Mark Carny on Italian bank collapse

TrickyTree83

DollarSaver wrote: »

It just so happens that you will be in the front row for whether being out of the E.U. is better. It will be your finances that will be the post Brexit experiment. I wish you well.:money:

Me and the other 65 million in the UK. It's not like I'm out in a boat on my own.

When the anti-EU party in your country wins the mayoral seat of your capital (Rome) you've got problems and the people feel it's the EU in the way.

Meanwhile in France, when Hollande and the French establishment along with the EU (they're not lifting a finger to help, yet they're all for workers rights) are stripping French workers rights they have Le Pen standing up for them. If the hard-left on here think we've become a xenophobic country in the UK take a look at what's happening in France. Le Penn is currently polling ~30%. THIRTY!

TrickyTree83

mwpt wrote: »

Some people are never happy though. Should we or should we not have bailed out the banks? I think a lot of our fellows will say absolutely NO. But now that the EU steps in and says no to bailing out banks, suddenly this opinion becomes irrelevant and it's all about EU imposing on sovereignty.

And frankly, how do you imagine Italy are going to solve their problems with a swish of the magic wand? Have you noticed that there is a high correlation of poor performing economies with corruption and general mismanagement? Can they just magic up a new batch of money and print away all of those problems?

We should have bailed out the banks. They should have been reprimanded more for what took place, but definitely needed to keep that system going no matter how much I hate that idea and the system it perpetuates. Unless they want another crisis after just seeing the green shoots of recovery, with high youth unemployment already and a German financial system on the edge also, they really do need to bail out the Italian banks which is why they're trying to bend/break their own rules in order to do so. I don't think it will solve all their problems, but sadly it's better than the alternative.

mwpt wrote: »

That, to me, is entirely down to the Euro. And for what it's worth, I partially agree with you on this. I don't feel strongly one way or another about political union. It doesn't resonate negatively or positively. Whatever works that makes people's lives better, all things taken into account, is fine with me. I cannot pretend to understand "all things taken into account" but it seems some of you guys can and you have very strong opinions about them.

That said, if the move towards political union is causing discontent with citizens, then what on earth are the leaders of our societies playing at by pursuing it? I am generally pragmatic and even if I think something is worthwhile pursuing, if it results in a large group of (in my opinion) misinformed people causing a lot of trouble then perhaps it is better to concede the issue in favour of a longer term strategy.

I've no idea why they pursue it. I wish they hadn't. We wouldn't have all of this turmoil now if they were able to scale back the idea of a federal Europe and move to a multi-speed EU with varying degrees of integration. It would be better for Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, UK, Denmark, Poland, etc...etc... if we end up in EEA/EFTA that's almost what we'll end up with as the EEA/EFTA group will have a large country batting for it.

cells

Conrad wrote: »

The EU as a concept is not fit for purpose. Those of you so bewitched by it still, well enjoy your delusion while it lasts.

For all the negativity about the EU its nations are top of the league tables on wealth when you exclude the natural resource producing nations

You basically have America as #1 followed by the EU and then you have countries like S.Korea and Japan and then countries after that are too poor to mentioned

Even America advantage is somewhat explained by the fact its a very large natural resource producer. #1 on oil gas nuclear #2 in coal and very high up on other n.resources too.

So this failing EU project doesn't seem to be doing too bad. Certainly I would rather live in France or agermaby or the Netherlands or... Than fast growing India.

Electrum

Conrad wrote: »

I read yesterday that Deutsche Bank has loans equivalent to ten X the GDP of the USA, and of course is a contender to collapse. I love EU

the bad thing about the big betting house the banks gamble in called the derivative casino is the when somebody loses big time, they cant pay what they owe. then the entire house of cards comes tumbling down.

Electrum

Conrad wrote: »

20 years of recession for Italy according to the expert, ahem, IMF. I reckon her people will tell Brussels to poke it, vote out and take their chances as a nimble autonomous nation with its own currency

but how do they pay off all their debts?

If they default how will the world financial system survive?

TrickyTree83

Electrum wrote: »

but how do they pay off all their debts?

If they default how will the world financial system survive?

Well that's the nub of the issue I was highlighting, that the EU is in the way of effectively dealing with this unless they break their own rules.

Whereas the UK has implemented rules and stress tested these UK banks to survive an event a couple of orders of magnitude higher than that of the 2008 financial crash. Therefore they should be able to pay their debts and continue operating.

It would appear that one set of institutions has done it right, the other (according to current rules) has not.

mwpt

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Well that's the nub of the issue I was highlighting, that the EU is in the way of effectively dealing with this unless they break their own rules.

Whereas the UK has implemented rules and stress tested these UK banks to survive an event a couple of orders of magnitude higher than that of the 2008 financial crash. Therefore they should be able to pay their debts and continue operating.

It would appear that one set of institutions has done it right, the other (according to current rules) has not.

I don't follow. Which EU rules prevented the Italians from stress testing their banks and making sure they undertook measures to shore up capital ratios?

TrickyTree83

mwpt wrote: »

I don't follow. Which EU rules prevented the Italians from stress testing their banks and making sure they undertook measures to shore up capital ratios?

There are none as far as I'm aware, but that was not the point I was making. What I was saying was that the Eurozone (which is 19 out of the 28 members I think) has taken a route which has prevented Italy from doing what they need to do in order to shore up their economy as we did in 2008. The same rule will affect all other members of the Eurozone which as a result has a dire impact on the rest of the EU, unfairly I think, with us still in it!!

kabayiri

cells wrote: »

...
So this failing EU project doesn't seem to be doing too bad. Certainly I would rather live in France or agermaby or the Netherlands or... Than fast growing India.

Why talk about India as a single collective?

It seems there is a similar discord in India about which parts generate the wealth :
http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/united-states-south-india-can-southern-collective-get-us-better-deal-delhi-46501

From the article, does this sound familiar?
"In putting India ahead of narrow regional interests and generating extraordinary tax revenues to fund Delhi, UP, Bihar, MP and the overpopulated, under-educated, under-delivering, and over-pandered Hindi belt, the south carries a heavy cross year after year. For this achievement, the south gets a fiscal allocation downside, as vote-bank electioneering of the north overrides federalist policies."

You could almost transplant the Indian place names for North/South English place names, or indeed European states and it would still resonate.

Perhaps traditional institutions like nation states are just not well equipped in the long term for the full effects of globalization.

TrickyTree83

kabayiri wrote: »

Why talk about India as a single collective?

It seems there is a similar discord in India about which parts generate the wealth :
http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/united-states-south-india-can-southern-collective-get-us-better-deal-delhi-46501

From the article, does this sound familiar?
"In putting India ahead of narrow regional interests and generating extraordinary tax revenues to fund Delhi, UP, Bihar, MP and the overpopulated, under-educated, under-delivering, and over-pandered Hindi belt, the south carries a heavy cross year after year. For this achievement, the south gets a fiscal allocation downside, as vote-bank electioneering of the north overrides federalist policies."

You could almost transplant the Indian place names for North/South English place names, or indeed European states and it would still resonate.

Perhaps traditional institutions like nation states are just not well equipped in the long term for the full effects of globalization.

The nation states are well equipped, if you had differeing policies over regions which encouraged the distribution of business across the country rather than entrenched in one particular region it would go some way to addressing that. The idea behind that would likely be some kind of devolution to regions to manage their own tax take within nationally set boundaries for those regions. The UK government has done pretty well on matters of devolution, not great, more could be done I think. This idea flies in the face of the direction the EU are moving in with harmonised taxation across large swathes of people.