They have to if they're getting IMF loans. IMF usually makes a lot of public services privatized. Real fucking cutthroat and good for business, but if your country needs a loan from the IMF you guys fucked up a lot.Bertster7 wrote:
You do realise this isn't true?
Greece are not privatising their healthcare system. I certainly haven't seen anything about them privatising it in the proposed austerity measures.
Sounds good to me. Privatization is a necessary thing when a planned economy is suffering.Cybargs wrote:
They have to if they're getting IMF loans. IMF usually makes a lot of public services privatized. Real fucking cutthroat and good for business, but if your country needs a loan from the IMF you guys fucked up a lot.Bertster7 wrote:
You do realise this isn't true?
Greece are not privatising their healthcare system. I certainly haven't seen anything about them privatising it in the proposed austerity measures.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-05-16 11:53:17)
I'm assuming that's put into place to encourage foreign investment.eleven bravo wrote:
its not just privatization. things like "tax free zones" where foreign corporations have an advantage over domestic ones.
Last edited by CapnNismo (2010-05-16 13:39:23)
It sounds like they need to end tenure and radically change their government's rules.CapnNismo wrote:
Greece's problem isn't public healthcare. Greece's problem is that the government workers are abusing the system every way to Sunday (raping is probably a more accurate term). For instance: Greek civil servants cannot be fired. Once you have the job, you have it for life. You get paid A BONUS for showing up on time. Many civil servants have two jobs and don't go to the government job. Greece has thousands of committees that they pay money out to and being a member earns you a paycheck. Problem is, Greece has no clue how many of these committees exist, but there is one that is in charge of taking care of a lake - that dried up decades ago. Then if you are the divorced or unmarried daughter of a civil servant, you can collect the pension of your parent even after they are dead and gone. Civil servants can also go into retirement and start collecting their pension at the age of 47. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/10093758.stm)
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-05-16 14:03:01)
Oh, I'm not suggesting that will happen. I just find it sad that these countries so quickly take the money of other nations without doing what is necessary to fix things in the long run.CapnNismo wrote:
Turq, I can only agree with you, but do you really think a country is going to be very willing to giving up its sovereignty, even a piece of it? The member states of the EU already handed over a sizable portion just to be members.
Is that how you run your own life? Run up a bunch of credit card and mortgage debt and then declare bankruptcy? How's that working out for you? Are people still willing to loan you money? Do you own your own business or do you suck off the teet of your employer?Diesel_dyk wrote:
Greece should just default... screw the bond holders, take Goldman Sachs down with them, pull out of the Euro, help destroy the EU, ruin the plans for a world govt, put out arrest warrants on the IMF with shoot to kill orders... cause it looks like the IMF just declared war on Greece and laid out terms of unconditional surrender.
I agree with you on one part. Fuck Goldman Sachs. All of those fuckers need to be Al Quida's next target. The only difference is that they would actually be a legitimate target rather than an undeserving one like the previous ones.Diesel_dyk wrote:
Greece should just default... screw the bond holders, take Goldman Sachs down with them, pull out of the Euro, help destroy the EU, ruin the plans for a world govt, put out arrest warrants on the IMF with shoot to kill orders... cause it looks like the IMF just declared war on Greece and laid out terms of unconditional surrender.
Do you know what a derivative is? The government uses the term 'credit default swap' instead. Same thing, two different names.Turquoise wrote:
I agree with you on one part. Fuck Goldman Sachs. All of those fuckers need to be Al Quida's next target. The only difference is that they would actually be a legitimate target rather than an undeserving one like the previous ones.Diesel_dyk wrote:
Greece should just default... screw the bond holders, take Goldman Sachs down with them, pull out of the Euro, help destroy the EU, ruin the plans for a world govt, put out arrest warrants on the IMF with shoot to kill orders... cause it looks like the IMF just declared war on Greece and laid out terms of unconditional surrender.
Yep, and both need to be illegal.JohnG@lt wrote:
Do you know what a derivative is? The government uses the term 'credit default swap' instead. Same thing, two different names.Turquoise wrote:
I agree with you on one part. Fuck Goldman Sachs. All of those fuckers need to be Al Quida's next target. The only difference is that they would actually be a legitimate target rather than an undeserving one like the previous ones.Diesel_dyk wrote:
Greece should just default... screw the bond holders, take Goldman Sachs down with them, pull out of the Euro, help destroy the EU, ruin the plans for a world govt, put out arrest warrants on the IMF with shoot to kill orders... cause it looks like the IMF just declared war on Greece and laid out terms of unconditional surrender.
Why exactly? All it is is 'weather insurance'. Every business has inherent risk built into it. If a company sells snow shovels it stands a very good chance of going out of business if there is no snow. Company X comes in, assesses the risk of there being no snow and writes the snow shovel company an insurance policy that pays out if it doesn't snow. In return, they get a monthly premium fee. The lower the risk, the lower the premium. Company X takes on much of the risk for the snow shovel company in return for this monthly fee. It's a win/win situation for both because Company X is also free to write an insurance policy for the casino across the street that is dependent on there being no snow in order to get it's customers in the door. So, if it snows, it pays out the casino, if it doesn't snow it pays out the manufacturer. In both cases, the premiums it charges allows it to make a small profit. Derivatives themselves have very meager payouts so companies that write them are forced to sell vast quantities of them.Turquoise wrote:
Yep, and both need to be illegal.
Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-05-16 20:25:47)
That's all fine and well until taxpayers have to bail them out. As long as bailouts happen (and they will surely happen again as long as we have a crony capitalism), the government should limit the amount of risk taking that businesses should be allowed to take.JohnG@lt wrote:
Why exactly? All it is is 'weather insurance'. Every business has inherent risk built into it. If a company sells snow shovels it stands a very good chance of going out of business if there is no snow. Company X comes in, assesses the risk of there being no snow and writes the snow shovel company an insurance policy that pays out if it doesn't snow. In return, they get a monthly premium fee. The lower the risk, the lower the premium. Company X takes on much of the risk for the snow shovel company in return for this monthly fee. It's a win/win situation for both because Company X is also free to write an insurance policy for the casino across the street that is dependent on there being no snow in order to get it's customers in the door. So, if it snows, it pays out the casino, if it doesn't snow it pays out the manufacturer. In both cases, the premiums it charges allows it to make a small profit. Derivatives themselves have very meager payouts so companies that write them are forced to sell vast quantities of them.Turquoise wrote:
Yep, and both need to be illegal.
There's nothing inherently evil about this insurance business by any means. Neither the snow shovel company nor the manufacturer are forced into the contract and they benefit from the service Company X provides anyway. Derivatives have only been demonized because they were the spawn of Enron and because governments don't like the fact that they can't sell bonds if the cost of the derivative outstrips their interest rate. This is why Goldman has become the whipping boy of the Obama administration. They're afraid their own bond ratings will nosedive and they won't be able to fund their government. It's asinine and they and the media are scaring the shit out of ignorant people who have no fucking clue what they are talking about. Populism at it's worst and exemplified by Diesel in this very thread.
They like to point out that Goldman was placing bets against the housing market and other garbage when all it was doing was writing insurance policies in case it collapsed. Sure, insurance can be likened to gambling if you want to take it to an extreme, but so is walking across the street. If you read the risk correctly, you're fine, and if you stack the deck in your favor by only crossing at a crosswalk and at a red light, the risk is minimal. Same with most derivatives that are sold.
I'm not going to disagree that the bailouts need to cease... but saying they need to make a wholesale ban on something just because there is risk involved is silly. Every single company has inherent risk.Turquoise wrote:
That's all fine and well until taxpayers have to bail them out. As long as bailouts happen (and they will surely happen again as long as we have a crony capitalism), the government should limit the amount of risk taking that businesses should be allowed to take.
Otherwise, we'll continue to have to cover their risks with our tax money on a very frequent basis.
In short, because they aren't willing to take the fall for their risks, they shouldn't be allowed to take them to begin with.
Hey if you're dumb enough to lend it, you're dumb enough to lose it, I won't shed a tear. Fact is money only has value in the hands of the end user who actually uses it to purchase something like food or shelter. Money for any other purpose lacks real tangible value because at that point its only value is relative to some other intangible.JohnG@lt wrote:
Is that how you run your own life? Run up a bunch of credit card and mortgage debt and then declare bankruptcy? How's that working out for you? Are people still willing to loan you money? Do you own your own business or do you suck off the teet of your employer?Diesel_dyk wrote:
Greece should just default... screw the bond holders, take Goldman Sachs down with them, pull out of the Euro, help destroy the EU, ruin the plans for a world govt, put out arrest warrants on the IMF with shoot to kill orders... cause it looks like the IMF just declared war on Greece and laid out terms of unconditional surrender.
I had a lot of respect for you when I first came to this forum but you've clearly gone way off the deep end.
A) Sovereign nations can not declare bankruptcy.
B) Defaulting on your debts leads to zero foreign investment. So if you're resource poor like Greece, what will they do for things like fuel oil? Cars? Trains? Little plastic McDonald's Happy Meal toys? None of it. You'd become a third world nation instantly and irrevocably.
C) Yeah, screw those bond holders. Fuck the fat cats. Don't cry on my shoulder when you lose your job.
D) The IMF is evil? Yeah? Who does Greece have to blame for it's current situation besides itself? You like to point fingers and place blame on things that are irrelevant. What you are is a populist idiot who kowtows to whatever politicians tell you to believe. Nevermind that politicians never use logic to create an argument and instead depend on inciting the emotions in their listeners. That doesn't seem to matter to you. Turn your brain back on man.