Why it is in YOUR OWN INTEREST not to strike or protest at this time (mid May 2010).

DeVore

Slydice,

I feel the time when riots and strikes will do DAMAGE in terms of my OP has passed, so in that sense if people want to protest now, while I still think its a waste of time, I wouldnt talk them out of it. They can waste their time all they like, so long as they arent trashing the country (and by extension me!) while they are at it. So in that sense the variables in place when I wrote the OP have changed.

We are no longer open to speculator pressure and they can put our bond prices through the roof at the moment, we arent borrowing from them until mid next year. Had the bond prices gone to 9% in the summer (as they surely would have had Dublin turned into Athens) we would be in much much hotter water now. (yes, its possible!)

I still think Irish banks are fine. I have a good chunk of cash in BoI and I'm not rushing to withdraw it... in fact I'm buying a house next week (yep, I must be crazy I guess).

You'll notice that what I was saying about Ireland being "too big to fail" is coming true too, we arent being left alone to fester a huge problem like Greece did, the ECB are now aware that they are ultimately carrying the can for the smaller states and so are taking a much bigger interest in what those states are doing.

DeV.

DeVore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYsz0u6n2X0

Jump to 7 minutes 30 where the guy says exactly what I said at the start.

DeV.

Fr0g

DeVore wrote: »

And your plausible alternative is to .... what? Trash the gaff?

DeV.

Anything is better than lying down and taking it. I hope your children and grandchildren will be proud of your stance when they are still paying off the bill.

Fr0g

DeVore wrote: »

Jump to 7 minutes 30 where the guy says exactly what I said at the start.

DeV.

The bond markets don't believe our government regardless of whether we protest or not.

Fr0g

DeVore wrote: »

Slydice,

I feel the time when riots and strikes will do DAMAGE in terms of my OP has passed,

Unbelievable. The damage was done by FF WITHOUT protest. In May if the protests had succeeded in removing them they might have been replaced with a government that was serious about resolving the situation instead of denying everything.

DeVore wrote: »

so in that sense if people want to protest now, while I still think its a waste of time, I wouldnt talk them out of it. They can waste their time all they like, so long as they arent trashing the country (and by extension me!) while they are at it.

I'm alright Jack

Like I said too late now, the damage has been done WITHOUT serious protest.

DeVore wrote: »

We are no longer open to speculator pressure and they can put our bond prices through the roof at the moment, we arent borrowing from them until mid next year. Had the bond prices gone to 9% in the summer (as they surely would have had Dublin turned into Athens) we would be in much much hotter water now. (yes, its possible!)

The state being in or out of the bond market is a non issue. The problem is the banks. They have been shut out of the interbank market and depositers have been withdrawing money in recent weeks. that is why we our bond yields have come under pressure. Thanks to Lenihan we are the banks and they are us. They are dragging the us down with them.

DeVore wrote: »

I still think Irish banks are fine. I have a good chunk of cash in BoI and I'm not rushing to withdraw it... in fact I'm buying a house next week (yep, I must be crazy I guess).

Well if you think that less than 2 million taxpayers (and shrinking) can gaurantee and pay for 440 Billion of debt, depositers and bondholders (and carry the country on their back) then you must be. the bond market is telling us that we can't.

DeVore wrote: »

You'll notice that what I was saying about Ireland being "too big to fail" is coming true too, we arent being left alone to fester a huge problem like Greece did, the ECB are now aware that they are ultimately carrying the can for the smaller states and so are taking a much bigger interest in what those states are doing.

DeV.

This was a given. It is not "coming true".

Wibbs

DeVore wrote: »

You'll notice that what I was saying about Ireland being "too big to fail" is coming true too, we arent being left alone to fester a huge problem like Greece did, the ECB are now aware that they are ultimately carrying the can for the smaller states and so are taking a much bigger interest in what those states are doing.

I'd look at it another way D, not that we are too big to fail, quite the opposite, they consider us small enough to bail out so the bigger nations like Spain and Italy don't have to be bailed out. We're a small domino that has enough mass to knock over much bigger dominos. If they had to bail out those economies they simply couldn't do it and the Euro and by extension the EU could be in serious trouble.

Then again I was agin the Euro way back for this very reason. Great for ryanairing to sunny climes without changing into "funny money", but utterly daft for a conglomeration of states with very different economies. It's a nice pipe dream for your Europhiles drunk on ordering a newly discovered Chablis in their schoolboy French. With a territory so big with so many local variations in economic needs it's pretty much unfeasible. Look at the US. Same nation, same government, same laws, language and currency etc. Now compare Kentucky to California. Doubly so with the weighting of nations in the largely unelected civil service nightmare that is the EU.

IMHO it's a large part of what really screwed us up financially(ditto for Spain). You do not drop interest rates to the floor in a growing economy like we had here. It's economics 101. It overheats it and lets people think they've more money than they have. Oh and look what happened. Fine for Germany and France(big shock) at the time who were quite stagnant. I am firmly convinced, more than I was 10 odd years ago that the current crisis were in would not be nearly as bad if we had control of our own currency. It may not have been great, but nowhere as bad. For a start the rogue banks wouldn't have been able to generate such vast and empty credit in that situation.

IMHO We gave up a large part of the control of our nations future with the act of joining the Euro. Now it only remains for the ink to grace the pages of that act when the bailout funds come in as they inevitably will. And make no mistake we will lose control. It only gets debatable when we wnat to look at how much. This idea that the IMF only "suggest" is ballsology of the highest order. Oh sure they suggest, but we better follow those quarterly suggestions or the funding will stutter if not dry up. Look to Greece. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jeremywarner/100008678/austria-tells-greece-to-get-stuffed/ Autonomy is not an option beyond some puff piece claiming same by some gombeen fcukwit minister on RTE.

As for protest and striking? I'm still with DeV on this one. Mainly cos what alternative are you gonna give us? OK You wanna burn down this house? Shít I'll bring the petrol and matches, but only if you show me something better that can be built in its place. Otherwise it's utterly bloody pointless. Protest for hubris' sake is just.. well thick, if a tad romantic, if that's your thing.






PS good luck on buying the gaff. Good timing I'd say. Plus good planning on your part. God forbid, a man who saved?:eek: Clearly mad. Fetch the white coats

Scofflaw

Wibbs wrote:

For a start the rogue banks wouldn't have been able to generate such vast and empty credit in that situation.

One word: Icesave...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wibbs

Nope, it may be one word and an easy one at that, but it was hardly a given that an Icesave type scenario would kick off here. For a start it hadn't happened before through our various ups and downs economically. The Icelandic economy is and was quite a different beast to our own. You're comparing apples to oranges. While the economic results of joining a currency that dropped interest rates to the floor in an already heated economy such as ours was pretty much a given. So pardon me if I don't buy that argument.

Scofflaw

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, it may be one word and an easy one at that, but it was hardly a given that an Icesave type scenario would kick off here. For a start it hadn't happened before through our various ups and downs economically. The Icelandic economy is and was quite a different beast to our own. You're comparing apples to oranges. While the economic results of joining a currency that dropped interest rates to the floor in an already heated economy such as ours was pretty much a given. So pardon me if I don't buy that argument.

The start of Iceland's troubles, though, was exactly the fact that their banks, like ours, were able "to generate such vast and empty credit in that situation", that situation being that they had "control of [their] own currency". So I don't really see how you can claim that if we had had control of our own currency our banks couldn't have done what Iceland's did - or indeed the UK banks.

Claiming that they wouldn't have been allowed to do it is a very different argument, since it implies a change in regulatory behaviour that could just as easily have been implemented here in the euro, but wasn't.

Essentially, we were happy to let the government do what it liked as long as there was plenty of money, and the government, in turn, were happy to let the banks do what they liked as long as there was plenty of money. The tools were there to rein the banks in, but there was no political will to do so - quite the opposite.

cordially,
Scofflaw

GarlicBread

Scofflaw wrote: »

The start of Iceland's troubles, though, was exactly the fact that their banks, like ours, were able "to generate such vast and empty credit in that situation".

And the end of Icelands troubles was when they forced their criminal government out of office via mass protests, fact.

Wibbs

We as a nation were doing pretty well before the joining of the Euro. We had pretty solid economic growth for all the usual reasons trotted out, young and educated English speaking workforce and low corporation tax(and an industrial blank slate). High interest rates and control of our currency was the gas setting that kept the kettle just on the boil. Then came the Euro. Great, but for the fact that Germany and France needed to turn up the gas for their own kettle. Naturally. If you're economically quite static, then turning up the heat will boil the kettle. Problem is/was that causes problems with kettles already on the boil. I'll leave the "I fancy a cuppa now" analogy alone now :D

Anyway, overnight our interest rates halved. This was not an issue for France and Germany, especially with regard to inflation. And how pray tell do you curb inflation? Oh yes, back to interest rates again. Like I said economics 101. So what happened here? Inflation, especially of the housing sector went utterly mad. We went from an overall inflation rate of 4% in 1998 to 7% in 2001. Nearly doubled in 2 years. How could happen Ted? Hmmm, join the dots and spot why. And that was our overall inflation rate. The housing bubble that was a demographic accident waiting to happen went through the roof. Massively fueled by the low interest rates and the ability of banks to lend willy nilly on the back of that.



Lets look where the single EU currency kicked off shall we?

Like I said S, try again. Your take doesnt quite compute in any shape make or flavour.

*EDIT* just saw your last post. As per usual I was too busy building a soapbox...

My point is that you're again comparing apples to oranges. The Icelandic economy and their banks could generate vast and empty credit because they were running low interest rates at the time. We weren't. They were quite a different entity economically. If we in 1998 had tried to do that on the international markets offering our rates at the time we would have gotten bugger all takers. This is a fact. It would simply have not been worth their while. A very different scenario to Iceland. However, after the Euro changeover things changed massively for us as far as speculation internally and externally was concerned. Apples and oranges.

Kintarō Hattori

Woo Hoo - Devs buying a house, I'm buying a house.... woo hoo. No seriously, it's good to see, especially after all that's been in the news over the last few days. I had been having doubts about whether I was doing the right thing but I've been seeing lots of positive things and receiving lots of positive advice on Boards.

I would in my absolutely uneducated opinion agree that rioting and kicking up a fuss isn't going to help ourselves and that the best thing we can do to punish those responsible is simply not to re-elect them for a very very long time.

Scofflaw

My point is that you're again comparing apples to oranges. The Icelandic economy and their banks could generate vast and empty credit because they were running low interest rates at the time. We weren't. They were quite a different entity economically. If we in 1998 had tried to do that on the international markets offering our rates at the time we would have gotten bugger all takers. This is a fact. It would simply have not been worth their while. A very different scenario to Iceland. However, after the Euro changeover things changed massively for us as far as speculation internally and externally was concerned. Apples and oranges.

I presume that ought to read "high interest rates"? Either way, we had no trouble attracting that credit with low interest rates, and the Icelanders had no trouble attracting it with high interest rates. The UK banks managed it somewhere in the middle.

The reason we attracted credit is because our banks were loaning against a hugely appreciating asset - Irish property and a booming economy. Had we had higher interest rates we would have had slightly less of a bubble, but more attractive interest rates. Either way, I can't see that you can build a logically constructed case here, except by claiming that Ireland was totally unique and any comparison is apples and oranges - and the thing is that I've heard that one before.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wibbs

With respect that's avoiding the point. You're honestly trying to claim that if we had an interest rate of 8% we would have attracted the same level of wild speculation? eh no. It just doesn't happen that way. We would have attracted investement for a high interest rate return. That's quite different. For a start the boom predicated on the ballooning housing market and the resultant speculators you mentioned would simply not have happened in the first place without the Euro and attendant centralised EU fiscal policy. So that argument goes right out the faux Georgian double glazing in Carlow that we can't afford anymore.

It is quite clear to anyone but the most blinkered of observers that the changeover to the Euro overcooked this economy. Many observers said so at the time, but were poo pooed as "anti Europe". Again ballsology. Being "pro Europe" in this way as it turns out wasn't exactly the most wise of moves. The proof of the pudding is caught in our throats as we speak. This does not excuse our muppets government bodies and regulators from not spotting this daftness and seeking to cool it down. Nor excuse the average PAYE worker that thought he was George Soros just because he was in hock for two houses. But the catalyst was cheap credit on the back of a warm economy overheated by a currency designed to heat up the economy of the EU as a whole and Germany and France in particular. Of course one way we could have cooled it down would have been to hike up interest rates, but yea, bit of a problem there Ted. We couldnt anymore.

DeVore

Fr0g wrote:

DeVore wrote: »

And your plausible alternative is to .... what? Trash the gaff?

DeV.

Anything is better than lying down and taking it. I hope your children and grandchildren will be proud of your stance when they are still paying off the bill.

So... you dont have an answer to the very real question of "what is your believeable, realistic alternative". You're just mad as hell and you want to break something.

Its understandable.... its just not helpful right now.

DeV.

Fr0g

DeVore wrote: »

So... you dont have an answer to the very real question of "what is your believeable, realistic alternative". You're just mad as hell and you want to break something.

Its understandable.... its just not helpful right now.

DeV.

No. I don't want to "break something" as you suggest. I am not an anarchist. What angers me is that we have sat back and allowed our government to sell us out and generations ahead of us. I attended protests calling for a change of Government. They were peaceful protests but miserably attended. I just can't believe the apathy. I am actually ashamed of my country.

RTE are doing a very good job of villifying and ridiculing anyone who protests I expected better from the owner/operator of an open discussion forum.

I gave you an alternative a different government would have "lanced the boil" and drawn a clear line between the past and the future. Would not have been so doggedly determined to persue a failed banking policy and would not have their heads firmly stuck in the sand denying what is blatantly obvious to everyone else. (driving bond yields up in the process, the outcome you were so determined to avoid). Government is the problem not the people.

Protest is a very important component of democracy. If it is not appropiate in these times when is it appropiate?

I am going to leave it here. We had 2 years in which we had time to stop was happening. The inevitable outcome of this Governments disastrous mismanagent of our economy has happened. The IMF arrive today. Now the fun really starts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_Its_Discontents

Drumpot

From what I can gather, what this country is lacking, in terms of "revolution" is a voice.

A person with no clear alternative motive other then to get their country back on its feet for the greater good.

Somebody who inspires and puts hope in our hearts.

We have been beaten down as a country and in part accepted our fate a long time ago. Like a beaten housewife our confidence and self belief is shattered, but a true leader could emerge and bring us back to a more balanced society.

I for one would consider a political position, just not in any of the current setups of any of the parties who I feel are stale and stuck in the oldways of doing things (me first, constituants second, country a distant third).

Placing ill educated, ill qualified people into very important positions of power simply because they supported you in your campaign to the top (its not just an FF trait).

Treating your people with contempt and saying only what you think they want to hear.

Making decisions based on votes , not necessarily what is in the best interests of this country.

Playing political games (opposition have been shocking) in a time of economic crisis.

There are more, but I think people get the idea. To really change our government and the corrupt ways of politics throughout the system, we have to demand it from our politicians, we have to encourage a new breed of politician.

I dont understand why this government (and the next wont either) doesnt just slash its own wages grossly as a show of strength and conviction to its people. Then the words "we are in this together" would have meaning and people would certainly feel more open to following. Its a gesture of sacrifice to galvanise the people. The lack of vision in the Dail by all parties is just horrifyingly numb.

wobbles-grogan

One good thing about the IMF coming in is maybe, just maybe, our politicians wont be the best paid politicians in the world anymore.

Drumpot

wobbles-grogan wrote: »

One good thing about the IMF coming in is maybe, just maybe, our politicians wont be the best paid politicians in the world anymore.

But theyve got butlers to pay and houses in europe to maintain . . How do you exepect them to be able to afford to fund these things if they take any more cuts ? Think about the butlers . . .

GarlicBread

DeVore wrote: »

So... you dont have an answer to the very real question of "what is your believeable, realistic alternative". You're just mad as hell and you want to break something.

Its understandable.... its just not helpful right now.

DeV.

This thread is unhelpful :mad:.

mike65

That People Before Profit loser is demanding people take to the streets right now (the Last Word).

later12

DeVore wrote: »

For Greece it was the strikes which led to the IMF...

Going out and protesting right now is NOT going to change anything, I'm sorry but do you really think it will? Has it ever before??

Sorry but this is totally inaccurate.

The strikes did not lead to the IMF-EU bailout of greece. It was the debt crisis and the hesitancy of Berlin last April about a bailout that triggered their bailout.
Angela Merkel's badly timed comments recently, and wider European reluctance about bailouts, was also a huge factor in what has now become th Irish bailout.

The Irish people are not being bailed out because of protests. There was no protests, yet the IMF have arrived.

Don't protest? Has it ever changed anything before? Eh... Yes it has. And maybe if the people had protested earlier we wouldn't be in the middle of a bailout right now. This very thread is symptomatic of our poor approach to our own sovereignty and our inability to help ourselves and direct our own affairs.

Sickening.

DeVore

Sorry I cant find where I posted that... if I click the ">" above the quote, it does not have such line as "For Greece it was the strikes which led to the IMF...". Genuinely, I am just looking to see the context of where I said that.

And yes, if people had protested earlier then it could have made a difference, but they didnt and it was rushed through. From that point going out and trashing the place would not have brought the money back from Anglo. It would have hastened the destabilisation of the country imho.

Again, lots of rhetoric and imaginary time machines but no pragmatic or clear indication of what the protest would have achieved from MAY 2010 ONWARDS.

A year ago I was doing a standup comedy routine trying to get the word out that we were being sold down the river by the way, so keep your ad hominem to yourself mate.


DeV.

later12

DeVore wrote: »

Sorry I cant find where I posted that... if I click the ">" above the quote, it does not have such line as "For Greece it was the strikes which led to the IMF...". Genuinely, I am just looking to see the context of where I said that.

Right here:

What they NEED is a single kick off point, kind of like a shotgun start at a golf course, everyone gets a clear GO GO GO signal. For Greece it was the strikes which led to the IMF.

Saying that 'it was the strikes' is not true.
It was mostly the debt crisis and german reluctance (probably wider EU reluctance) about a bailout that triggered the may crisis that led to a bailout. Something similar led to our bailout.

DeVore

Ok, I may not have been clear (though I think we will probably still disagree about it). From my reading of things and the timings, the strikes and riots happened when the Greek government attempted to put "austerity" measures into place. That was a big signal to the bond market "DANGER HERE" and they hiked the interest rates on Greek bonds (because in their world, increased risk must be balanced by increased reward). Consequence of that was the requirement of the IMF. ERGO Austerity => Strikes/Protests => Bond Hike => IMF.

Now, I've at least clarified my point. Can you address mine regarding the timing of my original post (May 2010) and not hark back to what we SHOULD have done prior to that?

Can you tell me that if we had protested in May or any time after that, that you can paint me a BELIEVEABLE set of events that would have resulted in a positive outcome from protest (including that such protests would likely be hijacked as they have been now, twice) ?

DeV.

later12

DeVore wrote: »

Ok, I may not have been clear (though I think we will probably still disagree about it). From my reading of things and the timings, the strikes and riots happened when the Greek government attempted to put "austerity" measures into place. That was a big signal to the bond market "DANGER HERE" and they hiked the interest rates on Greek bonds

I'm sorry, but you are wrong and it would be wrong for the above to go uncorrected.

First off. The underlying reason for the IMF-EU bailouts and the crises are themselves not 100% connected.
It was common knowledge from about December 2009 that Greece was heading for a bailout. I can recall such headlines appearing on newspapers here over New Years'. The Government continued its austerity measures, and the people antagonised as strikes continued. Little changed. For heaven's sake, a protester was even killed in 2009 during the most serious striking - this did not result in the IMF arriving.

The IMF arrived in Greece when investors began to re-consider the likelihood of a bailout; ie they began to question whether or not Greece would survive. There were responding to calls that Greece should be made suffer in the event of a bailout, and Merkel's reticence over the nature of any possible bailout.
The IMF EU bailout was not down to any recent strikes. You can't really be serious if you're suggesting that? It was down to that great fiscal cancer - doubt. doubt over the bailout, doubt over the survival of Greece in the event of an insufficient bailout or - and this was considered - a refused request for funding.

So this bailout was triggered primarily by the debt crisis, and its secondary cause was the European reticence and the doubt that surrounded what shape, if any, a bailout would take.

Much the same can be applied to our own bailout here. If there is further issue with European policy on sovereign rescue plans at international level and among bondholders, then Portugal will be next to be bailed out. That is inevitable.

Strikes do not look good. But they did not cause the necessity for a Greek rescue.
Ireland had, and has ample austerity measures as you will see from its significant front loading of the financial correction in this years budget. It has minimal strike effort. Yet the IMF is here anyway.

You are quite simply wrong to couple striking with IMF-EU bailouts. It is not even a matter of opinion, it is a well established fact, just look at the Greek and Irish decline for yourself.

Can you tell me that if we had protested in May or any time after that, that you can paint me a BELIEVEABLE set of events that would have resulted in a positive outcome from protest

But you are misreading my post, accidentally or otherwise.

I have never advocated striking.
I'm not so unreasonable as to suggest it was going to cause an international bailout, but I do believe striking at a time like this, unless in very very exceptional cases, does not help. More than anything it is an annoying distraction. I am not a fan of the trade union movement as it exists in this country, or in countries like France for that matter.

I am simply taking issue with the line 'don't strike... has it ever solved anything before'. It's not that I would encourage a strike, I would just take issue with such dismissal of the strike as an effective means of promoting change. If you want to know if striking has ever changed anything, go down the post office in the morning and ask an OAP about his medical card entitlements.
Furthermore, I was making the point that if we had protested earlier we could have put our hands up to stop this mess. We were willing participants in this crash. We have had the power to eject this Government at various times over the past 18 months and we have failed to do so. Our fury has the pugnance of apathy to it.

Ultimately, don't take the view that i responded to your statement because I promote striking or a new departure from the current policy on rescuing Ireland or the Single European Currency. I don't.

I'm pointing out the error in what you posted, which to my mind, amounts to little more than scare mongering.

Wibbs

I do take your point later10 as far as the Greek strikes effect. I also take DeVores point that in a market with twitchy gamblers investors, some with a lot to gain and some with a lot to lose, strikes and public demonstrations, especially riots could well have sent them over the edge more quickly and with much greater effect. We've not had such issues, so although we're going cap in hand for extra money, to those handing out that extra money we look like a better bet as a financial punt. Our exports are pretty stable and we're not nearly in as bad a situation as Greece was* and is(the PS and rampant tax evasion was at crazy levels there). If the two countries were diseases, they needed chemotherapy and major surgery, we needed a dose of strong antibiotics.

Put it another way; if you were a banker(No insult meant) and two people come in, both down on their luck unable to pay back at the moment. One is dissolute and bolshey demanding more money and their rights, or a guy who comes in, who appears to be calm and level headed and is trying to get back on his feet willing to pay you down the line. Who would you extend credit to? Since you're not a top level Irish banker I'm gonna assume the second guy.

Hey I would only love to go down a list of people who sold this country down the swanny while others were handing them golden paddles to do so and string them up from the nearest lampost, but how would it benefit us? Show me the plan. Anybody? The best thing we can all do is to make damn sure that none of the current crop in government are ever able to chair anything but their local church committee when we go to the polls.







*actually thats why I think they wont touch our corp tax. It would make bad economic sense if they want their money back anytime soon, no matter how much some of our EU partners are in a snot over it.

DeVore

I said "dont strike now". You, and everyone else, seem to deliberately ignore the time factor in my original post.

Strikes have their place. I'm definitely in favour of peaceful protest and it too has its place. However a general understanding of the situation and what might or might not be achieved by them and when to employ those tactics is what I was trying to convey.

DeV.

later12

Wibbs wrote: »

I do take your point later10 as far as the Greek strikes effect. I also take DeVores point that in a market with twitchy gamblers investors, some with a lot to gain and some with a lot to lose, strikes and public demonstrations, especially riots could well have sent them over the edge more quickly and with much greater effect. We've not had such issues, so although we're going cap in hand for extra money, to those handing out that extra money we look like a better bet as a financial punt.

People, the IMF are not stupid.

Whereas the bond markets are more subject to the vagries of sheepish panic, the IMF and the ECB do actually look deeper (and now have deeper access) into our total income and expenditure, and our exposure to the debt crisis. They are not going to be so stupid as to base their condfidence (or otherwise) in ireland on who has been out striking.
Ultimately, they, and the bond holders understand that a lot more comes down to Government initiative than to public fury.

About four greeks have died in protests there. Has this stopped the Government there? No it hasn't. That's what matters.

if you were a banker(No insult meant) and two people come in, both down on their luck unable to pay back at the moment. One is dissolute and bolshey demanding more money and their rights, or a guy who comes in, who appears to be calm and level headed and is trying to get back on his feet willing to pay you down the line. Who would you extend credit to?

The guy with the better business plan.

I don't care about their personality types. i don't mean to make generalisations here, but generally the southern Europeans protest and Northerners don't. the Greeks are more likely to protest than the Swedish and the French are just going to protest no matter what. Who cares? I have already said why popular activity is too far removed from central European banking policy to matter.

Our recent bailout was more likely triggered (at an immediate level) at European level when Angela Merkel made her ill times comments than by anything immediate on the domestic front.
The OP would be better off asking European leaders (if they would listen) to be more unified and calm in their discourse, and to possibly follow the example of Irish workers in their passivity of late.

Wibbs

DeVore wrote:

I said "dont strike now". You, and everyone else, seem to deliberately ignore the time factor in my original post.

Yep, you were dead right at the time and for all the reasons you gave at the time. And you were talking about the gamblers on financial floors throughout the world. Though I've not stood on trading floors I do number among my mates guys in that world and you describe them to a tee. For all their objective worldly surface, they tend to react en masse and are quick to praise, but equally quick to panic. Furthermore ignoring the timeframe as many have in this thread I would argue you are still broadly correct in your assessment and advice. If we protest as a nation it must be focused protest, not "let's go mad here". Ironically I have the kinda personality that shoots first and then counts the dead, but I can still see that was and is not what we need to be doing as a nation. Like I say, vote these muppets out. I don't care(though I largely agree) that the alternative is much better, but it is an alternative and it's not the current shower. That will send a signal that as a nation we want change, which will make the money speculator guys lose interest

later10 wrote: »

People, the IMF are not stupid.

Whereas the bond markets are more subject to the vagries of sheepish panic, the IMF and the ECB do actually look deeper (and now have deeper access) into our total income and expenditure, and our exposure to the debt crisis. They are not going to be so stupid as to base their condfidence (or otherwise) in ireland on who has been out striking.
Ultimately, they, and the bond holders understand that a lot more comes down to Government initiative than to public fury.

yes and no. Public fury directly affects the ability to govern and more importantly for the money men affects growth.

About four greeks have died in protests there. Has this stopped the Government there? No it hasn't. That's what matters.

Have you looked at the trajectory of Greece's woes and subsequent bailout?

The guy with the better business plan.

That's just the surface. Of course the biz plan is a large part of it, but if the guy handing you the biz plan is an unpredictable flake the best laid plans?... well we're looking at mice here. Mad example, Leonardo Da Vinci. Major mind who could knock up a business plan that would knock your socks off. Good investment? Eh no. Get a ouija board and ask any number of his backers. Ideas are great, but as far as business goes the personality and the consistency of that personality is what counts. One of the biggest deals in selling is that the potential punter buys into the seller as much if not more than the product. This is human nature 101. If you reckon that in my example above you would give the bolshie guy the extended credit you would be unusual.

I don't care about their personality types. i don't mean to make generalisations here, but generally the southern Europeans protest and Northerners don't. the Greeks are more likely to protest than the Swedish and the French are just going to protest no matter what. Who cares? I have already said why popular activity is too far removed from central European banking policy to matter.

Personality types make a huge difference as I outlined above. This goes for countries too. A perception of an unstable populace is a barrier to investors. Reasons? OK striking and protesting workers reduce output. The bottom line is hit. This makes outsiders think, "eh hang on should we invest in these people, when we don't know how they'll react to a sudden change in fortune?". Among the passionate there are those unusual people who do come up with ideas, but it's the beige, the grey people who actually make money day to day on the back of them. If your back is up against the wall and you wonder who you reckon are the lesser risk, the beige are a far better bet.

Our recent bailout was more likely triggered (at an immediate level) at European level when Angela Merkel made her ill times comments than by anything immediate on the domestic front.

I agree, though we did have a target on our heads already.

The OP would be better off asking European leaders (if they would listen) to be more unified and calm in their discourse, and to possibly follow the example of Irish workers in their passivity of late.

Which so far they're doing.