Europe, After the Euro collapse

[snapper]

.....and off we go again. Yet another fairy tale from Snapperland. You really must think we are as forgetful about the past as you are....when it suits you. You have an ability to edit events to suit your narrative that is truly remarkable. I would actually be paying you a compliment to accuse you of trying to mislead us because that would mean I believed you had a clear understanding of events in the first place. Based on your posts here it seems that you simply edit events as they happen to fit your preconceived ideas & then flush anything you get wrong down the memory hole.

Yes yes, I know, bad old BF & his ad hominems strikes again. Poor Snapper.

This is just more of the same irrelevant graffiti as normal.

Papandreou did indeed propose a referendum in late October 2011. It was strongly opposed by a number of people and groups - not least senior figures within his own party. You left the distinct impression that him being 'out' was somehow connected to some EU diktat because he threatened the 'troika'. In fact, it was quite the reverse. His decision to resign was part of a bargain to call an election, form a government of national unity with the opposition and thus force the opposition to agree to the terms of the bailout. he knew he was going to lose the election anyway, so he used what little power he had left to achieve what he thought best for Greece.

Here I welcome you to real debate! I am glad you finally 'dived in' and we can perhaps have some constructive argument. My impression was that Papandreou proposed to leave the choice upto the Greek people in a referendum actually. If not why else propose it? As for this:

His decision to resign was part of a bargain to call an election, form a government of national unity with the opposition and thus force the opposition to agree to the terms of the bailout

If true: A. Why offer a referendum? B. If his sole objective was to force through compliance with the terms of the bail out via national coalition Government what does that say about democracy? A part of the story you are also missing is that Papandreou was asked to sign a "Memorandum of Understanding" with the troika to comply to any bail out terms before an election. That might have something to do with why he thought he should the people no?

At the time I posited that the threat of a referendum that would produce a result exactly opposite to what Papandreou wanted was actually an attempt to force the opposition to unequivocally back the bailout rather than have them posture against it at the next election. Given what followed I'm backing my analysis ahead of yours, especially given that you have just tried to sell us an account that gives an impression strongly at odds with events. That Greek PM favoured the troika's plan rather than opposing it. He left office in order to guarantee that the bailout got done rather than being outed because he posed a threat.

You may of course be correct that Papandreou wanted acceptance of the term. I have never met him to ask him and I would hazard a guess that you haven't either. Clearly though at some point he thought the issue of sufficient importance that he required a referendum to continue. Why was he not allowed to consult the Greek people? Why did he suddenly have to resign without any referendum? Above all why weren't the Greek people asked until after?

The former EU official - Lucas Papademos - took the role of PM of a national unity government of both major parties on the understanding that it would be a short term position. It was.

Was he elected?

He stepped down at the scheduled election in May 2012 and did not return to the post even when the election produced no clear result. After a further election the opposition was able to form a majority and Greece had a new government. Greeks had the opportunity to elect an anti-bailout government. They did not. Neither did Italians at elections a few months ago. Polls in Greece at the time repeatedly showed strong majorities in favour of staying in the Euro. 'Post democratic Europe' actually looks an awful lot like 'democratic Europe'. Of course, if you are the sort of person who equates 'democracy' with 'getting the result I want' then you might disagree.

Well that's a bit of brief summary of the Greek and Italian elections... So as we 'filling in gaps' here Greece had two elections the first of which produced very close result 1,192,051 to 1,061,282 votes for a pro troika deal Party - although Samaras said he'd renegotiate the terms. In the second election, equally close they managed to get enough votes which with the 50 'free' MPs that a winning Party in Greece receives has presided over the worst economic destruction in peace time Greek history since Independence. Even the IMF admitted it had it's 'fiscal multiplier' wrong on Greece and they are supposed to be helping the Greeks. Strikes have been banned for some workers in Greece in clear contradiction of EU law yet the EU has done nothing.

Now, I know that you observed these events closely, because at the time you were favouring us with a heady mix of bizarre observations & wild predictions. Beyond the aforementioned Greek troops keeping their people inside their borders there was talk of impending military coups; wild swings between telling us that there was no way nations could leave the Euro & then excited claims that Greece was about to do just that; the infamous claim that new Drachmas had already been printed; a prediction that the Euro would be finished by Christmas....2011 and one particularly pertinent to your 'end of democracy' claims. At one point you predicted that the governments in Athens & Rome with their technocratic PMs would be 'Long Parliaments' - a subversion of democracy by the EU. Of course, they were nothing of the sort. Both parliaments were dissolved, elections were held & the technocrats were replaced.....as you should be aware. The problem is that those elections didn't produce the result you wanted, so I imagine they don't really count.

I have provided you evidence of trading in Greek post euro drachmas. If you wish to believe that Bloomberg is lying to you then I suggest you take it up with them. The Greek Parliament has a set term I believe and Mario Monti's Government in Italy was brought down when two Parties withdrew their support in Parliament. You also don't mention that the Five Star Movement came 3rd in the last Italian election from nowhere whereas the former EU Official, who also conveniently became the Italian Prime Minister briefly without being elected and who ran in the election came fourth. Nor the fact that there is no overall majority in the Italian Parliament or that the leader of the Party that received the most votes, Pier Luigi Bersani, was forced to resign.

I'm not expecting you to accept any of this. I imagine you have carefully constructed and very lengthy arguments prepared for just such an unwelcome intrusion of facts into your reality. Much as I suspect DOR has long since stopped trying to convince you that he is correct, so have I. It is useful, however, to remind others just how shaky the foundations of your analysis are. Far from 'adding nothing to the debate' I am adding a bunch of really meaty - and inconvenient - facts, in their proper context.

On the contrary I accept it all (apart from the first bit of graffiti) and welcome it! I have never bothered with "preparing a brief in case BigFella said X or Y" since you normally do not offer an opinion. Your point about DOR here though is entirely mis - placed. If you read the posts above he agrees with me - or I him - that default is the best option for the bankrupt euro economies and that this means returning to their own currencies.

My greater point about the EU being undemocratic I invite your comments on.

[Doktor]

Snapper, I believe you have a confusion on the elected part.

PMs are not elected, MPs are. Then they vote for a PM.

[tankie]

Snapper, I believe you have a confusion on the elected part.

PMs are not elected, MPs are. Then they vote for a PM.

Nope , leaders of parties are elected by mp's of their parties in the uk ,the public then vote for a party , for their politics and leader who delivers their policies , thereby electing the party and leader who becomes PM ,

[kato]

Are we talking specifically about Greece?

Cuz our PMs in Germany are elected. By vote in parliament (we don't just get the leader of a party, and it's not always the leader of a party that gets the job), which is the legitimate representative of the plebs... err, people.

[DOR]

snapper,

There was a Greek Prime Minister who suggested that the Greeks hold a referendum on 'troika' terms... Within less than a month he was out and former EU Official was appointed 'technocrat' Prime Minister of Greece.

Bigfella beat me to it, so I’ll just post the timeline:

Nov. 1, 2011: George Papandreou proposes a referendum. Lacking support, he OFFERS to resign and let a provisional coalition government deal with the debt crisis.

In a parliamentary democracy, as you know, a cornerstone piece of legislation that is rejected frequently leads to a change of government.

Nov. 11, 2011: Lucas Papademos is ELECTED by a cross-party coalition as the new prime minister.

As Doktor notes, in a parliamentary democracy, the prime minister is elected by the parliament and not by the people. c.f. John Major, July 24, 1989.

tankie misstated it: prime ministers usually are elected by parliament, and if one party has enough votes then they get to decide who gets the job. But, it is parliament and not the party that casts the actual vote.


RE default:

I wonder why you don't propose this option for the US or Japan?

They’re debts are managable.

[Parihaka]

It always makes me laugh how people who have never lived in a parliamentary democracy seem to think they know more than those who do. A party leader is elevated by his party, before an election takes place. Voters vote for that party in the knowledge that if that party gains the treasury seats, that leader will become the PM.
A PM can be rolled during the term of government, again by his own party. I am not aware of any parliamentary system that has had a PM that hasn't been a constituency MP though under proportional representation that is possible.

[tankie]

It always makes me laugh how people who have never lived in a parliamentary democracy seem to think they know more than those who do. A party leader is elevated by his party, before an election takes place. Voters vote for that party in the knowledge that if that party gains the treasury seats, that leader will become the PM.
A PM can be rolled during the term of government, again by his own party. I am not aware of any parliamentary system that has had a PM that hasn't been a constituency MP though under proportional representation that is possible.

Thats wot i said innit like . :slap:

[Parihaka]

Thats wot i said innit like . :slap:

It is indeed Tankie, I was just translating it into Queens English for them

[tankie]

It is indeed Tankie, I was just translating it into Queens English for them

Heeey respect bro like yea man

[Doktor]

I think we need Mr. Lukins to translate the translation

[snapper]

Nov. 1, 2011: George Papandreou proposes a referendum. Lacking support, he OFFERS to resign and let a provisional coalition government deal with the debt crisis.

In a parliamentary democracy, as you know, a cornerstone piece of legislation that is rejected frequently leads to a change of government.

Nov. 11, 2011: Lucas Papademos is ELECTED by a cross-party coalition as the new prime minister.

As Doktor notes, in a parliamentary democracy, the prime minister is elected by the parliament and not by the people. c.f. John Major, July 24, 1989.

tankie misstated it: prime ministers usually are elected by parliament, and if one party has enough votes then they get to decide who gets the job. But, it is parliament and not the party that casts the actual vote.

Again you forget to mention the 'Memorandum of Understanding' that ALL the Greek Parties were asked sign agreeing to honour the 'bail out' terms before any election took place. What does that mean? The Greek population would not be able to vote about the single most important economic matter in the next election. Democratic?

RE default:
They’re debts are managable.

No doubt the EU would argue that they 'managed' to contain their debts - with inherently undermining their currency.

But you're missing the real point... Let's say that at the next European election UKIP, who want the UK out of the EU, return the largest number of MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) - something which is quite likely to happen next year. So where does this get us? Even if the UK returned only UKIP MEPs and none from any other Party they could not stop a single law proposed by Commissariat being imposed in Britain.

Suppose the British Government itself opposes an EU law? Well it's happened with the Financial Transactions Tax (or Tobin tax as it sometimes called). Clearly because the City of London is the largest financial market in Europe the majority of taxes raised by such a law would come from the UK and go to the EU and this would hurt London as opposed to New York or Tokyo etc... Well the UK opposes such a law but guess what? Sod all the British Government can do about it...

If 100% of the British people voted against a single EU diktat or tax it wouldn't make a jot difference. We can't vote out the Commissariat. That is why our freedom and economic survival depend on leaving this growing autocracy.

Hell when unelected people start telling the Hungarians what their Constitution should be I say it's time to start re-arming and planning a BEF.

[DOR]

snapper,

The Greek population would not be able to vote about the single most important economic matter in the next election.

Does the phrase ‘representative government’ ring any bells? Americans didn’t vote for our monetary policy, and neither did Germans vote for theirs. Why would you expect Greek voters to have a direct say on policy, as opposed to electing representatives to decide policy?

And, why would you assume that those same representatives were incapable of adjusting their views to incorporate new information or new political realities between the election and the decision?

UKIP: If they sweep the British MEP elections, but still don’t have enough votes in Brussels, they will be in opposition to whoever has more votes. Unless you have a fundamental problem with representative democracy, on whatever scale, I’m not sure where the problem lies.

If the UK passes a law that is at odds with EU regulations, there is a mechanism for dealing with it. And, vice versa.

If the UK, on the other hand, acts on its own sovereignty and decides to unilaterally abrogate its most important international treaty, that would be (a) within its rights; and (b) a terrible blow to decades of work toward European unity.

100% of the British people don’t vote on EU diktat or taxes. It isn’t a direct democracy. But, leaving the EU because it isn’t a direct democracy doesn’t solve the matter, since the UK itself isn’t a direct democracy. Brits would still be at the mercy of their elected representatives.

[snapper]

Does the phrase ‘representative government’ ring any bells? Americans didn’t vote for our monetary policy, and neither did Germans vote for theirs. Why would you expect Greek voters to have a direct say on policy, as opposed to electing representatives to decide policy?

And, why would you assume that those same representatives were incapable of adjusting their views to incorporate new information or new political realities between the election and the decision?.

So you're trying to tell me that people don't vote on economic issues? What was phrase "It's the economy stupid" or something... The fact that an attempt was made to get ALL the Greek political Parties to adhere to the terms of the bail out, thus depriving the Greek electorate any real choice in a future election is indictative of the EU's attitude to democracy compared to their support of banks which fundamentally bankrupt in reality. Debts must be payed to bankers with the ECB immune from any and all losses/mistakes. Sod democracy or unemployment or the number of suicides. People set light to themselves outside jobcentres and the press says "wonder why he/she did it? Must have been a nutcase or a drug addict".

UKIP: If they sweep the British MEP elections, but still don’t have enough votes in Brussels, they will be in opposition to whoever has more votes. Unless you have a fundamental problem with representative democracy, on whatever scale, I’m not sure where the problem lies.

Look my problem is not with representative democracy as such but suppose the British Parliament passed a vote in direct contravention of some EU law? It's happened on allowing convicted prisoners the 'right' to vote... still out elected representatives cannot change the system. IF every person and MP in the UK voted 'no' to banana standardisation (yep rules exist for that) it wouldn't make a jot of difference. The House of Commons and the Lords agree that we don't want a Tobin/Financial Transactions tax... It is specifically aimed at the City of London which contributes large amounts of tax revenue to the UK Treasury. What are you not understanding?

If the UK passes a law that is at odds with EU regulations, there is a mechanism for dealing with it. And, vice versa.

Yes we'd be fined and if we refused to pay? Trade sanctions would hurt them and us. Gonna invade are you? Not a realistic option.

If the UK, on the other hand, acts on its own sovereignty and decides to unilaterally abrogate its most important international treaty, that would be (a) within its rights; and (b) a terrible blow to decades of work toward European unity.

Iceland has a free trade agreement with China... Do you not think that UK could negotiate one on it's own behalf? Give me a break.

100% of the British people don’t vote on EU diktat or taxes. It isn’t a direct democracy. But, leaving the EU because it isn’t a direct democracy doesn’t solve the matter, since the UK itself isn’t a direct democracy. Brits would still be at the mercy of their elected representatives.

The people in Britain are awakening to the fact that they can't trust their careerist politicians after Cameron gave a "cast iron guarantee" of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and failed to deliver. The latest poll (yesterday) puts UKIP on 22% if a General election were held today. The same poll puts those who vote to leave the EU at 50% and those who vote to stay at 36%; How Has Political Opinion Changed Since Before The Local Elections? Fieldwork May 17th-18th The point is there is growing divide between the normal people and political class and their banker pals in Europe. Normal people increasingly do not trust the traditional Parties who keep harping the same line. It's happened in Italy with the Five Star Movement and in the UK with UKIP, both of which are fundamentally anti - establishment and pro people. I think that is a good thing yet the policies you advocate here and in the other thread merely serve to empower the bankrupt establishment interest. We are not interested in collectivism - that is tyranny - freedom to 'unelect' the law makers that make laws I disagree with is not mine in the EU and so I vote to leave. If they ignore us too long woe betide... I am not a "clown". The British people WILL leave the autocracy, it's just a matter of when and how. It would be wise to allow us to do so democratically.

[tankie]

Hopefully sooner rather than later , ca'moron is saying 2017 for a ref ,B/S out now and start afresh saving huge wads of tax payers cash which would be better used here in the UK ,Pensioners / NHS / Military etc .

[DOR]

snapper,

So you're trying to tell me that people don't vote on economic issues?

Issues, yes. Specific policy decisions, no.

But, getting all Greek parties to agree to something means that all the parties elected by the voters agree to something . . . thus exercising the powers entrusted to them by the voters.