the Government might remain stable, the expenditure will be reduced by the removal of the debt burden we have to serve, thereby freeing up resources which can be spent elsewhere, which will ease the need to cut further spending in order to maintain essential services.

    No it won't. Those cuts still have to be made. Ireland caught a break, which is a good thing, don't get me wrong. But your post states:

    "I think our handling of our crisis is the direct cause of us getting in on level pegging with Spain and Italy and not as an after thought"

    Which I disagree with. We're not on "level pegging" with Spain & Italy, their stance and how "they handled" their crisis is why we caught a lucky break. Had they not pooled together then we would never have been given any concessions.

    FG/Labour have now the very same problem as the left in sofar as they now will have to sit and still make the neccasary cuts to bring our house in order. We are not out of the woods yet.

    The removal of the debt (which still has to be repaid but maybe on more favourable terms) won't make a difference to the restructuring we still have to do.


  • #66
    General Atomic
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭General Atomic


    daltonmd wrote: »
    No it won't. Those cuts still have to be made. Ireland caught a break, which is a good thing, don't get me wrong. But your post states:

    "I think our handling of our crisis is the direct cause of us getting in on level pegging with Spain and Italy and not as an after thought"

    Which I disagree with. We're not on "level pegging" with Spain & Italy, their stance and how "they handled" their crisis is why we caught a lucky break. Had they not pooled together then we would never have been given any concessions.

    FG/Labour have now the very same problem as the left in sofar as they now will have to sit and still make the neccasary cuts to bring our house in order. We are not out of the woods yet.

    The removal of the debt (which still has to be repaid but maybe on more favourable terms) won't make a difference to the restructuring we still have to do.

    Indeed guys, we really need to address these debt levels right now because, you know, that's far more important than tackling the issue of mass unemployment. Once we've balanced the budget everything will get better!

    Sure, we'll all be paying more taxes and we'll have cuts to our public services that mean we have less money to spend in our own economy but that's ok because the debt is the real problem here.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    The Finnish and Dutch have decided to block the ESM from buying secondary bonds.


    I think theymay be too small to block the ESM though it is like 8%-10% of the vote...it THINK it may be based on contributions...not sure

    But they may be able to block the ESFS....I think the Germans have a special position.....unsure if they can act on these headline coming from the Finish and Ducth Covts ..


    But the Finnish and the Dutch Govt have staed an intention to lock Esm buying secondary bonds.

    Unsure why they decided to come out with this now...


  • #68
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #69
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    On another note, this discussion should really be in the "what will the left do now" thread. It's not actually a discussion of the EU 'new deal'.

    42 posts moved - please excuse the disruption, and please continue the discussion about "massive social costs" vs "cuts" on that thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056686550

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • #70
    daltonmd
    Registered Users Posts: 1,246 ✭✭✭daltonmd


    General Atomic wrote: »
    Indeed guys, we really need to address these debt levels right now because, you know, that's far more important than tackling the issue of mass unemployment. Once we've balanced the budget everything will get better!

    Yes, indeed, so how do you expect that we can go back to the markets, or attract investment with our huge deficit? Tell them it's ok? We're working on the unemployment issue? Really? Ok then.
    General Atomic wrote: »
    Sure, we'll all be paying more taxes and we'll have cuts to our public services that mean we have less money to spend in our own economy but that's ok because the debt is the real problem here.


    Nail on head - knew you'd get it - eventually.:)


  • #71
    General Atomic
    Registered Users Posts: 37 ✭General Atomic


    daltonmd wrote: »
    Yes, indeed, so how do you expect that we can go back to the markets, or attract investment with our huge deficit? Tell them it's ok? We're working on the unemployment issue? Really? Ok then.




    Nail on head - knew you'd get it - eventually.:)

    Japan has a debt-to-GDP ratio that's nearly double our own, and yet they're able to borrow without any problems so obviously the market doesn't really care about how much debt they've accrued. What's at issue here is our likelihood of defaulting and that speculation is fueled far more by our high unemployment rate , resulting dropped tax receipts and inability to control our own currency.

    Spain's debt-to-GDP ratio is below that of the UK and Germany, even after the bailout deal, so why exactly is it that Germany and UK can borrow at record low rates and Spain cannot? The answer is not their deficit, it's their huge unemployment rate. Tackling that should come first, even at the cost of greater short-term debt.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2012/07/02/finland-seeking-spanish-collateral/


    The Finns want something for their money...??

    They are seeking Spannish collateral they want similar terms to the Greek deal and are trying to seek it...
    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CF0QFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chicagotribune.com%2Fbusiness%2Fsns-rt-us-eurozonebre8610l7-20120702%2C0%2C482840.story&ei=cTryT-vlBM-3hAf6zMmJDQ&usg=AFQjCNHrDG5MrF3FCc5Pjce8qCV_Kjdd0w&sig2=2yTCD-0J9ZmZinhQuottpA

    The Finns did not get backing for a bond covered proposal

    ?? But did they not ratify the treaty?? And agree to this deal???

    however it seems there will be not change to the treaty..so i really don't get it


    I can't seem to understand what eu politicaians are at sometimes its all stances with agendas..i will not let you do this unless you give me that or i will stop this...

    We need a phrase for it..like the Irish solution to an Irish problem..

    It's EU chess....


  • #73
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    Sorry for linking fox....please don't judge me i really am a very nice person:-)


  • #74
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    poeticseraphim wrote: »
    http://www.forexlive.com/blog/2012/07/02/finland-seeking-spanish-collateral/


    The Finns want something for their money...??

    They are seeking Spannish collateral they want similar terms to the Greek deal and are trying to seek it...
    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CF0QFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chicagotribune.com%2Fbusiness%2Fsns-rt-us-eurozonebre8610l7-20120702%2C0%2C482840.story&ei=cTryT-vlBM-3hAf6zMmJDQ&usg=AFQjCNHrDG5MrF3FCc5Pjce8qCV_Kjdd0w&sig2=2yTCD-0J9ZmZinhQuottpA

    The Finns did not get backing for a bond covered proposal

    ?? But did they not ratify the treaty?? And agree to this deal???

    however it seems there will be not change to the treaty..so i really don't get it


    I can't seem to understand what eu politicaians are at sometimes its all stances with agendas..i will not let you do this unless you give me that or i will stop this...

    We need a phrase for it..like the Irish solution to an Irish problem..

    It's EU chess....

    It's normally just called horse-trading. And it's basically why the EU tends to evolve when there's a crisis, because otherwise the variety of national interests trump the need for action.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #75
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    ECB does something useful for Ireland shocker...


    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0703/1224319267101.html


    Big deal if true because if the ECB is in Ireland's corner now with the IMF on the bank debt and the market knows that sentiment could improve further.


  • #76
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    Well it's a review..potentially good...


    we are the 'good example' ....

    However given that the Finns and Dutch are asking for Spannish collateral for funds we shall see..

    It is interesting though...the EU deal has been presented as though it has to be retrospectively applied to Ireland...this makes it clear that this is not necessarily the case ..

    A day or to ago we had this ..now its under review...

    Perhaps the favourable reaction of the market to Ireland will help sway them..

    Will the Dutch and Finns try to block any change?...

    Some (krugman for example) have critcised Merkels approach in Ireland ...

    Potentially good news..

    However the Eu deal is not as straight forward for Ireland it seems....the devil is always in the detail


  • #77
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    It's normally just called horse-trading. And it's basically why the EU tends to evolve when there's a crisis, because otherwise the variety of national interests trump the need for action.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Oops, posted this on the "what will the Left do" thread but now think I should have posted here:

    Talk about horse trading at EU level, the first step, “sine qua non” in the “seismic shift” allowing the ESM to directly recapitalize the banks is implementation of “an effective single supervisory mechanism”.

    Going back to antoobrien’s post #3 (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showt...p?t=2056686110) - the trade off to the ESM taking over the bank recapitalization piece of our national sovereign debt is more effective centralised banking supervision.

    Presumably, current national supervisory arrangements are still considered too subject to national interests and hence too risky in the long term.

    This key condition, of closer banking supervision, seems like another step towards a much more integrated Europe (and reduced national sovereignty), which would probably have been unthinkable without the current crisis.

    As for the immediate short-term cost / benefit impact – a maximum Irish investment of €11.1 billion in the ESM gets us a large chunk of our bank bailout debt of €40.5 billion off our balance sheet and onto the weighted ESM pool of debt. Whether this also involves transfer of ownership of the banks to the centre remains to be seen – please correct me if I’ve got any of these sums wrong!

    Extract from 1st paragraph of the brief Euro Area Summit statement (emphasis is mine):
    “When an effective single supervisory mechanism is established, involving the ECB, for banks in the euro area the ESM could, following a regular decision, have the possibility to recapitalize banks directly. This would rely on appropriate conditionality, including compliance with state aid rules, which should be institution specific, sector-specific or economy-wide and would be formalised in a Memorandum of Understanding. The Eurogroup will examine the situation of the Irish financial sector with the view of further improving the sustainability of the well-performing adjustment programme”.
    For full text see: http://consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cm.../ec/131359.pdf.

    The statement goes on to say that “ECB has agreed to serve as an agent to EFSF/ESM in conducting market operations in an effective and efficient manner“ and that “Eurogroup to implement these decisions by 9 July 2012”.


  • #78
    briankirby
    Registered Users Posts: 148 ✭✭briankirby


    Would be grateful if somebody could explain this to me.
    It looks as if ESM will capitalise our banks directly rather than the government having to pump money into the banks and then borrow from the troika to do so.
    But,wont the money from the ESM still have to be repaid by the banks,which are now state owned?

    Also,would the ESM money replace(rather than add to) the money that was already pumped into the banks by the taxpayer?
    Thanks


  • #79
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    briankirby wrote: »
    Would be grateful if somebody could explain this to me.
    It looks as if ESM will capitalise our banks directly rather than the government having to pump money into the banks and then borrow from the troika to do so.

    Yes, that is the case for future bank capital requirements, e.g. the €4bn that we reckon they'll need in a few years.
    briankirby wrote: »
    But,wont the money from the ESM still have to be repaid by the banks,which are now state owned?

    The deal is short on detail, so it remains to be seen exactly how the money will be paid back. It should be the banks, as they will be borrowing it directly.
    briankirby wrote: »
    Also,would the ESM money replace(rather than add to) the money that was already pumped into the banks by the taxpayer?

    In our case we'll be looking to replace at least some of the exchequer borrowings. Exactly how much, again, remains to be seen but it's up to about €40 bn.


  • #80
    roro2
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭roro2


    Exactly how much, again, remains to be seen but it's up to about €40 bn.

    I can't really see the ESM stumping up for the €35bn IBRC funding, seeing as Eurostat has already deemed this not recoverable. But about €5bn of the State input into AIB was also deemed non-recoverable by Eurostat recently, along with another €0.5bn for ILP. So, on a worst case scenario, only about €5bn might be considered by the ESM and reclassified off our debt. But the problem is there has only been speculation so far and zero detail (except one vague sentence in the EU statement), so it's all guesswork that will take a long time to sort out.


  • #81
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    http://www.businessinsider.com/european-markets-collapse-2012-7

    And borrowing for Spain and Italy is rising further especially for 3 year bonds.

    Investors are still losing faith in Europe.


    Ireland had a T-bill auction...
    http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/07/05/ireland-tbills-idINL6E8I54Y220120705

    We seem to be the only good news story.

    We pay less for a three month bet than Spain. But is that us going well or simply spain doing badly ?

    Anyway it seems Europe is not doing great , we are a doing better , but a lot ddepends on whether Europe gets it together and also gives us a better deal.

    Ireland sold 500 million euros of treasury bills at an average yield of 1.8 percent.
    Deficit still 13% of GDP economy expected to stagnate next year.

    Still we are the only ones giving Europe good news.

    SO GO ON EUROPE GIVE US A GOOD DEAL!:):):)


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    http://www.independent.ie/business/european/dutch-rule-out-ecb-buying-up-any-more-government-bonds-3159183.html

    Hmmm...

    It appears the Dutch object to the ECB buying Govt bonds ...they want to keep it's balance sheet in check.

    The ECB says it will not resume it's existing programe of purchasing bonds fromcurrent investors.
    They are talking about giving the ESM a banking license to buy bonds from the ECB to fund buying bonds ???


    How would that keep the balance sheet in check ? And it is still just borrowing from the ECB??

    Are they going to use it to force countries to borrow from the ESM to tighten the conditions of any buying of bonds?


  • #83
    poeticseraphim
    Closed Accounts Posts: 930 ✭✭✭poeticseraphim


    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/111762e6-c6c1-11e1-943a-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=published_links%2Frss%2Fhome_uk%2Ffeed%2F%2Fproduct#axzz1zsbBFsuh

    Greece drops demands to ease terms on it's second bailout.

    It came as a response to EU and IMF officials visiting and Christine Lagarde saying 'she was in no mood for negotiations or renegotiations'.

    The drop of demands came after lenders said they would refuse further funding.

    All Greek parties promised to try to negotiate the deal before elections.


    So Greece gets no re-negotiation.....and Ireland? Who knows? I wish they would make it clearer.


  • #84
    Sand
    Registered Users Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭Sand


    Its good to see that some realism is emerging this week after the puzzling reaction to the European summit last week. Despite all the talk of "seismic shifts" no one was able to explain who had paid off Ireland's debt. The reason being because no one had agreed to do so. That would have been a "seismic shift".

    Merkel, painted as being a defeated figure last week, has had the last laugh as the self declared victors begin to realize she didn't promise any concrete game-changer and didn't increase Germany's liability for their debts in the slightest - directly or indirectly via EU institutions. Instead the other states re-affirmed their adherence to Merkel's short term pet project of the fiscal pact and ECB banking control in exchange for a long term promise that when an institution that doesn't exist yet is set up, it might,once a eurozone banking regulatory system is agreed and implemented, and if Germany agrees, do something under a mechanism that no one has agreed yet. Maybe.

    It might be said the best victories are when the other side think they've won.

    The ESM has a limited budget, which hasn't been increased. Ireland's banks have already been recapitalized, at state expense so a commitment to in the future directly capitalize banks is a fine solution to a problem we had 4 years ago and have already solved. Even if the ESM does buy into Irish banks, it will be at market value - crystallising huge losses for the Irish government. The best that can be said is that it might in the long term reduce small sovereign funding risks - but that's in the long term.

    The Finnish and Dutch have already announced their resistance to the ESM being used to buy bonds in secondary markets - they probably dont need to worry, the ESM simply doesn't have the firepower to meet all the jobs its being given. Meanwhile, the ECB have shut down their bond buying exercise which was at best grudgingly endured by factions within the ECB.

    All in all, Merkels position hasn't shifted at all - she's always said that the other Eurozone states must comply with Germany's conditions first, and then they'll talk about aid. Maybe.

    Its just ironic that the Irish political set, so long the masters of avoiding difficult decisions by agreeing to setup an inquiry to produce a report to file in the archives didn't recognize what Merkel has done to them.


  • #85
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    roro2 wrote: »
    I can't really see the ESM stumping up for the €35bn IBRC funding, seeing as Eurostat has already deemed this not recoverable. But about €5bn of the State input into AIB was also deemed non-recoverable by Eurostat recently, along with another €0.5bn for ILP. So, on a worst case scenario, only about €5bn might be considered by the ESM and reclassified off our debt. But the problem is there has only been speculation so far and zero detail (except one vague sentence in the EU statement), so it's all guesswork that will take a long time to sort out.

    The latest on this (to be taken with a pinch of salt) is that we are looking at getting a deal on €32bn out of the €64bn total, with the PNs to be restructured separately. The deal is hoped to be in place by October.
    THE European Commission has confirmed that a deal to shift the burden of Ireland’s bank debt off the government’s books will be ready by October this year.

    The deal, reached after a marathon nine-hour meeting, involves the eurozone’s future rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism, taking over Irish taxpayers’ €32 billion euro stake in the banks.

    EU economics chief Olli Rehn said early today that the Commission would publish proposals in September and aim to get the agreement of Ireland's 16 eurozone partners by October.
    Restructuring talks are already underway on €31 billion in promissory notes issued by the government in 2010 to spread the cost of bailing out the former Anglo Irish Bank.

    However, any deal involving the ESM will be conditional on the setting up of a euro-level bank supervisor, most likely within the European Central Bank.

    A proposal from the Commission is due in September, but the ECB is unlikely to be able to take over supervisory duties before next year.

    The Irish deal hinged on decisions taken for Spain


  • #86
    roro2
    Registered Users Posts: 412 ✭✭roro2


    The deal, reached after a marathon nine-hour meeting, involves the eurozone’s future rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism, taking over Irish taxpayers’ €32 billion euro stake in the banks.

    This sentence strikes me as a bit optimistic/sensationalist. I wouldn't describe last night's events as a "deal" being reached, and this quote isn't really backed up by the rest of the article, and definitely not in the EU statement: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/131648.pdf

    Positive that they did mention Ireland again though.


  • #87
    antoobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭antoobrien


    roro2 wrote: »
    This sentence strikes me as a bit optimistic/sensationalist.

    Nine hours is one day's work. Hardly sensationalist.


  • #88
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,633 ✭✭✭darkman2


    FT video on the cross over between Spanish and Irish bonds and why investors think Ireland post summit is probably the better bet (just grit your teeth at the begorah stuff)

    http://video.ft.com/v/1727863980001/Irish-eyes-are-smiling


  • #89
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    darkman2 wrote: »
    FT video on the cross over between Spanish and Irish bonds and why investors think Ireland post summit is probably the better bet (just grit your teeth at the begorah stuff)

    http://video.ft.com/v/1727863980001/Irish-eyes-are-smiling

    Somewhat annoying video, both for the begorrah stuff (people really think we should rejoin the UK, eh?) and for the reiterating of some irritating myths, such as rather casually describing our employment and GDP collapse in 08/09 as "not a great advertisement for austerity", something they're not causally related to.

    To be fair, though, both the begorrah stuff and the myths were the work of the presenter, while the other guy at least pointed out that there had been "some unsustainable growth" before the collapse - which is perhaps a slight understatement of the Celtic Tiger period.

    Anyway, the gist was that the fall in Irish rates compared to Spanish rates related to "admiration for what Ireland has done" so far, the outcome of the recent summit, and the fact that Ireland has the 3rd largest positive trade balance in the EU (c. €37bn to Holland's €50bn and Germany's €125bn), which means that (if it keeps up) the money is there for Ireland to pay its way.

    I suspect that while the Spanish were obviously the main focus of the potential bank debt deal, unlike Ireland the magnitude of the hole in their banking sector is still unknown, and their government is still largely at the stage of denial.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • #90
    golfwallah
    Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭golfwallah


    Looks like the "seismic shift", "game changer" and "special case" to take the €64 billion cost of the bank bailout out of our national debt are all being quietly dropped. This seismic shift was to take place as a first step towards setting up a Eurozone banking union.

    This was portrayed as a reward for our government's "softly softly" approach in Europe.

    So much for political announcements/ grandstanding and the change towards more accountability and the way politics are done in Ireland.

    Is it any wonder that people are pissed off with politicians?

    See Irish Times article here.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    beeno67
    Registered Users Posts: 1,218 ✭✭✭beeno67


    golfwallah wrote: »
    Looks like the "seismic shift", "game changer" and "special case" to take the €64 billion cost of the bank bailout out of our national debt are all being quietly dropped. This seismic shift was to take place as a first step towards setting up a Eurozone banking union.

    This was portrayed as a reward for our government's "softly softly" approach in Europe.

    So much for political announcements/ grandstanding and the change towards more accountability and the way politics are done in Ireland.

    Is it any wonder that people are pissed off with politicians?

    See Irish Times article here.

    I am not saying it is untrue but besides Fintan o'Tool's opinion there is no evidence offered for either what you are saying or for what Finatan O'Toole is saying.
    Any facts to back up this opinion?


Advertisement