We could be into the last 10 days of the Euro according to the Financial Times...

RandolphEsq

beeftotheheels wrote: »

As and when the euro fails our currency will fall. People will be unable to put fuel in their cars, to heat their houses if their heating is oil. Unless we can get the Corrib gas onshore take a mature view of nuclear power the price of electricity will go through the roof.

Food prices will initially rise as the export demand will be there. This the Government can control because we at least produce enough food to feed ourselves. People can be shipped back out to the bogs to cut turf if you want a proper war time analogy.

This, right now, is not as bad as it gets, it is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets worse. That's not something to celebrate. The euro was and is well worth saving. It's just a shame that the politicians didn't realise how easily they could destroy it in the name of "strengthening" it.

I edited your post because I feel that nuclear power is more sustainable than Corrib gas

beeftotheheels

RandolphEsq wrote: »

I edited your post because I feel that nuclear power is more sustainable than Corrib gas

Oh good lord I'm not quite, but almost, clinging to the hope that the Irish people, threatened with EU expulsions might just be capable of passing an referendum on the treaties if that referendum makes the changes required and involves some sort of quid pro quo from the Germans. I doubt it, but it is the straw I am clutching to.

And then you have to go and bring up things like Nuclear power....

Because it is a fact, universally acknowledged (especially in France) that Nuclear Power KILLS BABIES AND PEOPLE, all of the time. Poverty, cold and hunger never did any one a bit of harm, part of our heritage that is.

Corrib Gas STOLEN FROM US BY EVIL MULTINATIONALS WHO WILL NEVER PAY US A CENT IN TAX AND NOW WISH TO USE IT TO KILL OUR BABIES AND PEOPLE is equally evil.

So I'm really not sure you fixed my post since I cannot decide which of the two evils is worse.

Liam Byrne

Scofflaw wrote: »

Everybody says it, but nobody proves it. Have you any proof?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Strange how you ask for proof about that and none for the generalised claim that "the Irish were spending".

If even some German banks lent recklessly then we are surely allowed the same generalisations, no ?

Personally I'd prefer cold hard facts re both, with no ridiculous generalisations or inaccurate collectivity allowed, but that's just me.

Coillte_Bhoy

shannon_tek wrote: »

So basically were going to be back to 1990's if the euro breaks what will Ireland use. Will we develop a new currency.

I don't like this for the simple face its easier just to have euros in ur pocket when in Europe

No disrespect but if you think the the worst thing about collapse of the euro will be inconveniencing you on your holidays abroad, then god help you

FreudianSlippers

GSF wrote: »

The end of the euro wont mean the end of austerity. The same fundamental problems in the european economies remain. Too many unfunded entitlements in short.

On the contrary, the end of the Euro for us will mean years of crippling economic depression, drastic reductions in social welfare payments and other severe austerity measures simply to "keep the lights on".

Crazy Horse 6

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

On the contrary, the end of the Euro for us will mean years of crippling economic depression, drastic reductions in social welfare payments and other severe austerity measures simply to "keep the lights on".

All good things imo. We need to get back to basics and start over. We have been living beyond our means for more than 20 years now.

FreudianSlippers

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

All good things imo. We need to get back to basics and start over. We have been living beyond our means for more than 20 years now.

Get off your fancy computer so.

Benny_Cake

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

On the contrary, the end of the Euro for us will mean years of crippling economic depression, drastic reductions in social welfare payments and other severe austerity measures simply to "keep the lights on".

All good things imo. We need to get back to basics and start over. We have been living beyond our means for more than 20 years now.

Really,how far back to basics should we go?The 1950s?The Bronze Age?The masochism of some people boggles the mind..

Scofflaw

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Strange how you ask for proof about that and none for the generalised claim that "the Irish were spending".

If even some German banks lent recklessly then we are surely allowed the same generalisations, no ?

Personally I'd prefer cold hard facts re both, with no ridiculous generalisations or inaccurate collectivity allowed, but that's just me.

I'm aware, and you're aware, that not all the Irish spent. I'm also aware that any time anyone says it, you're going to get snippy about it, but like everyone else, I find it hard to reach 100% compliance with your particular bugbears.

slightly forgetful regards,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Strange how you ask for proof about that and none for the generalised claim that "the Irish were spending".

If even some German banks lent recklessly then we are surely allowed the same generalisations, no ?

Personally I'd prefer cold hard facts re both, with no ridiculous generalisations or inaccurate collectivity allowed, but that's just me.

In 2007, private debt in Ireland totalled €148 billion:
http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2008pressreleases/statisticalyearbookofireland2008

gizmo555

Scofflaw wrote: »

Uh-huh. See the bit at the bottom of the graph where it says "Bank of International Settlements"? That means the data includes the entire IFSC, which is roughly the same size as the Irish banking sector at its most bloated, and contains wall-to-wall eurozone money. In the Irish domestic banks, the ones lending into the Irish property bubble, and the ones we bailed out, on the other hand, there was next to sod-all.

Journalists pick the first set of data that makes a pretty picture - they're not about accuracy and correct use of applicable statistics.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Have you a source for any of these assertions, in particular the one that German banks lent Irish ones "next to sod-all"?

According to this article by Laura Noonan in the Indo, as of March this year, the Bundesbank reported that German banks had exposure of €21.3bn to Irish banks. "Next to sod all"? Feel free to refute these figures if you can, but this time you might include some references.

HellFireClub

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

On the contrary, the end of the Euro for us will mean years of crippling economic depression, drastic reductions in social welfare payments and other severe austerity measures simply to "keep the lights on".

In fairness, it seems to me that the problem with this country is that the large majority of people in Ireland today, (people in non-high earning private sector employments & people who are currently unemployed, are already in territory where they are experiencing poverty (this is certainly true for people on the dole), but folks in private sector jobs where they are not earning more than 40K, are being bled dry financially.

Then we have a load of people in the public sector, (like Gardai, teachers, etc, still on yearly automatic pay increments, something that is unheard of in the private sector in the sense that it is automatic, you have to fight for it and provide a basis for an annual pay increase and you still won't get a pay increase in the current climate).

The whole thing is upside down, inside out and back to front. You have these huge inefficiencies being held in place by vested interests like Siptu, IBEC, ASTI, UNITE, etc, and you have the vast majority of the workforce being bled dry to pay for it all. Then you have nearly 500,000 unemployed people on long term state support, that there is no plan at all to deal with.

In this context, I don't believe that it is wrong to say, "right, hit the nuclear/reset button and bring it all back to where it really ought to be.

Whether we do or we don't, until we have a credible government that has an actual plan for job creation, as opposed to the absolutely rediculous ramblings, false hopes and deluded talk of a school teacher Taoiseach, we are not going to get anywhere in this country.

whatstherush

gizmo555 wrote: »

Have you a source for any of these assertions, in particular the one that German banks lent Irish ones "next to sod-all"?

According to this article by Laura Noonan in the Indo, as of March this year, the Bundesbank reported that German banks had exposure of €21.3bn to Irish banks. "Next to sod all"? Feel free to refute these figures if you can, but this time you might include some references.

€21.3 bn might not be "Next to sod all", but its hardly lending recklessly either as you put it.

Scofflaw

gizmo555 wrote: »

Have you a source for any of these assertions, in particular the one that German banks lent Irish ones "next to sod-all"?

According to this article by Laura Noonan in the Indo, as of March this year, the Bundesbank reported that German banks had exposure of €21.3bn to Irish banks. "Next to sod all"? Feel free to refute these figures if you can, but this time you might include some references.

Sure: http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/cmab/Pages/Money%20and%20Banking.aspx

You want this one in particular: http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/cmab/Documents/ie_table_a.4.2_covered_institutions_-_aggregate_balance_sheet.xls

That's the aggregate balance sheets of the banks we bailed out, from 2003 to present.

You can compare that one to this one: http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/cmab/Documents/ie_table_a.4_credit_institutions_-_aggregate_balance_sheet.xls

That's the aggregate balance sheets for all the banks in Ireland, including the banks in the IFSC.

Take September 2008 - for all banks in Ireland, the figure for bonds held by eurozone entities is about €38bn, and for deposits €206bn. But for the bailed out banks, the figures are €14bn and €25bn.

If we take March 2011, which is the date of the article you're referencing, the figures are: for all banks in Ireland, eurozone entities held €21bn bonds and €145bn deposits. But for the domestic banks, it's €9.75bn bonds and €16.4bn deposits.

What does all that mean? It means that the big figures usually cited by journalists include the IFSC. And the IFSC has nothing to do with the Irish domestic economy - exposure to something in the IFSC doesn't mean a thing when it comes to working out "exposure to Ireland".

Do journalists regularly cite the wrong figures? Absolutely. There's a piece by Fintan O'Toole in today's IT, for example, where he says:

And now a second mercenary question. How much are we paying back to the EU to support the euro and rescue euro zone banks? At the time of the so-called “bailout” by the troika this time last year, euro zone banks held €214 billion in Irish debt.

That's utter, utter, bollox. At the time of the bailout eurozone banks held €22.8bn in bonds and €178bn in deposits in banks in Ireland, sure - but what happens if we strip away the IFSC and just leave the covered banks? We get, instead, a figure of €10.1bn in bonds and €8.2bn in deposits - and that's for the whole eurozone, not just Germany, and more importantly, not just the banks. Those deposit figures will include any eurozone resident brave enough to hold money in an Irish bank account, right down, as far as I can tell, to an Irish emigrant in France with €50 still in his AIB student account.

Journalists want to know the answer to "how much does country x owe country y?" or "how much do Irish banks owe German banks?". The only set of figures that provides a nice easy set of tables showing the "answers" to those questions are the BIS figures on 'locational banking statistics'. Unfortunately, as is often the case with a nice easy set of statistics, they don't actually answer the question. Instead, they answer another question - how much do legal banking entities in Ireland owe legal banking entities outside Ireland - with the extremely important proviso that "legal banking entities in Ireland" covers the 6 bailed out banks (Anglo, AIB, BOI etc), the 6 domestic banks that weren't bailed out (Rabo, KBC etc), and 71 other banks that have nothing whatsoever to do with the Irish taxpayer or the Irish domestic economy.

Journalists ignore the last part, and it means their figures don't relate to the question they're "answering" with them.

Anyway, sorry - pet peeve! It annoys me that so much of the discussion about the crisis is bedevilled by lazy journalists who completely fail to check the relevance of the figures they drag into the debate.

cordially,
Scofflaw

irishh_bob

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

On the contrary, the end of the Euro for us will mean years of crippling economic depression, drastic reductions in social welfare payments and other severe austerity measures simply to "keep the lights on".

i think you could be usefull in fronting the vote YES campaign in whatever referendum we are asked to vote on in the near future

meglome

irishh_bob wrote: »

i think you could be usefull in fronting the vote YES campaign in whatever referendum we are asked to vote on in the near future

Do you think he's incorrect? Because from my reading of it he's on the money (so to speak).

Crazy Horse 6

irishh_bob wrote: »

i think you could be usefull in fronting the vote YES campaign in whatever referendum we are asked to vote on in the near future

It's incredible is'nt it yet people keep buying the BS. Fear is the elites best weapon aginst the sheeple.

[MOD]Please save the conspiracy theory terms for the appropriate forum.[/MOD]

djpbarry

HellFireClub wrote: »

...the large majority of people in Ireland today ... are already in territory where they are experiencing poverty...

No, no they are not.

HellFireClub wrote: »

Then you have nearly 500,000 unemployed people on long term state support...

You're overstating the number unemployed by about 200,000.

HellFireClub wrote: »

In this context, I don't believe that it is wrong to say, "right, hit the nuclear/reset button and bring it all back to where it really ought to be.

And where would that be?

HellFireClub wrote: »

Whether we do or we don't, until we have a credible government that has an actual plan for job creation....

A big chunk of the unemployed were formerly employed in the construction sector. The only way to get them back into employment, unless they retrain (lots of demand for software developers, for example), is to kick off another construction bubble. Personally, I don't think that's a great idea. What's needed is a massive retraining strategy, not a "job creation plan".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

irishh_bob

meglome wrote: »

Do you think he's incorrect? Because from my reading of it he's on the money (so to speak).

i wont even try to argue with you on matters european , you make angela merkel look like nigel farrage

TheMilkyPirate

To a layman, What percentage chance has the euro of completely collapsing before the new year, Or early in the new year?

Dr Galen

baraca wrote: »

To a layman, What percentage chance has the euro of completely collapsing before the new year, Or early in the new year?

that depends totally on who you are asking. It's either 0%, somewhere around 25%, somewhere around 50/50, maybe around 73% or actually 100%

MungBean

Dr Galen wrote: »

that depends totally on who you are asking. It's either 0%, somewhere around 25%, somewhere around 50/50, maybe around 73% or actually 100%

Would it actually be calculable from predicted inflation and bond market interests rates ? If the market is pricing in a euro collapse now then the difference between the pricing now and the pricing a few weeks ago is the chance of collapse perhaps ? Maybe not the actual chance but the perceived chance that the market sees of it collapsing.

Dr Galen

theoretically maybe, but things are so volatile, and the truth is that no-one knows what things would be like post Eurosplosion, that I doubt that you could look at the market sentiment or pricing as any sort of reliable indicator.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

MungBean wrote: »

Would it actually be calculable from predicted inflation and bond market interests rates ? If the market is pricing in a euro collapse now then the difference between the pricing now and the pricing a few weeks ago is the chance of collapse perhaps ? Maybe not the actual chance but the perceived chance that the market sees of it collapsing.

There probably are such indicators, but the real question would be whether they're any good guide to anything. The indicators for euro collapse were very high in June and early July, and the euro is still here. And last last week the markets seem to have been expecting the euro to fall against the dollar, but it's currently rising.

At the end of the day, the decision on whether to collapse the euro is a political one, and I still can't see it as to anyone's advantage to either leave it unilaterally or to agree to dissolve it. On the contrary, the most likely steps all seem to me to be strengthening of it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

beeftotheheels

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Fundamentally disagree. Greece is not the game, Italy is.

BTPs (Italian Government Bonds) are generally under Italian law and Italy is G7 so can re-denominate them relatively easily (compared to us for example).

The IMF cannot save Italy. The EFSF/ ESM cannot save Italy. So absent the ECB promising to back stop Italy, we have a huge problem. Now Monti + reforms may recover some of the markets faith but it will take 6-12 months. And realistically Italy can afford to struggle on for 6-12 months given the current pricing of their debt.

But we can't afford for Italy to struggle on. Because in the interim the banks need to mark down their Italian debt. Which means that France and Austria and Belgium etc need to back stop their banks. Which is why they're in play. Once France and Belgium and Austria are in hot water the problem moves on the Germany and the Netherlands. This is contagion in action, and it is not pretty.

The strength of the euro in forex markets is irrelevant to the question as to whether or how the euro survives. Any one taking faith from the forex markets needs their head examined. Equity markets follow bond markets. Forex follows equities. The rapid deterioration of the eurozone position has just not been fully priced in yet when so many short term indicators point in the opposite direction.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/1e2d0f1a-0ae4-11e1-b62f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1eL3yp4qv

My call is 75% that the euro, as we know it, ceases to exist by mid March, probably earlier. The reason being that what is necessary to save the euro at this stage are two things that Germany will not countenance. Eurobonds and an ECB LOLR. Germany may accept them in return for treaty changes (although even this is unclear) but we are out of time, we just don't have time for treaty changes which would take through to the end of 2012.

Scofflaw

My call is 75% that the euro, as we know it, ceases to exist by mid March, probably earlier.

"As we know it" covers a lot of bases, though! I'd argue the same thing, but I wouldn't expect a collapse, just the "end of the euro as we know it".

cordially,
Scofflaw

carveone

Just looking for an excuse to post this really, but Ouch!

This is the OECD leading indicators graph and it’s pretty clear that Europe is already in a Recession. When the lagging GDP results catch up we can look forward to strings of disappointing numbers.

I'm know, I'm not helping!

beeftotheheels

Scofflaw wrote: »

"As we know it" covers a lot of bases, though! I'd argue the same thing, but I wouldn't expect a collapse, just the "end of the euro as we know it".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Let me rephrase. The Euro, if it survives, will either be a PIIGS currency absent Germany, or a core currency absent Italy and others. If the euro survives it will be minus at least one G7 nation (and numerous small ones).