Sarkozy and Merkel push tax plan, closer economic coordination

Scofflaw

(Reuters) - The leaders of France and Germany, under pressure to counter a debt market crisis in Europe, have agreed to float proposals in September for a tax on financial transactions and push for closer joint governance of economic policy, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on Tuesday.

After talks in Paris, Sarkozy said he and German Chancellor Angela Merkel were also proposing that all 17 euro zone countries commit to balanced finances and write that goal into their constitutional law by summer 2012.

Among other measures announced, he said they would also seek to ensure better cross-border economic government for the euro zone via twice-yearly meetings of leaders and the creation of a two-and-a-half-year presidency to steer this forum.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/16/us-eurozone-idUSL6E7JD02L20110816

Being rather poorly reported in the IT as "Merkel and Sarkozy propose 'government' for euro zone"

Writing a debt brake into the Constitution would require a referendum, obviously...

cordially,
Scofflaw

musings

President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel have called for the formation of a common government to help tackle the euro zone debt crisis.

They are proposing that the body should be headed by current EU president Herman Van Rompuy.
Speaking after a meeting in Paris, the leaders of the euro zone's two biggest economies said the 17 euro zone states should also adopt balanced budget laws by mid-2012 to stabilise their public finances.
Sarkozy also said France and Germany would be proposing a new tax on financial transactions.
Asked about the issue of eurobonds, or common bonds for the euro zone, Merkel said they would not help resolve the crisis. Sarkozy said France and Germany were at one on the issue, but he said eurobonds could be imagined, but only at the end of a process of euro zone integration.
The French president also said both countries were seeking to harmonise company tax rates for French and German companies.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0816/euro-business.html

So Jim Corr was right all along...one world goverment and all of that.

Will the poeople of Europe go along with this???

Spudmonkey

No mention of how much say this economic government will have in individual countries finances.

Is this still going to be left up to the countries themselves?

Scofflaw

Spudmonkey wrote: »

No mention of how much say this economic government will have in individual countries finances.

Is this still going to be left up to the countries themselves?

Sarkozy & Merkel wouldn't be in a position to determine that by themselves, so I guess we'll have to wait for the horse-trading, assuming the idea is a runner at all.

cordially,
Scofflaw

D1stant

Scofflaw wrote: »

Source:
Being rather poorly reported in the IT as "Merkel and Sarkozy propose 'government' for euro zone"

Why badly reported. Thats the obvious end game right?

digme

Our population are not informed enough to vote on this.
Not very surprising to hear this "proposal", why don't they just stop raping the population with usury.

Scofflaw

D1stant wrote: »

Why badly reported. Thats the obvious end game right?

Of course, because national governments are not even slightly nationalist, and would happily put forward any proposal that forwards their own dissolution. At no point during the crisis have the eurozone's constituent governments shown any signs of looking after their national self-interest or grandstanding for their home constituencies because of their complete subservience to the ideal of European unity.

amused,
Scofflaw

D1stant

Scofflaw wrote: »

Of course, because national governments are not even slightly nationalist, and would happily put forward any proposal that forwards their own dissolution. At no point during the crisis have the eurozone's constituent governments shown any signs of looking after their national self-interest or grandstanding for their home constituencies because of their complete subservience to the ideal of European unity.

amused,
Scofflaw

Short term public behaviour does not equal long term private ambition. S&M will of course pander to their electorates. They have to. They will also push an agenda that step-by-step makes their countries even more powerful in Europe and the rest of us grunts will accept and pay for it. Sure they wouldnt have a badly hidden agenda would they? They are our friends!

Not amused

hatrickpatrick

BWAHAHAHAHA
I KNEW it. One day their dreams of dominating Europe would be laid bare.
Scoffy, will you attempt to justify this or will you for once accept that they are going too far?

You can bet that in such an arrangement, the biggest economies would obviously have the biggest say. Who benefits from this? France and Germany. Who would ultimately end up calling the shots? France and Germany. Who would get screwed over for the good of France and Germany? Everyone else. Just as it has been with ECB policy since the inception of the Euro.

I sincerely hope the rest of Europe will put their feet down and prevent this napoleonic quest for Franco-German hegemony from going any further. My nationalist ancestors, including Eoin MacNeill (great great grandfather) did not go through what they went through to liberate Ireland for merely a century, they did it to liberate Ireland for eternity.

I wonder how many referendums they would call here to get the right answer? Would they stop at 2 this time? 5? 10?
Would voting on this become a weekend pastime for the people of Ireland until they grew weary of it and finally voted yes?

LUNACY.

hatrickpatrick

D1stant - I'm sorry but your abbreviation of Sarkozy and Merkel to "S&M" has irresistibly conjured the most appalling mental image of Merkel in a dominatrix costume, which will undoubtedly haunt me for the rest of my days, thank you so much :mad:

Scofflaw

D1stant wrote: »

Short term public behaviour does not equal long term private ambition. S&M will of course pander to their electorates. They have to. They will also push an agenda that step-by-step makes their countries even more powerful in Europe and the rest of us grunts will accept and pay for it. Sure they wouldnt have a badly hidden agenda would they? They are our friends!

Not amused

So which is this supposed to be - short term public behaviour or long term private ambition? And why would the long term private ambitions of Sarkozy or Merkel be other than to be as they are? Why would their long term ambitions be to serve Europe at the expense of their own countries?

And I have to point out that if your explanation involves secret conspiracies, it will receive short shrift.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote:

Scoffy, will you attempt to justify this or will you for once accept that they are going too far?

I haven't seen the details yet. I somehow doubt that the other countries will sign up to something that produces an enduring Franco-German dominance over their economies, and without them signing up to it, it won't go anywhere.

If that's a plan for "dominating Europe", it's a very poorly conceived one.

Scofflaw - I'm sorry but your abbreviation of Sarkozy and Merkel to "S&M" has irresistibly conjured the most appalling mental image of Merkel in a dominatrix costume, which will undoubtedly haunt me for the rest of my days, thank you so much

Yes, sorry about that. I won't add to it by pointing out that "Merkel" in itself sounds awfully like a word that shouldn't even exist, but does.

cordially,
yet with a slight shudder,
Scofflaw

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

D1stant

Scofflaw wrote: »

So which is this supposed to be - short term public behaviour or long term private ambition? And why would the long term private ambitions of Sarkozy or Merkel be other than to be as they are? Why would their long term ambitions be to serve Europe at the expense of their own countries?

And I have to point out that if your explanation involves secret conspiracies, it will receive short shrift.

cordially,
Scofflaw

You misunderstand me.

I think their long term ambitions are to serve their countries at the expense of Europe.

There is no grand conspiracy here. It is simply the strong looking to dominate the weak.

And I couldn't care less about short shrift, but thanks for the offer

force eleven

Won't happen. At least they way they want it to. In any case, 'closer economic governance', i.e the Euro/ECB were huge contributors to Irelands downfall. Billions lent to Irish banks, unfavourable exchange rates, too low interest rates when the boom happened. Factors which were major contributors to Irelands economic woes.

We should be very very wary of Merkel and Sarkozy proposing this. It may well suit the larger economies and be directed at the markets - i.e rhetoric to soothe frayed nerves,but Ireland needs to watch it keeps its low corporation tax, and keep on our path to getting out of this mess.

D1stant

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

D1stant - I'm sorry but your abbreviation of Sarkozy and Merkel to "S&M" has irresistibly conjured the most appalling mental image of Merkel in a dominatrix costume, which will undoubtedly haunt me for the rest of my days, thank you so much :mad:

I know. Sorry. Brevity has its problems. I picture Enda as a more believable gimp than Sarky though

Tora Bora

So that's why Michael Healy Rea has been taking French lessons.

pog it

I said this was coming in a thread here during the Lisbon Treaty debate and Scofflaw put another thread of mine focussing on this (where I said this was their long-term plan) in the conspiracy theories forum.

I have nothing more to add.

femur61

TBH I am not up to speed as was away but maybe not all details of their proposal are broadcast to the public yet. It would put an end to the stupid civil politics that have dominated this country for so long and eradicate parish pump plitics.

hmmm

The news reports on this seem very badly reported. The core technical change is a balanced budget amendment to member's constitution. I think that's a great idea, take the power away from politicians to do stupid things with borrowed money. Other than that there is a twice yearly meeting to chinwag and not much more.

The inevitable is a Eurobond, but the Germans are not going to allow this in the short term as countries like Greece or ourselves can happily run 10% deficits. I'd say there is a small hope that certainly Greece and perhaps Ireland reject the constitutional change, at which point Germany, France, the Dutch etc. will pull up the drawbridge and wish us well on our spiral into dreadful default. I doubt we'll get a second chance to rethink our vote this time around.

Let's have the amendment as soon as possible, I'm all for it.

pog it

Long EU Government and EU President.. I don't know how long it will take to achieve but they will either make things get far, far worse here first OR they will do it little by little.

This is what Lucinda Creighton et al. are salivating at also.

Nobody wants an end to parish pumps politics more than the politicians themselves..

hmmm

pog it wrote: »

Long EU Government and EU President.. I don't know how long it will take to achieve but they will either make things get far, far worse here first OR they will do it little by little.

This is what Lucinda Creighton et al. are salivating at also.

Nobody wants an end to parish pumps politics more than the politicians themselves..

Lucinda Creighton et all are hoping that things turn out much worse for Ireland? That's your argument?

Scofflaw

And a reminder that this is Politics, not CT. What has been suggested - and is not in any sense a certainty - is a regular steering group meeting and debt limits for the eurozone, not the NWO or a European government.

moderately,
Scofflaw

pog it

hmmm wrote: »

Lucinda Creighton et all are hoping that things turn out much worse for Ireland? That's your argument?

Where did I say that? If you can't pick up the meaning properly don't bother twisting what I say

pog it

Scofflaw wrote: »

And a reminder that this is Politics, not CT. What has been suggested - and is not in any sense a certainty - is a regular steering group meeting and debt limits for the eurozone, not the NWO or a European government.

moderately,
Scofflaw

You're not fooling anyone Scofflaw, though of course there are many in this country of the same persuasions as yourself.

meglome

pog it wrote: »

I said this was coming in a thread here during the Lisbon Treaty debate and Scofflaw put another thread of mine focussing on this (where I said this was their long-term plan) in the conspiracy theories forum.

I have nothing more to add.

I'm curious what's in the Lisbon treaty that made countries borrow more money than made any sense?

I'm fascinated by all the crying about the EU somehow making us do utterly stupid things. We fúcked up as a nation, I really don't see what's so difficult to understand.

WalterMitty

Sure we'll vote YES for this in return for 100billion of bank debts written off our national debt or federalised debt or whatever they want to call it. It will be like time albert reynolds came on late late show and said to us " we did great, we got 8 billion pounds off them lads in europe" except it will be enda saying "i've got a 100billion off dem lads in brussells, just vote yes for 100billion!"

pog it

Link to that thread I mentioned:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055696586

meglome

WalterMitty wrote: »

Sure we'll vote YES for this in return for 100billion of bank debts written off our national debt or federalised debt or whatever they want to call it. It will be like time albert reynolds came on late late show and said to us " we did great, we got 8 billion pounds off them lads in europe" except it will be enda saying "i've got a 100billion off dem lads in brussells, just vote yes for 100billion!"

I'd vote yes personally because I believe a constitutional ban on borrowing more money than the country can afford would be great. Actually I'd be ecstatically voting yes so our poor excuse for politicians couldn't make the same mess again.

pog it wrote: »

Link to that thread I mentioned:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055696586

Em... There is no EU president and nothing in Lisbon can make that happen. I'm not seeing your point.

pog it

meglome wrote: »

I'm curious what's in the Lisbon treaty that made countries borrow more money than made any sense?

I'm fascinated by all the crying about the EU somehow making us do utterly stupid things. We fúcked up as a nation, I really don't see what's so difficult to understand.

Germany shovelled money into our banks and of course the CEOs of same gladly accepted. What part of that don't you understand?

These are not accidental events. Sure there will be bumps in the road along the way for the interested parties (our future leaders), including keeping their own electorates happy, etc. but they will get what they want in the end.

My sole preoccupation in the intervening time will be to watch the Irish people's response and from what I've seen so far, it will make for predictable and depressing viewing unless they grow some balllls.

pog it

meglome wrote: »

Em... There is no EU president and nothing in Lisbon can make that happen. I'm not seeing your point.

Don't worry Meglome, you're not the only one who doesn't get it.

waxon-waxoff

After the mess we have made of our own finances, maybe we need the Germans looking over the shoulders of the Irish government.

So far theres been little real progress in cutting expenditure and instead they keep dreaming up up new taxes to squeeze the life out of workering people. Theres difficult decisions to be taken before we can balance our books but the government would face so much opposition from the various lobby groups that its almost impossible for them to do anything. At least they can now say the EU left them no choice and actually push through some radical cuts.

digme

waxon-waxoff wrote: »

After the mess we have made of our own finances, maybe we need the Germans looking over the shoulders of the Irish government.

So far theres been little real progress in cutting expenditure and instead they keep dreaming up up new taxes to squeeze the life out of workering people. Theres difficult decisions to be taken before we can balance our books but the government would face so much opposition from the various lobby groups that its almost impossible for them to do anything. At least they can now say the EU left them no choice and actually push through some radical cuts.

and without a single shot fired huh? lol pure gold

View

pog it wrote: »

Germany shovelled money into our banks and of course the CEOs of same gladly accepted. What part of that don't you understand?

What a load of twaddle - the money for the banks came from the international bond markets, the largest of which are in London and NYC. You can be certain that German companies do hold some of our bonds but then again so probably do US, UK, Japanese, Middle Eastern and almost definitely Irish ones as well. The average Irish pension fund manager almost certainly wasn't turning up his/her nose at bonds in Irish banks in favour of more exotic types - why would he/her when the self-same banks were probably loaning him/her the money to buy property here at the time?

pog it

waxon-waxoff wrote: »

After the mess we have made of our own finances, maybe we need the Germans looking over the shoulders of the Irish government.

So far theres been little real progress in cutting expenditure and instead they keep dreaming up up new taxes to squeeze the life out of workering people. Theres difficult decisions to be taken before we can balance our books but the government would face so much opposition from the various lobby groups that its almost impossible for them to do anything. At least they can now say the EU left them no choice and actually push through some radical cuts.

That's a sound and rational argument but the trouble is that Germany et al have actually created/masterminded this problem by giving the banks here all that money, so had that money not been available to them things would not have gotten so out of hand. They wanted our economy to overheat and go bust.

Well at least they can't do it overnight. They will achieve their long-term goal of EU federalisation step by step. Crashes, treaties, etc. will be all in the make-up. The markets are crashing at the mo. They'll get back up and then crash again.... Rinse and repeat. Honestly, there isn't much to all of this.

View

hmmm wrote: »

The news reports on this seem very badly reported. The core technical change is a balanced budget amendment to member's constitution.

And, the amazing thing about this idea is that the Italians proposed changing their constitution to include this within the last month and they did so without anyone suggesting they do it - we on the other hand, have had a chasm in our current account expenditure, for four years now (since Q2/Q3 2007) and it still isn't even on the domestic political radar as potentially a good idea to have in place for when we ever manage to get out of our current financial mess.

pog it

View wrote: »

What a load of twaddle - the money for the banks came from the international bond markets, the largest of which are in London and NYC. You can be certain that German companies do hold some of our bonds but then again so probably do US, UK, Japanese, Middle Eastern and almost definitely Irish ones as well. The average Irish pension fund manager almost certainly wasn't turning up his/her nose at bonds in Irish banks in favour of more exotic types - why would he/her when the self-same banks were probably loaning him/her the money to buy property here at the time?

I've told you before on here View that I don't buy your spin. I'm more educated and knowledgeable on this than you are and won't be wasting my time with you.

Scofflaw

pog it wrote: »

Germany shovelled money into our banks and of course the CEOs of same gladly accepted. What part of that don't you understand?

The bit where anyone has ever shown it to be the case. I challenged Karl Whelan on the same point and he has no evidence either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

pog it wrote: »

I've told you before on here View that I don't buy your spin. I'm more educated and knowledgeable on this than you are and won't be wasting my time with you.

You're tempting fate there, rather. If you can't rise above this kind of thing, don't post. And don't argue with moderation on thread.

moderately,
Scofflaw

pog it

Scofflaw wrote: »

The bit where anyone has ever shown it to be the case. I challenged Karl Whelan on the same point and he has no evidence either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Who are you to challenge Karl Whelan? Sorry but I respect Karl Whelan and I know his credentials and track record.

You have been killing off threads you don't like about EU end-game. Why?

If this results in my account being suspended I'm taking this issue to Boards.ie owners. There's your warning.

meglome

digme wrote: »

and without a single shot fired huh? lol pure gold

While I don't want Germany running our country I also have no doubt they would do a better job than our current lot.

pog it wrote: »

That's a sound and rational argument but the trouble is that Germany et al have actually created/masterminded this problem by giving the banks here all that money, so had that money not been available to them things would not have gotten so out of hand. They wanted our economy to overheat and go bust.

Well at least they can't do it overnight. They will achieve their long-term goal of EU federalisation step by step. Crashes, treaties, etc. will be all in the make-up. The markets are crashing at the mo. They'll get back up and then crash again.... Rinse and repeat. Honestly, there isn't much to all of this.

I have no idea how you can get nations/banks to be utterly stupid with borrowed money. The Germans and the EU actually warned us to stop what we were doing but we flipped them a big arrogant finger. The numbers posted on boards show most of our money was borrowed on International markets, mainly US and UK based so your argument just doesn't stand up.

pog it wrote: »

I've told you before on here View that I don't buy your spin. I'm more educated and knowledgeable on this than you are and won't be wasting my time with you.

Maybe you can prove your point as I see no evidence for what you claim.

pog it wrote: »

Who are you to challenge Karl Whelan? Sorry but I respect Karl Whelan and I know his credentials and track record.

So does Karl Whelan have evidence for what he claims or not?

Scofflaw

pog it wrote: »

Who are you to challenge Karl Whelan? Sorry but I respect Karl Whelan and I know his credentials and track record.

You have been killing off threads about EU end-game. Why?

Enough. You're not contributing anything useful to this thread, and you seem to have decided to use it as an opportunity to have a go at the modding of the forum and anyone who disagrees with you.

Banned for a week.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Debtocracy

The fact that they’re looking to get balanced finances across the Eurozone shows how little they know about the current situation. Once the PIIGS stop running large public sector deficits, where will the private sector get the money to service their existing debts? In a debt-based monetary system, the only way to service existing debt is with new debt. The private sector is so heavily indebted that it has little capacity to take on new debt.

As expected, Eurozone growth is grinding to a halt. This is what happens when too much money becomes directed towards the payment of debt rather than the generation of economic activity.

Coyler

Scofflaw wrote: »

The bit where anyone has ever shown it to be the case. I challenged Karl Whelan on the same point and he has no evidence either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Would you have a link to that? For my records, of course

beeftotheheels

pog it wrote: »

Who are you to challenge Karl Whelan? Sorry but I respect Karl Whelan and I know his credentials and track record.

The case in point involved KW posting on something on which he was not an expert and Scofflaw called him on it.

Let's look at Seamus Heaney for example, clearly an expert on poetry, probably even literature. But I wouldn't buy a house based on SH telling me it was a great buy, and his Nobel prize would do nothing to change my mind. Of course it might be that SH is an avid amateur structural engineer and that his advice is valuable, but I cannot tell that from his public persona which only tells me that he's a great poet/ teacher of English literature.

Karl Whelan is an economist, not an accountant. So there is no reason to assume that he's any sort of expert on the accounting standards applicable to central banks. Much the same as if Seamus Heaney were to tell me to buy a "great little house" with serious damp, an unsound roof, and subsidence issues on three walls (thus undermining any idea that he is in fact a great amateur engineer but this is hypothetical and not intended to reflect at all on SH's skills as an engineer), if KW suggests that central bank accounts mean something a world apart from what an accountant or indeed anyone who had read the applicable accounting standards would take them to mean then he is wrong.

He is just wrong. And since he is outside his sphere of expertise, his PhD means nothing. The problem is that it is not necessarily clear to Joe Soap that a PhD in economics means nothing when it comes to interpreting accounting standards, many of the best accountants do not have PhD's in economics, lets look, for example at the heads of the Big 4 firms in Ireland who collectively could be taken to represent "expertise" in this area.

Deloitte - http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_IE/ie/about/our-leadership/be96f07fb62fb110VgnVCM100000ba42f00aRCRD.htm Not an economist, not sure from this that he is even a graduate (but he is a very, very smart guy)

E&Y - Can't find the link, their website has always been a nightmare

KPMG - http://www.kpmg.com/IE/en/Directory/Pages/TerenceORourke.aspx again no evidence from this that he's a graduate of anything, but if he were then commerce would be the obvious choice. Very clever guy which or whether, is KW's opinion on accounting standards to be taken above his?

PWC - 'B. Comm seems to be the order of the day here as well'

D1stant

Well ho hum. I dont post on this forum much, but this thread has been .... enlightening

I just watched the VB show and the general opinion on the news today was VERY negative. Agreeing with my 'feeling' that we are on a road to US of E. And Ireland is going to get even more screwed in the process. Now what I see here is a lot of angst (to the point of smug bullying) against conspiracy theories or 'anti-european' sentiment. Theres nothing to see here folks, just some more welcome little tweaks.

As I said before theres no conspiracy. It's pretty much in black and white if you read S&Ms comments today.

Think of how things have moved from 1957 to 1973, 87, Maastrict, Nice, Lisbons (cant remember the years)........ Reverse engineer this.

This is a geometric progression which I beleieve will hurt this country, my familly, and yours.

I am not generally dramatic, but the thought of those two ****es sitting in Paris today, perusing over their domain and deciding the makeup of the economics of 600 million people really really pisses me off

hatrickpatrick

Scofflaw wrote: »

I haven't seen the details yet. I somehow doubt that the other countries will sign up to something that produces an enduring Franco-German dominance over their economies, and without them signing up to it, it won't go anywhere.

If that's a plan for "dominating Europe", it's a very poorly conceived one.

PErhaps I was a bit strong, it sounds more like a plan to cause Europe's entire economic policy to benefit Germany and France, regardless of the consequences for everyone else. Much like ECB policy was for the last decade or so.

Yes, sorry about that. I won't add to it by pointing out that "Merkel" in itself sounds awfully like a word that shouldn't even exist, but does.

cordially,
yet with a slight shudder,
Scofflaw

O_o
You've got me stumped there... Spit it out would ya (Hopefully not a pun of any kind)

jc84

Those two make me sick, every time I see merkels face I want to slap it, they want to force all these countries to the brink of bankruptcy and then strike to take control, if those idiots didn't guarantee all the banks we wouldn't be as deep into this sh*t, we only needed one functioning bank

I can't see other countries agreeing to this initiative but if forced into a corner who knows what's gonna happen

hinault

Scofflaw wrote: »

The bit where anyone has ever shown it to be the case. I challenged Karl Whelan on the same point and he has no evidence either.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Agreed.

Unless we know the identity of the counterparties to these deposits, we will never know which foreign banks have been exposed to the Irish Financial/Banking crisis.

hinault

D1stant wrote: »

Well ho hum. I dont post on this forum much, but this thread has been .... enlightening

I just watched the VB show and the general opinion on the news today was VERY negative. Agreeing with my 'feeling' that we are on a road to US of E. And Ireland is going to get even more screwed in the process. Now what I see here is a lot of angst (to the point of smug bullying) against conspiracy theories or 'anti-european' sentiment. Theres nothing to see here folks, just some more welcome little tweaks.

As I said before theres no conspiracy. It's pretty much in black and white if you read S&Ms comments today.

Think of how things have moved from 1957 to 1973, 87, Maastrict, Nice, Lisbons (cant remember the years)........ Reverse engineer this.

This is a geometric progression which I beleieve will hurt this country, my familly, and yours.

I am not generally dramatic, but the thought of those two ****es sitting in Paris today, perusing over their domain and deciding the makeup of the economics of 600 million people really really pisses me off

Peter Jennings (on VB's show) made the point that probably Germany/France would prefer to exclude the indebted nations.

If the boot was on the other foot and Ireland was having to bail out Germany, you can be sure that there'd be calls for more fiscal/economic control in exchange for further support.

D1stant

hinault wrote: »

Peter Jennings (on VB's show) made the point that probably Germany/France would prefer to exclude the indebted nations.

If the boot was on the other foot and Ireland was having to bail out Germany, you can be sure that there'd be calls for more fiscal/economic control in exchange for further support.

He did. But I doubt they want that. They want as much of the debt to their banks paid back as possible.

There were other points on a EU-wide financial tax (to reassure German tax payers) an (unelected?) EU president, harmonised corporation taxes and the like.

Boots on other feet :-) The beautiful game was never designed to work that way.