[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]So are you saying Europe has devolved into fiefdoms?[/QUOTE]

I wrote only about influence, which has nothing to do with a legal possession. An example of such influence (except examples of my last post) is that in Polish Parliament there is one place reserved for a member representing German ethnic group.


[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]From what I can see, you appear to have a point that there is not much to be done in Brussels. That appears to be more of a problem with the EU charter than anything else.[/QUOTE]

It is not a problem of charter, but rather problem with larger member countries, who prefer to make decisions themselves than by voting in EU Parliament.


[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]There are no "rules" for bailing out ailing economies.[/QUOTE]


That is why UE Parliament should explore all possibilities to get out and pick up the best.



[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]What do you expect Germany to do? Write a blank check? .[/QUOTE]


I can only write what Germany shouldn't do. They shouldn't write neither blank check nor any check. Greece has a commitment with respect to United Europe, but no commitment with respect to Germany. This a problem of and only of United Europe. Of course, Greece may leave UE and then they won't have any commitment to anybody.


[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]Kicking the red headed step children out of the EU is not exactly the right solution.[/QUOTE]


Agreed. A solution must be found by UE. This is what UE should be about. Solution not harmful for UE and Greece. It should be announced by authorities of UE, not by any of member country.


[QUOTE=Fusion_power;278056]Maybe Greece needs to hold a "nation sale". Large country for sale, beautiful location, historic buildings, lots of tourism, wonderful people. Purchaser must assume all existing liabilities such as "entitlement people" and tax evaders as well as all debts.[/QUOTE]

There is nothing like "country on sale" and I believe Greeks are not stupid enough to do anything like this. If, at some point, they don't have money, they can always announce that "no debt to repay". This would force Europe to find a solution.

[url]http://ca.news.yahoo.com/berlusconi-quit-parliament-passes-reforms-debate-remains-party-120531313.html[/url]

intro on yahoo:

[QUOTE]Mario Monti's failure could tear apart the 17-nation group and throw U.S., Europe into a recession.[/QUOTE]

always nice when one leader could throw a lot of people in turmoil.

[QUOTE=literka;278061]There is nothing like "country on sale" and I believe Greeks are not stupid enough to do anything like this. If, at some point, they don't have money, they can always announce that "no debt to repay". This would force Europe to find a solution.[/QUOTE]

I see that as criminal. They took money from others, spent it on themselves,
and refuse to pay it back. Can you say "stealing"???

If Greece does reneg, the international courts should round up their
leaders and put them on trial for larceny.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278264]I see that as criminal. They took money from others, spent it on themselves,
and refuse to pay it back. Can you say "stealing"???

If Greece does reneg, the international courts should round up their
leaders and put them on trial for larceny.[/QUOTE]Be careful of what you wish for, because you may get it.

The British crown is still owed rather a lot from the criminal activities of certain inhabitants of North America.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278264]
If Greece does reneg, the international courts should round up their
leaders and put them on trial for larceny.[/QUOTE]


I am not sure what country you are from. If you live in the US, then you should have heard about eleventh amendment. It says more or less that if someone has not money, then court cannot order him to pay out his debt. Current leaders of Greece did not borrow money, so they are not responsible to repay debt. Moreover, to repay debt they would have to take, for example, from elderly, hence to steal theirs money. This would be a terrible crime.
Moreover, every government should have priority to protect own citizens. Only puppet governments care about foreigners more than own people.
You can see this from one side only. That someone borrowed, then he must give back. May you please think why banks where lending without limits? I can answer it. They were lending, because they were greedy. Greedy also without limits. They want to give a lesson of honesty. They should get a lesson of honesty. They wanted to seat and see flowing money to theirs pocket. Easy money, everybody happy. Now they can learn that easy money can be only for a short while.

[QUOTE=xilman;278279]Be careful of what you wish for, because you may get it.

The British crown is still owed rather a lot from the criminal activities of certain inhabitants of North America.[/QUOTE]

OH? Can you say "No taxation without representation"? It could be a matter
of debate as to whose activities were criminal. We did not borrow money
then refuse to pay it back. We did dump some tea.

Be that as it may. If you still think we owe you money you can remind
us the next time you are attacked by Germany. Or would you like to
pay back all the food and supplies that we gave you? Can you say
"lend-lease"?

Note: I don'[t believe any of this. I just mention it because you raised the
issue of our owing you money.

[QUOTE=literka;278289]I am not sure what country you are from. If you live in the US, then you should have heard about eleventh amendment. It says more or less that if someone has not money, then court cannot order him to pay out his debt. Current leaders of Greece did not borrow money, so they are not responsible to repay debt.
[/QUOTE]

False. The citizens of Greece collectively borrowed the money through
their government. The citizens of Greece are collectively responsible for
paying it back.

[QUOTE]
Moreover, to repay debt they would have to take, for example, from elderly, hence to steal theirs money. This would be a terrible crime.
[/QUOTE]

False. They collectively benefited, so collectively they must pay. Not
just some sub-part of the population.

[QUOTE]
Moreover, every government should have priority to protect own citizens. Only puppet governments care about foreigners more than own people.
You can see this from one side only.
[/QUOTE]

I am neither Greek nor part of the EU. I speak as an outsider.
Certainly a government's priority is to protect its own citizens.
But it must bear the consequences, if any, for doing so.

I am unfamilar with the rules under which the EU was formed.
Did the individual countries give up sovereignty in currency matters?
Are they subject to common rules? Or is it "each country for itself" and
only agree to the rules when it is convenient?


[QUOTE]
That someone borrowed, then he must give back. May you please think why banks where lending without limits? I can answer it. They were lending, because they were greedy.
[/QUOTE]

The greed of the banks is a given. But two wrongs do not make a right.
And the banks did not hold a gun to the head of Greece to get them to
borrow.

Does [i]integrity[/i] mean nothing anymore? Greece took money under a
contract. People of [i]integrity[/i] stick by their agreements.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278292]False. The citizens of Greece collectively borrowed the money through
their government. [/QUOTE]

False. Elderly of Greece neither borrowed money not nor benefited from borrowing.


[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278292]They collectively benefited, so collectively they must pay.[/QUOTE]


Why do you want to take money , for example, from elderly of Greece. This money the government owes them. They will not survive without this money, while bank will survive?


[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278292]Certainly a government's priority is to protect its own citizens. But it must bear the consequences, if any, for doing so.[/QUOTE]


What kind of consequences are you talking about? Foreign assets abroad can be frozen, some restrictions on commerce, maybe something else. I agree that it is nothing good. Still it is better than giving up a country piece by piece.


[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278292]I am unfamilar with the rules under which the EU was formed.
Did the individual countries give up sovereignty in currency matters?
Are they subject to common rules? Or is it "each country for itself" and
only agree to the rules when it is convenient?[/QUOTE]


I am not sure about it, but I heard that international law does not foresee the possibility that a country cannot repay debt. I guess you refer to a common rule that borrowed money must be given back. There is also a rule that if someone has no money, then he cannot give money. That is why 11-th amendment was created. It is not convenient for Greece to have this situation.


[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278292]Greece took money under a
contract.[/QUOTE]

Greece got money, which was given them in a reckless way, against any rules.

[QUOTE=literka;278297]Why do you want to take money , for example, from elderly of Greece. This money the government owes them. They will not survive without this money, while bank will survive?
[/QUOTE]

Why do you want to allow people to just borrow money without the
consequences of having to pay it back???

Paying it back creates a hardship. So what? I have borrowed money.
Should I not have to pay it back without suffering consequences simply
because it might be a hardship?

Many people in the U.S. took out mortgages they could not afford.
They did not pay back the borrowed money. So they lost their homes.
This is the consequence. Their age does not matter.

[QUOTE]
Greece got money, which was given them in a reckless way, against any rules.[/QUOTE]

Huh? It wasn't a HANDOUT, it was a LOAN under a contract, with an obligation to repay.

I don't believe the claim that it was loaned "against any rules". It was a
contract. Of course there were rules.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278299]Why do you want to allow people to just borrow money without the
consequences of having to pay it back???
[/QUOTE]



There are enough consequences. Total turmoil, collapse of economy, hardship, cuts. Loans with a yield 17%. How much more you need?



[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278299]Many people in the U.S. took out mortgages they could not afford.
They did not pay back the borrowed money. So they lost their homes.[/QUOTE]



Sure they lost homes. But it does not mean they paid theirs loans back. You gave a beautiful example of giving loans in a completely reckless way. Toxic loans brought many banks to the brink of bankruptcy. Some people were borrowing money with a leverage 1:50. Of course they couldn't repay debts even if they sold their homes. Banks don't complain that people did not pay debts back. Banks gave loans and they never recovered them. Banks miscalculated and they had to face consequences. The same situation we have with Greece. Banks miscalculated and now they have losses. This is kind of business they have. Every loan bears some risk. Giving Greece money was an enormous risk. Bank took that risk and they failed. Not first time banks made a bad decision. This is what they are doing - always risking. If they fail, nobody should be blamed.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;278290]OH? Can you say "No taxation without representation"? It could be a matter of debate as to whose activities were criminal. We did not borrow money then refuse to pay it back. We did dump some tea.

Be that as it may. If you still think we owe you money you can remind
us the next time you are attacked by Germany. Or would you like to
pay back all the food and supplies that we gave you? Can you say
"lend-lease"?

Note: I don't believe any of this. I just mention it because you raised the
issue of our owing you money.[/QUOTE]YHBT. YHL. HTH. HAND. [1]

Oh, I do love a good religious argument,. Evidence: the trolling in which I sometimes indulge.

FWIW the UK paid off, in full and with interest, the loans which the US made in consequence of WW2. The final payment was made a year or so ago.

As for taxation without representation, why am I being forced by the Infernal Revenue Service to pay tax on my exceedingly modest earnings from the MSFT stock I acquired though my employment with MSR?


Paul

[1] Only us old farts[2] will instantly recognize the meaning of these (E)TLA's

[2] A technical term, perhaps best translated as "tribal elder".