Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Deal! EU reaches agreement on budget and COVID-19 stimulus fund
Options
Comments
-
Chips Lovell wrote: »Really? I've been reading loads. In the first twelve hours or so, there wasn't much detail available but presumably that's because it takes a bit of time to pick through what I'm sure is a pretty lengthy and complex agreement.
I don't often look at the IT, but today I clocked through. A good few articles yes, but all light on detail.
I don't think it's a conspiracy to conceal a bad deal from the populace, it just reflects how poor Irish journalism is.0 -
In a nutshell you pay more in, than you get back, is this not the case as reported widely across the media e.g.IRELAND is poised to become the '5th highest net contributor to the EU' as a result of the coronavirus recovery package and associated budget agreed by the bloc yesterday, an opposition politician has claimed.0
-
MrMusician18 wrote: »That's a bit of an exaggeration to be fair. Yeah, it's not a great deal but it's not terrible either.....
In what sense? - my understanding of the deal is that we are paying €15bn net to the EU. Larger nations with more advanced infrastructure are paying less. Crude a calculation as it is; France is paying less than a third per citizen, Germany half what we're paying.0 -
Maybe in terms of direct payments but member states recoup many times their input from trade within the EU.Lila Fat Crossbar wrote: »In a nutshell you pay more in, than you get back, is this not the case as reported widely across the media e.g.
Were we to leave the EU we'd be broke within a fortnight!0 -
Seth Brundle wrote: »Maybe in terms of direct payments but member states recoup many times their input from trade within the EU.
Were we to leave the EU we'd be broke within a fortnight!
Every country in the EU could claim similar (trade) benefits, but fact remains Ire is the 5th highest contributor.
A smaller EU stretching as far as e.g. Latvia, across to Italy (if they remain) and down to Portugal would mean these members would all be better off, and certainly not broke, and might even attract brexitland back in.
Instead, after the EU2, the WB6 are now being lined up to join, each with an average GDP-PP half that of Germany, which will require plenty of additional funding. Turkey had flirted with the ideal of joining also.
In the bigger picture, and with a global tougher stance against the mighty dragon, the US will be looking for much, much closer partnerships, they'll either choose brexitland or the EU to counteract the Chinese.0 -
Advertisement
-
Seth Brundle wrote: »Maybe in terms of direct payments but member states recoup many times their input from trade within the EU.
Were we to leave the EU we'd be broke within a fortnight!
But could such a free trade construct exist without the massive spending programmes? Rather than a central budget, a framework for domestic support within certain limits for the likes of agriculture could be agreed.
I'd argue that it probably could.0 -
Flip that question: would we be where we are without the support frameworks from the EU?MrMusician18 wrote: »But could such a free trade construct exist without the massive spending programmes? Rather than a central budget, a framework for domestic support within certain limits for the likes of agriculture could be agreed.
I'd argue that it probably could.0 -
Seth Brundle wrote: »Flip that question: would we be where we are without the support frameworks from the EU?
It's impossible to say really since the policy has been highly consequential for Ireland. Answering that question is like answering what Europe would be like if Germany won the war. Would we be further behind developmentally? Perhaps. But equally we might not be burdened with a huge debt either.
Not that Irish people can complain about the construct - they've said yes to all the EU reforms.0 -
It is fairly easy to predict: Ireland was a basket case until we joined the EEC.MrMusician18 wrote: »It's impossible to say really since the policy has been highly consequential for Ireland. Answering that question is like answering what Europe would be like if Germany won the war. Would we be further behind developmentally? Perhaps.
Once in, we recieved funds that helped us modernise and move from being a crappy agricultural economy to a global services led economy.
Had we not joined, we'd stilll be heavily dependent on the UK selling milk and beef and that's about it.
What amount of our debt has been as a result of EU membership?MrMusician18 wrote: »But equally we might not be burdened with a huge debt either.
Not that Irish people can complain about the construct - they've said yes to all the EU reforms.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 22733
MrMusician18 wrote: »I don't often look at the IT, but today I clocked through. A good few articles yes, but all light on detail.
I don't think it's a conspiracy to conceal a bad deal from the populace, it just reflects how poor Irish journalism is.
I think some of the detail people are looking for isn't available yet. For example, while the FT coverage is better than the Irish Times (which isn't surprising given the level of resources they have) it still doesn't get into the nitty gritty of net contributors/recipients.In what sense? - my understanding of the deal is that we are paying €15bn net to the EU. Larger nations with more advanced infrastructure are paying less. Crude a calculation as it is; France is paying less than a third per citizen, Germany half what we're paying.
Where's that €15 billion figure coming from? The only place I've seen it is on a graphic being shared around the place that originated on Deutsche Welle, but is dated from May.0 -
Advertisement
-
Scuid Mhór wrote: »Sure -- but at the same time it would cost a lot less money to help Ireland substantially than it would cost to improve other countries by the same amount, just based on the size of our population and infrastructure. It's not proportionate is what I'm saying.
But why should Ireland benefit disproportionately???
Ireland is a rich country now even by European standards.
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/irish_social_welfare_system/claiming_a_social_welfare_payment/going_abroad_and_social_welfare_payments.html
We even had to introduce a restriction on foreign holidays for social welfare recipients during the crisis - you wouldn't get a foreign holiday on German or UK welfare benefits. Our employees are better off than the average EU employee, our self-employed are better off, our pensioners are better off than the average EU pensioner, as I point out, even our unemployed are better off than the average EU unemployed person.
We are very lucky. If you are on social welfare on the continent, you are probably living in a cramped flat on the 8th floor of an old badly-maintained apartment block with a weekly payment far less than the Irish one. If you are on the average wage, you pay less income tax than in other EU countries.0 -
I never said we shouldn't have joined. I said that the Union could've been constructed differently. The structural funds surely helped develop the economy, I agree, but Ireland also gave up control of it's EEZ, and some argue that the value of fish extracted by other EU states far exceeds what we've received in funding.Seth Brundle wrote: »It is fairly easy to predict: Ireland was a basket case until we joined the EEC.
Once in, we recieved funds that helped us modernise and move from being a crappy agricultural economy to a global services led economy.
Had we not joined, we'd stilll be heavily dependent on the UK selling milk and beef and that's about it.
What amount of our debt has been as a result of EU membership?
That said the advancement of the Irish economy is much more to do with access to the market rather than infrastructure. A single market doesn't need a budget beyond something small to administer the common rules.
So what does Ireland receive in return for it's net budget contribution? Some sort of ethereal sense of being good Europeans?
Debt, well the 15bn we will need to borrow to pay our agreed contribution to this fund - and that's before we get into an argument about how the bank bailout came to pass.
I've yet to see a justification for why we had to pay 6% for emergency funding while Italy and Spain will get a mixture of cheap loans and grants in their hour of need.0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »
So what does Ireland receive in return for it's net budget contribution? Some sort of ethereal sense of being good Europeans?
need.
Ireland will get some help when it comes to Brexit.
In a broader scope what do you think one of the big reasons for a large amount of the multinationals we have here. Remember for all the talk about tax there are plenty of places around the world that have 0 corporation tax but don't have the same levels of FDI or employment.
Even native Irish business do you really think companies like Ryanair, Glanbia, Kingspan etc would have become as big without easy access to the European Market. Remember even today with Irelands largest population in around 150 years or so the ROI has only a population of 4.5 million. The combined EU population is 10 times that. Nevermind the benefits of having a say in global regulations through the EU. Look at Brexit where the Ireland had the upper hand on the UK in negotiations probably for the first time ever which was only possible due to continued EU membership.
The issue around fishing is a myth/red herring to pardon the pun. It provides relatively low levels of employment and exports when compared to the modern service economy and high tech manufacturing that is reliant on EU membership. Even in the Brexit talks the biggest issue for the UK fishing industry is that they sell most their fish to the EU.0 -
Ireland will get some help when it comes to Brexit.
In a broader scope what do you think one of the big reasons for a large amount of the multinationals we have here. Remember for all the talk about tax there are plenty of places around the world that have 0 corporation tax but don't have the same levels of FDI or employment.
Even native Irish business do you really think companies like Ryanair, Glanbia, Kingspan etc would have become as big without easy access to the European Market. Remember even today with Irelands largest population in around 150 years or so the ROI has only a population of 4.5 million. The combined EU population is 10 times that. Nevermind the benefits of having a say in global regulations through the EU. Look at Brexit where the Ireland had the upper hand on the UK in negotiations probably for the first time ever which was only possible due to continued EU membership.
The issue around fishing is a myth/red herring to pardon the pun. It provides relatively low levels of employment and exports when compared to the modern service economy and high tech manufacturing that is reliant on EU membership. Even in the Brexit talks the biggest issue for the UK fishing industry is that they sell most their fish to the EU.
Ireland is a net contributor to the fund ffs! Help with Brexit, we will be paying more into this Brexit fund for the help we'll get back from it.
Ireland wasn't always a services economy - up until the late 90s manufacturing and primary industry were major employers. A decision was made that fishing wouldn't be developed (it could've been) in exchange for entry into CAP. That was the call, for good or ill. I only mention it is that some posters point to the funds we've historically received from Europe but neglect to mention the common contribution to fishing that Irish membership brought the Bloc.
I agree that the single market is good, but a single market doesn't need enormous spending programmes. It needs a rulebook, and a way to enforce the rules - that's it.
So I'll ask again, why are Spain and Italy not being treated the same as Ireland was when it needed assistance?0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »
Ireland is a net contributor to the fund ffs! Help with Brexit, we will be paying more into this Brexit fund for the help we'll get back from it.
Ireland wasn't always a services economy - up until the late 90s manufacturing and primary industry were major employers. A decision was made that fishing wouldn't be developed (it could've been) in exchange for entry into CAP. That was the call, for good or ill. I only mention it is that some posters point to the funds we've historically received from Europe but neglect to mention the common contribution to fishing that Irish membership brought the Bloc.
I agree that the single market is good, but a single market doesn't need enormous spending programmes. It needs a rulebook, and a way to enforce the rules - that's it.
So I'll ask again, why are Spain and Italy not being treated the same as Ireland was when it needed assistance?
So what your saying is the EU bail out of Ireland wasn't assistance? Remember Ireland was bust unable to borrow because of rates normal lenders were charging Ireland. Ireland got loans at below market rates that have since been negotiated to even lower amounts. Certain amounts have been given such long maturity dates to make the cost/valueof the loans close to irrelevant ie free money. So basically complaining that Ireland didn't have enough austerity and that the Banks should be let go bust with all the associated costs associated with far more businesses going bust and people being made homeless. Without the EU the 20 billion hole in Irish finances would have to have been closed immediately not over a number of years. Actually the hole would have been even higher with no functioning banking system. That's what would have happened if other EU states didn't put their hands in their pockets at the time. Remember most of those other EU countries were and are poorer than Ireland.
The bank guarantee was an Irish decision that annoyed the hell out of other EU states when first announced. So the EU can't be blamed for that.
You are aware Ireland is one of richest countries in the world never mind EU so it's normal to expect Ireland to be a net contributer. If you want to look at what Ireland gets back look at Brexit and remember the UK is a far far larger economy than can take the hit better.
In terms of the cost of the EU again look at Brexit and the cost of duplicating every EU regulatory body and the costs associated with increased customs controls. The EU relative to its GDP has very low costs.
What is the told value of fishing Ireland gave up?0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »
Ireland is a net contributor to the fund ffs! Help with Brexit, we will be paying more into this Brexit fund for the help we'll get back from it.
Ireland wasn't always a services economy - up until the late 90s manufacturing and primary industry were major employers. A decision was made that fishing wouldn't be developed (it could've been) in exchange for entry into CAP. That was the call, for good or ill. I only mention it is that some posters point to the funds we've historically received from Europe but neglect to mention the common contribution to fishing that Irish membership brought the Bloc.
I agree that the single market is good, but a single market doesn't need enormous spending programmes. It needs a rulebook, and a way to enforce the rules - that's it.
So I'll ask again, why are Spain and Italy not being treated the same as Ireland was when it needed assistance?
Where on Earth has this "Ireland is a net contributor to the COVID Fund" come from? It's frickin' everywhere.
IT IS NOT TRUE.
None of the Member States are 'contributing' to the €750 billion COVID recovery fund. The EU Commission will be issuing bonds on the market to raise the money, and then the goal to pay for those bonds down the line is through a number of "Own Resources" - like a new plastic tax or carbon tax which (like tariffs and VAT currently are) will be collected by member states on behalf of the EU. None of the Member States are inputting anything into the fund at this point.
What Ireland is contributing to is the regular EU budget - the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Ireland has been a net recipient of EU funds right up until the most recent MFF cycle (look at the 2nd point under Economy and Jobs) which lasts 7 years, the current one from 2014-2020. The next will begin in 2021. It's decided based on Gross National Income - Ireland is a very wealthy country in this regard. Quite above the EU average, and so as a result we will be contributing more per citizen than some other EU nations. Our money will go into the development of less-developed EU nations in exactly the same way Germany, France, Italy and others have been net contributors that funded our development for decades
We're rich now, we should pay our share. A more developed EU is better for us down the line because we are an enormously globalised economy and are enormously reliant on the Single Market for our wealth.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 22733
MrMusician18 wrote: »So I'll ask again, why are Spain and Italy not being treated the same as Ireland was when it needed assistance?
For a start, a banking crisis and a pandemic aren't the same thing. One is a man made disaster, the other more a natural disaster. Given how difficult it was to secure the COVID deal, I don't think it's in anyway a foregone conclusion that mutualised debt would have be used to aid with a banking collapse in those countries.
Secondly, it ought to be possible for the EU to learn from the mistakes of the past. Mutualised debt was floated as a possibility at the time of the banking crisis and there was even more resistance to it then than there is now. If you believe the EU made a mistake in not taking this path back then, why do you think it should repeat that mistake now?0 -
Join Date:Posts: 22733
Regarding our contributions, they're calculated on the basis of GNI. I don't know what the final figure was, but the Commission was proposing 0.9 percent of GNI by 2027.
Our GNI last year was €275 billion, so a back of an envelope estimate of our gross contribution would be around €2.5 billion a year. I must stress that's a very rough calculation and we won't know the correct figure until a more detailed breakdown of the budget comes out.
Our net contribution would be calculated by deducting everything we get back from the EU every year.0 -
Where on Earth has this "Ireland is a net contributor to the COVID Fund" come from? It's frickin' everywhere.
IT IS NOT TRUE.
None of the Member States are 'contributing' to the €750 billion COVID recovery fund. The EU Commission will be issuing bonds on the market to raise the money, and then the goal to pay for those bonds down the line is through a number of "Own Resources" - like a new plastic tax or carbon tax which (like tariffs and VAT currently are) will be collected by member states on behalf of the EU. None of the Member States are inputting anything into the fund at this point.
What Ireland is contributing to is the regular EU budget - the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Ireland has been a net recipient of EU funds right up until the most recent MFF cycle (look at the 2nd point under Economy and Jobs) which lasts 7 years, the current one from 2014-2020. The next will begin in 2021. It's decided based on Gross National Income - Ireland is a very wealthy country in this regard. Quite above the EU average, and so as a result we will be contributing more per citizen than some other EU nations. Our money will go into the development of less-developed EU nations in exactly the same way Germany, France, Italy and others have been net contributors that funded our development for decades
We're rich now, we should pay our share. A more developed EU is better for us down the line because we are an enormously globalised economy and are enormously reliant on the Single Market for our wealth.
Ah, so we are paying for that ethereal sense of European-ness. And indeed paying grant aid towards other wealthy European nation's, last time I checked, Spain and Italy had high GDPs too. Why aren't we charging them 6%? You know the kind of solidarity we received...
While the EU may be imposing common taxes to fund this bailout, these have not been agreed and the liability for these borrowings will fall proportionally on the member states so Ireland's balance sheet will have to reflect this. It can't be hand waived away like you are claiming. And if they can't agree on these taxes it will be paid for though direct budget contributions. Either way, Irish taxpayers will be putting in a lot more than they will be getting out.
I agree we are enormously reliant on the single market for our wealth and I'm no eurosceptic. What is more than irritating is that it's only because populist movements that threaten the place of Spain and Italy in the Union are gaining in strength is what is motivating the bailout. When Ireland needed financial assistance at came at a price of 6%, when Greece needed assistance dealing with migrants, the European back was turned.
Solidarity for some, threats of financial bombs and 6% for the rest of us.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13636
MrMusician18 wrote: »But could such a free trade construct exist without the massive spending programmes? Rather than a central budget, a framework for domestic support within certain limits for the likes of agriculture could be agreed.
I'd argue that it probably could.
I don't accept that they are massive spending programmes when they constitute 1% of member states GDP.
To answer your question, yes, a free trade organisation could exist for less money, but it wouldn't be able to integrate the economies as finely as the EU does, nor would it be able to uphold the values of the EU, including the redistribution of wealth to underdeveloped regions, ensuring a strong agricultural sector, etc.
Domestic support within limits for agriculture would result in a more unstable food economy and would overall be bad for farmers, as we are seeing with the UK, but to give you an answer more in keeping with your question, under the principle of subsidiarity, local governments do get to decide how the CAP payments are distributed within certain parameters, so it wouldn't really make much difference. The member states can agree to change those parameters every few years, and often do.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 13636
MrMusician18 wrote: »Ah, so we are paying for that ethereal sense of European-ness. And indeed paying grant aid towards other wealthy European nation's, last time I checked, Spain and Italy had high GDPs too. Why aren't we charging them 6%? You know the kind of solidarity we received...
While the EU may be imposing common taxes to fund this bailout, these have not been agreed and the liability for these borrowings will fall proportionally on the member states so Ireland's balance sheet will have to reflect this. It can't be hand waived away like you are claiming. And if they can't agree on these taxes it will be paid for though direct budget contributions. Either way, Irish taxpayers will be putting in a lot more than they will be getting out.
I agree we are enormously reliant on the single market for our wealth and I'm no eurosceptic. What is more than irritating is that it's only because populist movements that threaten the place of Spain and Italy in the Union are gaining in strength is what is motivating the bailout. When Ireland needed financial assistance at came at a price of 6%, when Greece needed assistance dealing with migrants, the European back was turned.
Solidarity for some, threats of financial bombs and 6% for the rest of us.
I think you are answering your own question to be honest. You aren't so much asking why Ireland has to pay, so much as why Italy and Spain are getting more benefits from the covid relief funds?
Well the short answer is that Italy and Spain were worse hit than Ireland by Covid. If the cost to the Irish exchequer is more per capita than it was in Italy and Spain, that is because of our government's decision to pay more in covid assistance payments, rather than a true assessment of the economic impact of covid on us. That was, fundamentally, our choice, and to decide otherwise would allow countries to effectively game the system by paying out massive amounts to their citizens to justify claiming more from the EU.
I would also point out that while Spain was historically a wealthy nation, it's GDP per capita is significantly lower than Ireland, Italy, Germany etc, and their unemployment is also a significant problem. Not that their below average economic performance over the last 10 years justifies them getting a higher payment, but I disagree with your suggestion that they are on a par with Ireland in wealth terms, when they are not.0 -
I'm actually all for European solidarity and I have asked before why Greece and Italy for example didn't receive proper support in dealing with the migrant crisis from the EU. The kind of support we provided was to provide a free Mediterranean ferry service for people smugglers, I'd say the Italians were delighted to have us.johnnyskeleton wrote: »I think you are answering your own question to be honest. You aren't so much asking why Ireland has to pay, so much as why Italy and Spain are getting more benefits from the covid relief funds?
Well the short answer is that Italy and Spain were worse hit than Ireland by Covid. If the cost to the Irish exchequer is more per capita than it was in Italy and Spain, that is because of our government's decision to pay more in covid assistance payments, rather than a true assessment of the economic impact of covid on us. That was, fundamentally, our choice, and to decide otherwise would allow countries to effectively game the system by paying out massive amounts to their citizens to justify claiming more from the EU.
I would also point out that while Spain was historically a wealthy nation, it's GDP per capita is significantly lower than Ireland, Italy, Germany etc, and their unemployment is also a significant problem. Not that their below average economic performance over the last 10 years justifies them getting a higher payment, but I disagree with your suggestion that they are on a par with Ireland in wealth terms, when they are not.
The reason they are getting support is because populists are gaining strength in Spain and Italy and the only way the EU can potentially halt their rise is to buy off the population. If either country were to leave it would fatally undermine the project and the EU is fully aware it cannot afford to lose another big member states. Like any organisation the primary objective of the EU is the preservation of itself.
If it were Ireland facing the pandemic alone we'd be getting warm words, not low interest loans or grants. Some will no doubt point to the Brexit fund, but as net contributors we are paying for that ourselves. This country went through a financial hell thanks to troika austerity, it's funny that there seems to be an endless supply of money now that big states need it.
It's the hypocrisy that gets me.
(Also GDP is not a true reflection of Irish wealth, due to the amount of multinational IP warehoused here)0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »
(Also GDP is not a true reflection of Irish wealth, due to the amount of multinational IP warehoused here)
You do realise the GNI is used for the calculations not GDP? Which takes out the distortion of multinationals? And even by that measure per capita Ireland is comfortably one of the richest countries in the world.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_national_income
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(nominal)_per_capita
On your point about Ireland not being supported you obviously haven't been paying attention to negotiations particularly the many responses of hard line Brexiters which have been frustrated putting it mildly by the Irish issues. Something they did not expect as they thought the EU wouldn't support a small country like Ireland. Ireland is comfortably the most exposed country to Brexit and the country has received massive support.0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »
If it were Ireland facing the pandemic alone we'd be getting warm words, not low interest loans or grants. Some will no doubt point to the Brexit fund, but as net contributors we are paying for that ourselves. This country went through a financial hell thanks to troika austerity, it's funny that there seems to be an endless supply of money now that big states need it.
If you think austerity was bad with the Troika it was painless compared to what would have happened if they had not stepped in and bailed the country out. And even the help the "PIGS" got was difficult to get because you were asking people in other countries to bail Ireland out most of which were and are still poorer. This meant citizens in other countries took a lot of persuading. Why should poorer countries have had to bail out a rich country like Ireland?
The reality is Ireland is a rich country in EU terms and especially globally. Complaining out being net contributer is a bit like a rich person complaining they have to pay more taxes and get less benefits from the government compared to a poor person.
If you want the benefits of the club you have to pay the fees. Ireland is a small very open economy heavily dependant on global trade and the EU gives massive commercial and diplomatic benefits. Again look at the UK a far bigger country and economy and look how its suffered without having full left the protection of the EU.0 -
You do realise the GNI is used for the calculations not GDP? Which takes out the distortion of multinationals? And even by that measure per capita Ireland is comfortably one of the richest countries in the world.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_national_income
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(nominal)_per_capita
On your point about Ireland not being supported you obviously haven't been paying attention to negotiations particularly the many responses of hard line Brexiters which have been frustrated putting it mildly by the Irish issues. Something they did not expect as they thought the EU wouldn't support a small country like Ireland. Ireland is comfortably the most exposed country to Brexit and the country has received massive support.
Indeed, but if you care to look at the post I quoted, they refer to GDP. GNI is also distorted too by multinationals as well as GNI*. The country isn't as wealthy as the numbers suggest.
They're wouldn't be much point in staying in the EU and being a net contributor if the EU backed a departing state over a member now would it?0 -
If you think austerity was bad with the Troika it was painless compared to what would have happened if they had not stepped in and bailed the country out. And even the help the "PIGS" got was difficult to get because you were asking people in other countries to bail Ireland out most of which were and are still poorer. This meant citizens in other countries took a lot of persuading. Why should poorer countries have had to bail out a rich country like Ireland?
The reality is Ireland is a rich country in EU terms and especially globally. Complaining out being net contributer is a bit like a rich person complaining they have to pay more taxes and get less benefits from the government compared to a poor person.
If you want the benefits of the club you have to pay the fees. Ireland is a small very open economy heavily dependant on global trade and the EU gives massive commercial and diplomatic benefits. Again look at the UK a far bigger country and economy and look how its suffered without having full left the protection of the EU.
I think you are missing my point. If the country has been left to collapse financially of course it would've been a disaster. What I'm saying is now the big boys have the bowl out the EU has found a way to magic up the money to support them. We were left to take the 6% loans in a take it or leave it, as some sort of moral hazard exercise. The Paddy's didn't have a choice and the Commission and ECB knew it. Italy and Spain have options, like leaving, and that's the difference.
The covid bailout isn't solidarity for solidarity's sake - it's the institutions protecting themselves. If there was genuine solidarity in the Union, loans to Ireland wouldn't have had a massive mark-up. (Financial) Bombs wouldn't have been threatened to go off in Dublin...
Italy is a wealthy G8 country that has refused to reform, and indeed refused to accept conditions to reform. It's had 12 years since the crash and the state sfa has changed.0 -
The loans to Ireland didn't have a massive mark up, they were at a severe discount to the market rate.
Several of the EU member states have acknowledge that their response to the crash was not sufficient and they should have done more. There was still quite a lot of resistance to that idea from some of the more frugal states, but the covid fund is simply an evolution of EU strategy and collaboration. It reflects lessons learned from the crash.0 -
The loans to Ireland didn't have a massive mark up, they were at a severe discount to the market rate.
Several of the EU member states have acknowledge that their response to the crash was not sufficient and they should have done more. There was still quite a lot of resistance to that idea from some of the more frugal states, but the covid fund is simply an evolution of EU strategy and collaboration. It reflects lessons learned from the crash.
The other countries borrowed the funds on the markets they loaned to Ireland at I think around 2% (iirc) then loaned those funds collectively to Ireland at 6%. The EU took the absolute maximum in terms of setting a punitive rate, it set a rate just below that of the lockout rate.
The loans were hugely marked up, and for what? The money tree does exist.0 -
MrMusician18 wrote: »The loans were hugely marked up, and for what? The money tree does exist.
The large chance we would default on them. Which is what had our own rates in the market up at around 14% if I remember correctly.
The EU was also against QE until it changed its mind and wasn't. Their response to crises has evolved a lot over the last decade or so but there remains a sentiment that the frugal nations do not want to suffer by collectivising debt with others. Hence why this deal was so hard to achieve and why it contains a greater loan to grant ratio then many wanted.0 -
Advertisement
-
johnnyskeleton wrote: »I would also point out that while Spain was historically a wealthy nation, it's GDP per capita is significantly lower than Ireland, Italy, Germany etc, and their unemployment is also a significant problem. Not that their below average economic performance over the last 10 years justifies them getting a higher payment, but I disagree with your suggestion that they are on a par with Ireland in wealth terms, when they are not.
So why are they giving more in extra aid tonon EU than Ireland is recieving in terms than Ireland is recieving from this fund then?
If Hungary or Poland was misusing funds this way the typical poster on this forum would be outraged.0
Advertisement