Greece to Leave Euro Zone on June 18

reply to post by Telos

Telos-Alda...you're both greek, right? You're both right, too. Citizens between a rock and a hard place. The EU (germany) is bending you over, and so is your government. The focus is all on you at the moment, but it's just the same in the UK. We are being screwed by the EU, and we have a massively bloated and non-productive public sector sucking the teat of the Corporate owned politicians, to the detriment of the citizen.
The only slight difference I suppose is that you are nearer the abyss than us, and mabye as a people you are more willing to throw petrol bombs at the police to express dissatisfaction with government. In the UK, it is only the unemployable underclass and feral immigrants that will petrol bomb police in order to distract them while they loot TVs and designer clothing. The majority here will carry on wearing blinkers and watching soap-operas until they realise too late, like the frog in the pan, that the water is boiling around them.
And that appalling Lagarde woman, telling you you must all pay your taxes, when she pays NONE on her 350000 euro income, sticks in my throat, and all this for the 'noble' cause of 'ending war in europe'! Who starts wars in europe? Who ends up near bankrupt as a result? And who has benifitted the most out of the EU/Euro? Those are the questions that need honest answers.

Originally posted by freebornman
reply to post by Telos

 

Telos-Alda...you're both greek, right? You're both right, too.

No, I'm not greek, I'm canadian. My name has no relation to my background. Is ATS for pit sakes, all nicknames have a meaning according to our participation in this board...lol

to all of you here is an answer cause it's been put so well that my comment is not needed

truth about Greece pt.2

looks like they pulled another rabbit out of their hats and greece is till in the EU. lulz let the games continue

Oh yeah we are screwed.

Greece will leave the euro zone on June 18 if the populist government wins the country’s elections on the 17 as the rest of the euro zone rounds on "cheaters"....
____________________________________________________________________

Darn.
I should have cornered the Ouzo market while I had the chance.

My questions to the greeks..

Isnt ND the political party responsible for the financial mess that Greece finds itself in?
Are the fraudulant politicians brought to justice?

reply to post by Telos


Well, as the original poster it falls to me to acknowledge that the article seems to have mistaken in its prediction. The pro-bailout, stay-in-the-euro party has won the elections. However, the opposition has a large number of chairs and you can be sure they will gain even more influence as the harsh realities of austerity set in on a populace already reeling from four years of deep recession. June 18 may come and go, but Greece remains a weak link in the increasingly weak chain that keeps the euro together.

Originally posted by earthling42
My questions to the greeks..

Isnt ND the political party responsible for the financial mess that Greece finds itself in?
Are the fraudulant politicians brought to justice?

Yes it's that party (ND: the political party of the greek Bilderbergers) and they won again because they used their best and very wellknown weapon of FEAR on the sheeple citizens ("If we reject the austerity measures and go out of Eurozone we will all die and go to hell!"). It's a trick the dummy sheeple will ALWAYS fall for... sadly.

Ko3

reply to post by kid_of_3NKi


I wonder if the elections were rigged.

Did they use Diebold machines?

I honestly thought the opposition would win. I thought the Greek population is more politically astute and willing to entertain radical ideas than many of their counterparts in other nations. Perhaps, perhaps not.

So they've managed to kick the can a little further down the road, yet again. The system still holds. But the danger is far from over. The next place to watch for Eurodrama will be Span.

Originally posted by silent thunder
reply to post by kid_of_3NKi

 

I wonder if the elections were rigged.

Did they use Diebold machines?

I honestly thought the opposition would win. I thought the Greek population is more politically astute and willing to entertain radical ideas than many of their counterparts in other nations. Perhaps, perhaps not.

So they've managed to kick the can a little further down the road, yet again. The system still holds. But the danger is far from over. The next place to watch for Eurodrama will be Span.

I don't think the elections were rigged.
Responsible for the outcome of these elections are the older people (beyond the age of 50 y.) who made the ND party win. Younger greeks clearly prefered SYRIZA party over ND.

Ages 18-34 voted:
33% for SYRIZA
20% for ND
6% for PASOK (socialist party)

Ages 35-54 voted:
34% for SYRIZA
24% for ND
8% for PASOK

Ages 55+ voted:
20% for SYRIZA
39% for ND
17% for PASOK

(Source: www.madata.gr...)

By looking at the stats above you will get the picture
The younger greeks should have locked their parents and grandparents up at home on that day!!

Ko3

reply to post by kid_of_3NKi


I feel sad for you guys, the same party in power.
It makes me wonder what democracy really is? well the vote has been democratic.
But the right of us as civilians, be it in Greece, in the US, in the UK, or elsewhere in the world, what value has it really.
What is the right of the people who lost their home, who cannot feed their children, can't afford medicine, while the news is filled with bailouts and rescue funds for banks.

Greek Election Past, Europe Returns to Fiscal Rescue

www.nytimes.com...

I seem to recall we were working on a new banking institution that would deal in money cards.

If it is inevitable that you have to give money to support members who at this time are unable to pull their own weight, then you need to begin to decide how the money will be spent. And if you use money cards you can encourage development in areas by offering discounts associated with the card holder.
The value of the card is up to you.
I know you are hoping for a magic bullet but there is more to this card scheme, and that is to create a banking institution that does not lend money at all.

It accepts deposits and gives interest. And it has user fees. And you sell banking services.

Will that affect the existing banks? Well you didn't get very far since last time because you had trouble selecting which institutions should be granted the license. I gave you the example of a Canadian bank which separates investment banking from normal banking. The Royal Bank model.
www.rbc.com...
www.rbccm.com...#
You can reinvent the wheel Angela. People do it all the time.

If you want to build investor confidence then make an institution that is sheltered from unrelated occurrences.

Why should capital markets suffer when real estate suffers? If they weren't joined at the hip they would be individually more resilient.

When I was a real estate tycoon, I was working on a real estate deal that was an absolute sure bet money maker, but the credit union turned down my mortgage, because I was already heavily into real estate beyond the ratios. Not by much but they chose to play it by the book. A Canadian credit union, not even a normal bank, and certainly not a chartered bank of Canada. These are conservative lenders.
I could have gone to private mortgage but I didn't bother but my point is that after that, I changed the banking system and went to the fee based banking system, because frankly these people were just no darn good at lending money.
Since then you see how the American free lending policies got them into deep banking problems while Canadian banks have flourished. So what you see in Canada is them being successfully conservative, yes after I brought in fee based banking removing the need for them to pay high interest rates on deposits and removing the need for them to be aggressive lenders.

First it was them who were conservative and that alone may have sheltered them to a degree during the soft landing, but we had the fee based banking system in place long before that anyway.
And you know its easier to charge fees for consulting and services if you are a very successful bank so it feeds into itself.
But Europe followed the American model and the hope of great bargains at the collapse of the market in the bust cycle drove people on. They hoped to buy up large amounts of land when the bottom fell out of the market.
And they got caught by our engineering a soft landing.
Real values are not going up globally for some time to come under this new economic approach of supply and demand. So waiting for that to happen is not a good idea. So I would suggest you work on making some new banking institutions that are more resilient. And in that way you can offer the investor shelter from economic turbulence.

That doesn't help your financial institutions which today you feel have little credibility due to past exposure to risk. Well people have a short memory and you should realize the power of advertising. If you build a strategy, they will come. A reorganization only needs to be basic, in order for you to call it a reorganization especially if the problem does not lay in the solvency of the bank but rather in public opinion. Under New Management is an example.

Can you imagine how you dropped the ball and by you I don't mean you personally Angela?

Have you ever heard of a company called Pay Pal? Was that even created by a bank? Um, where were the banks?

Perhaps the problem is that older institutions become too set in their ways to respond to such amazing banking opportunities as we have seen in the last 15 years.

So we can get a trade route almost to Greece for you. That much we can do. We are in the process of doing it.

reply to post by Rocketman7


There is an item in that last post that will not make sense to everyone. We removed the need to pay high rates of return on deposit by a larger global strategy of low rates. You know I can't claim responsibility for that except that I was Alan's partner always edging him to lower rates and adopt the zero interest rate of Germany which financed Germany during the war. Yes me and Alan, Alan himself a Jew we stole that idea from Hitler.

And we used it to engineer a real estate boom. But we did that out of necessity because we had to save America from itself. Lazy bunch of dot com bust people who were really short of money there for a while.

So then we didn't want to cream them with a hard landing after that so we gave them a soft landing. Well us and our huge throng of associates and organizations and team players which make up such organizations as yourselves. We did it together didn't we.

I blame George Jr for a lot of things, but its difficult to blame him for doing a good job during the flu pandemic scare which was partly why we cut tourism back substantially world wide. We need to assess risks and catch up on our ability to handle outbreaks which we are doing. And we need to take a second look at immigration policy which we have been doing. My strategy is to use the Christian country card. Well at least it is something to stem the tide.

I can not say that I am totally in favor of Canada's banking system as it is today despite the fact that it is extremely successful. It is not really family friendly. And not as friendly to the middle class as maybe it should be.
And does not work at all in terms of doing something for society for the lower class. They want to deal with the best and leave the rest so alternate institutions spring up like Moneymart, which are just sharks waiting to prey on people. Hard money lenders. I'm not in favor of that although I understand the need for it.
I just wish we didn't need them.
I don't see why our banking institutions which we have made very lucrative cannot give back to society by having systems in place for the lower class as well. I mean who do you have to kill to get prepaid Visa cards? Well it took years to get them. Now Paypal is the best on-line transaction service I have ever seen.
So who needs prepaid Visa?
Maybe you need to spend money on research and development and partner with some universities and scientific organizations to search for new methods.
I know, its hard ball, its supply and demand, its not quite dog eat dog, but you know in some places it is.
I don't want to say that maybe Europe needs to be more capitalistic and you know recognize opportunities when they arise. But as I see it opportunities are flying past your doors. Opportunities that the banking industry should be able to handle and not have to delegate to mere businesses that really have no place in banking.
Rogers Cable company wants to open a bank. We have grocery stores that have their own banking.
It dilutes the banking industry. It does make things more competitive and lots of people would not agree with me supporting old banking institutions in favor of free enterprise.
I just haven't given up on you yet.

reply to post by Rocketman7


So, the moral of the story, re the Canadian banks. Along with lower rates I mentioned that they were conservative lenders and that they did not have to be aggressive lenders since we brought in user fee banking.

So we took the pressure off them, and so now you can see how if you have all the time in the world and a good bottom line that surprised even shocked them, and yes outraged some Canadians when they saw their profit margins, but when the ship is sailing in calm waters and everything is running smoothly you can pick and choose and you can invest in other aspects of business. A stable successful banking business is easier to run.

Then you just have to protect your image. The numbers speak for themselves. That is what people see mostly and what builds a good reputation.

Yes in Britain and in Europe and in America we did I shouldn't say we, but yes our spawn, were instructed to now come up with a plan themselves that was creative as an exercise and Alan was prepared to bail them out if need be and I was not far away as well, but Alan wanted to retire and I wanted to see some independence so that well they could manage on their own and they came up with some creative offerings didn't they?

The difference between them and me and Alan, our team, is we would never even so much as stretch the law in any fashion. We would not enter into a game of chance that put banks at risk. We constantly managed the profitability of the banking industry and bond rates and we moved mountains to maintain the banks as job one.

Well maybe our spawn never paid attention to the fact that while we were playing good cop bad cop or low rates high rates and I would be pro business anti-bank and Alan would be pro bank, he would be striving for bond rates and I would be striving for business but at no time ever, would I do anything that put banking at risk. In all cases where Alan thought it would be better to support banking returns rather than the markets, I would back off completely and support banking. You know I would switch from being the antagonist, to being an ally, and right away we would stabilize banking returns and the banking system.
Never would we treat the economy like Vegas.
Whenever we did anything that was a little bit risky, we would first be sure we propped up the banking industry and then test the waters we did our homework, we watched carefully and always made sure we have a huge support network in banking and investment circles and the media.
So it looked easy, but we were always being cautious.

But I understand the need to finance a war and Europe was in Iraq too and it had dot com bust as well so I was pleased when I saw what they were doing, since I like that independent spirit. Maybe they were too successful because it sure took off in a big hurry.

You know the riskiest I will get, is when I need to raise money for the military. Sometimes I have to be very creative with yet another bond offering, and the bank shuffle lending money between institutions to increase capital. You can't do that without the support of government so I only did that when it was to pay for the military.
I never really explained the bank shuffle so even our spawn couldn't do it and they didn't have the same influence in government so they had to work with what they had which was Goldman Sachs and a few other huge institutions. Then they got government onside and they did get money just handed to them.
But they also sold some mortgage backed securities that were less than safe investments by capitalizing on people's love for gambling.
I am not going to say by not bailing them out, that I am at fault, because from my perspective I planned for any eventuality and used it to my advantage to achieve global economic goals. Such as to fix capitalism.
It was not working properly. I am sure you recall everyone saying that.
Well its working better now.
I can't get involved on the street level and look at America for instance and their homeless problem or their foreclosure problems and base global economic strategy on those unfortunate people.
I can not blow in the wind. I can however let a country like America look after its own poor.
Since it looks after its wealthy so well. If some of that wealth is at the expense of the poor, then by going in with help for the poor I am just reinforcing the problem.

Well I could talk all day as you know but what we are doing for Greece is building a trade route since it is in with our global strategy for the region. What the EU makes of that is up to you. Its not just Greece who can benefit, we are also involving other countries in the region for economic development. There isn't enough fish farming in Greece for them to use that as a chief source of income so I hope their commercial skills will kick in if we provide some opportunities for trade.

reply to post by Rocketman7


It wouldn't be fun if I didn't give you a little bit of inside information.

Rogers Cable SO as we were building the Internet years ago it was based on phone line technology and I made the push to get it onto the cable system, for higher bandwidth.

And so cable companies at that time were being treated quite well since we wanted bandwidth in residential houses since we of course had big plans for the Internet. Its a visual experience. The Internet and it requires bandwidth which at the time phone lines could not provide. SO about the second year in and its working well and so I say to Rogers, what you need to do, is to make a deal with a financial institution, so that you, who already have credit information about subscribers can middle some on-line shopping. I was giving back grateful to them increasing bandwidth, cable companies not just Rogers, and making large infrastructure investments.

He never took me up on my offer. And so then years later, about 10 months ago he says he wants to open a bank. At the time that I suggested he at least partner with a financial institution there was no Internet money of any kind and people were terrified to use their credit cards on-line so you had incredible investments in dot com start-ups and no money for people to shop with.
There went the golden goose on the golden train being pulled by golden stallions with him or anyone who would take up that challenge at the reigns.
Imagine the opportunity. And as a result of my not being able to get any on-line money for people to use for transactions, you had the dot com bust.

Now the net is a successful enterprise and on-line shopping a breeze. I just had to be patient.
Which is ok, I am not the one who missed the golden train to megabucks. How difficult is it, to make a deal with a credit card company to say to them, what if, someone did some shopping on-line and we paid the pill and charged their account? That never seemed like rocket science to me.

You see cable companies were in the perfect position to benefit from credit services. I mean they were right there sending them monthly bills. And a line of credit approved by some partner company and away you go. Whatever makes it easier for the consumer they would go for at that time. And the problem was safety of transactions and credit card theft. No problem if you have just a payee type account and a system set up.

Now the banks are in for a pound and you can email money. Email transfers but Paypal?
Once you establish your account, which is free, the service is free, and it fills in all the forms at the seller, so you just say Paypal please and it uses software (the seller) that joins with Paypal software and provides all the shipping details address and all the typing is done, and you just give Paypal your password and say pay that for me please and it is done faster than cash at a grocer. At one time I envisioned Interac doing that. Well they couldn't.

They just could not get it together.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Moral of the story Angela, 15 years to jump on an opportunity is 14 years too late. Thats why I suggest that the old banking industry invest in R&D so you will recognize opportunities when they arise and have some tools to use to capitalize on them.
15 years ago the banks were sitting in their lofty towers and I have no idea what they were thinking of our Internet project but maybe they were not taking us seriously or who knows.
Now the field is highly competitive and companies with next to no overhead by comparison can out-compete the banks on-line because first in and you get a market share and they have their market share.

R&D and you might recoup your status as merchant service providers and modernize your institutions.

France, who I am great friends with, they had this telephone Internet like service before the Internet. They were really forward thinking during the time of Compuserve. The main part of the commercial net was not invented by Al Gore, the initial networks that came out of trade networks that were being provided in government run business development banks of which I was involved. And they merely hooked up to each other through the phone lines so you could hop from one to the next. Text only on screen, but downloadable graphic capabilities and of course shareware software as it grew with companies like Compuserve hooking up. You may know about these trade networks which merely listed trade opportunities across the globe. Matching buyers and sellers and investors in global trade. As part of economic development sponsored by governments.
Of course the backbone was the military system and the universities hooking up together but the commercial net was built from trade networks. Anyone there at that time recognized the incredible potential.

reply to post by Rocketman7


How did I get this job? I will quote a passage from Plato's Republic...

Socrates: And does not tyranny spring from democracy in the same manner as democracy from oligarchy
--I mean, after a sort?
Glaucon: How?
Socrates: The good which oligarchy proposed to itself and the means by which it was maintained was
excess of wealth --am I not right?
Glaucon: Yes.
Socrates: And the insatiable desire of wealth and the neglect of all other things for the sake of moneygetting
was also the ruin of oligarchy?
Glaucon: True.

I am an oligarch who does not chase money. I don't have vows of poverty, but I am not allowed to chase money.

I know you thought it was a patronage appointment but actually I clawed my way to the top not unlike a speech by Al Pacino 'Peace by Inches"

reply to post by Rocketman7


You see anyone else would have just gone to private money and continued to buy properties and increase their portfolio, but not me, I had to instead, fix the banking system. If everyone chases money then the system can't function.
But its not just me who can't be seen as chasing money. The church takes vows of poverty. The military, you can trust them to manage huge lucrative drug cartels. Its not competitive for me to win at capitalism really its competitive for me to fix the system and better the system.
Some people get their kicks from champagne and the big dollar win at the expense of the competition.
Bill Gates is good at that, the Waltons, (Walmart) and Slim in Mexico where you are. The richest man in the world?
Out of left field he sneaks up out of Mexico to become the richest man in the world?
You would think he should have my job but according to history, and philosophy, that just doesn't work.

reply to post by Rocketman7


I know we agreed at the outset of the G20 that I wasn't going to teach economics to the best economists in the world and I will try not to.

Socrates again...

I know what you want to say, Meno … that a man cannot search either for what he knows or for what he does not know. He cannot search for what he knows—since he knows it, there is no need to search—nor for what he does not know, for he does not know what to look for (2)⇓ .

A research paradox. Aristotle said that you can know about something and at the same time not know everything about it and thus you can get ideas for research by inference essentially.

And by investigation. You see Slim, he would not try to fix the banking system if he had my job. Everyone assumes that at the top the people are in it for themselves until they become philanthropists and just give money to deserving people. They give advice. My friend Warren Buffet is a storehouse of advice.
But...
Chris Christie:
"He should just write [the government] a check and shut up," the New Jersey Governor and one-time rumored presidential candidate told CNN'

I laughed at that.
So if you ever have to replace me when I retire then you will have to find an oligarch who is willing to almost take a vow of poverty but not really, he just has to not chase wealth, be an idealist, and be willing to go in and investigate first hand which means he has to be capable of winning in capitalism or he won't be able to investigate, but he should not win.

Democracy only goes so far until the people watching football on Sunday have to fix banking.

reply to post by Rocketman7


So to the finance minsters at the G20, who do win lets face it, some are very wealthy, if you want to fix the EU you may have to investigate but not win let them win.
Is that making any sense?

Not really is it.

Thats why I suggested investing in R&D instead. Scientists are some of the best people who are willing to investigate and not win. They will dedicate their entire lives to watching a snail, just so that if ever anyone ever wanted to know something about it, the data would be there. Pure research.
It sounds so much like a buzzword I didn't want to just say it.