Even Germans are afraid of a United States of Europe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CZr17HLH5U

They see that the bill is going to be huge and they'll be on the hook for it.
Also they will have no exit clause.

The EU is Fúcked! :eek:

andrew

What do you mean 'even the Germans?' This applies to the entire EU.

I really don't think there's deep enough analysis in that video to make any judgments TBH.

4leto

The EU its a mess, who in their right mind would want a united states of Europe. Do we really want to live in a country like the USA. It would never work in Europe we are to fractured. Our cultures are to different it's a utopian project bound to fail, just look at the state of the last EU utopian idea the fkucen Euro.

Saila

Question: is she the american version of the "please mind the gap" guy?

andrew

andrew wrote: »

What do you mean 'even the Germans?' This applies to the entire EU.

I really don't think there's deep enough analysis in that video to make any judgments TBH.

While the Germans were in the driving seat, they were quite happy with the route being taken, now that the banksters are ensuring that they dictate the route, the Germans are running scared.

parrai

Will we be automatically signed into this or do we get a vote? It really is going to far, beyond a joke.

andrew

Deleted User wrote: »

While the Germans were in the driving seat, they were quite happy with the route being taken, now that the banksters are ensuring that they dictate the route, the Germans are running scared.

So one internet video made my some randomer, who may be from Germany (due to the use of that eagle and the Reichstag pics) means that 'even the Germans are running scared'? And c'mon, really; 'banksters?' And what says it's the banks dictating this; currency unions need certain institutions to preform certain functions, as dictated by the needs of a currency union, not of any specific banks.

I think this video is silly.

parrai

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/financial_operations/2011-07-11-esm-treaty_en.htm

ejmaztec

The Germans should attack the Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and head off into Russia. They should then kick around for about five or six years. The rest of Europe will then pay the Americans for their help (like they did the last time).

After it's all over, there will be another Marshall plan, and *we'll be quids in, money problem solved.


*Note to Irish government: Don't go for neutrality this time, or we won't get a sh1t-load of money.

4leto

It looks like China is the donor nation of this currency marshal plan. Hail our new masters.

EI_Flyboy

andrew wrote: »

I think this video is silly.

Are you saying the message the video puts across is inaccurate...? Because if it is accurate then it is very far from silly. Or you're saying that if this is how the ESM is going to work, it's a very silly thing indeed?

I find the idea of the banks having an exhaustible tit to feed on that comes straight from our pockets to be extremely serious and very far from funny. If this is an accurate description of the ESM, I'd like to know.

ejmaztec

4leto wrote: »

It looks like China is the donor nation of this currency marshal plan. Hail our new masters.

They like lending billions to the American war-machine, so that they can sit back and watch, and not get blamed for anything:eek:.

It's time for intensive Mandarin classes.

parrai

parrai wrote: »

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/financial_operations/2011-07-11-esm-treaty_en.htm

Thanks, just scanned through and the clauses highlighted in the video are in fact real!
Personally, I think it's a step too far down the path to an integrated Europe as it has the banking sector in a lead position.

andrew

EI_Flyboy wrote: »

Are you saying the message the video puts across is inaccurate...? Because if it is accurate then it is very far from silly. Or you're saying that if this is how the ESM is going to work, it's a very silly thing indeed?

The way in which the ESM works, and it's aims, are complicated. I'm not saying I understand them or anything, I just understand the general aim, which is to stabilize the euro by ensuring that there's enough money to deal with the Soverign debt crisis.

Trying to sum the treaty up in 3 minutes, by cherry-picking sinister sounding quotes, without any context at all, I think is both disingenuous and inaccurate.

ed2hands

andrew wrote: »

So one internet video made my some randomer, who may be from Germany (due to the use of that eagle and the Reichstag pics) means that 'even the Germans are running scared'? And c'mon, really; 'banksters?' And what says it's the banks dictating this; currency unions need certain institutions to preform certain functions, as dictated by the needs of a currency union, not of any specific banks.

I think this video is silly.

Is that the best you can do?
And you're the economics mod.
Am presuming you're an economist or at least in the financial industry. Please accept my apologies if i'm wrong about that.

"I think this video is silly"
Maybe you'll put some effort in and enlighten us as to what you really think instead of just pouring sarcastic scorn on it from the get-go.
After all it's quite an important subject. Or are you going to get all offended because some of us question the bull**** that is going down and blame it on the tools that caused it; namely the financial "experts"?

andrew

ed2hands wrote: »

Is that the best you can do?
And you're the economics mod.
Am presuming you're an economist or at least in the financial industry. Please accept my apologies if i'm wrong about that.

"I think this video is silly"
Maybe you'll put some effort in and enlighten us as to what you really think instead of just pouring sarcastic scorn on it from the get-go.
After all it's quite an important subject. Or are you going to get all offended because some of us question the bull**** that is going down and blame it on the tools that caused it; namely the financial "experts"?

Actually, I'm (just) a fourth year economics student

And I think I've clarified why I think it's silly in my post previous to this one; I accept that it would've made more sense to do this in my original post.

Lawrence1895

andrew wrote: »

What do you mean 'even the Germans?' This applies to the entire EU.

I really don't think there's deep enough analysis in that video to make any judgments TBH.

Exactly, Germany is not the EU, and the voices, critical to Brussels are not that silent either. But nobody seems to listen to the parties from the left wing anyway...sounds familiar, does it?

parrai

They have too much power, I hope it all blows up in their faces

ed2hands

andrew wrote: »

Actually, I'm (just) a fourth year economics student

And I think I've clarified why I think it's silly in my post previous to this one; I accept that it would've made more sense to do this in my original post.

No probs dude!

andrew

andrew wrote: »

The way in which the ESM works, and it's aims, are complicated. I'm not saying I understand them or anything, I just understand the general aim, which is to stabilize the euro by ensuring that there's enough money to deal with the Soverign debt crisis.

Trying to sum the treaty up in 3 minutes, by cherry-picking sinister sounding quotes, without any context at all, I think is both disingenuous and inaccurate.

The real issue is trying to stabilise an unstable system that cannot be made stable by just pumping money in, that's the problem!

The banking system in general requires infinite economic growth to function correctly at all, when the global limits to growth are reached (they have been now) when one country or region grows - somewhere else has to decline.

This decline is happening in Europe & USA, the current banking system is incapable of operating under these circumstances, just throwing more and more money will NOT resolve it. (period)

The solution is to change the way money is created, a "debt-free" currency* will function in a stable economy and does not require continuous growth and debt remains manageable.

*One that the government issues without charging interest, unlike the current system where the banks charge interest on all money.

SEPT 23 1989

West Germany was way cooler with the deutsche mark and franz beckenbauer

andrew

Deleted User wrote: »

The real issue is trying to stabilise an unstable system that cannot be made stable by just pumping money in, that's the problem!

The banking system in general requires infinite economic growth to function correctly at all, when the global limits to growth are reached (they have been now) when one country or region grows - somewhere else has to decline.

This decline is happening in Europe & USA, the current banking system is incapable of operating under these circumstances, just throwing more and more money will NOT resolve it. (period)

The solution is to change the way money is created, a "debt-free" currency* will function in a stable economy and does not require continuous growth and debt remains manageable.

*One that the government issues without charging interest, unlike the current system where the banks charge interest on all money.

Economic growth is not a zero sum game. You're operating under incorrect knowledge with regard to how the banking system works (gathered from the money as debt videos, I think), which heavily simplifies and distorts aspects of the money creation process, and how it actually operates in the economy. If you PM me, I can send you some economics textbooks which explain how the macroeconomic system works.

Lawrence1895

parrai wrote: »

They have too much power, I hope it all blows up in their faces

Who? The Germans? They just have a relatively strong economy and as far as I know (still have got my family over there), they made their way out of the recession without any bailout package

ed2hands

C'mon Andrew. Hit me! I need to be educated..

Sincere apologies about biting your head off on the basis of my presumptions.

4leto

Deleted User wrote: »

The real issue is trying to stabilise an unstable system that cannot be made stable by just pumping money in, that's the problem!

The banking system in general requires infinite economic growth to function correctly at all, when the global limits to growth are reached (they have been now) when one country or region grows - somewhere else has to decline.

This decline is happening in Europe & USA, the current banking system is incapable of operating under these circumstances, just throwing more and more money will NOT resolve it. (period)

The solution is to change the way money is created, a "debt-free" currency* will function in a stable economy and does not require continuous growth and debt remains manageable.

*One that the government issues without charging interest, unlike the current system where the banks charge interest on all money.

But the temptation will always be there for government to borrow money to appease their electorate, Ireland even borrowed during the boom.

No the only way out of this mess long term is a disintegration, recognise the Euro zone as a set of unique sovereign economic zones that cannot be harmonised.

So stabilise the currency for no and slowly return to the way it was before the Euro.

bnt

I won't believe there's a serious possibility of a United States of Europe until there's serious talk of a Federal, Europe-wide tax, paid directly in to a central Treasury. The political hurdles that would stand in the way of such a move are at least as large as those that had to be overcome to set up the EU in the first place i.e. a referendum on the matter would have to be won. Not gonna happen any time soon - unless one or more countries goes in to total meltdown and begs the ECB for a total financial reboot.

parrai

Lars1916 wrote: »

Who? The Germans? They just have a relatively strong economy and as far as I know (still have got my family over there), they made their way out of the recession without any bailout package

The people who are making these decisions, that as a result are going to fcuk us all up, ECB, european council or whoever in making these ambitious decisions based on nothing other than greed (in my opinion), under the disguise of saving the euro. With all their expert economists, they seem to be blind to what all experts around the world seem to think. They are throwing good money after bad instead of owning up to the fact that the euro is ****ed.

If the euro went tits up tomorrow, we would all suffer, I'm aware of this, (no wages, sw, money for Ireland etc), but maybe that might bust up this overly ambitious 'Super Union' or 'United States of Europe' they are trying to create...Wipe out this debt that has been lumped on us for the unforeseeable future. We would be forced to start again, and no harm imo.

andrew

ed2hands wrote: »

C'mon Andrew. Hit me! I need to be educated..

Sincere apologies about biting your head off on the basis of my presumptions.

Oh No problem!

I'm heading out for the night now, but I'll write a proper post tomorrow I think; posting about economics on boards instead of actually studying economics is my form of procrastination, but at least it's kinda relevant!

MungBean

Why dont people add a paragraph explaining what the fcuk they are on about rather than just positing a video ? Isnt this kinda shíte why pics were banned from AH's ?

SafeSurfer

bnt wrote: »

I won't believe there's a serious possibility of a United States of Europe until there's serious talk of a Federal, Europe-wide tax, paid directly in to a central Treasury. The political hurdles that would stand in the way of such a move are at least as large as those that had to be overcome to set up the EU in the first place i.e. a referendum on the matter would have to be won. Not gonna happen any time soon - unless one or more countries goes in to total meltdown and begs the ECB for a total financial reboot.

A Europe wide tax, paid directly to a central Treasury you say?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-28/eu-proposes-78-billion-a-year-financial-transaction-tax-to-start-in-2014.html


The European Union proposed a financial-transactions tax that would take effect in 2014 and raise about 57 billion euros ($78 billion) a year, prompting renewed opposition from the U.K.

The proposal would apply a tax of 0.1 percent on trading of stocks and bonds, with a 0.01 percent rate for derivatives contracts, the European Commission, the EU executive, said today in Brussels. Those minimum rates would apply throughout the 27- nation bloc. The measure would deliver “a fair contribution from the financial sector,” EU Tax Commissioner Algirdas Semeta said.

parrai

MungBean wrote: »

Why dont people add a paragraph explaining what the fcuk they are on about rather than just positing a video ? Isnt this kinda shíte why pics were banned from AH's ?

Basically the video is saying that a treaty is in the works that will, at the drop of a hat, be able to provide 700 billion euro to banks without being able to be challenged by any european country at a weeks notice...should a crisis arise, adding more debt to the people of Europe.

andrew

andrew wrote: »

Economic growth is not a zero sum game. You're operating under incorrect knowledge with regard to how the banking system works (gathered from the money as debt videos, I think), which heavily simplifies and distorts aspects of the money creation process, and how it actually operates in the economy. If you PM me, I can send you some economics textbooks which explain how the macroeconomic system works.

I'm not an economist, but even I can see that a system based on infinite growth cannot work indefinitely in a finite world.

4leto wrote: »

But the temptation will always be there for government to borrow money to appease their electorate, Ireland even borrowed during the boom.

No the only way out of this mess long term is a disintegration, recognise the Euro zone as a set of unique sovereign economic zones that cannot be harmonised.

So stabilise the currency for no and slowly return to the way it was before the Euro.

Money should be considered as a proxy for energy*, the more energy that is available to operate the economy the more money can be created to make things run smoothly.

Creating more money while the available energy is is static or declining leads to an increase of debt under the current system as the cost of this energy rises at at rate that is out of sync with the cost of labour. Well the results of this imbalance are clearly on view for all to see.

*Energy in the form of fossil fuels & renewable sources such as wind solar etc.

ed2hands

Andrew what did you think of Alan Greenspans boast that the US can never "go broke" for the simple reason that all the Fed has to do is simply print more money (aka quantatative easing)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6vi528gseA

Andrew are you also agog at this confession like the guy sitting beside Greenspan?

Solnskaya

andrew wrote: »

Actually, I'm (just) a fourth year economics student

And I think I've clarified why I think it's silly in my post previous to this one; I accept that it would've made more sense to do this in my original post.

Sorry, but enough said. I love hearing students and graduates spouting their new found "knowledge", but the real world is a harder place, with far more experienced, hard bitten and machieavellian minds at work. The beneficiaries of these measures will be the mandarins all right, but they will be financial mandarins, the bond-holders and capital funds. Europe is now like a family with a huge mortgage who suddenly cannot afford the repayments but have a rich but cruel aunt willing to fund future repayments in return for their first borns kidneys.
Poland is the latest victim of this cruel aunt. They are falling for the same sh1te Ireland and Greece swallowed- accepting "development" funds to fuel a building boom and infrastructure modernisation. When the Poles have done with their spending spree and are indebted up to their necks, the vultures of big capital will swoop in and buy up their state assets- just like in Ireland. It's clever, but it's sh1tty.

andrew

Solnskaya wrote: »

Sorry, but enough said. I love hearing students and graduates spouting their new found "knowledge", but the real world is a harder place, with far more experienced, hard bitten and machieavellian minds at work. The beneficiaries of these measures will be the mandarins all right, but they will be financial mandarins, the bond-holders and capital funds. Europe is now like a family with a huge mortgage who suddenly cannot afford the repayments but have a rich but cruel aunt willing to fund future repayments in return for their first borns kidneys.
Poland is the latest victim of this cruel aunt. They are falling for the same sh1te Ireland and Greece swallowed- accepting "development" funds to fuel a building boom and infrastructure modernisation. When the Poles have done with their spending spree and are indebted up to their necks, the vultures of big capital will swoop in and buy up their state assets- just like in Ireland. It's clever, but it's sh1tty.

I've never claimed to be an expert, or infallible. I'm studying and have an interest in economics, and so I think my posts are more informative than people who don't, when talking about economics subjects. In the same way that I'd find someone studying biology to be able to inform me about the workings of a cell. If you're going to discount my opinions just because I'm a student, I think that's silly. Being a student doesn't automatically make me wrong. If you think I'm wrong, then say why, rather than resorting to the whole 'but I've live in the real world' meme; I live there too you know.

Solnskaya

andrew wrote: »

I've never claimed to be an expert, or infallible. I'm studying and have an interest in economics, and so I think my posts are more informative than people who don't, when talking about economics subjects. In the same way that I'd find someone studying biology to be able to inform me about the workings of a cell. If you're going to discount my opinions just because I'm a student, I think that's silly. Being a student doesn't automatically make me wrong. If you think I'm wrong, then say why, rather than resorting to the whole 'but I've live in the real world' meme; I live there too you know.

No you don't. You're a student. And I don't mean that as an insult, it's just the way it is. You will need to come back to me in 20 years and we can discuss over a pint just what I am on about. I'm not trying to be smart or belittling, but the block is long, and it takes a while to go around it.

IcedOut

Michael D Higgins for president of United States of Europe :L

Solnskaya

ed2hands wrote: »

Andrew what did you think of Alan Greenspans boast that the US can never "go broke" for the simple reason that all the Fed has to do is simply print more money (aka quantatative easing)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6vi528gseA

Andrew are you also agog at this confession like the guy sitting beside Greenspan?

Correct answer from Greenspan. If you produce that which everyone seeks, you will never go hungry. We all seek money, and last time I checked, that was made in a mint. Who owns the mint-the state(and Polo, for the AH crew). All that changes is the amount of "stuff" you get in exchange for a particular design of piece of paper. What is screwing the EMU, is that we no longer print our own money, we have to buy it from europe. We are no longer a producer, we are now just another "consumer",and best of all, most will struggle to define just who this "europe" who controlls the supply of money(elaboratly printed paper) is. Andrew, as an avowed economics student, could you please explain to me(and everyone else) where exactly the vast capital sums involved in the bailouts comes from? The beauty of modern capital is that you no longer have to faff about printing it, you can just type it onto a computer screen. How many zeros you use just depends on how big your balls are and how hard your neck is.

Solnskaya

Solnskaya wrote: »

Correct answer from Greenspan. If you produce that which everyone seeks, you will never go hungry. We all seek money, and last time I checked, that was made in a mint. Who owns the mint-the state(and Polo, for the AH crew). All that changes is the amount of "stuff" you get in exchange for a particular design of piece of paper. What is screwing the EMU, is that we no longer print our own money, we have to buy it from europe. We are no longer a producer, we are now just another "consumer",

For the system to function correctly, money really needs to circulate within the economy plus some growth to enable the interest to be repaid, but currently it appears to all be going "East" and not coming back! This imbalance means that we are slowly becoming poorer as time goes by.

The problem is much bigger than just the Euro debt.

Solnskaya

Ireland is a consumer state, as is most of Europe, barring perhaps Germany and the Czech republic(not an EU member). we specialised in re-packaging, finishing and warehousing. There are exceptions, noble ones, but we as a continent need to stop consuming more than we produce. We need to lose the "The only way is Essex" mentality and adopt the "American Chopper" mentality. Produce, work and export. All the rest is just fluff.

Killer Pigeon

andrew wrote: »

Actually, I'm (just) a fourth year economics student

So does that mean you've been indoctrinated by Keynes' ideology?

Baked.noodle

The deregulation of the financial world has totally undermined the global economy. There is no political will to deal with this issue as the political system has become hopelessly intertwined with corporate financiers. Wall street and Washington are one and the same. For social and economic stability China must support the worlds sick consumer markets, absurd as it is. The racket has infected most of the world, and the really is no sign of changing as America could lumber on for years, backed up by warmongering and the petro dollar. Things will change eventually, so I hope the people making decisions in America and elsewhere (and I'm not referring to the tiresome public relations executives) anticipate change proactively and fix this mess sooner rather than later.

K-9

I don't blame them, they've far more to fear from forgiving Greek, Irish and Portuguese profligacy than we've of them.

Yeah Germany would get hit if the weaker countries left, but they'd get over it and just get on with it.

andrew

ed2hands wrote: »

Andrew what did you think of Alan Greenspans boast that the US can never "go broke" for the simple reason that all the Fed has to do is simply print more money (aka quantatative easing)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6vi528gseA

Andrew are you also agog at this confession like the guy sitting beside Greenspan?

In a nominal sense, Greenspan is right. The USA can print as much money as it likes, in order to pay most of it's debts (apart from the inflation indexed ones). Doing so would might just inflate the debt away, which is a bad thing, but he's still right.

Solnskaya wrote: »

No you don't. You're a student. And I don't mean that as an insult, it's just the way it is. You will need to come back to me in 20 years and we can discuss over a pint just what I am on about. I'm not trying to be smart or belittling, but the block is long, and it takes a while to go around it.

I can see where you're coming from, and I accept that you've more personal experience of what it means to experience macroeconomic fluctuations. But I reject the idea that I'm some sort of naive student who thinks that the world behaves like some sort of economic model (I believe you have this impression anyway); nobody thinks that it does. If I post, it's to clarify an issue of economics which people, through lack of education in this area, don't understand. If someone disagrees, simply because they think they know the answer because they're older, or have more experience than me, or something; I think they'll need a better reply than that.

Solnskaya wrote: »

Andrew, as an avowed economics student, could you please explain to me(and everyone else) where exactly the vast capital sums involved in the bailouts comes from? The beauty of modern capital is that you no longer have to faff about printing it, you can just type it onto a computer screen. How many zeros you use just depends on how big your balls are and how hard your neck is.

Avowed economics student; what does that mean? The money which is produced in terms of bailouts is given in exchange for assets from banks. Thats it. Where does it come from? It's backed by Euro member states, and the money which they're able to generate through taxation.

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

So does that mean you've been indoctrinated by Keynes' ideology?

No, in fact, many of my lecturers have been rather right wing. It's quite a mix.

Gummy Panda

Solnskaya wrote: »

Ireland is a consumer state, as is most of Europe, barring perhaps Germany and the Czech republic(not an EU member).

Czech Republic is an EU member

4leto

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not an economist, but even I can see that a system based on infinite growth cannot work indefinitely in a finite world.



Money should be considered as a proxy for energy*, the more energy that is available to operate the economy the more money can be created to make things run smoothly.

Creating more money while the available energy is is static or declining leads to an increase of debt under the current system as the cost of this energy rises at at rate that is out of sync with the cost of labour. Well the results of this imbalance are clearly on view for all to see.

*Energy in the form of fossil fuels & renewable sources such as wind solar etc.

How about the economies that have no energy or means of producing it?.

A unit of currency can be loosely defined as a unit of work or productivity. That is what money is. The more I have the more work I can get done or the more proceeds from work I can buy.

So a currency has to reflect the overall currencies area of productivity, which is what is wrong with the current conditions of the Euro. You can't have a single currency in an area which is not unified economically.

Take the US and the dollar, they have many areas of different economic performance, but they have 1 fed, and one economic zone. So if one area is doing badly money flows from other zones. You can't have that in Europe, although technically with the cheap loans we have that now, but the Germans do not want to pay for our public services and why should they.

So what we have is the Euro is being propped up by the efficient engine house economies of the north, subsidising the under performing economies of the med and Ireland (although Ireland is a little better off) without a single European economic policy.

So something has to give, I don't think the recent deal is enough.

4leto

andrew wrote: »

In a nominal sense, Greenspan is right. The USA can print as much money as it likes, in order to pay most of it's debts (apart from the inflation indexed ones). Doing so would might just inflate the debt away, which is a bad thing, but he's still right.

No they can't, not with their current paymasters. If they print to much money their bonds increase in price, last year they were rated double AA by one agency and the current holders of the most US bonds which is China can threaten to dump them if they keep decreasing in value. Now it is not likely China will do that, they are dependent on a stable dollar to. But if America keep printing money deflating the value of Chinese held American bonds they will leave them with no choice.

America like Europe have to cut their budgets and regain a fiscal balance.

noodler

Solnskaya wrote: »

Sorry, but enough said. I love hearing students and graduates spouting their new found "knowledge", but the real world is a harder place, with far more experienced, hard bitten and machieavellian minds at work. The beneficiaries of these measures will be the mandarins all right, but they will be financial mandarins, the bond-holders and capital funds. Europe is now like a family with a huge mortgage who suddenly cannot afford the repayments but have a rich but cruel aunt willing to fund future repayments in return for their first borns kidneys.
Poland is the latest victim of this cruel aunt. They are falling for the same sh1te Ireland and Greece swallowed- accepting "development" funds to fuel a building boom and infrastructure modernisation. When the Poles have done with their spending spree and are indebted up to their necks, the vultures of big capital will swoop in and buy up their state assets- just like in Ireland. It's clever, but it's sh1tty.

Pathetic.

Solnskaya

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Czech Republic is an EU member

Correct-I meant to say they have not adopted the Euro as a currency, my bad. I was over there a while ago, and for a small, relativly rural country, they have some serious industry, you cannot drive for more than a few minutes without passing a modern factory manufacturing goods. To the lad who just said "pathetic", whatever, water, back, ducks, etc. Care to tell me which bit you found pathetic? When the ESB, phones and water have been snapped up by outside investors, come back with more smart comments.:)

EI_Flyboy

noodler wrote: »

Pathetic.

He's right, it is pathetic. It's essentially a tax on stupidity. The rich, who believe they're more entitled than the rest of us because they think they're smarter than everyone else, taxing the poor because they're stupid. It's actually quite transparent, more and more people are beginning to see through it and how pathetic it really is.

parrai

This was posted in another thread on AH, think it has relevance here too though

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/12611732/the-european-bailout-explained