It happened as expected: “under pressure of the Euro partners, Prime Minister Papandreou agreed to think about not going through with the announced referendum on the subject of strengthening the Euro” (source: ARD). And now it seems that he will actually do what he said.
Well – this is how far we have come in our EU. Foreign countries can decide whether or not one state can ask “its people” about their opinion on an issue that is of central importance to them.
But I was even more surprised to read something in one of the SZ comments. On the first page of the business sector, you could find two articles. The first was “for” and the second “against” re-establishing the “Greek Drachma”. Two really excellent pleadings with many good arguments.
Only the proponent of the “for” position conceded that the re-estabilshment of the drachma might have one disadvantage: after a declaration of bancruptcy and re-establishment of the Greek Drachma, Greece would not find anyone prepared to lend them money for many years (!).
In my opinion, this is nonsense. In fact, I would seriously offer a bet that in such a case the international banks would queue before the doors of Greece and offer new credit.
In other words:
If Greece, for example, were to declare total bankruptcy as of January, 1st, 2012 and at the same time introduce their own currency, then the banks would probably offer their service to the new Greek Minister of Finance early in the morning of January, 2nd, 2012.
Is there a better debtor than a country with no debts? And would such a scenario not provide the best reason of the world to expect better collateral secutiry – simply because you can always refer to recent experiences. …
How can intelligent persons write such stupid things?
To be sure, banks are probably better than arms dealers, but they are certainly more buyable than prostitutes. I apologize for the drastic choice of words, but one way or other, I am fed up.
RMD
(Translated by EG)
Loading ...