Politics Historian calls not to forget that Germany owes a great debt to Greece

Yes, not only does China and India supply slave labour but out-sourced western companies can also avoid the enviromental and pollution laws in their own. In out-sourcing our industries to Asia the west has created a rod for it's own back and, of course, the consumer is also part of the problem. We want everything, we want it cheap and we want it now and all without a thought that someone is slaving to supply it.

I agree re the drachma but I don't think it will happen. Greece is too paranoid over Turkey to leave the protection of the EU, and Germany et al use that paranoia to keep Greece in line and make a lot of money selling weapons whilst they are at it.
 
Hmm China has two things going for them, low paid labour and cheap oil. Only Hong Kong has a minimum wage, the rest of china doesn't, so the corporations can pay them what they like. Once the chinese start demanding better wages, or more rights, then china is in trouble. China is a "slave" economy, people like to put their factories there for the cheap labour.

The other thing is the -relatively- cheap oil. We can still have world wide trade becuase we can transport cheaply around the world. In the next 20 years oil will either be gone or so expensive it isn't viable anymore, so the cost of transporting chinese goods to the richer countries will be too expensive and china is in trouble. Unless a viable substitue comes along and then its business as usual.

I think Greece should go back to the drachma and start developing its industrial capital, it needs to diversify. With a cheap drachma, greece will attract more tourists, the industrial sector will instantly be competative, and costs of living will lower. In other words, I don't think this EU project is worth it for greece. Germany wants to have its cake and eat it too.


Yes, not only does China and India supply slave labour but out-sourced western companies can also avoid the enviromental and pollution laws in their own. In out-sourcing our industries to Asia the west has created a rod for it's own back and, of course, the consumer is also part of the problem. We want everything, we want it cheap and we want it now and all without a thought that someone is slaving to supply it.

I agree re the drachma but I don't think it will happen. Greece is too paranoid over Turkey to leave the protection of the EU, and Germany et al use that paranoia to keep Greece in line and make a lot of money selling weapons whilst they are at it.


you are both correct, a return to drachmas will send back Greece 2-5 years,
but a memorandum 3 will last 40 years,

a return to drachma will make Greek products more cheaper so easy to go to market,
that means Germany will lose the extra money from package greek juice, which will stay in greece, etc,


with Drachma Greece had the 3-5 biggest merchant navy in the world,
was 2nd in peach production in the world,
was 1rst in Europe in white sugar production
etc etc
 
The other thing is the -relatively- cheap oil. We can still have world wide trade becuase we can transport cheaply around the world. In the next 20 years oil will either be gone or so expensive it isn't viable anymore, so the cost of transporting chinese goods to the richer countries will be too expensive and china is in trouble. Unless a viable substitue comes along and then its business as usual.

QUOTE]

I wouldn't count on it even if oil doubles or triples.
The biggest Maersk ship:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_M%C3%A6rsk
can carry 150 000 tons of goods from china to wherever around the world in 20 days.
It burns 6,300 litter of oil an hour, that's 2,520,000 liter per trip. It is a cheap heavy oil, probably 50 cents a liter, bought in volume. Let's say oil went up to 1.00 for easier calculations. 2.5 million dollars divided by 150,000,000 kilograms of cargo, that's almost 1.7 cent per kilogram. Crew is only 17 people, but maintenance and repairs probably runs in couple of millions a month, plus some profit, and we can arrive at 5 cents per kilogram. Some road and rail trip to destination, loading and unloading can bring the price to 10 cents a kilogram, but the fuel cost is closer to 4 cents. In 20 years fuel will double again or triple, but engines efficiency and ships size will keep the transportation cost constant.
When you go to wal-mart and you buy a plastic chair from China for 10 bucks, and it weighs a kilogram, the transportation fuel cost is only 4 cents. How much more you'll pay for this chair if fuel will go up 10 fold? The whole 10.36! The fuel cost is insignificant, well almost.

What is going to level the playing field is automatization and robotics. In close future work in factories will be done mostly by robots and machines. Labor cost therefore production cost will be the same regardless where the factory is located.
Greece will finely produce plastic chairs at home. This is what iapetoc wants :grin:
 
I wouldn't count on it even if oil doubles or triples.
The biggest Maersk ship:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_M%C3%A6rsk
can carry 150 000 tons of goods from china to wherever around the world in 20 days.
It burns 6,300 litter of oil an hour, that's 2,520,000 liter per trip. It is a cheap heavy oil, probably 50 cents a liter, bought in volume. Let's say oil went up to 1.00 for easier calculations. 2.5 million dollars divided by 150,000,000 kilograms of cargo, that's almost 1.7 cent per kilogram. Crew is only 17 people, but maintenance and repairs probably runs in couple of millions a month, plus some profit, and we can arrive at 5 cents per kilogram. Some road and rail trip to destination, loading and unloading can bring the price to 10 cents a kilogram, but the fuel cost is closer to 4 cents. In 20 years fuel will double again or triple, but engines efficiency and ships size will keep the transportation cost constant.
When you go to wal-mart and you buy a plastic chair from China for 10 bucks, and it weighs a kilogram, the transportation fuel cost is only 4 cents. How much more you'll pay for this chair if fuel will go up 10 fold? The whole 10.36! The fuel cost is insignificant, well almost.

What is going to level the playing field is automatization and robotics. In close future work in factories will be done mostly by robots and machines. Labor cost therefore production cost will be the same regardless where the factory is located.
Greece will finely produce plastic chairs at home. This is what iapetoc wants :grin:




that is the point,

we put 25-35% production taxes in Europe, and we leave china to rule,
just think that 10 bucks had and an extra tax 12.5 E then diffrence is not that big,

that is Greece problem
Lamaplast the biggest company in North greece in plastic chairs,
became import from china, and move central factory in romania were for at least starting years tax is 0% and max 5-9% instead of 25-35% . :sad-2:


Besides smart quy such ships need a 6 and bigger lvl harbor to load and take off,

how many 6th and bigger lvl harbors you know in europe?????

hmmmm only 2 or 3, that means from china to netherlands only hmmmmmm
lets put the extra cost from netherlands to Greece, hmmmmmmmmmm
 
Last edited:
I agree re the drachma but I don't think it will happen. Greece is too paranoid over Turkey to leave the protection of the EU, and Germany et al use that paranoia to keep Greece in line and make a lot of money selling weapons whilst they are at it.

I don't think an EU army is out of the question sometime in the future, maybe then Greece can stop being paranoid. In North America, we have had NORAD for the longest time now, Europe needs to keep up with the times, then again I think Germany is a `lame-duck`leader.
 
The other thing is the -relatively- cheap oil. We can still have world wide trade becuase we can transport cheaply around the world. In the next 20 years oil will either be gone or so expensive it isn't viable anymore, so the cost of transporting chinese goods to the richer countries will be too expensive and china is in trouble. Unless a viable substitue comes along and then its business as usual.

QUOTE]

I wouldn't count on it even if oil doubles or triples.
The biggest Maersk ship:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_M%C3%A6rsk
can carry 150 000 tons of goods from china to wherever around the world in 20 days.
It burns 6,300 litter of oil an hour, that's 2,520,000 liter per trip. It is a cheap heavy oil, probably 50 cents a liter, bought in volume. Let's say oil went up to 1.00 for easier calculations. 2.5 million dollars divided by 150,000,000 kilograms of cargo, that's almost 1.7 cent per kilogram. Crew is only 17 people, but maintenance and repairs probably runs in couple of millions a month, plus some profit, and we can arrive at 5 cents per kilogram. Some road and rail trip to destination, loading and unloading can bring the price to 10 cents a kilogram, but the fuel cost is closer to 4 cents. In 20 years fuel will double again or triple, but engines efficiency and ships size will keep the transportation cost constant.
When you go to wal-mart and you buy a plastic chair from China for 10 bucks, and it weighs a kilogram, the transportation fuel cost is only 4 cents. How much more you'll pay for this chair if fuel will go up 10 fold? The whole 10.36! The fuel cost is insignificant, well almost.

What is going to level the playing field is automatization and robotics. In close future work in factories will be done mostly by robots and machines. Labor cost therefore production cost will be the same regardless where the factory is located.
Greece will finely produce plastic chairs at home. This is what iapetoc wants :grin:

There are other more sinister forces that can make oil raise to unsustainable levels. We need to move away from oil completly not skip around it, if not for our sake then our children or grandchildren who will indeed have to deal with these issues.

As for us Leborke, who live in Canada, Obama made a speach a while ago in which he said he wanted to cut America`s dependence on foreign oil in the next 20 years, which means he will need albertas oil sand more than ever. If it comes to a point where its a national security issue for USA you can garauntee there will be a referendum for a NAU. It won't be a coincidence.
 
Media misrepresentation, at least one media outlet recognises there is a problem.
 
Perhaps one of the greatest sins of today is how short the collective memory. While Greece is pressed in a long agony seems endless and the Eurozone conditions for the country to support their extreme austerity measures are made to believe that the situation is the worst experience helena who has lived in Europe's history. And nothing could be further from reality.

The economic historian Albrecht Ritschl, a professor at the London School of Economics, believes that Germany is ignoring most of its history and what led to what it is today. In an interview with Der Spiegel and in this article for The Guardian, Ritschl points out that Germany was even more indebted to Greece in the last century and Germany invites the country to be more understandable to the crisis in the euro if it is to meet new demands remissions of 50% was applied in the Second World War in the payment of war reparations. Remember that Germany paid off the First World War, only in October 2010.


In the interview with Der Spiegel, which also collected Business Insider, Ritschl points out that the German government's attitude is unreasonable, since the failure to make payments that Germany starred in the twentieth century, with the first World War and the Second after World War has been one of the largest in history.

Costs of War
After the First World War, the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 demanded that Germany pay reparations or compensation to the winners. There were thousands of millions of gold marks, a huge amount that the country tried to take up that suspended payments during World War II by order of the Nazi regime of Adolph Hitler.

From 1924 to 1929, the Weimar Republic and even lived in the United States borrowed the money needed to pay war reparations. This credit bubble collapsed during the economic crisis of the 30 that dropped the gold standard not only existing but also the democracy of Weimar. The money disappeared, the damage to the United States was enormous "and the consequences for the world economy was devastating," says Ritschl, who is surprised at the brevity of the Germanic collective memory.

After the Second World War the situation was almost similar. And, to avoid the mistakes of the past, the U.S., then accepted the possibility of debt relief from Germany. Thus in the Treaty of London of 1953 was reduced by half the German debt and established that the payment of interest on foreign loans shall be suspended until the reunification of Germany, which occurred on October 3, 1990. "It was a gesture that saved his life," says Ritschl, and pemitió enable their economic miracle, he says. However, since 1990, the Germans have consistently refused to address the outstanding debt with several nations. As Ritschl says "have refused to open that can of worms."

The German non-payment was "the king of the default"
In fact, it was not until last October 2010 that Germany could terminate the share of payments of the First World War to make the last payment of that debt, 92 years after the war. For Albrecht Ritschl, the German default after the First World War "has been" the king of kings "of defaults, while Greece falls short of him." Ritschl believes that if the U.S. and other countries (including Greece) have not accepted the possibility of a remission in Germany, the Germany of today not be the same we know.

The historian notes that "no one in Greece has forgotten that Germany owes its prosperity to the consideration of other nations." Thus, in his opinion the only correct solution for Greece is to allow its default. The most reassuring, he believes, is that Greece is very small compared to Europe, so they accept a remission of their debt would not be a serious problem, unless it could be a possibility of infection.

"I have advocated for a long time away and not for a second rescue plan for Greece, for the same reason." Even with the optimism of the IMF, "the possibility that Greece can pay your debt is almost impossible." The country has two options: implement further cuts in exchange for more bailout money, or make default. In his view, the first option increases the chance that Greece will be able to pay, but the Greeks will be a disaster in their standard of living is concerned. So, for the Greeks, the default seems to be the best option.

It is time that the Germans remember the promises made in 1990 when he announced that Europe would compensate in other ways. The only country at that time refused and Germany openly defied demanding compensation in the courts was Greece. Now is the time that Germany must fulfill the promise.
http://www.elblogsalmon.com/entorno...o-olvidar-que-tiene-una-gran-deuda-con-grecia

sorry, this is utter bullshit
this is looking for an excuse
wwII has nothing to do with Greek bankrupcy
nothing but Greek policiticians are to blame for this
I suppose these politicians were smart enough to realize they were spending more than Greek economy could support
but spending money makes them popular and getting re-elected
and they didn't have to worry, I've never heard of a politician getting punished for destroying his own country
it's the citizens taht get punished
 
I don't think an EU army is out of the question sometime in the future, maybe then Greece can stop being paranoid. In North America, we have had NORAD for the longest time now, Europe needs to keep up with the times, then again I think Germany is a `lame-duck`leader.

Actually, NATO already has an army of sorts (ISAF). The problem is that each country gets to define the mandate of any troops it commits to ISAF and it's unclear whether European countries would commit their army to any serious military action, even if there was a real emergency. And I doubt any European governments would be willing to support the creation of an European army under the command of NATO or EU officials. So the Greeks are right to be paranoid about Turkey - Greece wasn't prepared to deal with what the Turks did in Cyprus and the rest of Europe didn't want to get involved, so there's a permanent problem in Cyprus. That's probably why Greeks aren't willing to cut their military too much, no matter what their financial problems. But I think the austerity assault on the Greek economy by the IMF and the World Bank was probably a test run to see whether it's possible to get citizens to accept widespread poverty. So far, the Greek experiment seems to be working out well for the billionaires and their servants.
 
There are other more sinister forces that can make oil raise to unsustainable levels. We need to move away from oil completly not skip around it, if not for our sake then our children or grandchildren who will indeed have to deal with these issues.

As for us Leborke, who live in Canada, Obama made a speach a while ago in which he said he wanted to cut America`s dependence on foreign oil in the next 20 years, which means he will need albertas oil sand more than ever. If it comes to a point where its a national security issue for USA you can garauntee there will be a referendum for a NAU. It won't be a coincidence.

Canada need to step away from the poisonous tar sands and also step away from the FTA, if that's possible, since the Americans seem to be determined to destroy themselves with misgovernment and bad economic policies. If we can't separate ourselves sufficiently from the dying elephant, we'll end up as badly off economically, politically and socially as the Americans.
 
Here! Here! I say England owes the United States tremendous reparations for razing our White House during The War of 1812. That will be $4,000,000 please, payable in pounds of silver.

Listen here's the situation. The global economy is a complete and utter sh-- storm. There is no recovery, at least not for the vast majority of folks.

The boys in Davos have been gleefully rubbing their necks for the last few years, grateful everything's attached and accounted for and that there wasn't a replay of the French Revolution (obviously elites didn't fair too well during that time). Soon their greed will override their fear and the full bore fleecing of the remaining Middle Class will begin (we see this here with ObamaCare). War will begin, fortunes will be made, the rich get richer...

Nothing changes. Everything stays the same. Welcome to the wonderful world of neo-feudalism. Grab a shovel, keep your head down, and keep digging.


I have an invoice here for reparations for the American burning of Toronto during the War of 1812. When will you Americans be able to pay? Toronto need the money to pay for a subway expansion.

I agree with most of the rest of your comments. However, I think your Obamacare may have been a real attempt by a moderate Republican politician (Obama) to fix the mess that is American health care. He just didn't think things through very well. Of course, I could be wrong about Obamacare - I'm thankfully looking at the issue from a distance, in a country that has "socialized medicine".
 
Here! Here! I say England owes the United States tremendous reparations for razing our White House during The War of 1812. That will be $4,000,000 please, payable in pounds of silver.

Listen here's the situation. The global economy is a complete and utter sh-- storm. There is no recovery, at least not for the vast majority of folks.

The boys in Davos have been gleefully rubbing their necks for the last few years, grateful everything's attached and accounted for and that there wasn't a replay of the French Revolution (obviously elites didn't fair too well during that time). Soon their greed will override their fear and the full bore fleecing of the remaining Middle Class will begin (we see this here with ObamaCare). War will begin, fortunes will be made, the rich get richer...

Nothing changes. Everything stays the same. Welcome to the wonderful world of neo-feudalism. Grab a shovel, keep your head down, and keep digging.
Can you explain this conundrum, how come rich want to keep all poor (fleecing the remaining middle class), even though they make more money when society is rich, when they can do more business, more sales, more profits.
To illustrate my argument, here is a number of billionaires in USA - 442, in whole Africa - 12. So tell us where it is easier to get rich, among poor?

To illustrate my point even better I should mention that in China 25 years ago there was no middle class (by wester standards of living) and only the First Secretary of Communist party could have been considered a billionaire. Now the middle class is estimated at 400 million people with 122 known billionaires.
Why on earth the rich would like to destroy the middle class if well being of middle class, and good economy of the whole country, is the key to making more billions?
 
Canada need to step away from the poisonous tar sands and also step away from the FTA, if that's possible, since the Americans seem to be determined to destroy themselves with misgovernment and bad economic policies. If we can't separate ourselves sufficiently from the dying elephant, we'll end up as badly off economically, politically and socially as the Americans.

Really? This dying elephant is perking along with predicted 3.2% GDP growth next year with Canada at 2.4%. We should be more worried about Canadian economy than with US. Even if they are for severe mismanagement problems in the future it will be a very long process. Sort of like decline of Roman Empire long. We are talking about 15 trillion economy with tremendous capital potential (at least twice bigger than canadian per capita). There is no growth without capital.
 
The short answer is greed and lack of foresight. You are assuming they are as intelligent as you are...
Surely there are some who don't grasp much of socioeconomics. It is not really needed under a good economic system though, because is self regulating. Giving the right environment companies will reinvest all profits in new productions, creating new jobs and wealth for citizens and whole country. Many US companies are sitting on piles of cash waiting for right opportunities to invest (who likes to keep idle billions of cash in chequing account?). One reason of lackluster will to invest was current recession, the other is inability of governing and political bodies to create right environment to unleash capital, right and transparent regulations, dealing with banking problems or acting in time before system breaks, or dealing with housing bubble and rampant speculations in other markets. Real economy like stability, transparent regulations and rich middle class.

The short answer is greed and lack of foresight.
I thought that, in your previous post, you suggested deliberate and conscious action of rich to keep middle class poor.
 
The short answer is greed and lack of foresight. You are assuming they are as intelligent as you are...
Generally speaking manufacturing shows strong sale and increased production and hiring. However US is big and it might not happened yet in area where you live.

Nearly 40% of car factories in North America now operate on work schedules that push production well past 80 hours a week, compared with 11% in 2008, said Ron Harbour, a senior partner with the Oliver Wyman Inc. management consulting firm
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324769704579008774210016680

Apple is planning to open a new factory in Arizona in partnership with mineral crystal firm GT Advanced Technologies, to make sapphire components for its devices.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/05/apple_factory_arizona/

[h=1]US Housing Market Up: 139,000 More Homes Built In February 2013 Than In February 2012, A 24.3% Jump[/h]

With time passing by, Asia's economic growth and their middle class rise there will be less incentive to produce anything there for US market. Manufacturing jobs will come back, also Asia will by more made in America products. Surely better times coming to America. However the huge deficit and debt on all government levels and future debt payments will force government to increase taxes, suck money from private wallets and slow future GDP per capita growth.

There is another unexpected phenomenon started to unwrap. More and more manual jobs are done by machines and robots, and bigger revolution to come soon in this department. As positive as it is for GDP growth for whole country, it means fewer jobs for ordinary Joe. It is probably not much of a problem because booming economies will create extra jobs in services. However the new technologies are destructive for cash flow.
Old model of cash flow:
consumer->company->employee->buying products->consumer->company, etc
This cash flow will break down because robots won't make money and won't spend it in economy.
consumer->company-(money flow stops)-robots
New money transfer model needed.
 

This thread has been viewed 51406 times.

Back
Top