Nigel Farage MEP

SeanW

McDave wrote: »

(which will no doubt be revised in economic text books in light of the success of the Euro model).

Dafuq? I'm sure the 50% of young people unemployed in Greece or the parents who had to leave their babies outside the doorsteps of churches because of what amounted in parts to a humanitarian catastrophe would be delighted to learn about the "success of the Euro model." >_< **** me.

The countries with the biggest problems transpired in the main to be those with the largest budget deficits and/or debts.

No dispute there but that was facilitated by an excess of credit, without which, none of it could ever have happened. Have a look at Greek Drachma-era interest rates in the 1990s (sorry, it requires Excel or compatible) here: http://www.bankofgreece.gr/Pages/en/Statistics/rates_markets/oldrates.aspx
Note the rates are mostly/all North of 17-20% for most of the 1990s, only falling to about 5% before the end of the Drachma in 2000.

Can you think of any good reason why these rates should have changed so? Did Greek (both government and private) debt suddenly become more trustworthy during and after 2000? Was there a legitimate reason for looser economic policy in the context of Greek currency?

Certain of these also have significant competitiveness and enterprise problems. All of these problems would exist with or without the Euro as they reside in the economic cultures of those countries.

All the more reason to allow those countries to have a currency and interest rate that reflect national conditions.

By joining the Euro they have committed to address those problems

And it's been such a wonderful success, shattered lives, broken dreams, hundreds of billions of Euro in bank debt loaded onto European taxpayers. Sounds like a case of the medicine killing the patient.

It's quite clear there are those who would be quite happy to get off scot free for their part in our downfall, primary among them Fianna Fáil.

Well, I'm not one of them - I've always hated Fianna Fail and so far as I can see, noone else here was advocating such a position. Feel free to show where I or indeed anyone else argued that Ireland or Greece had good governance in the early-mid 2000s. Or accept that you were beating a strawman.

Nodin wrote: »

Obvious as it is, UKIP.

Re-read my post. I asked for specifics. Since you are now claiming that certain negative attributes apply to "UKIP" presumably that includes - in their entirity:

1. Leadership
2. Rank and file members
3. Supporters and likely voters.

So I will ask you once again, can you show that individuals in question (the fellows that blamed gay marriage for the flooding, want to send black people back to Bongo Bongo land etc) either:

1. Share those views with the party leadership, i.e. the people who suspended them.
2. Speak on behalf of the vast majority of UKIP members, supporters, or likely voters.

If you cannot show either of those, then how is your argument any more than biased, cheap mudslinging and a hypocritical case of "tarring all with one brush," or any more logically solvent than the "argument" of a monkey throwing their own feces hoping some of it sticks?

McDave

SeanW wrote: »

Dafuq? I'm sure the 50% of young people unemployed in Greece or the parents who had to leave their babies outside the doorsteps of churches because of what amounted in parts to a humanitarian catastrophe would be delighted to learn about the "success of the Euro model." >_< **** me.

Greece's problems are as a result of their own longstanding corruption and incompetence. The successes of other countries and the wider Eurozone will occur regardless of what Greece does. And for the benefit of their countries and welfare of their citizens. Greece's problems will continue of their own accord, inside or outside the Euro, so long as they shirk their responsibilities and treat polity as a joke.

You rubbish emoting about babies and youth unemployment is a pathetic attempt to take the high moral ground. Of course, rather than address fundamental structural problems, ideological austerians will blithely carry on spending borrowed money until the tap is turned off. Which is what happened to the GIPS economies. Blaming the Euro, or Angela Merkel as the Greeks did, is lazy prejudice.

Simply put *Greece* has to take responsibility for its citizens, it's youth, it's babies and its economy. It has to make hard, responsible choices using limited resources. Just like we have to.

McDave

SeanW wrote: »

All the more reason to allow those countries to have a currency and interest rate that reflect national conditions.

And it's been such a wonderful success, shattered lives, broken dreams, hundreds of billions of Euro in bank debt loaded onto European taxpayers. Sounds like a case of the medicine killing the patient.

Or those countries can take responsible decisions within a stable currency union. I fail to see how reverting to the drachma will all of a sudden inspire sensible economic responsibility on the part of the Greeks. Especially now as they have succeeded in balancing their budget.

Bank debt has been mainly loaded onto the taxpayers of the GIPS economies, where they for the most part appropriately reside. Unless of course you're arguing for default, there's nowhere else for the debt to reside in the first insurance.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

Re-read my post. I asked for specifics(............) it sticks?

No, you asked a loaded question. The fact is that these people keep popping up, be they candidates, members or those who donate funds. It's a clear, fairly unambiguous pattern.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

No, you asked a loaded question. The fact is that these people keep popping up, be they candidates, members or those who donate funds. It's a clear, fairly unambiguous pattern.

Bad people, oddballs etc. "pop up" routinely in all walks of life, in UKIPs case, a handful.

Do you actually have a point other than infantile smear tactics and crude generalisations? Anything that would - oh say - indicate that this so-called "pattern" of IIRC <10 people is representative of UKIP as a whole?

Or are you just smearing the vast majority of good people associated with UKIP by presenting the handful of cranks as the whole?

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

Bad people, oddballs etc. "pop up" routinely in all walks of life, in UKIPs case, a handful.

Do you actually have a point other than infantile smear tactics and crude generalisations? Anything that would - oh say - indicate that this so-called "pattern" of IIRC <10 people is representative of UKIP as a whole?

Or are you just smearing the vast majority of good people associated with UKIP by presenting the handful of cranks as the whole?

10? This has been going on since the party was founded. Year after year of remarks all in the same vein.

sin_city

McDave wrote: »

Simply put *Greece* has to take responsibility for its citizens, it's youth, it's babies and its economy. It has to make hard, responsible choices using limited resources. Just like we have to.

Ok, would you support the Greeks if they decided to leave the euro-zone and then re-payed their debt in devalued drachma?

Joe Doe

meanwhile back to the stats...

(eu..^) Nigel Farage's party has 29% of the vote ahead of labour on 26% the Conservatives on 23% and Liberal Democrats on 10%. Undecided but the numbers sure are doing some talking. Think the Scots are steaming ahead towards independence also.

^ Recent 'YouGov poll' for the Sun on Sunday.

sin_city

Joe Doe wrote: »

meanwhile back to the stats...

(eu..^) Nigel Farage's party has 29% of the vote ahead of labour on 26% the Conservatives on 23% and Liberal Democrats on 10%. Undecided but the numbers sure are doing some talking. Think the Scots are steaming ahead towards independence also.

^ Recent 'YouGov poll' for the Sun on Sunday.

Wonder how this pans out in first past the post.

Joe Doe

Well if you put money on it, you'd only get a gross return from x1.44, which is very short for a 4 dog race. Betfair offer x34 ROI for the Cons to lead. LibDems would get you a massive 950euro for each 1euro waged.

link



A better ROI rate is for the Scots to re-in-act the Braveheart movie script with x3.5 return for them to be partying in their own supply of north sea crude oil later this year.

link:

Nodin

sin_city wrote: »

Wonder how this pans out in first past the post.

EU elections are done under PR.

McDave

sin_city wrote: »

Ok, would you support the Greeks if they decided to leave the euro-zone and then re-payed their debt in devalued drachma?

It's Greece's sovereign right to leave the Euro if it wants to badly enough. They don't need my support.

If Greece chose to leave the Euro, I'd support European debtors insisting on repayment of debts in Euro, especially considering how much Greek debt has been written down already.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

McDave wrote: »

<...>If Greece chose to leave the Euro, I'd support European debtors insisting on repayment of debts in Euro<...>

If Germany left the euro at the same time, I wouldn't be surprised if the Greeks agreed with you.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

10? This has been going on since the party was founded. Year after year of remarks all in the same vein.

A handful, the highest of whom was Godfrey Bloom, who was booted out when the totality of his statements were clear, and the rest is just a minority of low level members and proposed local authority candidates (all expelled or suspended), that you are using to smear the many good people that no doubt exist in UKIP, and I include Nigel Farage in that.

McDave wrote: »

Or those countries can take responsible decisions within a stable currency union.

That would be nice but it might not help prevent the next crisis, because countries may have divergent needs to control their economic systems that they cannot meet without monetary control.

Remember that BOTH Austrian and Keynesian economists agree on what happens when you put too much cash into an overheating economy - catastrophe is inevitable. So you regulate the government so that government debt does not become the next big bubble. Then you regulate the mortgage sector so that there is no more housing bubbles. Sounds fine. In theory.

But then your central bank (on another central bank, offering cheap credit indirectly via carry trading) keeps flooding the gaf with cheap money. So the bubble happens somewhere else.

Food/energy futures.
Institutional property investment.
Tech stocks.
Credit Default Swaps.
Some foreign country that seems to be taking off.
Etc.

Remember that both Keynesians and Austrians agree on this point, though Austrian-school economists have a more radical view of the problem.

Bank debt has been mainly loaded onto the taxpayers of the GIPS economies, where they for the most part appropriately reside. Unless of course you're arguing for default, there's nowhere else for the debt to reside in the first insurance.

And that's exactly where the debt from the next ECB inspired boom-and-bust cycle will end up. On the backs of national taxpayers.

oscarBravo

SeanW wrote: »

And that's exactly where the debt from the next ECB inspired boom-and-bust cycle will end up. On the backs of national taxpayers.

If the national taxpayers insist on electing governments with pro-cyclical policies (and boy, do they ever) - sure. That's where it will end up.

The Corinthian

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

If Germany left the euro at the same time, I wouldn't be surprised if the Greeks agreed with you.

How is that supposed to make sense?

SeanW

oscarBravo wrote: »

If the national taxpayers insist on electing governments with pro-cyclical policies (and boy, do they ever) - sure. That's where it will end up.

Or if when we are ever again subject to pro-cyclical monetary policy ...

DublinWriter

UKIP now have a militant wing...who knew!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=460398084105458&set=a.346633882148546.1073741826.300455573433044&type=1

sin_city

The Corinthian wrote: »

How is that supposed to make sense?

Made sense to me

SeanW

DublinWriter wrote: »

UKIP now have a militant wing...who knew!

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=460398084105458&set=a.346633882148546.1073741826.300455573433044&type=1

Seriously? From their own press release its fairly obvious that they're acting on their own:

Britain First is indeed a rival patriotic party to UKIP ...

While no great fans of UKIP ...

We shall continue to fight UKIP for votes at the ballot ...

Yeah, sounds like UKIPs armed wing alright. But they're certainly right about one thing - UKIP needs protection of that sort. Remember when Nigel Farage visted Scotland? The reaction of the left was very much a sign of a healthy democracy ... :pac:

The Corinthian

sin_city wrote: »

Made sense to me

So if Greece were to leave the Euro (which would likely see them devalue whatever new Drachma against the Euro and the Euro possibly even appreciating given the departure of the Zone's weakest economy), Greece would be in a bit of a pickle.

And if Germany instead of Greece were to leave the Euro (which would precipitate a collapse in the value of the currency as theirs is the strongest economy), Greece would want to see German 'debts' paid off in Euro?

Well you may need to explain how that makes sense to you.

SeanW

The Corinthian wrote: »

So if Greece were to leave the Euro (which would likely see them devalue whatever new Drachma against the Euro and the Euro possibly even appreciating given the departure of the Zone's weakest economy), Greece would be in a bit of a pickle.

And if Germany instead of Greece were to leave the Euro (which would precipitate a collapse in the value of the currency as theirs is the strongest economy), Greece would want to see German 'debts' paid off in Euro?

Well you may need to explain how that makes sense to you.

I think what he meant was that if Greece and Germany left the Euro simultaneously, the values of both the reinstated Drachma and the Euro would tank at the same time and by similar degrees. Ergo, using New Drachma to pay off debt in Euro would not be a problem.

The Corinthian

SeanW wrote: »

I think what he meant was that if Greece and Germany left the Euro simultaneously, the values of both the reinstated Drachma and the Euro would tank at the same time and by similar degrees. Ergo, using New Drachma to pay off debt in Euro would not be a problem.

Oh, that makes perfect sense... :rolleyes:

McDave

SeanW wrote: »

That would be nice but it might not help prevent the next crisis, because countries may have divergent needs to control their economic systems that they cannot meet without monetary control.

Remember that BOTH Austrian and Keynesian economists agree on what happens when you put too much cash into an overheating economy - catastrophe is inevitable. So you regulate the government so that government debt does not become the next big bubble. Then you regulate the mortgage sector so that there is no more housing bubbles. Sounds fine. In theory.

But then your central bank (on another central bank, offering cheap credit indirectly via carry trading) keeps flooding the gaf with cheap money. So the bubble happens somewhere else.

Food/energy futures.
Institutional property investment.
Tech stocks.
Credit Default Swaps.
Some foreign country that seems to be taking off.
Etc.

Remember that both Keynesians and Austrians agree on this point, though Austrian-school economists have a more radical view of the problem.

And that's exactly where the debt from the next ECB inspired boom-and-bust cycle will end up. On the backs of national taxpayers.

What next crisis? And who cares about 'nice'?

It just so happens there is no nirvana on this Earth. At any given point in time there will be some set of problems to be considered. The Euro is simply an attempt to set parameters which generally smooth out the ups and downs. The Euro is not a guaranteed solution to all life's economic problems. And it very much depends on member countries cooperating. Peer example and pressure is as important as any notional legal requirement.

Of course that's not going to stop Eurosceptics of various hues lining up problems as if any single one or a given combination will constitute an existential crisis for the currency. In the real world, public authorities will seek out pragmatic solutions, as they have been over the last six or so years, irregardless of what Keynesian or Austrian purists obsess about.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

Seriously? From their own press release its fairly obvious that they're acting on their own:



Yeah, sounds like UKIPs armed wing alright. But they're certainly right about one thing - UKIP needs protection of that sort. Remember when Nigel Farage visted Scotland? The reaction of the left was very much a sign of a healthy democracy ... :pac:

Wow, a far right group that sees a fellow traveller in UKIP....best not jump to conclusions.

Why is it that UKIP attract these kinds of people with such consistency?

McDave

Nodin wrote: »

Wow, a far right group that sees a fellow traveller in UKIP....best not jump to conclusions.

Why is it that UKIP attract these kinds of people with such consistency?

There are a lot of people on the fringes. It's a big catchment area to aim at.

However, when you finally get them into the same room...

Ganley had a similar problem trying to pull together a Eurosceptic alliance in the last EP elections. Nice in theory, but messy in practice.

Frank Lee Midere

McDave wrote: »

What next crisis? And who cares about 'nice'?

It just so happens there is no nirvana on this Earth. At any given point in time there will be some set of problems to be considered. The Euro is simply an attempt to set parameters which generally smooth out the ups and downs. The Euro is not a guaranteed solution to all life's economic problems. And it very much depends on member countries cooperating. Peer example and pressure is as important as any notional legal requirement.

Of course that's not going to stop Eurosceptics of various hues lining up problems as if any single one or a given combination will constitute an existential crisis for the currency. In the real world, public authorities will seek out pragmatic solutions, as they have been over the last six or so years, irregardless of what Keynesian or Austrian purists obsess about.

Hmm. I am fairly dubious that the euro has smoothed anything. The ECB acted pro-cyclical during the boom and pro-cyclical during the bust.

McDave

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Hmm. I am fairly dubious that the euro has smoothed anything. The ECB acted pro-cyclical during the boom and pro-cyclical during the bust.

EZ interest rates relate to the EZ in aggregate, and not to the needs of individual economies. Our national policies were pro-cyclical, and in quite a spectacular fashion. It's up to us to make the effort to get in synch, and to keep our spending at sustainable levels.

Frank Lee Midere

McDave wrote: »

EZ interest rates relate to the EZ in aggregate, and not to the needs of individual economies. Our national policies were pro-cyclical, and in quite a spectacular fashion. It's up to us to make the effort to get in synch, and to keep our spending at sustainable levels.

Wrong. Most of the periphery was growing stronger than the interest rates warranted. That decision - for the benefit of the centre - is the main reason why capital flowed into the peripheral countries. These countries could do little, it's like trying to handle flood damage downstream of the Hoover dam if it released all it's water. The large fault was in the ECB. Basically it caused the Great Recession in Europe.

View

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Wrong. Most of the periphery was growing stronger than the interest rates warranted.

Interest rates are set based on the inflation rate not the growth rate. It is a bit rich of you to tell other posters they are wrong when you fail to understand this basic point.

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

That decision - for the benefit of the centre - is the main reason why capital flowed into the peripheral countries.

Of course it was. Germany, for instance, in 2003, when their economy CONTRACTED, really, really wanted to have interest rates 10 times higher than in 2013 when their economy expanded. Or does Germany qualify as being "periphery" in your opinion, perhaps? :-)