Who bankrupted Ireland?

[Fruitcake]

Reuters reports that Eurogroup Chairman Jean-Claude Juncker has criticised the pressure being exerted on Ireland by its eurozone partners to raise its corporate tax rate in exchange for a discount on the interest rate charged on its bail-out loan. "I'm not happy with the idea that some governments obviously find some pleasure in torturing Ireland in the meetings and outside. I don't like this way of dealing with serious problems," he argued.

Meanwhile, the European Commission is due to unveil its proposals for a common corporate tax base today. An article in Le Figaro notes: “It could take years for the proposed system to make headway, if it needs to go through enhanced cooperation among interested countries instead of moving forward at 27. But it’s clear that, in a system sharing a single currency and a single tax base, the next logical step would be the harmonisation of rates.”

The WSJ reports that an Ernst & Young study showed that almost 24,000 groups of taxpayers would face higher corporate income taxes under the proposal, including agriculture, mining, financial services, real estate and transportation industries.

Portugal’s credit rating was downgraded two notches and given a negative outlook by Moody’s yesterday. Moody’s also warned that a bailout may not be sufficient to reduce the Portuguese government’s borrowing costs, suggesting that more drastic action, such as a debt restructuring, may need to be taken.

Meanwhile, yesterday EU finance ministers agreed on a new set of proposals to strengthen budgetary surveillance in the EU and the eurozone. Under the proposed rules, if a eurozone country fails to close the gap between its debt level and the EU limit of 60% of GDP, by 5% per year, it will be subject to a fine of 0.2% of its GDP. The fine would be automatic, unless a majority of the council opposed it. The agreement does also allow pension reforms to be offset in national accounts and private indebtedness taken into consideration before a country is fined.

Furthermore, it was agreed that countries must not spend more per year than their medium term economic growth rate. However, Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank, called the measures “insufficient”. The proposals still have to be approved by the European Parliament, which is expected to try to increase the punishments.

The UK won an opt-out from a proposal which would have included new powers for the European Commission to set rules on public accounting systems, statistics, forecasting practices and other issues relating to deciding the budget.

The WSJ reports that Greek Finance Minister, George Papaconstantinou, announced during yesterday’s meeting that his country might need more assistance on top of last year's bailout. Süddeutsche Zeitung reports that Germany will need to contribute €18bn - €25bn in paid up cash to the eurozone’s permanent bailout fund, as opposed to just guarantees. This could result in a massive increase in German borrowing and hamper the efforts to consolidate the German budget.

The noose tightens.

[BigBallinStalin]

Reuters reports that Eurogroup Chairman Jean-Claude Juncker has criticised the pressure being exerted on Ireland by its eurozone partners to raise its corporate tax rate in exchange for a discount on the interest rate charged on its bail-out loan. "I'm not happy with the idea that some governments obviously find some pleasure in torturing Ireland in the meetings and outside. I don't like this way of dealing with serious problems," he argued.

That's some very serious coercion, and a good indication of more upcoming abusive measures that other lesser powerful Eurozone members would unfairly face.

Meanwhile, the European Commission is due to unveil its proposals for a common corporate tax base today. An article in Le Figaro notes: “It could take years for the proposed system to make headway, if it needs to go through enhanced cooperation among interested countries instead of moving forward at 27. But it’s clear that, in a system sharing a single currency and a single tax base, the next logical step would be the harmonisation of rates.”

Sounds as disastrous as setting fixed rates on determining which department gets how much funding, or as disastrous as across the board government budget cuts at fixed percentages.

Such a simple strategy is problematic because such a fixed rate overlooks the actual need to change such a rate. For each country, an objective-based rate should be applied--not some arbitrary fixed rate across all countries.

The WSJ reports that an Ernst & Young study showed that almost 24,000 groups of taxpayers would face higher corporate income taxes under the proposal, including agriculture, mining, financial services, real estate and transportation industries.

I've had trouble understanding the logic behind raising such taxes. Of course, I'm not sure by how much they'll rise, but a rise in any company's costs (via taxes) will just force them to shift the rise in cost in their prices. This inevitably forces consumers to pay higher prices for all sorts of goods, which in turn will increase inflation to some degree.

And if some companies can't operate at such costs, they'll just leave.

And do the benefits really outweigh the costs? I wouldn't be surprised to find most of the tax revenue being allocated to tasks like artificially and temporarily propping up other governments or spending funds on unnecessary and inefficient stimulus plans. It only prolongs the seemingly inevitable, another big recession or depression.

Portugal’s credit rating was downgraded two notches and given a negative outlook by Moody’s yesterday. Moody’s also warned that a bailout may not be sufficient to reduce the Portuguese government’s borrowing costs, suggesting that more drastic action, such as a debt restructuring, may need to be taken.

Meanwhile, yesterday EU finance ministers agreed on a new set of proposals to strengthen budgetary surveillance in the EU and the eurozone. Under the proposed rules, if a eurozone country fails to close the gap between its debt level and the EU limit of 60% of GDP, by 5% per year, it will be subject to a fine of 0.2% of its GDP. The fine would be automatic, unless a majority of the council opposed it. The agreement does also allow pension reforms to be offset in national accounts and private indebtedness taken into consideration before a country is fined.

Furthermore, it was agreed that countries must not spend more per year than their medium term economic growth rate. However, Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank, called the measures “insufficient”. The proposals still have to be approved by the European Parliament, which is expected to try to increase the punishments.

The UK won an opt-out from a proposal which would have included new powers for the European Commission to set rules on public accounting systems, statistics, forecasting practices and other issues relating to deciding the budget.

The WSJ reports that Greek Finance Minister, George Papaconstantinou, announced during yesterday’s meeting that his country might need more assistance on top of last year's bailout. Süddeutsche Zeitung reports that Germany will need to contribute €18bn - €25bn in paid up cash to the eurozone’s permanent bailout fund, as opposed to just guarantees. This could result in a massive increase in German borrowing and hamper the efforts to consolidate the German budget.

The noose tightens.

Wouldn't such a fine produce the unintended consequence of preventing a country from spending more on paying off its debt? Those countries already have the incentive to drastically balance their budgets and pay off their debts, so isn't such a fine really just another way for the richer or more powerful countries to siphon from the lesser advantages ones?

[Fruitcake]

Reuters reports that Eurogroup Chairman Jean-Claude Juncker has criticised the pressure being exerted on Ireland by its eurozone partners to raise its corporate tax rate in exchange for a discount on the interest rate charged on its bail-out loan. "I'm not happy with the idea that some governments obviously find some pleasure in torturing Ireland in the meetings and outside. I don't like this way of dealing with serious problems," he argued.

That's some very serious coercion, and a good indication of more upcoming abusive measures that other lesser powerful Eurozone members would unfairly face.

You betcha. But this is one step in this whole crazy situation. Whilst even the USA is seeing local people rise up in anger at central Govt decisions Europe continues to fly headlong into this very practice (as you point out succinctly below)

Meanwhile, the European Commission is due to unveil its proposals for a common corporate tax base today. An article in Le Figaro notes: “It could take years for the proposed system to make headway, if it needs to go through enhanced cooperation among interested countries instead of moving forward at 27. But it’s clear that, in a system sharing a single currency and a single tax base, the next logical step would be the harmonisation of rates.”

Sounds as disastrous as setting fixed rates on determining which department gets how much funding, or as disastrous as across the board government budget cuts at fixed percentages.

Such a simple strategy is problematic because such a fixed rate overlooks the actual need to change such a rate. For each country, an objective-based rate should be applied--not some arbitrary fixed rate across all countries.

Correct again, I couldn’t have put it better myself.

The WSJ reports that an Ernst & Young study showed that almost 24,000 groups of taxpayers would face higher corporate income taxes under the proposal, including agriculture, mining, financial services, real estate and transportation industries.

I've had trouble understanding the logic behind raising such taxes. Of course, I'm not sure by how much they'll rise, but a rise in any company's costs (via taxes) will just force them to shift the rise in cost in their prices. This inevitably forces consumers to pay higher prices for all sorts of goods, which in turn will increase inflation to some degree.

And if some companies can't operate at such costs, they'll just leave.

Just as the major hedge fund operations are exiting London and setting up in Switzerland. So far it is estimated 10,000 positions have been lost to that country in recent years since the UK Govt capitulated to Brussels over Financial Laws.

And do the benefits really outweigh the costs? I wouldn't be surprised to find most of the tax revenue being allocated to tasks like artificially and temporarily propping up other governments or spending funds on unnecessary and inefficient stimulus plans. It only prolongs the seemingly inevitable, another big recession or depression.

Don’t get me started. I sit in total bewilderment at how, in the 21st Century, Politicians act more and more like the rulers of Rome nearly 2 millennia ago.

Portugal’s credit rating was downgraded two notches and given a negative outlook by Moody’s yesterday. Moody’s also warned that a bailout may not be sufficient to reduce the Portuguese government’s borrowing costs, suggesting that more drastic action, such as a debt restructuring, may need to be taken.

Meanwhile, yesterday EU finance ministers agreed on a new set of proposals to strengthen budgetary surveillance in the EU and the eurozone. Under the proposed rules, if a eurozone country fails to close the gap between its debt level and the EU limit of 60% of GDP, by 5% per year, it will be subject to a fine of 0.2% of its GDP. The fine would be automatic, unless a majority of the council opposed it. The agreement does also allow pension reforms to be offset in national accounts and private indebtedness taken into consideration before a country is fined.

Furthermore, it was agreed that countries must not spend more per year than their medium term economic growth rate. However, Jean-Claude Trichet, President of the European Central Bank, called the measures “insufficient”. The proposals still have to be approved by the European Parliament, which is expected to try to increase the punishments.

The UK won an opt-out from a proposal which would have included new powers for the European Commission to set rules on public accounting systems, statistics, forecasting practices and other issues relating to deciding the budget.

The WSJ reports that Greek Finance Minister, George Papaconstantinou, announced during yesterday’s meeting that his country might need more assistance on top of last year's bailout. Süddeutsche Zeitung reports that Germany will need to contribute €18bn - €25bn in paid up cash to the eurozone’s permanent bailout fund, as opposed to just guarantees. This could result in a massive increase in German borrowing and hamper the efforts to consolidate the German budget.

The noose tightens.

Wouldn't such a fine produce the unintended consequence of preventing a country from spending more on paying off its debt? Those countries already have the incentive to drastically balance their budgets and pay off their debts, so isn't such a fine really just another way for the richer or more powerful countries to siphon from the lesser advantages ones?

You are absolutely spot on. So many people have asked this question of how a massive can actually enhance a country’s prospects, but we don’t ever get a straight response.

[Pedronicus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koY6kXhQDQo

[2dimes]

That was NSFW (not safe for wanker-bankers) How hillarious was the end?

[patsfan12]

ur mom

[2dimes]

Bogus?

[BigBallinStalin]

Bogus?

Who? Your mom?

[oVo]

Now across Europe the great blame game will rumble back into play. Our banks, your banks, their banks, or is it your feckless householders or ours, certainly can't be theirs, they're still doing well in Germany. Expect lots more national stereotypes to be wheeled out for ritual defamation.

So let's ask who it was took a dump in Ireland?

First, the suspects.

Ireland has three big insolvent banks and several other smaller, equally insolvent financial institutions we won't bother to mention by name.

Ireland also has a large number of subsidiaries of European, British and American Banks.These subsidiaries are often registered as Irish and therefore on Ireland's tab not the nation of the parent bank. This often gets forgotten in the excitement. But it is KEY.

Ireland also houses a very large chunk of the world's Special Investment Vehicles (SIV's) which are the shell companies which house trillions and trillions of dollars and Euros and pounds worth of Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs). These are what Warren Buffett described as "weapons of financial mass destruction'" And they are in their own way as hard to find and disarm as the ones we had a fraudulent war over. Anyway I digress.

These CDOs, in turn, house an equal or greater nominal value of Credit Default Swaps (CDS) written upon the CDOs. I can't tell you the figures because only the Irish Stock exchange has the otherwise completely confidential paper work and I have serious doubts (from what I have been told in the last week by an insider with first hand knowledge) that the Irish regulator and stock exchange have much of a clue themselves.

So, to the crime.

Some of this will, for legal reasons have to be done in generalized terms with names left out to protect the Innocent - me. But to start with let's be reasonably specific. Germany was and is very very angry with Ireland for ruining its banks. That is what a German banker told me this week. She spoke on the guarantee of anonymity as she would suffer all sorts of legal problems if she was identified. I am sorry that this leaves you just having to trust that I'm not just making this up, but I hope many of you know me well enough to go with it.

In fact it was rumoured in German banks that at the time of the collapse of Hypo Real Estate, an angry call was made from the German Premier to the Irish, to complain, to which the answer was ... well it was short. Now this is nothing but a rumour. But it was a rumour in Germany which indicates that some in Germany were and perhaps still are very angry and blame Ireland.

So are they right in their blame?

The same banker told me this. She was aware of instances, and so was everyone else, of banks, German banks, who used to fly their people from Germany to Ireland in order to do deals that were not allowed in Germany.

German banks set up subsidiaries in Ireland. These subsidiaries were often registered as completely Irish companies. Back in Germany the German regulator (BaFin) had strict and enforced rules. Very good rules for the most part. Far, far better than Britain or Ireland. But these good rules, properly enforced meant German banks could not do many of the most lucrative and in hind sight reckless kinds of deals.

So the German banks would do the figures and work it all out in Frankfurt, then send a banker over to Ireland, get them to sit at 'their' desk in Ireland, in the Irish bank, and do the deal there. The legal registration of the deal and the 'oversight' were all Irish. This is known in the financial world as jurisdictional arbitrage. You and I would call it cheating if we were feeling charitable and lying if we weren't.

The Banker flies back to Germany, where the German bank hasn't done any deal, and therefore has done nothing wrong. The deal was properly overseen and approved by the appropriate Irish financial authorities and the profits would be banked at a very happy Irish bank. If any management of the 'deal' was required an Irish company would be hired, there are many, and an Irish manager often living not far from Cork, would 'manage' the money in and out. I have spoken to such people. Usually I can hear the sweat coming off them as they ask how I got their number and where did I get my information. To which I would reply that the Internet is a very large place and never, never forgets.

Now my question to you is this. If it's a German bank and a German banker doing the deal is it Germany who made the mess? Or, equally justified, if the deal was actually done in Ireland in an Irish company allowed and no doubt welcomed by Ireland's financial world, and overseen by Ireland's wonderful regulators, is it Ireland who made the mess?

Should Germany, have pulled the plug on this racket? Should Ireland? Whose losses when they finally came, are they?

If the bank is registered in Ireland as an Irish bank/business, then the loss is on Ireland's tab. Depfa was an Irish bank. Just months before its collapse in 2007 it was bought by Hypo, a German bank. Had that not happened the €180 billion euro loss at Hypo Real Estate would have been Ireland's loss, dwarfing all other losses. Why was Hypo Real Estate bought by Germany at that moment?

I can't say for sure. But think about this. Sachsen Landesbank collapsed due to around $30-40 billion in bad sub prime loans its Irish subsidiary called Ormond Quay had made in the U.S. OrmondOrmond's collapse caused the immediate collapse of one of Germany's Landesbanks. Which suddenly sent ripples of fear through all the other Landesbanks as the world woke up to the rampant idiocy that the Landesbanks had been getting up to ...in Ireland.

Germany had to step in and bail Sachsen out. Now lets think about Depfa. Depfa started life as a German bank. It became listed in London and then in 2002 moved to and registered itself in Ireland in the newly set up IFSC (Irish Financial Services Centre) This was like a legal gated community or financial maquiladora. The IFSC was in many ways supposed to be the regulator of what went on in its grounds. I leave you to decide how well it must have done.

By the way the IFSC was created by Dermot Desmond with the help of Charles Haughey.

So Depfa is now an Irish registered bank. But it has very close ties to Germany and many German banks and landesbanks. If ever Depfa went down it would certainly have plunged a vast swathe of German banks and landesbanks into a storm of insolvency, that would have dwarfed the fall out from SachsenLB. . Depfa must not be allowed to go down.

So when in 2007 Depfa was suddenly bought by Hypo Real Estate was it because news of financial problems hadn't reached Germany and they bought it because they thought it was a great deal and were cheated by those crafty Irish? OR might Germany have known that a massive crisis was ticking away in Depfa and could see the clock was running down close to zero hour, and realized that if left in Ireland it would not, could not be rescued by Ireland and so would be left to start a chain reaction that would move straight to Germany? If they thought the latter, do you think it likely that Germany would have just said "Oh Scheisse" and sat waiting for Armageddon, or do you think they would have taken emergency action to bring Depfa under German ownership and jurisdiction where German pockets were deep enough to bail it out and thereby save the rest of Germany's banking system?

You decide.

So let's return to our question? Whose fault? Would Germany be right to be bitter about Depfa/Hypo and others? Or does the blame lie with the Germany banks and Bankers who flew to Ireland to do their mess? Is it Ireland's banks mess or Germany's? I don't think we can disentangle the blame.. maybe when the Irish Banks' books are finally opened we could. But I bet you no one outside the top bankers and politicians, the people who oversaw the creation of the bomb in the first place, will ever be told what's really in there.

I can't say and neither can you, if the losses are Irish or German. But we can say, the losses never were, and should not ever be, yours and mine. We, the people, who were told nothing, were not asked nor consulted, whose laws were either ignored, set aside or re-written, we should not be expected to pay for those losses now.

They are bankers losses. It is NOT a question of Irish or German. It is question of wealthy bankers from all countries not just Germany (almost every nation, Germany, America, Russia, France Britain, we did dirty work in Ireland) and their corrupt Irish helpers versus the people. It is not a question of should the Irish people or the German people pay. Neither people should. It should be the bankers who made the losses who should take them.

DO NOT allow the bankers to set us against each other as a cover for their crime and guilt.

On the other side of this coin Ireland has a corporate tax rate that is much more favorable than the United States, which has led to the ten biggest American Corporations establishing overseas headquarters there. So with all those associated jobs, income and tax revenue Ireland's government should be fine.

If Ireland is fucked by questionable banking and business practices, the people responsible should be held accountable. If there are public officials who condoned these activities or were paid to look the other way ? They too should be accountable too, even though that is nearly impossible to do... since they just happen to run things.

[2dimes]

Bogus?

Who? Your mom?

Yeah, him and skibo.

[oVo]

No. I think that Congress was trying to win the favor of the public, without understanding the long-term ramifications of the laws they passed.

The result was these laws forced banks to make bad loans.

The Banking Industry... being filled with smart / creative and greedy people... them setup up new investment structures to spread the risk of these bad loans. In doing so they made a lot of money... but they were somewhat forced into this action.

I disagree... Congress was stuffing their own pockets with the "aid" of special interest groups, with total disregard for the potential consequences of their "inaction" before taking action to bail the bastards out when it backfired and the shit hit the fan.
..."they were somewhat forced into this action." ? Forced??? Was their greed holding a gun to their collective heads? The lack of regulation over the banking industry was never to "win the favor of the public" and was always about personal priorities. MAKING FUCKING MONEY!

btw... The Banking Bailouts cost more than it will take to rebuild Japan after the recent disaster. Cash for clunkers was an attempt to win the public favor in the states, and did fairly well for such a minor investment of tax dollars.

[CreepersWiener]

Leprechauns. Quite simple...Leprechauns bankrupted Ireland.

It has been well known that for centuries that Leprechauns have been hording vast quantities of gold and unwilling to share it with the masses. By doing this, Leprechauns have been in control of the entire financial system of Ireland. Unfortunately, there is only so much gold to go around, therefor, Ireland was forced to take a "bailout" from the IMF. They just filled their coffers with fake money, while the Leprechauns get richer and richer from the world's financial crisis.

[Mr Changsha]

Leprechauns. Quite simple...Leprechauns bankrupted Ireland.

It has been well known that for centuries that Leprechauns have been hording vast quantities of gold and unwilling to share it with the masses. By doing this, Leprechauns have been in control of the entire financial system of Ireland. Unfortunately, there is only so much gold to go around, therefor, Ireland was forced to take a "bailout" from the IMF. They just filled their coffers with fake money, while the Leprechauns get richer and richer from the world's financial crisis.

I blame the modern world. Most Irish were too blattered to even find a bank not all that long ago. Since they've sobered up a touch (you know, not ALWAYS have a few shots with their breakfast...that kind of thing), it has been down-hill all the way...they discovered investments. Of course, they are all still too pissed to actually make good ones, but are just sober enough (collectively) to be aware of the concept. A dangerous mix, if ever there was one.

The solution (as ever) is to actually increase their consumption of alcohol, place a trade embargo on potatoes (just for the amusement factor really) and have the British take over their economy again. We've tried an independent Ireland...

..and it just doesn't work.

[Fruitcake]

Moody’s cut Portugal’s credit rating today in the latest of a series of downgrades which have hit the country over the past month.

The agency stated that it expected the new Portuguese government to seek external aid “as a matter of urgency”. The Portuguese cost of borrowing hit 9.91% yesterday, meaning that it is now higher than Ireland’s when it requested a bailout.

The FT reports that nearly all investors and Portuguese commentators see a bailout as inevitable, except former Prime Minister Jose Socrates who maintains his opposition to a bailout.

[Fruitcake]

The FT reports that Portugal has held talks with the EU after the Portuguese banking sector applied pressure for Portugal to seek a bridge loan, in order to cover its financing needs until a new government is formed. The biggest Portuguese banks are holding significant amounts of Portuguese government debt and refuse to take on any more. In an interview with Portuguese TVI, the President of Portugal’s largest bank – Portuguese Commercial Bank – Carlos Santos Ferreira, said it’s "indispensable that the country seeks an interim short-term loan from the Commission, which has €60bn available" for these type of problems before the next government seeks a formal bail-out from the European Financial Stability Facility. “In my estimation over €10bn [is necessary]”, he added.

However, the WSJ reports that European Commission sources have denied the possibility of a short term bridge loan. A spokesman said that “the Commission doesn’t give loans like this”. Francisco Assis, leader of the Portuguese Socialist party, yesterday signalled a change in position saying, “An emergency situation demands emergency solutions…with a caretaker government, we cannot ignore this situation in the two months until the elections”, reports i Informação. Portugal will hold an auction of up to €2bn in short term government debt today, the results will give a key indication of market sentiment.

Greek daily Ta Nea reports that the informal meeting of EU finance ministers taking place in Budapest over the coming days will examine the possibility of a “joint, concurrent and co-ordinated” debt restructuring for Greece, Ireland, and Portugal. Meanwhile, FT Deutschland reports that Greek Finance Minister Giorgos Papaconstantinou is considering the possibility of a debt restructuring, however a Finance Ministry source suggested that before pressing ahead with such a solution it would need to know the results from the next round of EU bank stress tests.

It was as if the past 3 weeks never happened yesterday as sterling piled onwards after some great services data, euro weakened as further cracks in the growth veneer emerged and the US dollar slumped as Fed members squabbled over whether more stimulus was needed.

The UK service sector is of course key to the onward progress of the UK economy as a whole and, following a downbeat assessment from the British Chambers of Commerce, the PMI reading surprised to the upside and indicated the fastest growth in 13 months. Whether this optimism is reflected in other measures such as consumer confidence, retails sales and unemployment remains to be seen but the 1 cent jump seen against the euro is testament to the susceptibility of pound to data be it good or bad. This figure also suggests that UK GDP in the 1st quarter will be around the 0.8-0.9% area as opposed to around 0.5% that was forecast after the February figure. Rate-setters on the BOE’s Monetary Policy Committee will be glad for this figure as it makes their job just a little bit easier as when to raise rates; it’s easier to justify rate rises whilst the economy is growing.

The probability is that the European Central Bank hikes rates tomorrow despite figures released yesterday that consumers are tightening their belts and Portugal's belt is so tight it's killing them. Eurozone retail sales fell by -0.1% in March, a trend that will only continue if rates rise. The news out of Portugal was roughly what we've heard every day for the past few months; further downgrades for banks and the sovereign and rumours of a bail out. One thing that we haven’t heard in recent weeks however is that Portuguese banks have virtually no more margin to buy country's government debt. The game is up and for good measure there is a sale of EUR2bn of Portuguese debt due today as well....guess who won't be lining up for that.

The minutes of the latest Federal Reserve meeting show that they are having the same problem as pretty much every other central bank: some members are indicating that economic conditions might merit a move toward a tighter stance this year, while others are arguing that further stimulus or a continuation of current facilities is necessary beyond the end of the year. This has weakened the dollar overnight to a 2 week high while EURUSD is pushing on 5 month highs at 1.4280.

What chaos there is in the EU over what to do about the rapidly deteriorating currency/debt position and with Merkel's bashing in her regional elections it is clear the German people are against any bail-outs for the PIIGS.

Meanwhile, the German Constitutional Court remains silent when we were told that its judgement on the "no bail-out" clause from Maastricht was to have been delivered in February.

Anyone know what's happened to that one??? Even a blind man could see that the game is up, so why don't the 'crats give up, split the Eurozone and let the PIIGS devalue and trade their way out of their crisies?

Answer: they don't have the guts to admit that they got it wrong, and the poor bloody infantry get screwed as always.

[2dimes]

How are these things affecting real estate values and is Portugal still a reletively safe place for a family?

[Fruitcake]

How are these things affecting real estate values and is Portugal still a reletively safe place for a family?

Property values are sliding gently, it's still a safe place.

[Mr Changsha]

How are these things affecting real estate values and is Portugal still a reletively safe place for a family?

'Relatively safe'...heh. As my old grandmother liked to say, ''Never drink a foreigner's water..''

I've always made it a rule to merely partake in domestic watersports ever since.

[Mr Changsha]

I think everyone would agree that my answer is much more helpful to a family thinking of emigrating to Portugal.

[Fruitcake]

The FT Weekend reported that the German government has begun drawing up contingency plans for a Greek debt restructuring. The plans being discussed are thought to focus on a voluntary debt restructuring, possibly with the European bailout fund (EFSF) purchasing government bonds, helping to retire some debt and extending debt maturities. Werner Hoyer, Deputy German Foreign Minister, said that such a restructuring would “not be a disaster” for Greece or the eurozone. The Irish Independent reports that IMF officials have told EU leaders that a debt restructuring must be considered. Meanwhile, violent protests against austerity continue in Greece, with many protesters calling for Greece to default on or restructure its debt, reported the Observer. Former Greek PM Costas Simitis, who oversaw the country's eurozone accession, has said that "the longer it delays, the greater the debt that cannot be restructured."

However, Olli Rehn, EU Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, warned that he does not see “debt restructuring as an option” since it would set off a “chain reaction” in the banking sector, according to Bloomberg. El Pais reports that French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde suggested a debt restructuring would be “catastrophic”.

The front page of Handelsblatt reports that Germany’s economic and legal establishment is rebelling against Chancellor Angela Merkel, with 12 leading experts criticising the plans for the EU’s permanent bailout mechanism (ESM). Meanwhile, the battle over the ESM in the Bundestag continues, with up to 12 FDP members set to reject the proposal meaning the vote is too close to call. Separately, following its downgrade of Ireland’s credit rating on Friday, Moody’s downgraded Irish banks to junk status over the weekend.

Here are the surges in 10 year Sovereign bond rates posted in this thread over the months.
1st number is the yield back in July 2010, the second, the yield December 2010, the last is today's yield.
Italy 4.02 / 4.42 / 4.73
Spain 4.36 / 5.18 / 5.42
Ireland 5.43 / 9.20 / 9.71
Portugal 5.55 / 6.99 / 9.00
Greece 11.38 / 11.77 / 13.83

The Euro has stayed strong in the markets for the last few months, strengthening even more recently due to bad data coming out of the USA. However, the market is starting to have it's way. Without creating limitless amounts of cash the Euro Govts are finding themselves trapped in an ever decreasing circle. After peaking at near break points for Sterling and Dollar it has started to slide. Last Friday saw the real beginnings of this. Pundits are generally moving the Euro from 'Neutral' to 'Neutral to Negative'. A 2% slide in 2 days is about as much as can be allowed in a 21st century market and that's what has happened.

[Mr Changsha]

A) The Jews!
B) The Germans!
C) Allah!
D) Whiskey!

[Fruitcake]

A) The Jews!
B) The Germans!
C) Allah!
D) Whiskey!

If only it was so simple.

[tyche73]

Haven't read all of this thread only just came across it
It's one thiong to talk about it it's another to live it
I wouldn't be a fan of UKIP but i did like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVvsJUPaWoE

[2dimes]

So tell me some tales.

[Fruitcake]

Haven't read all of this thread only just came across it
It's one thiong to talk about it it's another to live it
I wouldn't be a fan of UKIP but i did like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVvsJUPaWoE

I empathise with you over the situation tyche. I have many friends in Ireland and they are not at all happy with things.

UKIP are a ragtag bunch with great ideals. What's more important is the rise and rise of equivalent parties in most of the EU countries.

As for Ireland's predicament, I would hope the Government there see sense and refloats the Punt. Let the damn thing sink to a new much lower level, take the hit in a jolt to imported inflation, put two fingers up the Bond holders as they will now be having to take a big hit on their balance sheets in the write downs in value, let the currency settle back to a realistic level and get on with life.