Greece

[Ulysses]

couldn't

[Ulysses]

be

[Ulysses]

arsed

[Ulysses]

typing what

[Ulysses]

I think

[Ulysses]

in a single

[Ulysses]

coherent post.

[Ulysses]

It is a fact that the Greek economy and Greek society would have imploded, with consequences far more devastating than occurred, unless the Greek economy had been given some chance of a soft landing.

 

It was given the best chance available, to the tune of €80,000 per household.

 

Things would have been worse if the Greek government had not accepted the Programme.  Things would have been better if Greek governments had acted sooner to address the devastating structural failings in the country's public finances.  Things would have been even better still if successive Greek governments had acted more responsibly and less corruptly than they did over an extended period of years, even decades.

 

Those are the facts.  The rest is just rhetoric.  I watched irresponsible eejits of the highest order try to argue the same self-destructive economically illiterate nonsense when that fool Varoufakis was clowning around making an arse of himself before chickening out of taking any responsibility as a member of the Greek government.  Back in 2010 I watched them try to argue that Ireland should set itself on fire rather than give its economy the breathing space being offered by the EU and the IMF so that it could hold its economy and society together.

 

Nonsense, from people who spout from a position of both ignorance and irresponsibility.  Maybe they can afford to watch the world burn.  The Greek government did not have that luxury.

 

Anyway, while others use Greeks - who they do not give a shite about - as political footballs, I'll once again express the hope that the recovery the Greek economy has seen in the last 12-18 months will become more sustained, and remain sustainable.

[jake]

15 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

coherent post.

Fair point.

I am not like you.

I post in a different way.

And I do not accept your reasoning .

You can bat away about 80 thousand pounds per household.

And take the piss out of me to try and prove your point.

It makes no difference .

 

If you are seriously trying to manipulate the truth that the solution to punish the poor to alleviate the hit that German banks would have had to take as some kind of aversion to a humanitarian crisis.

 

Why did the foolish bankers not take the hit.

 

Your use of the word clowns high horses and general put downs while repeating the same flawed argument reminds me that some people form views and carry them regardless of others.

And there is a word for your mindset.

 

 

[jake]

14 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

It is a fact that the Greek economy and Greek society would have imploded, with consequences far more devastating than occurred, unless the Greek economy had been given some chance of a soft landing.

 

It was given the best chance available, to the tune of €80,000 per household.

 

Things would have been worse if the Greek government had not accepted the Programme.  Things would have been better if Greek governments had acted sooner to address the devastating structural failings in the country's public finances.  Things would have been even better still if successive Greek governments had acted more responsibly and less corruptly than they did over an extended period of years, even decades.

 

Those are the facts.  The rest is just rhetoric.  I watched irresponsible eejits of the highest order try to argue the same self-destructive economically illiterate nonsense when that fool Varoufakis was clowning around making an arse of himself before chickening out of taking any responsibility as a member of the Greek government.  Back in 2010 I watched them try to argue that Ireland should set itself on fire rather than give its economy the breathing space being offered by the EU and the IMF so that it could hold its economy and society together.

 

Nonsense, from people who spout from a position of both ignorance and irresponsibility.  Maybe they can afford to watch the world burn.  The Greek government did not have that luxury.

 

Anyway, while others use Greeks - who they do not give a shite about - as political footballs, I'll once again express the hope that the recovery the Greek economy has seen in the last 12-18 months will become more sustained, and remain sustainable.

And I take exception to you trying to suggest I'm using Greeks as political football's that I don't give a shite about.

 

You really are rattled so you resort to being a snide.

Something I've come to notice about you.

 

Try realising that this forum is about sharing ideas and not some kind of little court of law in your little parliament.

I don't give a shite if someone's Greek Brown or a little tosser full of himself.

 

I will take their side if they are getting turned over.

 

 

[Ulysses]

Just now, jake said:

And I do not accept your reasoning .

 

 

 

That's exactly why you are wrong.

 

This has nothing to do with my reasoning.

 

It's to do with the facts.  Not the facts that you want to make up because you're in the mood for a rant or a row.  The facts that faced the Greek government and the Greek people, and that they had to deal with.

 

The trouble with you trying to ignore €80,000 per household is that it is a hell of a lot of money to pump into an ailing economy - and that is exactly what the EU and the IMF did.  The only alternative to lending the money was to not lend the money.  Then Greeks would have been jobless and hungry by the multitudes, and their society would have collapsed completely.  You have the luxury of pontificating on that at a safe distance a long way from the heat of the fire.  The Greek government did not have that choice.

 

You can rant all day, but you cannot outrun the realities, no matter how desperately you try.  If the Greek government couldn't, you certainly can't.

[Ulysses]

1 minute ago, jake said:

And I take exception to you trying to suggest I'm using Greeks as political football's that I don't give a shite about.

 

Then stop.

[jake]

2 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

That's exactly why you are wrong.

 

This has nothing to do with my reasoning.

 

It's to do with the facts.  Not the facts that you want to make up because you're in the mood for a rant or a row.  The facts that faced the Greek government and the Greek people, and that they had to deal with.

 

The trouble with you trying to ignore €80,000 per household is that it is a hell of a lot of money to pump into an ailing economy - and that is exactly what the EU and the IMF did.  The only alternative to lending the money was to not lend the money.  Then Greeks would have been jobless and hungry by the multitudes, and their society would have collapsed completely.  You have the luxury of pontificating on that at a safe distance a long way from the heat of the fire.  The Greek government did not have that choice.

 

You can rant all day, but you cannot outrun the realities, no matter how desperately you try.  If the Greek government couldn't, you certainly can't.

No .

The facts are this.

 

The financial institutions continued to loan Greece money.

Foolish to loan foolish to borrow.

 

Instead of a deal thrashed out between said parties a deal was enforced.

A deal which saw 95% of the bail out given to the 50% responsible lenders .

And 5% given to the responsible borrowers.

That saw the poor bear the brunt.

 

Your view is that this is acceptable.

I disagree.

You mock me.

You the all knowing Uly dismiss the views and insights of the then Greek finance ministers.

 

You can keep resorting to debt per household versus GDP.

 

You support austerity on people regardless of where they come from.

Regardless of the personal impact.

And you support it to save the impact being shared fairly .

That's fact

 

You can resort to insulting me all you want .

My view is as factual as you think yours is.

[jake]

12 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Then stop.

How can I stop doing something I have not started.

 

I am arguing a point.

 

You should stop trying to make out other people's points of view are as misguided as your own.

 

We can both play your silly student debate games.

 

 

[jake]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.businesstimes.com.sg/government-economy/germany-pockets-29b-euros-from-greece-bailouts%3famp

[Ulysses]

45 minutes ago, jake said:

 

We can both play your silly student debate games.

 

 

Ah jake, I've told you before and I'll tell you again; you really, really need to stop obsessing so much.

 

We have different ways of doing this.  I like to work with the facts.  I'm not working with any fancy economic theories here, and I'm not trying to promote the view that the EU/IMF Programmes were "right" or "wrong".   Unlike you I'm not motivated by any political agenda.  And unlike you I do care about the people involved here.  "Austerity" is just a buzz word to you to allow you to create bogeymen and then hate them.  Today it's the EU.  Tomorrow, who knows?  Unlike you, I know people who lost out - sometimes in a very big way - because of what happened in the post-2008 recession.  But I also know that they would have lost out in a far more profound and deeply painful way without the interventions by the EU/IMF.

 

Successive Greek governments deliberately and systematically forged and faked economic statistics so that they could borrow money to finance an impossible and unsustainable model of current and capital public spending, allied to a breathtakingly high trade deficit. 

 

The chickens came home to roost in spectacular and horrible style.  But that would not have had to happen if successive Greek governments had run their country without resorting to forgery, deceit and corruption to do so.  That is why it is a fact that austerity was brought upon Greek society and the Greek economy by the actions of Greek governments.

 

The EU and the IMF stopped the Greek banks and the Greek public sector from collapsing in on themselves, by providing over €300 billion to keep banks in a position to hand out money and to cover bills that the Greek government and Greek taxpayers had to pay.  That was not an austerity programme, that was a rescue.  Greek governments ducked and weaved and delayed and dithered, but in the end they did what was necessary.  If they could realistically have done differently they would have done so.

 

As for the fools, the clowns, and the headbangers who would rather have watched Greece and Ireland and Portugal and the others burn.  They offered no solutions and no ideas other than political rants - to be honest, they offered the same political rants that you offer.  The governments of those countries had to live in the real world and make real decisions; unlike the internet warriors and armchair commentators they couldn't just rant from behind a keyboard or rattle off a column for a newspaper and pretend it was real life.  Unlike losers and political  dilettantes like Varoufakis, they couldn't just chicken out of the responsibility of governing and ride off into the sunset the minute the going got tough.  That, like it or not, is what governing is about and what governments have to do.

 

You have no solutions, jake.  You've had multiple posts on the thread complaining about what happened, but you haven't offered a single viable solution.  But that's not such a big surprise.  No-one else who shouted "AUSTERITY" had any solutions either.  Not real ones.  Not ones that would have helped the Greeks, or anyone else.  Shouting at people who see things differently to you doesn't make your case stronger.  It makes it weaker.  If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better.

[ri Alban]

6 hours ago, jake said:

High horse.

Is this the new slap down of people who see the effects of irresponsible greed and foolish financiers who are immune from responsibility.

Of those who call out those who defend an austerity mad organisation.

 

 

That is true jake. But normal everyday people like you and i helped cause the financial meltdown too. Taking mortgages and loans way over what they could afford, then defaulting. Yes the banks played roulette with big Big consequences in other areas, but this was part of it too. 

Your right tho', the wee folk paid the biggest  price and will for evermore, unless we do something about it. REVOLUTION! would be my pick. 

[Ulysses]

9 hours ago, ri Alban said:

That is true jake. But normal everyday people like you and i helped cause the financial meltdown too. Taking mortgages and loans way over what they could afford, then defaulting. Yes the banks played roulette with big Big consequences in other areas, but this was part of it too. 

Your right tho', the wee folk paid the biggest  price and will for evermore, unless we do something about it. REVOLUTION! would be my pick. 

 

Normal everyday people made some contribution to the financial meltdown, and they did gain financially during the years of easy credit, but the overwhelming share of the blame lies with banks, regulators and governments.

 

But that being true was of no help to the Greeks.  Once the problems of their public finances and banking liquidity kicked in, Greece could not function without the EU/IMF bailout.  Its ATMs wouldn't have worked, and its public servants, including health workers, police and the army, would not have been paid, and chaos would have followed.  The bailout wasn't the cause of the problems - it was the point at which the chickens came home to roost.  The problems were already there, caused by years, possibly decades, of mismanagement  by successive Greek governments.

 

And if the Greeks had said no, there would have been a single, appalling collapse following which the country could have rebuilt its economy.  But the problem for the Greek government is that the collapse would have been worse than what happened, and could have been very much worse indeed.  And you can be 100% sure that the wealthier Greeks who could afford to hide money abroad would have been protected from the damage, while the worst-hit victims would have been the ordinary people of Greece

 

So the "AUSTERITY!" and "REVOLUTION!" supporters need to sit back, have a wee think, and then say what you would have done instead.  Not some theoretical notion of what you'd do if this was a game, because it was no such thing.  Faced with being responsible for the economic and social well-being of over 10 million people, a complete collapse of your public finances and money circulation system, and a terrible choice between something dreadful and something much worse, what would you have done?  What would you have done differently to the Greek governments of the time?  How would you have made sure to limit the damage rather than making it worse for the ordinary people of Greece?

 

To be honest, it doesn't matter what they think, because the decisions were already made and the time is now past.  But they argued for default and collapse then - in Greece, in Ireland, and in Portugal.  They were wrong then, and they're still wrong.

[jack D and coke]

On 20/08/2018 at 21:33, jake said:

Let's not forget that during this austerity the Greek GDP has shrunk by 30%.

That living standards amongst the poorest are unbearable.

That the middle class has all but disappeared.

That visible signs in the Greek infrastructure such as basic road signage has all but disappeared.

That it is now almost as cheap to buy halloumi in the UK as Greece.

That fruit and veg are almost beyond the reach of the poor.

That tax has gone up.

That rates have gone up.

 

Absolute brutal austerity brought to you from the EU.

To protect German banks.

 

And some of the same posters who rally against Tory austerity which in comparison look like socialist worker finances should wonder if their guardian led dogma is blinding them.

 

When you look at the favourable bail outs to financial institutions with little or no punishment you have to wonder .

 

Rant over .

And I make no apologies.

 

And Greece is not out of the woods by a long shot.

 

 

Interesting mate. I read these tweets who sort of back up what you’re saying...

 

Ive no idea if that’s right or not but it was liked by defecit owls who I follow who explain deficits in a way I’d never understood before. 

[Cade]

2 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Interesting mate. I read these tweets who sort of back up what you’re saying...

 

Ive no idea if that’s right or not but it was liked by defecit owls who I follow who explain deficits in a way I’d never understood before. 

Well yes, when you are in crippling amounts of debt, most of your money does tend to go to the people you owe the debt to.

 

It's not a conspiracy. It's just how finance works.

[jake]

2 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Interesting mate. I read these tweets who sort of back up what you’re saying...

 

Ive no idea if that’s right or not but it was liked by defecit owls who I follow who explain deficits in a way I’d never understood before. 

There are alternative ways in which the Europe's Mediterranean economies could have coped post crisis.

That would not have suited German financial institutions.

So German political muscle through the EU practice austerity.

A tactic which never promotes growth.

 

To pretend that the EU is some kind of beneficiary imo is naive as best.

[jake]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Well yes, when you are in crippling amounts of debt, most of your money does tend to go to the people you owe the debt to.

 

It's not a conspiracy. It's just how finance works.

The Greek economy didn't owe the debt to taxpayers.

 

I take it your in favour of Tory austerity now ?

 

 

[jake]

EU austerity good

 

Tory austerity bad.

 

The new socialism

[jack D and coke]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

Well yes, when you are in crippling amounts of debt, most of your money does tend to go to the people you owe the debt to.

 

It's not a conspiracy. It's just how finance works.

Did you read the tweets? 

[jake]

On 21/08/2018 at 01:24, Ulysses said:

 

Ah jake, I've told you before and I'll tell you again; you really, really need to stop obsessing so much.

 

We have different ways of doing this.  I like to work with the facts.  I'm not working with any fancy economic theories here, and I'm not trying to promote the view that the EU/IMF Programmes were "right" or "wrong".   Unlike you I'm not motivated by any political agenda.  And unlike you I do care about the people involved here.  "Austerity" is just a buzz word to you to allow you to create bogeymen and then hate them.  Today it's the EU.  Tomorrow, who knows?  Unlike you, I know people who lost out - sometimes in a very big way - because of what happened in the post-2008 recession.  But I also know that they would have lost out in a far more profound and deeply painful way without the interventions by the EU/IMF.

 

Successive Greek governments deliberately and systematically forged and faked economic statistics so that they could borrow money to finance an impossible and unsustainable model of current and capital public spending, allied to a breathtakingly high trade deficit. 

 

The chickens came home to roost in spectacular and horrible style.  But that would not have had to happen if successive Greek governments had run their country without resorting to forgery, deceit and corruption to do so.  That is why it is a fact that austerity was brought upon Greek society and the Greek economy by the actions of Greek governments.

 

The EU and the IMF stopped the Greek banks and the Greek public sector from collapsing in on themselves, by providing over €300 billion to keep banks in a position to hand out money and to cover bills that the Greek government and Greek taxpayers had to pay.  That was not an austerity programme, that was a rescue.  Greek governments ducked and weaved and delayed and dithered, but in the end they did what was necessary.  If they could realistically have done differently they would have done so.

 

As for the fools, the clowns, and the headbangers who would rather have watched Greece and Ireland and Portugal and the others burn.  They offered no solutions and no ideas other than political rants - to be honest, they offered the same political rants that you offer.  The governments of those countries had to live in the real world and make real decisions; unlike the internet warriors and armchair commentators they couldn't just rant from behind a keyboard or rattle off a column for a newspaper and pretend it was real life.  Unlike losers and political  dilettantes like Varoufakis, they couldn't just chicken out of the responsibility of governing and ride off into the sunset the minute the going got tough.  That, like it or not, is what governing is about and what governments have to do.

 

You have no solutions, jake.  You've had multiple posts on the thread complaining about what happened, but you haven't offered a single viable solution.  But that's not such a big surprise.  No-one else who shouted "AUSTERITY" had any solutions either.  Not real ones.  Not ones that would have helped the Greeks, or anyone else.  Shouting at people who see things differently to you doesn't make your case stronger.  It makes it weaker.  If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better.

You know you usually do alright when arguing against me.

 

Don't get the ah Jake your obsessed patter though.

 

What should have happened could not because Greece are members of the EU.

 

Inflationary policies would have and could allow country's such as them Italy Spain and Portugal to allow growth to alleviate debt.

 

German financiers turn white at that thought.

[jake]

7 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Did you read the tweets? 

Cade will defend the EU against anything.

Even austerity policies which make the Tories look like social workers.

 

[ri Alban]

4 hours ago, jake said:

EU austerity good

 

Tory austerity bad.

 

The new socialism

Drinking early? 

[56anawthat]

Good grief! Looked in here taking refuge from the endless Lafferty nonsense, and this is what I get! At at least a few sensible posts here (and occasionally there too) but not the light relief I was looking for. Too much reading!

 

For what it's worth I've been to Greece a few times since the economy went tats up, and see the effects - university graduates working as gardeners, construction projects all stopped, pension cuts. Everyone still avoiding paying taxes, and yet still wanting to get their pensions at age 55. That was never going to work. Big cuts taken out of credit card transactions, and mistrust of the banks, means everyone wants cash, and who can blame them.

 

Yet the people are mostly friendly and as cheerful, and there are currently great deals on offer at top class hotels desperate for tourist euros. So it's not all bad, at least from the outside looking in.

[Ulysses]

11 hours ago, jake said:

[....more obsessed patter....]

 

If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better. 

[DVB]

Greece is a good example of why you shouldn’t have different governments linked to one currency.

 

In the past the currency would have crashed meaning that the country would be dirt cheap for foreigners and expensive to Greeks importing from other countries.

 

Eventually the currency and economy would have recovered.

 

Now due to the Euro there is no additional inward investment and Greece will just stagger on weighed down by huge interest payments.

[jake]

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better. 

Why shouldn't I rant?

Why shouldn't I shout about austerity?

I have repeatedly said and explained  what I think is a better way forward.

The discussion is not on your terms.

My view is as valid as yours.

 

Do you advocate austerity as proven method for growth in a capitalist society?

Because history shows that investment and inflationary methods are stimulants.

 

So who benefits as has been pointed out from austerity?

 

Or are you so dogmatically driven you won't discuss properly  different views?

 

This is not a court of law Uly it's a football forum.

 

The EU is not working and when you have posters such as Cade celebrating austerity and the squeezing to death the poor in the name of the EU and opposing it under the Tories .

You come to realise that it's not about what's right but it's about choosing sides and sticking to it.

 

Try forming your own opinion Uly.

Set yourself free.

Don't be so anal.

[jake]

9 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Drinking early? 

Nice.

 

Can't get me on being a racist?

 

Go for drink or drug problems.

 

You constantly play me instead of my posts.

 

Happily celebrating ultra Tory policies on the Greeks while crying braveheart about piffle compared to what the people our side of the street are going through.

 

Two faced that's you Aussie

[jake]

48 minutes ago, DVB said:

Greece is a good example of why you shouldn’t have different governments linked to one currency.

 

In the past the currency would have crashed meaning that the country would be dirt cheap for foreigners and expensive to Greeks importing from other countries.

 

Eventually the currency and economy would have recovered.

 

Now due to the Euro there is no additional inward investment and Greece will just stagger on weighed down by huge interest payments.

Yep.

Inflationary measures which actually sees capitalism work.

 

And yet the comment from the OP .

 

Recovery complete.

 

Fek me unbelievably naive

[Ulysses]

13 minutes ago, jake said:

I have repeatedly said and explained  what I think is a better way forward.

 

 

No you haven't. You have never said or explained what you think is a better way forward.  You have complained about what you don't like, but you have never offered an alternative.  You have ranted, but you have never proposed solutions.  You have posted videos and links, but you have never said what would work.  You have shouted "AUSTERITY", but you have never said what should have happened.  You have said what shouldn't have happened, but you have never said what should have happened, and you have never explained why it would have been better than what did happen.

 

If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better. 

 

This is the third time I've asked.  Why won't you say what should have happened.  Is it because you don't know?  Why won't you explain why it would have worked?  Is it because you won't say what should have happened?  Why won't you explain your solution?  Is is because you don't have one?

 

I stand by what I said.  During that crisis the Greek governments - of different political colours - tried everything to come up with an alternative to the bailout, but they could not come up with anything that would work.  When all else failed they did what they had to do so that they could keep their country's money supply going, and keep paying for their public services.  The result was awful - but it would have been far, far worse if they had not done what they did.  That is not a matter of opinion, it is the reality of what happened.

 

You can complain all day, but unless you can say what would have worked instead, and why it would have worked, your posts are nothing more than meaningless.

 

We're all entitled to our opinions.  The difference is that I have a sound explanation for mine, and you have no explanation at all for yours.

[jake]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

No you haven't. You have never said or explained what you think is a better way forward.  You have complained about what you don't like, but you have never offered an alternative.  You have ranted, but you have never proposed solutions.  You have posted videos and links, but you have never said what would work.  You have shouted "AUSTERITY", but you have never said what should have happened.  You have said what shouldn't have happened, but you have never said what should have happened, and you have never explained why it would have been better than what did happen.

 

If you have a solution, explain it.  Don't rant.  Don't post a video or a link.  Don't shout about "AUSTERITY" and say what shouldn't have happened.  Say what should have happened, and explain why it would have been better. 

 

This is the third time I've asked.  Why won't you say what should have happened.  Is it because you don't know?  Why won't you explain why it would have worked?  Is it because you won't say what should have happened?  Why won't you explain your solution?  Is is because you don't have one?

 

I stand by what I said.  During that crisis the Greek governments - of different political colours - tried everything to come up with an alternative to the bailout, but they could not come up with anything that would work.  When all else failed they did what they had to do so that they could keep their country's money supply going, and keep paying for their public services.  The result was awful - but it would have been far, far worse if they had not done what they did.  That is not a matter of opinion, it is the reality of what happened.

 

You can complain all day, but unless you can say what would have worked instead, and why it would have worked, your posts are nothing more than meaningless.

 

We're all entitled to our opinions.  The difference is that I have a sound explanation for mine, and you have no explanation at all for yours.

I don't post video links.

You have offered nothing other than to support the EU position.

That's not your view merely a support of the action taken.

I have indeed offered an alternative solution to what happened.

You chose to ignore that .

 

You can complain all day about my view but the bottom line is you support a view that saw big finance compensated at the expense of the poor.

You support austerity.

I didn't shout that .

It's a commonly held view that the EU practice this approach.

 

You really need to stop ramping up language that paints a false picture of my posts.

The result was awful but you can only guess and not know that any other deal would have been worse.

 

There was no alternative for Greece as it had no control over it's economy.

 

I'm going to repeat this.

Because it's important

 

IT HAD NO CONTROL OVER ITS ECONOMY.

 

See I shouted that because it's the crux.

 

Try reading up on capitalism and failed measures for growth.

And proven measures.

 

The examples are obvious.

 

 

I say good night to you.

 

Try not taking it all to heart Uly

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, jake said:

I don't post video links.

You have offered nothing other than to support the EU position.

That's not your view merely a support of the action taken.

I have indeed offered an alternative solution to what happened.

You chose to ignore that .

 

You can complain all day about my view but the bottom line is you support a view that saw big finance compensated at the expense of the poor.

You support austerity.

I didn't shout that .

It's a commonly held view that the EU practice this approach.

 

You really need to stop ramping up language that paints a false picture of my posts.

The result was awful but you can only guess and not know that any other deal would have been worse.

 

There was no alternative for Greece as it had no control over it's economy.

 

I'm going to repeat this.

Because it's important

 

IT HAD NO CONTROL OVER ITS ECONOMY.

 

See I shouted that because it's the crux.

 

Try reading up on capitalism and failed measures for growth.

And proven measures.

 

The examples are obvious.

 

 

I say good night to you.

 

Try not taking it all to heart Uly

They didn't do too well with the economy pre crash, did they. I bit like everyone I suppose. 

 

You'll have to remind me of your solution, I can only see not this or not that. Talk about solutions, do you think Boris Donald, Nigel and Jacob Mogg are close to the final. 

Edited August 23, 2018 by ri Alban

[jake]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

They didn't do too well with the economy pre crash, did they. I bit like everyone I suppose. 

 

You'll have to remind me of your solution, I can only see not this or not that. Talk about solutions, do you think Boris Donald, Nigel and Jacob Mogg are close to the final. 

You are more in line with their policies than I am.

Considering you are a fan of austerity.

Tartan Tory Aussie ?

Or is it only foreigners who deserve that in your book?

[Ulysses]

17 hours ago, ri Alban said:

They didn't do too well with the economy pre crash, did they. I bit like everyone I suppose. 

 

You'll have to remind me of your solution, I can only see not this or not that. Talk about solutions, do you think Boris Donald, Nigel and Jacob Mogg are close to the final. 

 

 

jake has never offered a solution.  He has never said what he would have done or how it would have been better than what happened.

 

jake doesn't know what the solutions might be, or how they might have worked.  All jake knows is how to say what he doesn't like, not what he would do instead.  I've repeatedly asked jake to explain his case, but he hasn't.  Instead he's resorted to making up stuff.

 

For example, I have no idea on Earth why jake would claim that I supported the bailout.  I didn't.  I said that the Greek government had no choice but to accept it.  That doesn't mean it was good - it means any other course of action would have been so awful that the Greeks couldn't have contemplated it.  If the Greek government had a better choice at the time, they would have taken that instead.  Would I have supported that?  Who knows?  Doesn't it depend on how bad it was?  That's not support.  It's not opposition either.  It's realism.  It's not even my realism - it's the realism of the people who had to make the decision at the time.  And anyway, the poor unfortunates in Greece couldn't really give a crap what I thought.

 

This isn't like a comic strip or a soap opera where you get the cheer the good guys and boo the baddies - it's about real life, real screw-ups, real choices and real decisions.

 

Successive Greek governments ran the place into the ground.  They didn't mean to, but they still did it.  Once that happened, they were confronted with a set of choices, all of which were terrible.  The bailout was the option that offered the least terrible outcome.  Was it good?  No.  Was it less bad than the alternatives?  Yes.

 

If the above analysis is wrong, it's wrong because in fact there was something else the Greek government could have done that would have been better - or at least less terrible - than the bailout.  I'd be happy to see someone setting out what that is.  If it makes sense I'll buy it, if it doesn't I'll criticise it - either way I'll debate it.  But whoever does that, there isn't a hope in hell that it will be jake.  He can't.  If he could he would have done it already.  It's not like he hasn't had lots of chances.

 

Everyone's entitled to an opinion.  But the simple reality is that not all opinions are valid, and not all opinions are equal.  Passionate argument is fine, but it is no substitute for hard-nosed and realistic analysis of the facts.  We could form a club here in the Shed and boo the Greek governments who screwed things up, boo rich Greeks, boo the banks, boo the EU, boo the IMF, and boo anyone else we thought was at fault.  But so what?  Aside from letting us salve our consciences and engage in a bit of virtue-signalling, it wouldn't be any use at all.

[ri Alban]

21 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

jake has never offered a solution.  He has never said what he would have done or how it would have been better than what happened.

 

jake doesn't know what the solutions might be, or how they might have worked.  All jake knows is how to say what he doesn't like, not what he would do instead.  I've repeatedly asked jake to explain his case, but he hasn't.  Instead he's resorted to making up stuff.

 

For example, I have no idea on Earth why jake would claim that I supported the bailout.  I didn't.  I said that the Greek government had no choice but to accept it.  That doesn't mean it was good - it means any other course of action would have been so awful that the Greeks couldn't have contemplated it.  If the Greek government had a better choice at the time, they would have taken that instead.  Would I have supported that?  Who knows?  Doesn't it depend on how bad it was?  That's not support.  It's not opposition either.  It's realism.  It's not even my realism - it's the realism of the people who had to make the decision at the time.  And anyway, the poor unfortunates in Greece couldn't really give a crap what I thought.

 

This isn't like a comic strip or a soap opera where you get the cheer the good guys and boo the baddies - it's about real life, real screw-ups, real choices and real decisions.

 

Successive Greek governments ran the place into the ground.  They didn't mean to, but they still did it.  Once that happened, they were confronted with a set of choices, all of which were terrible.  The bailout was the option that offered the least terrible outcome.  Was it good?  No.  Was it less bad than the alternatives?  Yes.

 

If the above analysis is wrong, it's wrong because in fact there was something else the Greek government could have done that would have been better - or at least less terrible - than the bailout.  I'd be happy to see someone setting out what that is.  If it makes sense I'll buy it, if it doesn't I'll criticise it - either way I'll debate it.  But whoever does that, there isn't a hope in hell that it will be jake.  He can't.  If he could he would have done it already.  It's not like he hasn't had lots of chances.

 

Everyone's entitled to an opinion.  But the simple reality is that not all opinions are valid, and not all opinions are equal.  Passionate argument is fine, but it is no substitute for hard-nosed and realistic analysis of the facts.  We could form a club here in the Shed and boo the Greek governments who screwed things up, boo rich Greeks, boo the banks, boo the EU, boo the IMF, and boo anyone else we thought was at fault.  But so what?  Aside from letting us salve our consciences and engage in a bit of virtue-signalling, it wouldn't be any use at all.

[jake]

On 23/08/2018 at 22:04, Ulysses said:

 

 

jake has never offered a solution.  He has never said what he would have done or how it would have been better than what happened.

 

jake doesn't know what the solutions might be, or how they might have worked.  All jake knows is how to say what he doesn't like, not what he would do instead.  I've repeatedly asked jake to explain his case, but he hasn't.  Instead he's resorted to making up stuff.

 

For example, I have no idea on Earth why jake would claim that I supported the bailout.  I didn't.  I said that the Greek government had no choice but to accept it.  That doesn't mean it was good - it means any other course of action would have been so awful that the Greeks couldn't have contemplated it.  If the Greek government had a better choice at the time, they would have taken that instead.  Would I have supported that?  Who knows?  Doesn't it depend on how bad it was?  That's not support.  It's not opposition either.  It's realism.  It's not even my realism - it's the realism of the people who had to make the decision at the time.  And anyway, the poor unfortunates in Greece couldn't really give a crap what I thought.

 

This isn't like a comic strip or a soap opera where you get the cheer the good guys and boo the baddies - it's about real life, real screw-ups, real choices and real decisions.

 

Successive Greek governments ran the place into the ground.  They didn't mean to, but they still did it.  Once that happened, they were confronted with a set of choices, all of which were terrible.  The bailout was the option that offered the least terrible outcome.  Was it good?  No.  Was it less bad than the alternatives?  Yes.

 

If the above analysis is wrong, it's wrong because in fact there was something else the Greek government could have done that would have been better - or at least less terrible - than the bailout.  I'd be happy to see someone setting out what that is.  If it makes sense I'll buy it, if it doesn't I'll criticise it - either way I'll debate it.  But whoever does that, there isn't a hope in hell that it will be jake.  He can't.  If he could he would have done it already.  It's not like he hasn't had lots of chances.

 

Everyone's entitled to an opinion.  But the simple reality is that not all opinions are valid, and not all opinions are equal.  Passionate argument is fine, but it is no substitute for hard-nosed and realistic analysis of the facts.  We could form a club here in the Shed and boo the Greek governments who screwed things up, boo rich Greeks, boo the banks, boo the EU, boo the IMF, and boo anyone else we thought was at fault.  But so what?  Aside from letting us salve our consciences and engage in a bit of virtue-signalling, it wouldn't be any use at all.

Jake doesn't have to come up with a solution.

Because Jake isn't a financier or a politician.

But I'm sure I have posted links to others who point out exactly how we are where we are.

As for virtue signalling .

Please don't be so stupid.

It's hardly virtue signalling to point out that from the middle class down in Greece they are the ones who have paid the price and will continue to do so for the benefit of private capital .

 

The rest of your post is just a regurgitated collective of your previous posts.

And a defence of the EU.

 

[jake]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/26/greece-was-never-bailed-out---it-remains-a-debtors-prison-and-the-eu-still-holds-the-keys

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, jake said:

Jake doesn't have to come up with a solution.

Because Jake isn't a financier or a politician.

But I'm sure I have posted links to others who point out exactly how we are where we are.

As for virtue signalling .

Please don't be so stupid.

It's hardly virtue signalling to point out that from the middle class down in Greece they are the ones who have paid the price and will continue to do so for the benefit of private capital .

 

The rest of your post is just a regurgitated collective of your previous posts.

And a defence of the EU.

 

 

 

Thanks.  After five failed attempts, I'm glad you're getting more and more personal, rude and off-topic.  You have no solutions to offer, and I thank you for conceding the argument.

 

I knew there was no point, but I gave you five chances.  Better luck next time. 

[Ulysses]

On 24/08/2018 at 19:24, ri Alban said:

 

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

Oops, sorry Aussie, my picture link didn't post. 

 

 

[jake]

42 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

Thanks.  After five failed attempts, I'm glad you're getting more and more personal, rude and off-topic.  You have no solutions to offer, and I thank you for conceding the argument.

 

I knew there was no point, but I gave you five chances.  Better luck next time. 

Eh?

I don't get personal that's your remit.

And the solution is from my viewpoint that the single currency and the EU has failed .

I also posted the alternative.

 

More and more personal and rude and off topic.

 

Exaggeration just a tad no?

 

It must be easy to agree with something that's plainly been wrong but shrug and say what else can you do.

 

 

[jake]

Can I ask you Ulysses what you thought of the link I posted recently.

And if you can try to disassociate it from my standpoint.

That might help you be less nippy.

[jake]

Reading briefly back through the thread I'd have to say that if anyone was getting personal it was Uly.

Anyway I have I admit not a great posting style.

You say that you didn't support the bailout but what choice was there.

So if you didn't support it what was it you would have?

Because I didn't but you slag me off for not having an alternative.

So what was yours?

 

My view is that this is the result of the EU and in particular German financiers needing the bail out more than Greece.

And the OP was wildly off the mark.

The Greeks are to suffer austerity (the economic policy of the EU) for decades.

[jake]

Sorry

[jake]

For the break

[jake]

Up of my thoughts