probably london where euro trash usually ends up.well the silver lining in all of this that there will be an influx of immigration of greek olive skinned party girls in most of northern europe and prolly the us too.
anastassia korkoulous yummy.
probably london where euro trash usually ends up.well the silver lining in all of this that there will be an influx of immigration of greek olive skinned party girls in most of northern europe and prolly the us too.
anastassia korkoulous yummy.
Yes, and I am not referring to Greece here... The Eurozone has suffered through one sh1tstorm after another. Isn't it rather telling that, since the original Eurogeddon crisis, we've had pretty much ongoing mini-crises continuously in Europe and relative stability elsewhere? Isn't there a message in there that European approach of "business as usual" isn't working and the construct is in dire need of a better framework? Again, it's not just me saying that...Well, I am not sure Greece leaving the EMU is bigger a shitstorm than several countries at the brink of complete inability to finance themselves as we had with Spain, Ireland, Portugal, Italy, Greece, and several smaller nations in Europe. It took one single sentence by Draghi. In fact he never followed through with actions because actions were not necessary. 2-3 months later, multi ten-billion dollar hedge funds had their backbone broken and Eur traded at 1.399x levels. So, with all due respect I believe Greece leaving the EMU is a way smaller issue than what ECB dealt with before.
Yes, and the difference is between responsibility to a single entity vs responsibility to a bunch of agents, each w/their own agenda and ulterior motive. I don't know how else I can explain this "huge difference".But both central banks are equally held responsible, one by its country's treasury, the other by its "shareholders", the national central banks and European law. I do not see a huge difference between the two when it comes to the ability to fulfil their mandates and keep functioning. Of course can Fed print and so can ECB. ECB is equally backed and its capital stock is directly owned by the national central banks. The allocation of the ownership of the capital stock is clearly defined.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ecbs-risk-sharing-riddle-for-markets-heard-on-the-street-1422024124Can you please provide some links in reference to your claim? I would need to properly understand in detail what those individuals are worried about to comment
Lastly, I think the experiment the Fed has undertaken in 2008 was way riskier than anything ECB has ever embarked on. Fed in effect took over several multi billion corporations, loaded its balance sheets with toxic equity ownership (toxic because it represented nearly bankrupt corporations). Again, I respect your opinion but I believe you hardly find a single academician or market professional who did not consider Fed's undertakings in 2008 necessary but a huge gamble with very unclear outcome. We have to see what the first trances of ECB's QE will bring to see how ECB's balance sheet will perform going forward.

Yes, and I am not referring to Greece here... The Eurozone has suffered through one sh1tstorm after another. Isn't it rather telling that, since the original Eurogeddon crisis, we've had pretty much ongoing mini-crises continuously in Europe and relative stability elsewhere? Isn't there a message in there that European approach of "business as usual" isn't working and the construct is in dire need of a better framework? Again, it's not just me saying that...
Yes, and the difference is between responsibility to a single entity vs responsibility to a bunch of agents, each w/their own agenda and ulterior motive. I don't know how else I can explain this "huge difference".
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ecbs-risk-sharing-riddle-for-markets-heard-on-the-street-1422024124
http://www.voxeu.org/article/effective-eurozone-qe-size-matters-more-risk-sharing
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0700fd98-9ff5-11e4-aa89-00144feab7de.html#axzz3SlOb8WbM
http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2012/html/sp120420.en.html
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2015/html/sp150202.en.html
etc etc etc
As to the Fed, let me re-iterate that I never argued that what the Fed did was less or more risky than the ECB. IMHO, that's irrelevant.
The Biggest Problem For Greece Isn't Debt: It's This
"Greeks consider taxes as theft," which, among other things, explains, as WSJ reports, at the end of 2014, Greeks owed their government about €76 billion in unpaid taxes accrued over decades; the government says only €9 billion of that can be recovered, with most of the rest lost to insolvency.
* * *

Yes, agreed and I don't have the answers either... I do think, though, that there comes a point where integration through "perma-crisis", a la Jean Monnet, starts to become more costly than having the union in the first place.1) of course. I am fully and 100% on your page. Europe needs a different framework. But when a house is burning you don't spend your time on designing a better structure but first concern yourself with killing the fire. Delays and slower speed happens when you put together nations of starkly different cultures. Nobody doubts the huge benefits to peace, safety, and security the EU has brought to its member states. But should the EMU have never been created? Would the EU have been as stable as it is without a monetary union? Or would a financially degenerating nation destabilized peace and security as well? I do not have the answers.
Oh, good lord, I couldn't possibly disagree more with a statement like this, on a whole variety of levels.2) Well I do not see any diverging results from this difference. Let's keep it real for a moment, a) most NCBs within the EU run a highly responsible and coordinated monetary policy as set forth by ECB, and b) the large majority of nations within the European union probably run a more unified fiscal policy than the differences you see in financial and fiscal management between New York state and Louisiana.
Yes, agreed and I don't have the answers either... I do think, though, that there comes a point where integration through "perma-crisis", a la Jean Monnet, starts to become more costly than having the union in the first place.
Oh, good lord, I couldn't possibly disagree more with a statement like this, on a whole variety of levels.
What has to end is the abuse and strangulation that Greeks apply to hold the rest of Europe hostage.