Is it a fix by germany

Chicke

Markosy came out in sept and told us how they were going to bring about closer integration in Europe through treaty change.and they wait until the crisis has reached almost the point of no return before they release the details. Are they deliberately letting things go to this stage to ensure the treaties will be ratified by terrified member states.......terrify them and they will do anything type of approach.
I will be interested to see does their proposals limit or reduce democracy and is there any if it that is blatantly self serving.

NIMAN

I have heard this line a few times recently about the crisis

"will Germany allow the ECB to print more Euros"

Is it the European Central Bank or the German Central Bank?

If its the first one, then surely by definition, we (member states) have the same power/influence as Germany? No?

woodoo

Would it really be that bad though? I ask that as a question because i just don't know. We don't seem to be able to elect governments that can run this country properly. Maybe some wise eyes would be ok.

I don't think Germany are up to no good really. They are just looking to protect themselves from danger as we all should.

Icepick

Germany's economic output is about 27% of Eurozone's GDP and with France they have almost 50%.

Sand

I have heard this line a few times recently about the crisis

"will Germany allow the ECB to print more Euros"

Is it the European Central Bank or the German Central Bank?

If its the first one, then surely by definition, we (member states) have the same power/influence as Germany? No?

Yes. Germany and 16 others signed up to a certain deal whereby the ECB wouldnt "print more Euros". Everyone was very clear on that - there would be no mass printing of Euros. The ECB wouldnt be independant and wouldnt be a tool of the politicians.

Germany is adhering to that and expecting everyone else to do so too. Its the right of every EU member state to expect the treaties they enter into to be honoured.

That said - Germany is being dangerously crazy. They seem to have convinced themselves there is no problem whatsoever, and if anything goes wrong it wont affect them at all. This *might* be a stunt to try and wrangle concessions out of the other Eurozone members before they grudgingly agree to yield to common sense.

Or they simply might be that blind. Reading German opinion and user comments the view seems to be intensely hostile to the idea of any sort of bailout of what are seen as lazy, feckless, greedy peripheral states that have already been given generations of funding from German taxes. The common phase is "Sell your land first. Then come to us looking for help".

If it is a stunt, theyre running an incredible risk that events wont surprise them and knock their razor edge calculations into catastrophe. And that they'll be able to suddenly reverse course having encouraged the German self-pitying narrative where they are always put upon, always expected to pay up, and surrounded by nations who always have a begging bowl at the ready.

@woodoo

Would it really be that bad though? I ask that as a question because i just don't know. We don't seem to be able to elect governments that can run this country properly. Maybe some wise eyes would be ok.

The Germans are no more honest than we are, and their economic planning is not inherently wiser ( Germany was the sick man of Europe only a few years ago). They simply have a much more open and transparent way of making policy so that really stupid ideas are discussed and torn apart. We on the other hand get a dozen clowns in the DoF (stomping ground of Kevin Cardiff) to make a secret budget which isnt discussed or opened to criticism at all until it is suddenly announced in a panto production in the Dail to be rubber stamped by a whipped majority. Problems are ignored, difficulties downplayed, benefits overhyped. And by the time anyone figures out what the budget contains, its too late - its already been passed.

If we change the way we make policy so that it is open and transparent, then we will come up with better policy than any external oversight comittee. Even the most gifted German fiscal minds couldnt care less what happens about Ireland so long as it doesnt cost them anything.

hmmm

Chicke wrote: »

I will be interested to see does their proposals limit or reduce democracy and is there any if it that is blatantly self serving.

I love this. All these Eurozone countries (Ireland included) living beyond their means, and hurling abuse at Germany for not bailing them out. Retired Greeks at age 51 throwing petrol bombs, Irish civil servants being paid more than their German counterparts taking part in anti austerity marches.

The Germans are demanding that countries like Ireland sign up to budget discipline, before the German people are forced to hand over their hard earned wealth. I don't see why this is a problem, we can walk away if we'd prefer to be poor.

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

I love this. All these Eurozone countries (Ireland included) living beyond their means, and hurling abuse at Germany for not bailing them out. Retired Greeks at age 51 throwing petrol bombs, Irish civil servants being paid more than their German counterparts taking part in anti austerity marches.

The Germans are demanding that countries like Ireland sign up to budget discipline, before the German people are forced to hand over their hard earned wealth. I don't see why this is a problem, we can walk away if we'd prefer to be poor.

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis. Germany, the IMF, the troika or anyone else you care to suggest didn't bail US out - they bailed out their own banks which lent and lost money to bankrupt Irish banks.
The Germans ought to have no oversight of our budget, as we are supposed to be a sovereign nation. If they wish to rule us, let them run for election to Dail Eireann.
We could (and should) walk away from the banking debts and then we might discover who exactly it is who is really economically screwed. Just like Iceland did and ended up in an economic recovery in a very short period of time without needless austerity and with an unemployment rate a fraction of our own.

Sand

@Cavehill Red

If they wish to rule us, let them run for election to Dail Eireann

Why Dail Eireann? Thats a sideshow. If they wish to rule Ireland all they need to take over is the civil service. They can leave the politicians to carry on with the elections.

Cavehill Red

Sand wrote: »

@Cavehill Red

Why Dail Eireann? Thats a sideshow. If they wish to rule Ireland all they need to take over is the civil service. They can leave the politicians to carry on with the elections.

We could have that discussion too if you like, though it's not entirely germane to this thread topic. There are many ways in which Irish sovereignty is impaired, from the British occupation of the North and their patrolling of our waters and monitoring of our communications to the economic hegemony currently being enforced by the Germans or the policing for MNC corporate interests such as at Rossport, and the various internal forms of anti-democratic behaviour (be it golden circle corruption, the civil service or even something like the partnership process or the Croke Park agreement.)
However, according to our constitution, the people are sovereign in Ireland and are represented in governance by those they elect to Dail Eireann, and that's why I suggested that if Germany wishes to rule us they should do so openly by running for election rather than surreptitiously by seeking to subvert our economy to their banking sector's benefit.

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis.

So what? Our tax income before the banking crisis was built on a property bubble. As were Spains. Italy is not far away from surplus, their problems are based on decades of building up their debt level.

Is anyone in Germany forcing us to spend 18 billion a year more than we are taking in in taxes?

NIMAN

Every country is in debt, including Germany. They are no special case.

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

rather than surreptitiously by seeking to subvert our economy to their banking sector's benefit.

What would be surreptitious about treaty change? Could there be anything more obvious?

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

So what? Our tax income before the banking crisis was built on a property bubble. As were Spains. Italy is not far away from surplus, their problems are based on decades of building up their debt level.

Is anyone in Germany forcing us to spend 18 billion a year more than we are taking in in taxes?

The problem is that they're forcing us to assume responsibility for banking debts of many orders larger than that figure in order to support their (and France's and Britain's) banking sectors. 18 billion is peanuts and we could raise it in the bond markets annually no problem. Iceland is back successfully in the bond markets already.

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

What would be surreptitious about treaty change? Could there be anything more obvious?

The surreptition will come after we vote it down in a referendum. Then there will be a cascade of lies, scaremongering and overt threats to demand our compliance in their rule.

Vote Lisbon for Jobs, remember?

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

The problem is that they're forcing us to assume responsibility for banking debts of many orders larger than that figure in order to support their (and France's and Britain's) banking sectors. 18 billion is peanuts and we could raise it in the bond markets annually no problem. Iceland is back successfully in the bond markets already.

They aren't forcing us to do anything, at any stage the Irish government can refuse the money on offer and default. The ULA/SF etc have already identified a magic pot of gold that can be used to pay social welfare, PS salaries etc, so I don't see why this should be a problem.

18 billion is "peanuts"?

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Vote Lisbon for Jobs, remember?

Oh you're one of them I see. Lazy analysis, where is the conscription and the 1.84 minimum wage we were told would happen by the "no" side?

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

They aren't forcing us to do anything, at any stage the Irish government can refuse the money on offer and default.

And should, but won't because they don't act in the interests of the people of Ireland but in the interests of their peers in Europe.

hmmm wrote: »

The ULA/SF etc have already identified a magic pot of gold that can be used to pay social welfare, PS salaries etc, so I don't see why this should be a problem.

Wasn't a problem in Iceland either once they reneged on paying stratospheric debts they had never accrued.

hmmm wrote: »

18 billion is "peanuts"?

In global economic terms, or in terms of the bonds market, yes.

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

And should, but won't because they don't act in the interests of the people of Ireland but in the interests of their peers in Europe.

It's a conspiracy by all the major parties in Ireland to defraud the country? :rolleyes:

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

It's a conspiracy by all the major parties in Ireland to defraud the country? :rolleyes:

It's no conspiracy. It's done wide openly and overtly. The country has always been operated for the benefit of a small golden circle, predominantly connected to Fianna Fail. Latterly, those who engage in the process benefitted not only from preposterous pensions and passing on the seat to their offspring, but also from obtaining sinecures with the EU on leaving office.
It therefore comes as no surprise that the likes of Brian Lenihan or Bertie Ahern, or indeed the great and good within Fine Gael and Labour would prioritise the interests of their corporate and Eurocrat pals over their electorate with whom they have little in common but a location.
Simply look how Labour turned on their own Nessa Childers for having the audacity to suggest that Cardiff ought not be rewarded for his Dept of Finance incompetence to see how the system operates in favour of that golden circle and against the interests of the Irish people.

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

It therefore comes as no surprise that the likes of Brian Lenihan or Bertie Ahern, or indeed the great and good within Fine Gael and Labour would prioritise the interests of their corporate and Eurocrat pals over their electorate with whom they have little in common but a location.

That's about 80% of the elected politicians in the country accounted for. Which politicians or parties are not part of this grand conspiracy?

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

That's about 80% of the elected politicians in the country accounted for. Which politicians or parties are not part of this grand conspiracy?

I can see you're insistent in attempting to disengage with the argument by failing to address it. There is no conspiracy, as I already said. The EU operates on soft power rather than democratically elected mandates. It is in the interests of those in power in Ireland to function in line with the interests of their Eurocrat colleagues, as they too can expect to be rewarded by that system in turn, either by the outrageous pensions they receive here or by well-paid sinecures in Europe.
Childers was reprimanded for attempting to express the legitimate disgust of the Irish people that Cardiff should be rewarded with such a sinecure for his incompetency. But to the EU, it was not incompetency, since Cardiff oversaw the policy that their banks get paid at the expense of the Irish people. Hence the insistence by Labour that he should be appointed despite being voted down for the position. They don't wish to see that system uncoupled because it serves their interests and the interests of others in the golden circle, like Cardiff, at our expense and the expense of democracy.

hmmm

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Hence the insistence by Labour that he should be appointed despite being voted down for the position. They don't wish to see that system uncoupled because it serves their interests and the interests of others in the golden circle, like Cardiff, at our expense and the expense of democracy.

Which political parties in Ireland are not part of this golden circle? That's all I'm asking, why will you not answer a simple question with a simple (short) answer?

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

Which political parties in Ireland are not part of this golden circle? That's all I'm asking, why will you not answer a simple question with a simple (short) answer?

Not all allegedly simple questions can be answered with a short, snappy soundbite. All the political parties which have taken place in government during our time of EU/EEC membership can be shown to have prioritised their narrow party and personal interests over the interests of the state. This is a tradition of corruption and venality that predates the creation of the EU/EEC, and was operated domestically by Fianna Fail-led governments for many decades prior.
However, Fine Gael are only less culpable for having been in power less. Their grandees no less than Fianna Fail grandees benefited from their close connections within the domestic golden circle and later via their appointments to EU sinecures and MNC boardships arising directly from the influence they wielded and acquiesced to within Europe. Labour, being a non-governing party, is tangibly less culpable again, yet nevertheless has shown repeatedly (and most recently in relation to the Cardiff debacle) that the upper echelons of their party too is corrupted in a similar manner.
The Greens, I would argue via their own incompetence or simply being too innocent to live, didn't insert their noses into the EU trough in a similar manner, though there is modest evidence of corruption on the domestic level (such as their rotating ministerial roles to ensure pensions for all).
Sinn Fein have not been in government at all and to my notice have not, as they have done in the North, sought or been able to feather their own nests in a similar fashion. The Northern precedent bodes ill however and suggests that they would be equally inclined given the opportunity.
The other political entities in Ireland are as yet too small to gain access to the halls of self-interest. Lone warriors like Joe Higgins or indeed principled members in all the main parties have been able to resist the lure of easy money and self-advancement at the expense of the Irish people.

hmmm

I see, it's a fix by Germany aided and abetted by the entire Irish political class who are willing to sacrifice their country for the chance of an EU pension.

We'll have to disagree on that then.

Cavehill Red

hmmm wrote: »

I see, it's a fix by Germany aided and abetted by the entire Irish political class who are willing to sacrifice their country for the chance of an EU pension.

We'll have to disagree on that then.

Except that's not what I said at all. Your insistence on soundbite is a trite attempt to erode the nuance of what I'm trying to tell you.

It is in European interests, and especially was at the time of the banking crisis and the bailout, that Irish banks were able to meet their creditors. However, it is clear that they cannot and will not ever be in that position. The option was and is to default or else to have the sovereign underwrite those debts. Our political class chose the second option, and voted again for it this week.

The alternative, as pursued by Iceland, was to renege on debts the state had not accrued. The result is that they and not us are in economic recovery. However, that is complicated by our membership of the EU and our pooled sovereignty. Had we sought to renege on those debts, that would have created a cascade of banking collapses across Europe, damaging especially German, French and British (and Swiss) banks.

Now, it seems obvious that it is not in the interests of the Irish people to plunge them into the worst recession the country has seen since independence, enforcing punitive austerity and creating enormous unemployment in order to pay debts we do not owe.

However, it makes sense when you realise that those who made that decision, and keep making it, do not have the interests of the Irish people in mind but the interests of their peers in the EU, who are insistent that Ireland underwrite those debts even though they are not our debts so as to shore up a threat to banks in foreign countries.

For them to do this, there must be some form of pay-off. After all, they are elected by and live among the Irish people they have chosen to hurt. That pay-off is personal gain and exemption from the hardship, as expressed in terms of domestic pensions and rewards but also in terms of similar at a European level and from MNCs who shared European wishes to see those debts underwritten by the sovereign here.

jank

Is this the conspiracy forum?

Chicke

I am extremely worried.Guess what,Sarkosy did bring up tax harmonisation in all countries and immigration controls,which are blatantly Frances agenda in his so called speech to save the euro.
France and Germany are using their economic might to ensure their their own country political agendas is fulfilled.
It is the opposite of democracy,it is economic imperialism.
They stressed the importance of a strong France and Germany in Europe.
I don't want a strong France,I want a strong democratic europe
I have no problem with facing sanctions if a country does not keep within budgetary guidelines
But it now seems again France and Germany now want to run a Europe based in their own national interests.

Scofflaw

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis. Germany, the IMF, the troika or anyone else you care to suggest didn't bail US out - they bailed out their own banks which lent and lost money to bankrupt Irish banks.
The Germans ought to have no oversight of our budget, as we are supposed to be a sovereign nation. If they wish to rule us, let them run for election to Dail Eireann.
We could (and should) walk away from the banking debts and then we might discover who exactly it is who is really economically screwed. Just like Iceland did and ended up in an economic recovery in a very short period of time without needless austerity and with an unemployment rate a fraction of our own.

Mythic!

cordially,
Scofflaw

swordofislam

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis. Germany, the IMF, the troika or anyone else you care to suggest didn't bail US out - they bailed out their own banks which lent and lost money to bankrupt Irish banks.

Firstly we are not bailing out the Germans.

Total liabilities of the Guaranteed Banks to the Euro Zone are:
€08.3 bn in bonds
2% of liabilities of the Guaranteed Banks
€11.2 bn on deposit
4% of liabilities of the Guaranteed Banks
€19.5 bn
That is 6% of the total liabilities of the Guaranteed banks are to the Euro zone including deposits.

€16.5 bn in bonds is owed to Irish private individuals.
That's 4% of liabilities of the Guaranteed Banks just to rich individuals
And this is the real reason for the guarantee
Fianna Fail brought in the bank guarantee to ensure that their super rich owners would receive their money back.
€66.5 bn in bonds in owed to Irish institutions
16% of liabilities of the Guaranteed Banks

€87.5 bn is on deposit from the Irish private sector (people and businesses based in Ireland)

The narrative that you are putting forward is wrong and it is pernicious in that it could delay reform and recovery.
This is a dangerous and self serving myth that Irish people are creating to avoid facing up to problems of our own creation.
Fianna Fail did this to Ireland. Not the Germans.
Fianna Fail brought in the bank guarantee to ensure that their super rich owners would receive their money back.
By allowing yourself to be diverted to a factually incorrect anti germanism you are taking your eye off the real culprits.

Secondly the budget surpluses are a red herring
As regards the budget deficit once again you are engaging in pro Fianna Fail/ PD spin.
It is true that Ireland ran a budget surplus for some years after 2001 this budget surplus was based on transaction taxes from land.
This is why it was so difficult to predict.
Our problems predate the budget surplus.
Our problems could have prevented but Fianna Fail chose not to do that.

Thirdly
Ireland is running a budget deficit regardless of the bank guarantee scheme.

Finally
Iceland has seen a much bigger collapse in standards of living than Ireland and that is why they are recovering more quickly. They have pulled the plaster off an got it over with.
The Irish people haven't had the guts to do that and maybe they will be proved right in the medium term.

Scofflaw

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Except that's not what I said at all. Your insistence on soundbite is a trite attempt to erode the nuance of what I'm trying to tell you.

It is in European interests, and especially was at the time of the banking crisis and the bailout, that Irish banks were able to meet their creditors. However, it is clear that they cannot and will not ever be in that position. The option was and is to default or else to have the sovereign underwrite those debts. Our political class chose the second option, and voted again for it this week.

The alternative, as pursued by Iceland, was to renege on debts the state had not accrued. The result is that they and not us are in economic recovery. However, that is complicated by our membership of the EU and our pooled sovereignty. Had we sought to renege on those debts, that would have created a cascade of banking collapses across Europe, damaging especially German, French and British (and Swiss) banks.

Now, it seems obvious that it is not in the interests of the Irish people to plunge them into the worst recession the country has seen since independence, enforcing punitive austerity and creating enormous unemployment in order to pay debts we do not owe.

However, it makes sense when you realise that those who made that decision, and keep making it, do not have the interests of the Irish people in mind but the interests of their peers in the EU, who are insistent that Ireland underwrite those debts even though they are not our debts so as to shore up a threat to banks in foreign countries.

For them to do this, there must be some form of pay-off. After all, they are elected by and live among the Irish people they have chosen to hurt. That pay-off is personal gain and exemption from the hardship, as expressed in terms of domestic pensions and rewards but also in terms of similar at a European level and from MNCs who shared European wishes to see those debts underwritten by the sovereign here.

How much of the deficit is due to the bank debt, Cavehill?

regards,
Scofflaw

meglome

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis. Germany, the IMF, the troika or anyone else you care to suggest didn't bail US out - they bailed out their own banks which lent and lost money to bankrupt Irish banks.

And why were they running budget surpluses... certainly nothing to do with an unsustainable property bubble in Ireland and Spain.

I suppose you're going to prove now that we bailed out European banks?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

The Germans ought to have no oversight of our budget, as we are supposed to be a sovereign nation. If they wish to rule us, let them run for election to Dail Eireann.

You think they'd do a worse job?

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
We could (and should) walk away from the banking debts and then we might discover who exactly it is who is really economically screwed. Just like Iceland did and ended up in an economic recovery in a very short period of time without needless austerity and with an unemployment rate a fraction of our own.

Oh there are lots of things we could have done in 2008 instead of guaranteeing the entire banking sector. As soon as I get a time machine I'll come back to you.

Boskowski

Angela Merkel has addressed the Bundestag this morning.

She basically reiterated what we already learned over the last few days. The Euro cannot be fixed over night and the fix will be to bring everyone back in line with the stability pact parameters re debt and deficit ceilings. Treaty changes are required to give European bodies the authority to follow through on that.
France and Germany will be taking the lead on this.

She also reiterated her 'No' to sharing liabilities and deficits (Eurobonds).

irishh_bob

Chicke wrote: »

Markosy came out in sept and told us how they were going to bring about closer integration in Europe through treaty change.and they wait until the crisis has reached almost the point of no return before they release the details. Are they deliberately letting things go to this stage to ensure the treaties will be ratified by terrified member states.......terrify them and they will do anything type of approach.
I will be interested to see does their proposals limit or reduce democracy and is there any if it that is blatantly self serving.

rhetorical question and one which is 100% spot on

K-9

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Drivel from start to finish.
Ireland (and also Spain and Italy incidentally) were running budget surpluses before the banking crisis. Germany, the IMF, the troika or anyone else you care to suggest didn't bail US out - they bailed out their own banks which lent and lost money to bankrupt Irish banks.
The Germans ought to have no oversight of our budget, as we are supposed to be a sovereign nation. If they wish to rule us, let them run for election to Dail Eireann.
We could (and should) walk away from the banking debts and then we might discover who exactly it is who is really economically screwed. Just like Iceland did and ended up in an economic recovery in a very short period of time without needless austerity and with an unemployment rate a fraction of our own.

We were running paper budget surpluses as was shown when the whole thing blew up.

As for Iceland, they aren't the poster boy some would like, roughly the same as us in many ways, have had huge austerity and have an unemployment rate running at 6/700% normal levels.

Going Forward

Cavehill Red wrote: »

I can see you're insistent in attempting to disengage with the argument by failing to address it. There is no conspiracy, as I already said. The EU operates on soft power rather than democratically elected mandates. It is in the interests of those in power in Ireland to function in line with the interests of their Eurocrat colleagues, as they too can expect to be rewarded by that system in turn, either by the outrageous pensions they receive here or by well-paid sinecures in Europe.
Childers was reprimanded for attempting to express the legitimate disgust of the Irish people that Cardiff should be rewarded with such a sinecure for his incompetency. But to the EU, it was not incompetency, since Cardiff oversaw the policy that their banks get paid at the expense of the Irish people. Hence the insistence by Labour that he should be appointed despite being voted down for the position. They don't wish to see that system uncoupled because it serves their interests and the interests of others in the golden circle, like Cardiff, at our expense and the expense of democracy.

I am afraid this is starting to make sense.
I have dealt with both the current and past administrations, and both are absolutely petrified of criticising or acknowledging individual or departmental failure in the public service and are completely in awe of Europe.

hatrickpatrick

hmmm wrote: »

The Germans are demanding that countries like Ireland sign up to budget discipline, before the German people are forced to hand over their hard earned wealth.

Nobody is asking Germany to bail them out this time, what people are looking for is for the European Central Bank to do its job and be a Central Bank.

If the ECB == Germany then it should be called the German Central Bank, not the European Central Bank.

As it stands, practically every country in the Eurozone apart from Germany would benefit from the central bank doing what central banks are supposed to do and intervening at this point. If the German government don't want to allow that, and if unanimity is required to change the ECB's policy, then fine. But don't expect us to hand over our sovereignty again just because the much simpler option here is being ignored.

hatrickpatrick

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Had we sought to renege on those debts, that would have created a cascade of banking collapses across Europe, damaging especially German, French and British (and Swiss) banks.

That's what should have been done, and in the rubble of the old banking system we should have demanded governments to agree to design a new monetary system which would never, ever again give for-profit institutions the ultimate power over money creation, supply and circulation.

The entire model was crackpot right from the start.

Scofflaw

Cavehill Red wrote:

I can see you're insistent in attempting to disengage with the argument by failing to address it. There is no conspiracy, as I already said. The EU operates on soft power rather than democratically elected mandates. It is in the interests of those in power in Ireland to function in line with the interests of their Eurocrat colleagues, as they too can expect to be rewarded by that system in turn, either by the outrageous pensions they receive here or by well-paid sinecures in Europe.
Childers was reprimanded for attempting to express the legitimate disgust of the Irish people that Cardiff should be rewarded with such a sinecure for his incompetency. But to the EU, it was not incompetency, since Cardiff oversaw the policy that their banks get paid at the expense of the Irish people. Hence the insistence by Labour that he should be appointed despite being voted down for the position. They don't wish to see that system uncoupled because it serves their interests and the interests of others in the golden circle, like Cardiff, at our expense and the expense of democracy.

So the EU Parliament's budgetary control committee that interviewed him rejected him, our national politicians insisted that he and no other was our candidate...and this is an example of our national politicians being in awe of Europe and of Europe liking Kevin Cardiff because he did their bidding.

No facts appear to have been used in the manufacture of your conclusion there.

amused,
Scofflaw

Going Forward

hmmm wrote: »

I love this. All these Eurozone countries (Ireland included) living beyond their means, and hurling abuse at Germany for not bailing them out. Retired Greeks at age 51 throwing petrol bombs, Irish civil servants being paid more than their German counterparts taking part in anti austerity marches.

The Germans are demanding that countries like Ireland sign up to budget discipline, before the German people are forced to hand over their hard earned wealth. I don't see why this is a problem, we can walk away if we'd prefer to be poor.

No one will be walking away from anything:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15748696#summary

Going Forward

Scofflaw wrote: »

So the EU Parliament's budgetary control committee that interviewed him rejected him, our national politicians insisted that he and no other was our candidate...and this is an example of our national politicians being in awe of Europe and of Europe liking Kevin Cardiff because he did their bidding.

No facts appear to have been used in the manufacture of your conclusion there.

amused,
Scofflaw

Here you are:

http://www.labour.ie/press/listing/13220791561030003.html

Scofflaw

Going Forward wrote: »

Here you are:

http://www.labour.ie/press/listing/13220791561030003.html

If anything, that would imply that the rapporteur is in awe of Mr de Rossa or Ireland's national politicians. It's no more supportive of Cavehill's illogical conclusion than the original set of facts, quite possibly less so.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Going Forward

Scofflaw wrote: »

If anything, that would imply that the rapporteur is in awe of Mr de Rossa or Ireland's national politicians. It's no more supportive of Cavehill's illogical conclusion than the original set of facts, quite possibly less so.

cordially,
Scofflaw

They're all in awe of each other obviously, and once again content to seek another vote when the result is not what they originally sought.
The EU wont let the (Irish) govt. down on this one, its a little payback for sticking to the IMF agreement so well.

Scofflaw

Going Forward wrote: »

They're all in awe of each other obviously, and once again content to seek another vote when the result is not what they originally sought.

No, the Parliamentary vote has been part of the process all along.

Going Forward wrote: »

The EU wont let the (Irish) govt. down on this one, its a little payback for sticking to the IMF agreement so well.

Riiiight - so, basically, whatever happens you just bend it round to say exactly what you were going to say all along. If the national politicians get their way, it's because the EU is patting sycophants on the head. If they don't, it's because the EU is tyrannical and ignores national interests while the national politicians are in awe of them. Blah blah, etc.

You know, you should write to the EU to ask them whether they've stopped beating their wife yet.

regards,
Scofflaw

Going Forward

Scofflaw wrote: »

No, the Parliamentary vote has been part of the process all along.



Riiiight - so, basically, whatever happens you just bend it round to say exactly what you were going to say all along. If the national politicians get their way, it's because the EU is patting sycophants on the head. If they don't, it's because the EU is tyrannical and ignores national interests while the national politicians are in awe of them. Blah blah, etc.

You know, you should write to the EU to ask them whether they've stopped beating their wife yet.

regards,
Scofflaw

Let me be clear:
In what I deem to be the unlikely event of the nomination being rejected at the next vote, for once I will be the first here to commend the EU decision makers.

megafan

hmmm wrote: »

So what? Our tax income before the banking crisis was built on a property bubble. As were Spains. Italy is not far away from surplus, their problems are based on decades of building up their debt level.

Is anyone in Germany forcing us to spend 18 billion a year more than we are taking in in taxes?

But who was lending us cheap money?? "Let Lender & Borrower beware!"

meglome

megafan wrote: »

But who was lending us cheap money?? "Let Lender & Borrower beware!"

Who was? I assume you can show that?

megafan

meglome wrote: »

Who was? I assume you can show that?

Who is telling us not to burn the bond holders? Maybe the French and Germans? & you may wonder why!:rolleyes:

Dan_Solo

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Had we sought to renege on those debts, that would have created a cascade of banking collapses across Europe, damaging especially German, French and British (and Swiss) banks.

While I love our European brothers dearly, I really don't see how this is any of our concern. If we could "do an Iceland" (and believe me, our dynastic gombeen crook political classes aren't up to it) then I wouldn't have much sympathy for foreign banks who played for high odss and lost.

irishh_bob

megafan wrote: »

Who is telling us not to burn the bond holders? Maybe the French and Germans? & you may wonder why!:rolleyes:

fear of contagion spreading

Dan_Solo

irishh_bob wrote: »

fear of contagion spreading

And we care about this why as long as it gets us out of a hole? Because Germany said they'd be upset?

Scofflaw

megafan wrote: »

Who is telling us not to burn the bond holders? Maybe the French and Germans? & you may wonder why!:rolleyes:

Argument by innuendo! If it's the case that French and German banks poured money into Irish banks, it'll be there in their records. And their records are available from the Central Bank, and it's not there.

cordially,
Scofflaw