Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve? They are actually the ones with their dangly bities caught between an anvil and a bloody great hammer.
If Jeremy Corbyn is chosen as leader, it will be a sign that the Labour party has gone stark staring mad. If Andy Burnham is chosen as leader, it will be a sign that the Labour party has decided that the public needs to change rather than it. If Liz Kendall is chosen as leader, it will upset so many on the left that the internecine war is likely to capsize her leadership.
So that leaves Yvette Cooper, who is a bit of a blank canvass, but that's no bad thing.
I think they should go for Corbyn.
I'm not sure that you're completely disinterested.
It was tongue in cheek, but it would be hard not to admire. It would be like the defiance of the British Army at Albuhera.
Not the charge of the Light (in the head) Brigade?
''There is something wrong with our bloody ships today...''
WG True, but Clarke also led Tory leadership polls of the public in 2001
To be able to draw an analogy with Clarke you'd need someone like Mandelson to be in the running.
In 2001 the Tories had been crushed in part because they put forward someone (Hague) who was not seen as a credible Prime Minister in waiting. Many more serious Tories were willing to hold their noses and pick Clarke as he would solve this problem.
'Is there anyway they can stay in at this point??? '
Yes and as one interview with a Greek minister confirmed negotiations are ongoing,also Junker to-day talked about debt write-off which is what Greece wanted but was not on the table before.
This is a much bigger deal for the EU than Greece.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
WG In some respects Kendall is the Labour Clarke, ie most of her polices are the same as the governing party, however she lacks Clarke's charisma. Clarke also had the risk of splitting the Tories and leading many to leave for UKIP, Kendall has the same risk of splitting Labour and leading many to leave for the Greens as well as turning off Scotland
I'm amused by the pseudo-legalistic analysis of whether Greece can be 'forced out' of the Eurozone, or even 'voluntarily leave'.
You'd have to be a particularly obtuse lawyer to believe that there is actually any obstacle to either - in fact, probably a particularly obtuse and naive ivory-tower academic specialising in law, as it's hard to imagine any practising lawyer being daft enough to actually go to the trouble of reading treaties or other legal documents when considering this point.
If the banks are shut down, the population is starving, every business in the land is going bust, pensions can't be paid, the transport system is paralysed, the sick are dying through lack of medicines, then it doesn't matter a tinker's cuss what the treaties say: the Greek government will have no choice but to print an alternative currency. And, if they do, are the other Eurozone countries going to invade because of some provision in an EU treaty? Of course they are not, they are going to issue some dérogation or find some other fudge to pretend all is perfect in the best of all ever-closer unions.
OK, the Greek government might call the new currency something like IOUs or tokens, and pretend they are still fully-fledged Eurozone members, but reality trumps international law, every time.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
The Russian analogy is very apt, because the pistol is aimed squarely at the EU.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
'Is there anyway they can stay in at this point??? '
Yes and as one interview with a Greek minister confirmed negotiations are ongoing,also Junker to-day talked about debt write-off which is what Greece wanted but was not on the table before.
This is a much bigger deal for the EU than Greece.
How on earth can they possibly get away with a debt write off?
I mean why not write everyone's debts off at the same time? They might just as well as the precedent will be set, the floodgates would been opened and the queue to imitate the Greeks is going to be very long.
WG In some respects Kendall is the Labour Clarke, ie most of her polices are the same as the governing party, however she lacks Clarke's charisma. Clarke also had the risk of splitting the Tories and leading many to leave for UKIP, Kendall has the same risk of splitting Labour and leading many to leave for the Greens as well as turning off Scotland
Hate to break it to you, but Scotland are already turned off to Labour.
At least we could then have Eds Missus is Crap is PM (EMICIPM) for 4 years!!
Ms Cyclefree this comment is meant to be tongue in cheek and not at all sexist!!
Mr BJO - you are given a free pass (for a bit, anyway) as I am so delighted to see you back here, even if you unaccountably dislike la Kendall. Also, EMICIPM is funny.
Of the countries you list, one of the wealthiest is Saudi Arabia. And it is notable for how many of those who perpetrate atrocities come from there, including - for instance - the suicide bomber who blew himself up in Kuwait a few days ago. It is also notable as being the country which has funded many of the madrassahs and other institutions which perpetuate the ideology behind IS, Al Qaeda and the rest. And there have been even more serious allegations made against some of its wealthiest citizens.
Many of the terrorists, far from being poor and hopeless, are well educated and wealthy and, apparently, integrated into a Western lifestyle.
While it is a good thing to make poor countries richer, if the effect of, say, an education system funded by the Saudis is to create people who despise the West, think that there should be no freedom of religion and that women are third class citizens, then spreading the wealth will do no good at all. What's more people want - and need - something more than money. It is necessary for a worthwhile life. It is not sufficient. There is more to life than getting and spending. Islam provides a belief system. It is a failing in Western analyses which see everything through economics and only that to fail to understand that people can have other drivers and motivations. Western analysis often forgets its own bloody religious history, indeed its own religion and tends, therefore, to underestimate or misunderstand completely the mindset of people who have a culture where religion is not some add-on but is central to everyday life.
Rather than encourage Saudi Arabia to spread its ideology I would be doing quite the opposite. I do not regard it as an ally in any meaningful sense. Its values are wholly antithetical to Western values and its role in spreading Wahabi-Islam has been utterly malign. To give a small example: IS has said that it wants to destroy all evidence of any cultures or civilizations other than Islam in the areas it controls. The chief Saudi cleric takes exactly the same view. One may do it with violence and the other only say it. But in essence they want the same thing.
Were not most of the perps of 9/11 Saudi nationals?
Yes they were and it was reported that a senior US government person said that if the redacted parts of the official 9/11 report about the Saudis were ever published, no-one would ever think of Saudi Arabia as an ally again.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
I agree. It will fire up the social conservatives while also taking it off the table of issues that candidates have to address as it is now a decided issue. Thus, some will feel, it is the best of both worlds - firing up the base, while reducing the drag amongst independents and swing voters.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Neither the IMF nor the ECB/EU will call default tomorrow. It will be left hanging until the results of the referendum on Sunday. At which point, if the answer is "Yes" there will be a hasty extension organised. On the other hand, if the answer is "No", then default will be declared.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
However, I am not confident that the government is making sensible preparations.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
The Russian analogy is very apt, because the pistol is aimed squarely at the EU.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
My judgement is not sound in some areas, but I would advise no one to take that bet - granted, it has to end eventually, but one area the EU and partners excel is kicking cans and fudging a deal of some kind.
If Jeremy Corbyn is chosen as leader, it will be a sign that the Labour party has gone stark staring mad. If Andy Burnham is chosen as leader, it will be a sign that the Labour party has decided that the public needs to change rather than it. If Liz Kendall is chosen as leader, it will upset so many on the left that the internecine war is likely to capsize her leadership.
So that leaves Yvette Cooper, who is a bit of a blank canvass, but that's no bad thing.
If they vote for Yvette Cooper it will show that the Labour party has been watching that Ch 4 drama "Humans" and has decided to have the human most like a robot as leader.
I must Protest this Thread Even More Strongly than I Protested Last Saturday. It is unthinkable that someone who once voted Labour now votes Tory. After all, We are the Political Wing of the British People. We are the One Nation Party; They are the Tory Toffs.
Imagine if there were now a Miliband Government. Islamophobia would by now be a Distant Memory, as we would have Banned it. Instead of our Crumbling Hospitals, we would have an NHS With Time To Care. We would not have to witness the Chaotic Scenes at Calais, as we would have Controlled Immigration.
However, the Time for Morning is Over. We must embrace New Ideas, but we must Never Lose Our Values. We are the Party of the Many. They are The Party of The Few. We are the Party of the Future Jobs Fund; they are the Party of the Inheritance Tax Cuts for the Three Thousand Richest Estates.
I have some Interesting Ideas on how we can Regenerate the Labour Brand.
First, we must have immediate and compulsory Statutory Regulation of Polling. We must ban the Outrageous 'Likelihood to Vote Filters' which encourage Low Turnout. We must use the Full Weight of Harriet Harman's Equalities Act to fight the Prejudice of Demographic Weighting - I have never seen such Blatant Discrimination! The Polling Regulator can be paid for by a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Secondly, we must have Electoral Reform. Voting is a Privilege, and like all Luxuries, it should be Taxed. We must do this in a Progressive Way; the Rich must pay Most to Vote. At the same time, we can show we are tough on Welfare by imposing Sanctions on Benefits Claimants who do not Vote. Unlike the Tories' Unfair and Regressive 'Equal Sized Constituencies' this will show We Govern in the Interest of Fairness, not for Narrow Partisan Gain.
Thirdly, we must Fight Back against the claim that we are Ideologically Opposed to Cutting Taxes. Labour Fought Tirelessly against the Caravan Tax. David Miliband took his noble campaign against the Pastry Tax to Gregs Itself. We Marched against the Granny Tax. And no party has taken a more Stringent Line against the Bedroom Tax.
Thirdly, we must be Humble about our Mistakes of the Past. We should therefore express Solidarity with President Kirchner, and give up our Ill-Gotten Imperial Island to Her. To make this More Electorally Palatable, we can ask for a Goodwill Fee of Millions of Pesos for this Transaction. This will cement our claim to be Fiscally Responsible; the Money could be used to Reduce the National Deficit, thereby Reducing the National Debt.
Fourthly, we cannot make the Pound in Your Pocket go Further without Reducing Inequality and Tackling Entrenched Privilege. That is why we need to Cut Executive Pay. That is why we must ban Unpaid Internships. That is why we need to Increase the Minimum Wage. That is why we must ban Eton Mess.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
I agree. It will fire up the social conservatives while also taking it off the table of issues that candidates have to address as it is now a decided issue. Thus, some will feel, it is the best of both worlds - firing up the base, while reducing the drag amongst independents and swing voters.
Won't it annoy all those other voters who might otherwise vote Republican but don't want to support a party that seems so obsessed with being unkind to one group of people?
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
The Russian analogy is very apt, because the pistol is aimed squarely at the EU.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
Too difficult to define. If the EU ends up providing aid to prevent people leaving is that a compromise? I think that the Greek behaviour is so irrational it really has to change at some point. I agree with Richard that the legalities of this are being massively overstated and overvalued. In the real world whether you are suspended from the system or expelled really doesn't matter that much.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
Perhaps in the short term - good to find something that gets your core voters angry. In the long term it more-or-less takes the gay marriage issue off the table. Certainly the outcome seems to have more finality than Roe v Wade, where it was still possible to fight for some restrictions on abortion. As far as I can see it would be a gargantuan, clearly impossible, task to reverse gay marriage. It removes the capacity to fire up the base by running state referendums on the issue, for example.
Those Republicans who favoured gay marriage (even if they didn't favour its imposition nationwide by lawyers rather than politicians or voters!) might be glad of it being taken off the table. In the long run, not having to talk about it or campaign against it helps the Republicans catch up with modernity. If only Bush had been able to whack the immigration issue on the head in his last term, then moderate Republicans might be looking forward to a long period of, if not outright national domination, at least being well up in the game.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Isn't that how you re supposed to play russian roulette? It is however not generally a good idea to play with all the chambers loaded.
This issue is being over analysed. The significant outcome is closer monetary fiscal and hence political ties within the Eurozone. This lies at the heart of what Cameron's renegotiations are about.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
I agree. It will fire up the social conservatives while also taking it off the table of issues that candidates have to address as it is now a decided issue. Thus, some will feel, it is the best of both worlds - firing up the base, while reducing the drag amongst independents and swing voters.
Ah, beaten to it. Must not multitask while posting on PB.
'Is there anyway they can stay in at this point??? '
Yes and as one interview with a Greek minister confirmed negotiations are ongoing,also Junker to-day talked about debt write-off which is what Greece wanted but was not on the table before.
This is a much bigger deal for the EU than Greece.
There will be, and there was always going to be, a debt write off of sorts - so long as Greece played ball.
When SYRIZA was first elected, the first offer from the troika was for a combination of maturity extensions on ECB/ESFS debt, and for a cut in interest rates. The pitch to Tsipiras was "play ball, and your interest bill will drop from 3.5% of GDP to 2.5%, and there will be no meaningful debt to repay until 2025."
Greece played hardball. And the troika repeatedly improved their offer. Firstly, Greece was offered repayments linked to GDP growth (i.e. no debt to repay until GDP-per-capita reached a certain level). Next, the required primary budget surplus that Greece was supposed to run was cut. Then, Greece was also offered the ability to be a part of QE programme, so that some debt would be bought by the ECB and effectively cancelled. Finally, Greece was offered a multi-year interest holiday on certain bonds.
This was massive debt forgiveness, albeit with a different name on the tin. Depending on which economist you choose to believe the effective cut was from 30 to 70% of GDP.
But Greece needed to "play ball" and accept the troika's terms. That was politically unacceptable in Greece, because the changes to pension terms would be a serious vote face for the government.
Who the hell is this strange little man call Juncker, from an odd little country called Luxumbourg, to tell Greece (or anybody else for that matter) what to do?
TimT This is not 2004 when polls showed voters still opposed gay marriage, though they accepted civil unions, and thus W could campaign on the issue and gain more votes than he lost. Now almost 60% of Americans back gay marriage, if the issue dominates the GOP primaries Hillary might as well start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
The Russian analogy is very apt, because the pistol is aimed squarely at the EU.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
Too difficult to define. If the EU ends up providing aid to prevent people leaving is that a compromise? I think that the Greek behaviour is so irrational it really has to change at some point. I agree with Richard that the legalities of this are being massively overstated and overvalued. In the real world whether you are suspended from the system or expelled really doesn't matter that much.
I must Protest this Thread Even More Strongly than I Protested Last Saturday. It is unthinkable that someone who once voted Labour now votes Tory. After all, We are the Political Wing of the British People. We are the One Nation Party; They are the Tory Toffs.
Imagine if there were now a Miliband Government. Islamophobia would by now be a Distant Memory, as we would have Banned it. (snip)
However, the Time for Morning is Over. We must embrace New Ideas, but we must Never Lose Our Values. We are the Party of the Many. They are The Party of The Few. We are the Party of the Future Jobs Fund; they are the Party of the Inheritance Tax Cuts for the Three Thousand Richest Estates.
I have some Interesting Ideas on how we can Regenerate the Labour Brand.
First, we must have immediate and compulsory Statutory Regulation of Polling. We must ban the Outrageous 'Likelihood to Vote Filters' which encourage Low Turnout. We must use the Full Weight of Harriet Harman's Equalities Act to fight the Prejudice of Demographic Weighting - I have never seen such Blatant Discrimination! The Polling Regulator can be paid for by a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Secondly, we must have Electoral Reform. Voting is a Privilege, and like all Luxuries, it should be Taxed. We must do this in a Progressive Way; the Rich must pay Most to Vote. At the same time, we can show we are tough on Welfare by imposing Sanctions on Benefits Claimants who do not Vote. Unlike the Tories' Unfair and Regressive 'Equal Sized Constituencies' this will show We Govern in the Interest of Fairness, not for Narrow Partisan Gain.
Thirdly, we must Fight Back against the claim that we are Ideologically Opposed to Cutting Taxes. Labour Fought Tirelessly against the Caravan Tax. David Miliband took his noble campaign against the Pastry Tax to Gregs Itself. We Marched against the Granny Tax. And no party has taken a more Stringent Line against the Bedroom Tax.
Thirdly, we must be Humble about our Mistakes of the Past. We should therefore express Solidarity with President Kirchner, and give up our Ill-Gotten Imperial Island to Her. To make this More Electorally Palatable, we can ask for a Goodwill Fee of Millions of Pesos for this Transaction. This will cement our claim to be Fiscally Responsible; the Money could be used to Reduce the National Deficit, thereby Reducing the National Debt.
Fourthly, we cannot make the Pound in Your Pocket go Further without Reducing Inequality and Tackling Entrenched Privilege. That is why we need to Cut Executive Pay. That is why we must ban Unpaid Internships. That is why we need to Increase the Minimum Wage. That is why we must ban Eton Mess.
I really like Eton Mess. Other than that an excellent program, superior to anything the candidates have yet come up with.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Neither the IMF nor the ECB/EU will call default tomorrow. It will be left hanging until the results of the referendum on Sunday. At which point, if the answer is "Yes" there will be a hasty extension organised. On the other hand, if the answer is "No", then default will be declared.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
However, I am not confident that the government is making sensible preparations.
It would be an incredible achievement to keep preparations for something like that secret. This government has not shown any hint of having that level of competence.
Great post and great spoof! By the end of your 2nd paragraph I had tears forming and was biting down on my knuckles to stop laughing... More please....
Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve? They are actually the ones with their dangly bities caught between an anvil and a bloody great hammer.
Edited due to stupid spellchecker
The IMF loans are incredibly harsh. The IMF has the ability to seize Greek state assets abroad, and private sector creditors will almost certainly do likewise. (The Argentine government discovered how horrible this could be when Elliott Partners managed to get a Argentine naval vessel impounded.)
Also: don't forget Greece is not the IMF's major concern. Later this year, Venezuela will default and that will be 10x the concern for the IMF than Greece is. (Greece owes the IMF around $30bn; Venezuela will be going to the IMF to backstop close to $400bn in debts.) When the history of the Greek crisis is written, people will realise how much the coming Latin American defaults dominated IMF actions. The IMF cannot be seen to fold when there are much bigger problems coming later in 2015.
TimT This is not 2004 when polls showed voters still opposed gay marriage, though they accepted civil unions, and thus W could campaign on the issue and gain more votes than he lost. Now almost 60% of Americans back gay marriage, if the issue dominates the GOP primaries Hillary might as well start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office
I think you have completely misread and misunderstood what I wrote.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Neither the IMF nor the ECB/EU will call default tomorrow. It will be left hanging until the results of the referendum on Sunday. At which point, if the answer is "Yes" there will be a hasty extension organised. On the other hand, if the answer is "No", then default will be declared.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
However, I am not confident that the government is making sensible preparations.
It would be an incredible achievement to keep preparations for something like that secret. This government has not shown any hint of having that level of competence.
Then I fear for the people of Greece: exit from the Euro need not be a bad thing for the Greeks, but done in a disorderly manner, without proper preparation, will be a disaster.
Who the hell is this strange little man call Juncker, from an odd little country called Luxumbourg, to tell Greece (or anybody else for that matter) what to do?
Anybody? Anybody?
I presume Greece was one of the nations that nominated him to be chief bureaucrat (I believe the process is that the Council nominated candidate and the Parliament approves, although this time they pretended the elections had something to do with the nominations?), and being in the EU is to accept the bureaucrats will tell you what to do. They've been happy to accept it till now.
That Greece still hasn't, with all the years and assistance (the worth of that assistance may be arguable), gotten itself into even a position of stability, eclipses my disdain for arrogant EU bureaucrats.
Ultimately the Greeks are responsible for getting themselves into this mess (others allowing and encouraging them is not an excuse when so many years later they still cannot resolve the mess, nor does other sharing in the blame absolve them of the part they played in their own problems), and they cannot plausibly argue that the other side have not tried to assist them (not done enough, or tried to help themselves more, may be argued, but not that they have done nothing to help Greece), but the rhetoric of the Greeks suggests they feel they should do nothing, because that's what the people want.
Admirable attempt to stick to election commitments, perhaps, but sometimes you simply cannot do what your electorate wants you to do and what you have promised to do. Greece seems to be saying that if they don't want to play ball, everyone else is obliged to pick up the slack and continue the game for them.
They might end up doing that, the alternative, the game coming to an end, might be deemed worse, but the rest of Europe is not obliged to do everything Greece wants, just as they Greeks do not have to do what the rest of Europe wants...so long as both sides are prepared to accept the consequences, which both sides seem to be whinging about.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
The Russian analogy is very apt, because the pistol is aimed squarely at the EU.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
Too difficult to define. If the EU ends up providing aid to prevent people leaving is that a compromise? I think that the Greek behaviour is so irrational it really has to change at some point. I agree with Richard that the legalities of this are being massively overstated and overvalued. In the real world whether you are suspended from the system or expelled really doesn't matter that much.
In plain English you have bottled a £10 bet.
Try defining what you mean by the terms that you use. If you can come up with something specific and determinable I would be up for it. Of course the fact that there is so much rom for fudge is really your point and I don't deny that is the track record.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
I agree. It will fire up the social conservatives while also taking it off the table of issues that candidates have to address as it is now a decided issue. Thus, some will feel, it is the best of both worlds - firing up the base, while reducing the drag amongst independents and swing voters.
Ah, beaten to it. Must not multitask while posting on PB.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
Perhaps in the short term - good to find something that gets your core voters angry. In the long term it more-or-less takes the gay marriage issue off the table. Certainly the outcome seems to have more finality than Roe v Wade, where it was still possible to fight for some restrictions on abortion. As far as I can see it would be a gargantuan, clearly impossible, task to reverse gay marriage. It removes the capacity to fire up the base by running state referendums on the issue, for example.
Those Republicans who favoured gay marriage (even if they didn't favour its imposition nationwide by lawyers rather than politicians or voters!) might be glad of it being taken off the table. In the long run, not having to talk about it or campaign against it helps the Republicans catch up with modernity. If only Bush had been able to whack the immigration issue on the head in his last term, then moderate Republicans might be looking forward to a long period of, if not outright national domination, at least being well up in the game.
Stated more elegantly and clearly than by yours truly.
I must Protest this Thread Even More Strongly than I Protested Last Saturday. It is unthinkable that someone who once voted Labour now votes Tory. After all, We are the Political Wing of the British People. We are the One Nation Party; They are the Tory Toffs.
Imagine if there were now a Miliband Government. Islamophobia would by now be a Distant Memory, as we would have Banned it. Instead of our Crumbling Hospitals, we would have an NHS With Time To Care. We would not have to witness the Chaotic Scenes at Calais, as we would have Controlled Immigration.
However, the Time for Morning is Over. We must embrace New Ideas, but we must Never Lose Our Values. We are the Party of the Many. They are The Party of The Few. We are the Party of the Future Jobs Fund; they are the Party of the Inheritance Tax Cuts for the Three Thousand Richest Estates.
I have some Interesting Ideas on how we can Regenerate the Labour Brand.
First, we must have immediate and compulsory Statutory Regulation of Polling. We must ban the Outrageous 'Likelihood to Vote Filters' which encourage Low Turnout. We must use the Full Weight of Harriet Harman's Equalities Act to fight the Prejudice of Demographic Weighting - I have never seen such Blatant Discrimination! The Polling Regulator can be paid for by a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Secondly, we must have Electoral Reform. Voting is a Privilege, and like all Luxuries, it should be Taxed. We must do this in a Progressive Way; the Rich must pay Most to Vote. At the same time, we can show we are tough on Welfare by imposing Sanctions on Benefits Claimants who do not Vote. Unlike the Tories' Unfair and Regressive 'Equal Sized Constituencies' this will show We Govern in the Interest of Fairness, not for Narrow Partisan Gain.
Thirdly, we must Fight Back against the claim that we are Ideologically Opposed to Cutting Taxes. Labour Fought Tirelessly against the Caravan Tax. David Miliband took his noble campaign against the Pastry Tax to Gregs Itself. We Marched against the Granny Tax. And no party has taken a more Stringent Line against the Bedroom Tax.
Thirdly, we must be Humble about our Mistakes of the Past. We should therefore express Solidarity with President Kirchner, and give up our Ill-Gotten Imperial Island to Her. To make this More Electorally Palatable, we can ask for a Goodwill Fee of Millions of Pesos for this Transaction. This will cement our claim to be Fiscally Responsible; the Money could be used to Reduce the National Deficit, thereby Reducing the National Debt.
Fourthly, we cannot make the Pound in Your Pocket go Further without Reducing Inequality and Tackling Entrenched Privilege. That is why we need to Cut Executive Pay. That is why we must ban Unpaid Internships. That is why we need to Increase the Minimum Wage. That is why we must ban Eton Mess.
Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve?
People starve to death every day. It's a very nasty world.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Neither the IMF nor the ECB/EU will call default tomorrow. It will be left hanging until the results of the referendum on Sunday. At which point, if the answer is "Yes" there will be a hasty extension organised. On the other hand, if the answer is "No", then default will be declared.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
However, I am not confident that the government is making sensible preparations.
It would be an incredible achievement to keep preparations for something like that secret. This government has not shown any hint of having that level of competence.
Then I fear for the people of Greece: exit from the Euro need not be a bad thing for the Greeks, but done in a disorderly manner, without proper preparation, will be a disaster.
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
By the way, for those that compare Iceland with Greece, remember the former dealt with its crisis with the full support of the IMF.
As did Cyprus.
It's hard to blame anyone other than Syriza for the disaster Greece is plunging towards. They actually had a reasonable point that the previous austerity plan wasn't working, and many of their Eurozone partners were very sympathetic to it. However, they've gone out of their way to alienate even the most sympathetic, and their actions in actively cancelling modest fund-raising measures such as the privatisations were unambiguous evidence of their lunacy.
I think a lot of Republicans may be happy about the gay marriage ruling because it has the potential to fire up their base in 2016. This is probably true even for Republicans who agree with the judgement.
I agree. It will fire up the social conservatives while also taking it off the table of issues that candidates have to address as it is now a decided issue. Thus, some will feel, it is the best of both worlds - firing up the base, while reducing the drag amongst independents and swing voters.
Won't it annoy all those other voters who might otherwise vote Republican but don't want to support a party that seems so obsessed with being unkind to one group of people?
My argument is that it takes the issue off the table, so candidates will not have to discuss it, thus removing the irritant, while at the same time (without candidates having to say a word on the subject, but merely by virtue of the Supreme Court decision) getting the social conservatives fired up thereby ensuring high voter turnout in this group (which Romney failed to achieve).
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
If I had been running Greece, I would have stuck two fingers up at the EU and curried favour with the IMF.
The only people supporting Greece right now are Vladimir Putin and Diane Abbott. I'm not sure that's a great combination.
@DavidL - Once Greece defaults tomorrow it is game over.
Tspiras has stated tonight they don't have the 1.5 billion to pay to the IMF tomorrow so game over. His financial ministerial adviser stated that they will see what happens in the morning.
Is there a time it has to be paid like 1200 CET or simply before midnight on due date?
My understanding is that it is any time tomorrow up till midnight local. Even after that the IMF have to decide to formally call a default but that may not take long given how hard the Greeks have been trying to piss them off. A leader who actually cared about his people would be begging the EZ for the money tomorrow and agree to whatever they wanted to get it. At he moment the Greeks are playing Russian roulette with the pistol pointed at their own head.
Neither the IMF nor the ECB/EU will call default tomorrow. It will be left hanging until the results of the referendum on Sunday. At which point, if the answer is "Yes" there will be a hasty extension organised. On the other hand, if the answer is "No", then default will be declared.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
It would be an incredible achievement to keep preparations for something like that secret. This government has not shown any hint of having that level of competence.
Then I fear for the people of Greece: exit from the Euro need not be a bad thing for the Greeks, but done in a disorderly manner, without proper preparation, will be a disaster.
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
They needed help, didn't like the high handed way that help was being granted (as well as not being as much as they want/need) which is perfectly understandable, and have seemingly have decided to reject the help instead, while trying to avoid any blame in doing so (instead of at best half the blame) instead of coming to grips that sometimes political will cannot solve all your problems.
It will take an epic amount of fudging for a deal to be reached somehow - if nothing else whoever writes the press release on that deal, struggling how to word it, will have created a work of art.
Excellent comment. Greece was proud, and hated the impositions of the IMF. But failure to realise that - unlike with the EU - the IMF simply wanted the problem solved was an astonishing (potentially country destroying) mistake.
TimT There is no point firing up the base if you turn off independents in the middle and if someone like Huckabee or Walker were to gain momentum they are already talking of a constitutional amendment to overturn the SC decision
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
If I had been running Greece, I would have stuck two fingers up at the EU and curried favour with the IMF.
The only people supporting Greece right now are Vladimir Putin and Diane Abbott. I'm not sure that's a great combination.
The alternative, and the one I think Tsipras has bet the bank on, is to stick two fingers up to both with expectation that the desire to keep the EU project going will force the EU to settle Greek debts with the IMF after Greek exit (or near exit) causes (or appears to be likely to cause):
- eurozone sovereign debt contagion - a second euro-wide depression level event within a decade - the threat of civil disorder in Southern europe - the possibility of a failed state on the European side of the Med.
Not sure if it will work - head says never, gut says just maybe.
Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve? They are actually the ones with their dangly bities caught between an anvil and a bloody great hammer.
Edited due to stupid spellchecker
The IMF loans are incredibly harsh. The IMF has the ability to seize Greek state assets abroad, and private sector creditors will almost certainly do likewise. (The Argentine government discovered how horrible this could be when Elliott Partners managed to get a Argentine naval vessel impounded.)
Also: don't forget Greece is not the IMF's major concern. Later this year, Venezuela will default and that will be 10x the concern for the IMF than Greece is. (Greece owes the IMF around $30bn; Venezuela will be going to the IMF to backstop close to $400bn in debts.) When the history of the Greek crisis is written, people will realise how much the coming Latin American defaults dominated IMF actions. The IMF cannot be seen to fold when there are much bigger problems coming later in 2015.
And if the IMF is playing the game with future Latin American rounds in mind, the Eurogroup is playing it with future Spanish and Italian rounds in mind. Greece really is not even in the game, for all that Tsipras and Varoufakis might think.
I'm probably over strategising this, but I can see an argument for Burnham supporters to vote for Kendall. Here goes - it is expected that Kendall's 2nd prefs would break for Cooper but Cooper's 2nd prefs would be split more evenly between Kendall and Burnham. Therefore it would be better for Burnham if Kendall makes it into the final two. Therefore, vote Liz to get Andy.
Small risk that we then end up with Corbyn vs Kendall in the final ballot!
The Greek government is essentially saying to the voters that the Eurocrats are full of BS, so let's call their bluff. It all hinges on whether people think No really does mean Out (of the Euro). Sounds like a good case study for Game Theory...
Athens resident Ilia Iatrou says the situation is "unbearable".
"My mother-in-law queued up for over an hour at the cash point just to be able to withdraw a small amount of money.
"I haven't tried to go to the cash machine myself, as we don't have much money left.
"My neighbours and I have now resorted to a sort of barter system among ourselves because we have no money left.
"We can't take any more of this, so we have to keep saying no to the EU masters.
"The EU can't afford to let us fail so we should continue to say no and they will blink and give us a better deal."
Dangerous stuff in a high-stakes game, and I'm not sure everybody knows what game they're playing. Which adds to the risk they'll all lose.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
If I had been running Greece, I would have stuck two fingers up at the EU and curried favour with the IMF.
The only people supporting Greece right now are Vladimir Putin and Diane Abbott. I'm not sure that's a great combination.
The alternative, and the one I think Tsipras has bet the bank on, is to stick two fingers up to both with expectation that the desire to keep the EU project going will force the EU to settle Greek debts with the IMF after Greek exit (or near exit) causes (or appears to be likely to cause):
- eurozone sovereign debt contagion - a second euro-wide depression level event within a decade - the threat of civil disorder in Southern europe - the possibility of a failed state on the European side of the Med.
Not sure if it will work - head says never, gut says just maybe.
I think you are right about Tsipiras strategy. But it is an incredibly high risk strategy.
Going back to my earlier comment: I really hope that the Greek government is preparing for Grexit.
Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve? They are actually the ones with their dangly bities caught between an anvil and a bloody great hammer.
Edited due to stupid spellchecker
The IMF loans are incredibly harsh. The IMF has the ability to seize Greek state assets abroad, and private sector creditors will almost certainly do likewise. (The Argentine government discovered how horrible this could be when Elliott Partners managed to get a Argentine naval vessel impounded.)
Also: don't forget Greece is not the IMF's major concern. Later this year, Venezuela will default and that will be 10x the concern for the IMF than Greece is. (Greece owes the IMF around $30bn; Venezuela will be going to the IMF to backstop close to $400bn in debts.) When the history of the Greek crisis is written, people will realise how much the coming Latin American defaults dominated IMF actions. The IMF cannot be seen to fold when there are much bigger problems coming later in 2015.
And if the IMF is playing the game with future Latin American rounds in mind, the Eurogroup is playing it with future Spanish and Italian rounds in mind. Greece really is not even in the game, for all that Tsipras and Varoufakis might think.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
To be fair, that's one more than journalists have traditionally interviewed in situations like this...
Ageed. The determination to upset the IMF has been particularly perverse. Tomorrow is just the final straw of a long campaign against the people who could have helped them most.
If I had been running Greece, I would have stuck two fingers up at the EU and curried favour with the IMF.
The only people supporting Greece right now are Vladimir Putin and Diane Abbott. I'm not sure that's a great combination.
The alternative, and the one I think Tsipras has bet the bank on, is to stick two fingers up to both with expectation that the desire to keep the EU project going will force the EU to settle Greek debts with the IMF after Greek exit (or near exit) causes (or appears to be likely to cause):
- eurozone sovereign debt contagion - a second euro-wide depression level event within a decade - the threat of civil disorder in Southern europe - the possibility of a failed state on the European side of the Med.
Not sure if it will work - head says never, gut says just maybe.
I think you are right about Tsipiras strategy. But it is an incredibly high risk strategy.
Going back to my earlier comment: I really hope that the Greek government is preparing for Grexit.
Agreed on all counts.
Incidentally, it is the one which relies more upon political will and desire, and less upon economic factors. Greek politicians tried for 6 or 7 years to solve the crisis economically. I can understand now why politics is seen as the only way out.
But playing politics is sodding high risk when you don't have a fall back plan.......
TimT There is no point firing up the base if you turn off independents in the middle and if someone like Huckabee or Walker were to gain momentum they are already talking of a constitutional amendment to overturn the SC decision
You are still misunderstanding. The Supreme Court decision has fired up the base, so the candidates do not need to, thereby meaning they do not need to take a position against gay marriage, thereby easing their path with independents.
I am making the general case here, across all the elections (congressional, gubernatorial and presidential). I have not addressed the specifics of the presidential nomination.
Which makes me wonder, if the Greeks put the metaphorical two fingers up to the EU and the IMF, what will the two organisations do? Walk away and let people starve? They are actually the ones with their dangly bities caught between an anvil and a bloody great hammer.
Edited due to stupid spellchecker
The IMF loans are incredibly harsh. The IMF has the ability to seize Greek state assets abroad, and private sector creditors will almost certainly do likewise. (The Argentine government discovered how horrible this could be when Elliott Partners managed to get a Argentine naval vessel impounded.)
Also: don't forget Greece is not the IMF's major concern. Later this year, Venezuela will default and that will be 10x the concern for the IMF than Greece is. (Greece owes the IMF around $30bn; Venezuela will be going to the IMF to backstop close to $400bn in debts.) When the history of the Greek crisis is written, people will realise how much the coming Latin American defaults dominated IMF actions. The IMF cannot be seen to fold when there are much bigger problems coming later in 2015.
And if the IMF is playing the game with future Latin American rounds in mind, the Eurogroup is playing it with future Spanish and Italian rounds in mind. Greece really is not even in the game, for all that Tsipras and Varoufakis might think.
SR Considering some of the attacks Cooper has made on Kendall and the fact Kendall gets on better with Burnham I think Kendall's preferences could even favour Burnham
TimT Yet tonight a poll has come out giving Huckabee the national lead, he having spent the last week announcing his outrage at the passage of the nationwide gay marriage law and his determination to see it overturned
SR Considering some of the attacks Cooper has made on Kendall and the fact Kendall gets on better with Burnham I think Kendall's preferences could even favour Burnham
I can't wait for your first comment pointing to bad news for Burnham.
Stated more elegantly and clearly than by yours truly.
Cheers, Tim.
One of the most fascinating ideas from Game Theory, is that players can actually improve their final outcomes by "burning money" - reducing the payoffs of one of their available strategies. (Most famously this occurs in the "battle of the sexes" coordination game, where the improvement can be realised purely by the existence of the option to burn money, even without exercising it!)
The Culture Wars pose an interesting problem for Republican strategists. In tight elections, where you need to eke out every vote, playing the Culture Warrior card can be trumps. The marginal gain from getting your core vote to turn out might just furnish the percentage point or two you need for victory. But the Republicans are also well aware that a Sword of Demographicles dangles precariously above their heads. Every time they opt for to play Culture Warrior, and the tougher they play the role, the thread that it hangs by loosens. The threat of being swept away by the tides of Time, into deepest oblivion and irrelevance, draws ever closer. And yet each coming election is so important, so pivotal, so desired, that they daren't lose it - present needs feel so pressing that they outweigh discounted future threats. So "just one more time", and the card comes out.
Structural changes can loosen this dangerous dependency by reducing the pay-off of the Culture Warrior strategy, and easing the temptation to reach for it. This counts double if they can take ownership of the required structural transformation, as the UK Conservatives have done over the gay marriage issue, or as Bush grappled with over immigration reform. In areas your party is not ready for or would prefer not to be associated with, there are still benefits from it being set in motion by an external body or by force of nature instead: something beyond your control, which you can not be blamed for but are free to rail - but stop short of howling - against.
(A tortured analogy and no longer so clear or elegant, but I think this is a bloody good post. One of my finer efforts on PB. And I'm having this "Sword of Demographicles" thing, if nobody else has coined it.)
Mortimer If I see evidence of bad news I will of course comment on it, at the moment he leads the polls (both of the public as a whole and Labour voters) and on net favourability and is on course to win the leadership
I can't wait until the day in 2017 when I can walk to the polling station and vote to pull the plug on Mr Juncker and the rest of his interfering, bullying, expense's fiddling, gravy train jumping, non-entity, eurocrats.
Athens resident Ilia Iatrou says the situation is "unbearable".
"My mother-in-law queued up for over an hour at the cash point just to be able to withdraw a small amount of money.
"I haven't tried to go to the cash machine myself, as we don't have much money left.
"My neighbours and I have now resorted to a sort of barter system among ourselves because we have no money left.
"We can't take any more of this, so we have to keep saying no to the EU masters.
"The EU can't afford to let us fail so we should continue to say no and they will blink and give us a better deal."
Dangerous stuff in a high-stakes game, and I'm not sure everybody knows what game they're playing. Which adds to the risk they'll all lose.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
I'm not at all confident which way the referendum will go, and with the pace of events, I'm not even 100% convinced there will be a referendum!
I don't think journalist vox pops are every going to be representative, though listening to only one person takes this to extremis and beyond.
It was the logic I found interesting: vote No and a better offer will come along! I don't think it's just this sole quasi-random elector who believes this, judging from all reports. I'll stop short of calling it delusional, though it certainly invests a lot of hopes in a hypothetical prospect that there isn't a whole bunch of hard evidence for, and totally ignores what the reality of "No" might mean. Even if there were a counter-offer, Greece's problems wouldn't be sorted overnight - presumably even the optimists assume there'd be another week or so of shut banks and a frozen economy while everyone returns to the negotiating table. And to countenance the consequence if there weren't a counter-offer...
I think it's safe to call this strategy, regardless of its merits or the correctness of its core assumption, "high risk". And probably more accurate to pick a superlative form of "high".
Stated more elegantly and clearly than by yours truly.
Cheers, Tim.
One of the most fascinating ideas from Game Theory, is that players can actually improve their final outcomes by "burning money" - reducing the payoffs of one of their available strategies. (Most famously this occurs in the "battle of the sexes" coordination game, where the improvement can be realised purely by the existence of the option to burn money, even without exercising it!)
The Culture Wars pose an interesting problem for Republican strategists. In tight elections, where you need to eke out every vote, playing the Culture Warrior card can be trumps. The marginal gain from getting your core vote to turn out might just furnish the percentage point or two you need for victory. But the Republicans are also well aware that a Sword of Demographicles dangles precariously above their heads. Every time they opt for to play Culture Warrior, and the tougher they play the role, the thread that it hangs by loosens. The threat of being swept away by the tides of Time, into deepest oblivion and irrelevance, draws ever closer. And yet each coming election is so important, so pivotal, so desired, that they daren't lose it - present needs feel so pressing that they outweigh discounted future threats. So "just one more time", and the card comes out.
Structural changes can loosen this dangerous dependency by reducing the pay-off of the Culture Warrior strategy, and easing the temptation to reach for it. This counts double if they can take ownership of the required structural transformation, as the UK Conservatives have done over the gay marriage issue, or as Bush grappled with over immigration reform. In areas your party is not ready for or would prefer not to be associated with, there are still benefits from it being set in motion by an external body or by force of nature instead: something beyond your control, which you can not be blamed for but are free to rail - but stop short of howling - against.
(A tortured analogy and no longer so clear or elegant, but I think this is a bloody good post. One of my finer efforts on PB. And I'm having this "Sword of Demographicles" thing, if nobody else has coined it.)
Thanks. Any references to read up on the burning money option? I've read a certain amount on Game Theory, but less on multi-player games, or games that allow the players to affect pay offs.
Stated more elegantly and clearly than by yours truly.
Cheers, Tim.
One of the most fascinating ideas from Game Theory, is that players can actually improve their final outcomes by "burning money" - reducing the payoffs of one of their available strategies. (Most famously this occurs in the "battle of the sexes" coordination game, where the improvement can be realised purely by the existence of the option to burn money, even without exercising it!)
The Culture Wars pose an interesting problem for Republican strategists. In tight elections, where you need to eke out every vote, playing the Culture Warrior card can be trumps. The marginal gain from getting your core vote to turn out might just furnish the percentage point or two you need for victory. But the Republicans are also well aware that a Sword of Demographicles dangles precariously above their heads. Every time they opt for to play Culture Warrior, and the tougher they play the role, the thread that it hangs by loosens. The threat of being swept away by the tides of Time, into deepest oblivion and irrelevance, draws ever closer. And yet each coming election is so important, so pivotal, so desired, that they daren't lose it - present needs feel so pressing that they outweigh discounted future threats. So "just one more time", and the card comes out.
Structural changes can loosen this dangerous dependency by reducing the pay-off of the Culture Warrior strategy, and easing the temptation to reach for it. This counts double if they can take ownership of the required structural transformation, as the UK Conservatives have done over the gay marriage issue, or as Bush grappled with over immigration reform. In areas your party is not ready for or would prefer not to be associated with, there are still benefits from it being set in motion by an external body or by force of nature instead: something beyond your control, which you can not be blamed for but are free to rail - but stop short of howling - against.
(A tortured analogy and no longer so clear or elegant, but I think this is a bloody good post. One of my finer efforts on PB. And I'm having this "Sword of Demographicles" thing, if nobody else has coined it.)
Thanks. Any references to read up on the burning money option? I've read a certain amount on Game Theory, but less on multi-player games, or games that allow the players to affect pay offs.
And yes, it's a great post and you should be proud of your Sword of Demographicles ...
Athens resident Ilia Iatrou says the situation is "unbearable".
"My mother-in-law queued up for over an hour at the cash point just to be able to withdraw a small amount of money.
"I haven't tried to go to the cash machine myself, as we don't have much money left.
"My neighbours and I have now resorted to a sort of barter system among ourselves because we have no money left.
"We can't take any more of this, so we have to keep saying no to the EU masters.
"The EU can't afford to let us fail so we should continue to say no and they will blink and give us a better deal."
Dangerous stuff in a high-stakes game, and I'm not sure everybody knows what game they're playing. Which adds to the risk they'll all lose.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
Athens resident Ilia Iatrou says the situation is "unbearable".
"My mother-in-law queued up for over an hour at the cash point just to be able to withdraw a small amount of money.
"I haven't tried to go to the cash machine myself, as we don't have much money left.
"My neighbours and I have now resorted to a sort of barter system among ourselves because we have no money left.
"We can't take any more of this, so we have to keep saying no to the EU masters.
"The EU can't afford to let us fail so we should continue to say no and they will blink and give us a better deal."
Dangerous stuff in a high-stakes game, and I'm not sure everybody knows what game they're playing. Which adds to the risk they'll all lose.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
The BBC was last night due to begin “urgent” talks to avoid losing the Olympics after being beaten to the rights by a near £1 billion bid from the owner of Eurosport. For the first time in more than half a century, the corporation surrendered the broadcast contract to the biggest sporting event of them all, with US media giant Discovery Communications announcing yesterday it had secured the 2022 and 2024 Games on UK television as part of a £920 million pan-European deal with the International Olympic Committee (IOC).
I wish someone had given me a book on game theory when I was about 10 years old, it's the sort of thing I would have gobbled up at that age. Now I'm too lazy to learn the details.
I wonder if events in Greece might have domestic political ramifications?
Any parties playing the 'Don't listen to them - they're bluffing!' card may be in for interesting times, depending on whether the EU/IMF are bluffing.....
I expect the IMF will declare Greece 'in arrears' rather than 'in default' - though Lagarde does not look afraid of doing other people's dirty work, if push comes to shove - and of course will be aware of Voltaire's comment on 'pour encourager les autres....'
Thanks. Any references to read up on the burning money option? I've read a certain amount on Game Theory, but less on multi-player games, or games that allow the players to affect pay offs.
Sadly not much I could recommend in the way of references - though I think there are some game theory wonks on PB these days. The highest level I studied game theory to was as part of a microeconomics course, and the lecturer disdained the coverage of game theory in the standard micro textbooks and just taught what he thought was the "proper" stuff. Obviously microeconomics textbooks are one place you can look, and (given your background this may be more up your street!) I understand there are books written from a biology point of view (a quick google suggests even in this context, "burning money" comes under discussion). Then there are purely mathematical texts on game theory, which I confess to never having touched.
(As rcs is saying, many of the players in the Greek drama are not actually playing a single shot game, which has its own effect on their strategies! The Greeks just have the misfortune of being the first shot.)
I wonder if events in Greece might have domestic political ramifications?
Any parties playing the 'Don't listen to them - they're bluffing!' card may be in for interesting times, depending on whether the EU/IMF are bluffing.....
I expect the IMF will declare Greece 'in arrears' rather than 'in default' - though Lagarde does not look afraid of doing other people's dirty work, if push comes to shove - and of course will be aware of Voltaire's comment on 'pour encourager les autres....'
The morning thread looks in part at the ramifications of the events in Greece on Scottish independence.
Thanks. Any references to read up on the burning money option? I've read a certain amount on Game Theory, but less on multi-player games, or games that allow the players to affect pay offs.
Sadly not much I could recommend in the way of references - though I think there are some game theory wonks on PB these days. The highest level I studied game theory to was as part of a microeconomics course, and the lecturer disdained the coverage of game theory in the standard micro textbooks and just taught what he thought was the "proper" stuff.
(As rcs is saying, many of the players in the Greek drama are not actually playing a single shot game, which has its own effect on their strategies! The Greeks just have the misfortune of being the first shot.)
I studied Game Theory and, separately, negotiations analysis for my MBA, the latter dealt with multi-period negotiations, and the effects of process on future round outcomes - something Varoufakis seems to be totally ignoring. Since then, I have been interested in Game Theory in terms of risk analysis, and in terms of how to create security arrangements where the natural equilibria match desired outcomes.
I wish someone had given me a book on game theory when I was about 10 years old, it's the sort of thing I would have gobbled up at that age. Now I'm too lazy to learn the details.
The morning thread looks in part at the ramifications of the events in Greece on Scottish independence.
Is this the long-awaited thread on "How AV and Grexit could reduce the impact of Scottish Independence on the Labour leadership election and make a YES vote more likely in the UK referendum"?
Thanks. Any references to read up on the burning money option? I've read a certain amount on Game Theory, but less on multi-player games, or games that allow the players to affect pay offs.
Sadly not much I could recommend in the way of references - though I think there are some game theory wonks on PB these days. The highest level I studied game theory to was as part of a microeconomics course, and the lecturer disdained the coverage of game theory in the standard micro textbooks and just taught what he thought was the "proper" stuff.
(As rcs is saying, many of the players in the Greek drama are not actually playing a single shot game, which has its own effect on their strategies! The Greeks just have the misfortune of being the first shot.)
I studied Game Theory and, separately, negotiations analysis for my MBA, the latter dealt with multi-period negotiations, and the effects of process on future round outcomes - something Varoufakis seems to be totally ignoring. Since then, I have been interested in Game Theory in terms of risk analysis, and in terms of how to create security arrangements where the natural equilibria match desired outcomes.
That is very interesting stuff. Where did you do your MBA? I quite often tutor MBA students in quantitative methods. I don't think all business schools require Game Theory, and some take it further than others, but it's neat to see it has turned out so useful for you.
I edited my reference reply to add a few bits, but made the mistake of googling mid-edit which slowed me down, so you probably didn't catch it all!
I think one thing the Greeks haven't taken fully into account in the negotiations process is the human factor: their partners may be supposed to be rational agents, but it doesn't help things along if you seriously tick them off. Angry, distrustful negotiating partners are not the way forward. Perhaps they misread and didn't realise that they were going to tick people off so badly, or perhaps they just thought it didn't matter.
The morning thread looks in part at the ramifications of the events in Greece on Scottish independence.
Is this the long-awaited thread on "How AV and Grexit could reduce the impact of Scottish Independence on the Labour leadership election and make a YES vote more likely in the UK referendum"?
Don't you need to mention UKIP and 16-year-olds somewhere?
The morning thread looks in part at the ramifications of the events in Greece on Scottish independence.
Is this the long-awaited thread on "How AV and Grexit could reduce the impact of Scottish Independence on the Labour leadership election and make a YES vote more likely in the UK referendum"?
Athens resident Ilia Iatrou says the situation is "unbearable".
"My mother-in-law queued up for over an hour at the cash point just to be able to withdraw a small amount of money.
"I haven't tried to go to the cash machine myself, as we don't have much money left.
"My neighbours and I have now resorted to a sort of barter system among ourselves because we have no money left.
"We can't take any more of this, so we have to keep saying no to the EU masters.
"The EU can't afford to let us fail so we should continue to say no and they will blink and give us a better deal."
Dangerous stuff in a high-stakes game, and I'm not sure everybody knows what game they're playing. Which adds to the risk they'll all lose.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
"Met carry out major anti-terror exercise across London
Exercise Strong Tower will involve 1,000 police officers and is intended to test the Metropolitan Police's ability to cope with a 'marauding terror attack' on the capital "
I must say Hunt is one of those politicians I forget about completely when he's not on screen, and I struggle to recall anything about him, though I've also never recalled any gaffes of his either. I suppose he could sneak up on us and wow everyone in a leadership contest, unexpected candidate.
When Jeremy Hunt came to Croydon during the general election campaign to help (do a photo op with) Gavin Barwell, he shook hands with me twice because he went round the whole group and didn't notice or remember where he'd started from.
When they show footage from someone's mobile phone on TV (especially if it is filmed in portrait rather than landscape), it quite often has the picture in the middle, and a fuzzy / magnified version of the same picture on either side of the bit in the middle. I find it annoying and distracting. Does the phone / computer / whatever automatically make it do that, or do the TV editors edit it that way to try to be trendy? Either way, why?
On topic, while '2010 Lib Dems' were clearly key to the outcome - perhaps the lazy assumption that they would vote Labour (assumed not least of all by Labour) was the flaw - when under half of them did and for every two who did, nearly one voted Tory.....without the 2010 Lib Dems could the Tories have won?
What does the Greek referendum question mean? Does YES mean leaving the Euro? Or does NO?
I think they are making a point. There is no provision in the treaties for leaving either the euro or the EU, so they can't be asked to hold a referendum on the subject as that would be against the treaties. As Varoufakis said on his blog a day or two ago:
To ask us to phrase the referendum question as a choice involving exit from the Eurozone is to ask us to violate EU Treaties and EU Law. I suggest to anyone who wants us, or anyone else, to hold a referendum on EMU membership to recommend a change in the Treaties.
What does the Greek referendum question mean? Does YES mean leaving the Euro? Or does NO?
I think they are making a point. There is no provision in the treaties for leaving either the euro or the EU, so they can't be asked to hold a referendum on the subject as that would be against the treaties. As Varoufakis said on his blog a day or two ago:
To ask us to phrase the referendum question as a choice involving exit from the Eurozone is to ask us to violate EU Treaties and EU Law. I suggest to anyone who wants us, or anyone else, to hold a referendum on EMU membership to recommend a change in the Treaties.
As Mr Navabi pointed out, that's rather a theoretical legalistic approach to the matter.
I fear we are about to see how long the Greek state lasts with no money in the banks or food in the shops....
Who the hell is this strange little man call Juncker, from an odd little country called Luxumbourg, to tell Greece (or anybody else for that matter) what to do?
Anybody? Anybody?
Luxembourg! Oh! Luxembourg! I have been thinking about Luxembourg all month. It's the tenth anniversary. Luxembourg!
I have just noticed the various contributions from ProudToBeLabour. Brilliant! Everybody Must Enlighten Him or Herself with refreshing and invigorating Study of his Pronouncements.
For those interested in the boundary review, there is a very interesting passage in the advice of the Privy Council, given by Lord Hogde JSC, in Brantley v Constituency Boundaries Commission [2015] 1 WLR 2753, 2765E-F on the effectiveness of ouster clauses to protect boundary reviews from judicial review. In short, the Board suggested that the ouster clause in section 50(7) of the Constitution of St Kitts and Nevis would not protect the boundary review in that territory from judicial review on ordinary public law principles. If so, it is unlikely that section 4(7) of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 will be effective to prevent judicial review of the boundary changes here, especially if the 1986 Act is amended to remove each House of Parliament's ability to reject the proposals. Brantley is also authority for the proposition that a litigant can apply for an interim injunction to restrain the implementation of the Boundary Review pending the determination of their claim.
If so, it is unlikely that section 4(7) of the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986 will be effective to prevent judicial review of the boundary changes here, especially if the 1986 Act is amended to remove each House of Parliament's ability to reject the proposals.
Does this mean in effect that parliament is not sovereign and cannot use primary legislation to prevent judicial activism ? Or is it merely the provision in the act you cite were poorly or inadequately drafted ?
Does this mean in effect that parliament is not sovereign and cannot use primary legislation to prevent judicial activism ? Or is it merely the provision in the act you cite were poorly or inadequately drafted ?
The courts always construe clauses ousting their ordinary jurisdiction very strictly, applying a presumption that Parliament must demonstrate by express words a clear intention to remove the subject's right of access to the court's supervisory jurisdiction (Regina v Medical Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Gilmore [1957] 1 QB 574 (CA); Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147 (HL)). In no previous case, however, has an ouster clause been as clear as section 4(7) of the 1986 Act, which provides:
The validity of any Order in Council purporting to be made under this Act and reciting that a draft of the Order has been approved by resolution of each House of Parliament shall not be called in question in any legal proceedings whatsoever.
Then again, section 50(7) of the St Kitts and Nevis Constitution provides:
The question of the validity of any proclamation by the Governor-General purporting to be made under subsection (6) and reciting that a draft thereof has been approved by resolution of the National Assembly shall not be inquired into in any court of law...
Comments
Edited due to stupid spellchecker
In 2001 the Tories had been crushed in part because they put forward someone (Hague) who was not seen as a credible Prime Minister in waiting. Many more serious Tories were willing to hold their noses and pick Clarke as he would solve this problem.
'Is there anyway they can stay in at this point??? '
Yes and as one interview with a Greek minister confirmed negotiations are ongoing,also Junker to-day talked about debt write-off which is what Greece wanted but was not on the table before.
This is a much bigger deal for the EU than Greece.
You'd have to be a particularly obtuse lawyer to believe that there is actually any obstacle to either - in fact, probably a particularly obtuse and naive ivory-tower academic specialising in law, as it's hard to imagine any practising lawyer being daft enough to actually go to the trouble of reading treaties or other legal documents when considering this point.
If the banks are shut down, the population is starving, every business in the land is going bust, pensions can't be paid, the transport system is paralysed, the sick are dying through lack of medicines, then it doesn't matter a tinker's cuss what the treaties say: the Greek government will have no choice but to print an alternative currency. And, if they do, are the other Eurozone countries going to invade because of some provision in an EU treaty? Of course they are not, they are going to issue some dérogation or find some other fudge to pretend all is perfect in the best of all ever-closer unions.
OK, the Greek government might call the new currency something like IOUs or tokens, and pretend they are still fully-fledged Eurozone members, but reality trumps international law, every time.
Ten pound bet, payable to the site, that a compromise is reached and the EU back down.
I mean why not write everyone's debts off at the same time? They might just as well as the precedent will be set, the floodgates would been opened and the queue to imitate the Greeks is going to be very long.
The real question is "what preparations is the Greek government making for Grexit"? If Greece is well prepared, with an exchange rate, draft legislation (to help deal with the inevitable disputes that spring up when there are mismatches between currencies), capital controls, and new notes and coins, then the process could work relatively smoothly, and Greece could move to the New Drachma with only modest disruption.
However, I am not confident that the government is making sensible preparations.
If they vote for Yvette Cooper it will show that the Labour party has been watching that Ch 4 drama "Humans" and has decided to have the human most like a robot as leader.
Imagine if there were now a Miliband Government. Islamophobia would by now be a Distant Memory, as we would have Banned it. Instead of our Crumbling Hospitals, we would have an NHS With Time To Care. We would not have to witness the Chaotic Scenes at Calais, as we would have Controlled Immigration.
However, the Time for Morning is Over. We must embrace New Ideas, but we must Never Lose Our Values. We are the Party of the Many. They are The Party of The Few. We are the Party of the Future Jobs Fund; they are the Party of the Inheritance Tax Cuts for the Three Thousand Richest Estates.
I have some Interesting Ideas on how we can Regenerate the Labour Brand.
First, we must have immediate and compulsory Statutory Regulation of Polling. We must ban the Outrageous 'Likelihood to Vote Filters' which encourage Low Turnout. We must use the Full Weight of Harriet Harman's Equalities Act to fight the Prejudice of Demographic Weighting - I have never seen such Blatant Discrimination! The Polling Regulator can be paid for by a Bankers' Bonus Tax.
Secondly, we must have Electoral Reform. Voting is a Privilege, and like all Luxuries, it should be Taxed. We must do this in a Progressive Way; the Rich must pay Most to Vote. At the same time, we can show we are tough on Welfare by imposing Sanctions on Benefits Claimants who do not Vote. Unlike the Tories' Unfair and Regressive 'Equal Sized Constituencies' this will show We Govern in the Interest of Fairness, not for Narrow Partisan Gain.
Thirdly, we must Fight Back against the claim that we are Ideologically Opposed to Cutting Taxes. Labour Fought Tirelessly against the Caravan Tax. David Miliband took his noble campaign against the Pastry Tax to Gregs Itself. We Marched against the Granny Tax. And no party has taken a more Stringent Line against the Bedroom Tax.
Thirdly, we must be Humble about our Mistakes of the Past. We should therefore express Solidarity with President Kirchner, and give up our Ill-Gotten Imperial Island to Her. To make this More Electorally Palatable, we can ask for a Goodwill Fee of Millions of Pesos for this Transaction. This will cement our claim to be Fiscally Responsible; the Money could be used to Reduce the National Deficit, thereby Reducing the National Debt.
Fourthly, we cannot make the Pound in Your Pocket go Further without Reducing Inequality and Tackling Entrenched Privilege. That is why we need to Cut Executive Pay. That is why we must ban Unpaid Internships. That is why we need to Increase the Minimum Wage. That is why we must ban Eton Mess.
Tsipras wants victory over the oppressors. Preparing to reintroduce the Drachma would be contrary to his previous commitments.
Those Republicans who favoured gay marriage (even if they didn't favour its imposition nationwide by lawyers rather than politicians or voters!) might be glad of it being taken off the table. In the long run, not having to talk about it or campaign against it helps the Republicans catch up with modernity. If only Bush had been able to whack the immigration issue on the head in his last term, then moderate Republicans might be looking forward to a long period of, if not outright national domination, at least being well up in the game.
This issue is being over analysed. The significant outcome is closer monetary fiscal and hence political ties within the Eurozone. This lies at the heart of what Cameron's renegotiations are about.
When SYRIZA was first elected, the first offer from the troika was for a combination of maturity extensions on ECB/ESFS debt, and for a cut in interest rates. The pitch to Tsipiras was "play ball, and your interest bill will drop from 3.5% of GDP to 2.5%, and there will be no meaningful debt to repay until 2025."
Greece played hardball. And the troika repeatedly improved their offer. Firstly, Greece was offered repayments linked to GDP growth (i.e. no debt to repay until GDP-per-capita reached a certain level). Next, the required primary budget surplus that Greece was supposed to run was cut. Then, Greece was also offered the ability to be a part of QE programme, so that some debt would be bought by the ECB and effectively cancelled. Finally, Greece was offered a multi-year interest holiday on certain bonds.
This was massive debt forgiveness, albeit with a different name on the tin. Depending on which economist you choose to believe the effective cut was from 30 to 70% of GDP.
But Greece needed to "play ball" and accept the troika's terms. That was politically unacceptable in Greece, because the changes to pension terms would be a serious vote face for the government.
Who the hell is this strange little man call Juncker, from an odd little country called Luxumbourg, to tell Greece (or anybody else for that matter) what to do?
Anybody? Anybody?
'How on earth can they possibly get away with a debt write off? '
As long as it keeps Greece in their treasured Euro anything is possible, as somebody else pointed out Euro zone rules are made up as you go along.
Don't forget that Cyprus was in a similar position with banks closing etc. and are still in the Euro.
Great post and great spoof! By the end of your 2nd paragraph I had tears forming and was biting down on my knuckles to stop laughing... More please....
Also: don't forget Greece is not the IMF's major concern. Later this year, Venezuela will default and that will be 10x the concern for the IMF than Greece is. (Greece owes the IMF around $30bn; Venezuela will be going to the IMF to backstop close to $400bn in debts.) When the history of the Greek crisis is written, people will realise how much the coming Latin American defaults dominated IMF actions. The IMF cannot be seen to fold when there are much bigger problems coming later in 2015.
That Greece still hasn't, with all the years and assistance (the worth of that assistance may be arguable), gotten itself into even a position of stability, eclipses my disdain for arrogant EU bureaucrats.
Ultimately the Greeks are responsible for getting themselves into this mess (others allowing and encouraging them is not an excuse when so many years later they still cannot resolve the mess, nor does other sharing in the blame absolve them of the part they played in their own problems), and they cannot plausibly argue that the other side have not tried to assist them (not done enough, or tried to help themselves more, may be argued, but not that they have done nothing to help Greece), but the rhetoric of the Greeks suggests they feel they should do nothing, because that's what the people want.
Admirable attempt to stick to election commitments, perhaps, but sometimes you simply cannot do what your electorate wants you to do and what you have promised to do. Greece seems to be saying that if they don't want to play ball, everyone else is obliged to pick up the slack and continue the game for them.
They might end up doing that, the alternative, the game coming to an end, might be deemed worse, but the rest of Europe is not obliged to do everything Greece wants, just as they Greeks do not have to do what the rest of Europe wants...so long as both sides are prepared to accept the consequences, which both sides seem to be whinging about.
Good night all.
with something specific and determinable I would be up for it. Of course the fact that there is so much rom for fudge is really your point and I don't deny that is the track record.
Can't understand why you didn't mention Labour's new policy agreed by all four candidates to-day for gender equality in the shadow cabinet.
That's second only to the NHS in terms of importance to voters.
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03358/300615-MATT-web_3358496a.jpg
Best post ever. Sums up the farce of the EdM era!
It's hard to blame anyone other than Syriza for the disaster Greece is plunging towards. They actually had a reasonable point that the previous austerity plan wasn't working, and many of their Eurozone partners were very sympathetic to it. However, they've gone out of their way to alienate even the most sympathetic, and their actions in actively cancelling modest fund-raising measures such as the privatisations were unambiguous evidence of their lunacy.
The only people supporting Greece right now are Vladimir Putin and Diane Abbott. I'm not sure that's a great combination.
It will take an epic amount of fudging for a deal to be reached somehow - if nothing else whoever writes the press release on that deal, struggling how to word it, will have created a work of art.
Excellent comment. Greece was proud, and hated the impositions of the IMF. But failure to realise that - unlike with the EU - the IMF simply wanted the problem solved was an astonishing (potentially country destroying) mistake.
- eurozone sovereign debt contagion
- a second euro-wide depression level event within a decade
- the threat of civil disorder in Southern europe
- the possibility of a failed state on the European side of the Med.
Not sure if it will work - head says never, gut says just maybe.
I think they'll vote No too, but this report is literally a sample of 1. Did the journalist sally out, interview one person, and think "Ha, job done" and go back to the hotel?
Going back to my earlier comment: I really hope that the Greek government is preparing for Grexit.
Incidentally, it is the one which relies more upon political will and desire, and less upon economic factors. Greek politicians tried for 6 or 7 years to solve the crisis economically. I can understand now why politics is seen as the only way out.
But playing politics is sodding high risk when you don't have a fall back plan.......
I am making the general case here, across all the elections (congressional, gubernatorial and presidential). I have not addressed the specifics of the presidential nomination.
One of the most fascinating ideas from Game Theory, is that players can actually improve their final outcomes by "burning money" - reducing the payoffs of one of their available strategies. (Most famously this occurs in the "battle of the sexes" coordination game, where the improvement can be realised purely by the existence of the option to burn money, even without exercising it!)
The Culture Wars pose an interesting problem for Republican strategists. In tight elections, where you need to eke out every vote, playing the Culture Warrior card can be trumps. The marginal gain from getting your core vote to turn out might just furnish the percentage point or two you need for victory. But the Republicans are also well aware that a Sword of Demographicles dangles precariously above their heads. Every time they opt for to play Culture Warrior, and the tougher they play the role, the thread that it hangs by loosens. The threat of being swept away by the tides of Time, into deepest oblivion and irrelevance, draws ever closer. And yet each coming election is so important, so pivotal, so desired, that they daren't lose it - present needs feel so pressing that they outweigh discounted future threats. So "just one more time", and the card comes out.
Structural changes can loosen this dangerous dependency by reducing the pay-off of the Culture Warrior strategy, and easing the temptation to reach for it. This counts double if they can take ownership of the required structural transformation, as the UK Conservatives have done over the gay marriage issue, or as Bush grappled with over immigration reform. In areas your party is not ready for or would prefer not to be associated with, there are still benefits from it being set in motion by an external body or by force of nature instead: something beyond your control, which you can not be blamed for but are free to rail - but stop short of howling - against.
(A tortured analogy and no longer so clear or elegant, but I think this is a bloody good post. One of my finer efforts on PB. And I'm having this "Sword of Demographicles" thing, if nobody else has coined it.)
Licence fee, eh?
I don't think journalist vox pops are every going to be representative, though listening to only one person takes this to extremis and beyond.
It was the logic I found interesting: vote No and a better offer will come along! I don't think it's just this sole quasi-random elector who believes this, judging from all reports. I'll stop short of calling it delusional, though it certainly invests a lot of hopes in a hypothetical prospect that there isn't a whole bunch of hard evidence for, and totally ignores what the reality of "No" might mean. Even if there were a counter-offer, Greece's problems wouldn't be sorted overnight - presumably even the optimists assume there'd be another week or so of shut banks and a frozen economy while everyone returns to the negotiating table. And to countenance the consequence if there weren't a counter-offer...
I think it's safe to call this strategy, regardless of its merits or the correctness of its core assumption, "high risk". And probably more accurate to pick a superlative form of "high".
Daily Telegraph
The BBC was last night due to begin “urgent” talks to avoid losing the Olympics after being beaten to the rights by a near £1 billion bid from the owner of Eurosport.
For the first time in more than half a century, the corporation surrendered the broadcast contract to the biggest sporting event of them all, with US media giant Discovery Communications announcing yesterday it had secured the 2022 and 2024 Games on UK television as part of a £920 million pan-European deal with the International Olympic Committee (IOC).
Any parties playing the 'Don't listen to them - they're bluffing!' card may be in for interesting times, depending on whether the EU/IMF are bluffing.....
I expect the IMF will declare Greece 'in arrears' rather than 'in default' - though Lagarde does not look afraid of doing other people's dirty work, if push comes to shove - and of course will be aware of Voltaire's comment on 'pour encourager les autres....'
(As rcs is saying, many of the players in the Greek drama are not actually playing a single shot game, which has its own effect on their strategies! The Greeks just have the misfortune of being the first shot.)
I edited my reference reply to add a few bits, but made the mistake of googling mid-edit which slowed me down, so you probably didn't catch it all!
I think one thing the Greeks haven't taken fully into account in the negotiations process is the human factor: their partners may be supposed to be rational agents, but it doesn't help things along if you seriously tick them off. Angry, distrustful negotiating partners are not the way forward. Perhaps they misread and didn't realise that they were going to tick people off so badly, or perhaps they just thought it didn't matter.
I'm running out of time to publish my AV thread.
Exercise Strong Tower will involve 1,000 police officers and is intended to test the Metropolitan Police's ability to cope with a 'marauding terror attack' on the capital "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11706912/Met-carry-out-major-anti-terror-exercise-across-London.html
I fear we are about to see how long the Greek state lasts with no money in the banks or food in the shops....
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/306931/#Comment_306931