Will Greece exit the Euro? (Thread now a poll)

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Billy T, May 13, 2012.


Will Greece Exit the Euro (Poll version)

Poll closed Jul 12, 2012.
  1. Yes

  2. No

  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    LOL...well for starters the last few posts, isn't most of your posts in this or any other thread. But that doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. If Goldman Sachs only touched 2 percent of Greece's debt how can it be responsible for its debt woes as you have been arguing? That doesn't make sense. It's a simple matter of math. The unfortunate fact is Greece had a debt problem long before it hired Goldman Sachs to disguise its debt. If Greece's debt were small as you alleged, Greece wouldn't have needed to hire Goldman Sachs to disguise its debt from Eurozone members. The fact is Greece's debt had exceeded 100% of GDP when it hired Goldman Sachs and a debt exceeding 100% of GDP isn't small as you alleged.

    And you know this how? What sort of credentials do you have to back up that assessment? You have NONE. In case you haven't noticed, Greece's economy isn't growing now. Greece's economy has been in free fall for years now. You obviously don't understand Greece's problems. As has endlessly been pointed out to you, Greece suffers from serious structural governance issues. Functional governance and fiscal prudence isn't adverse to economic growth, quite the contrary. It's required and Greece hasn't had it. Keynes General Theory isn't a get out of jail free card or a panacea for fiscal recklessness and impotent governance. And contrary to your assertion, Greece's creditors have imposed conditions on Greece not to see it fail and default on the debt Greece owes them but rather to see Greece succeed so they can recover the money Greece owes them. In Keynes theory the piper must always be paid.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    LOL...as previously explained several times to you, a "clawback" is a contractual clause typically found in an employment contract. It isn't applicable here. A "clawback" isn't a violation of tort law as you seem to think it is, its a contract provision. Contrary to your assertion, not being naïve isn't a tort either. You haven't proven Goldman Sachs violated their contract with Greece and neither has Greece, nor have you proven said contract contained a "clawback" provision. That's why only ignorant folks are running around talking about clawbacks with respect to the work Goldman Sachs did for Greece.
    LOL, well you still haven't been able to identify how Goldman Sachs harmed poor little Greece. What you posted, is exactly what people like you post when they get called out on their fiction and ignorance, "well they may not have been fully cognizant". You are not fully cognizant and you still haven't explained how Greece was harmed by Goldman Sachs. You have made wild accusations, but you have repeatedly failed to back them up with evidence and reason. But then you don't need or want reason. Demagogues never do.
    Except that is pure bullshit. First, remember we are talking about only 2% of Greece's debt here. So how is 2% of Greek debt responsible for the 77% increase in Greek debt? It's that numbers thingy.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Two, Goldman Sachs was involved with Greece 15 years ago, back when Greece could finance its debt publically through private lenders. The lenders of last resort didn't get involved until 2010 when public financing became too expensive for Greece. So your assertion Goldman Sachs shorted the lenders of last resort is pure bullshit.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    The arrangements Goldman made to hide that 2% ended up - after some more Goldman contributions, 2002 and 2004 and the bad one in 2009 - bankrupting Greece.
    So you haven't read the links I handed you. Here's another: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-hide-debts-when-it-joined-euro-10381926.html
    The view in 2010: http://www.spiegel.de/international...ed-greece-to-mask-its-true-debt-a-676634.html
    Goldman's deal in 2009 was six years ago, not fifteen, and the takeover of that junkpile of derivatives by various taxpayers since 2010 was managed by, among others, former Goldman execs such as Mario Draghi, head of the ECB in this:
    The man in the center: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Draghi

    Or consider not only Krugman et al, but guys like Paulo Batista from the IMF: http://fondad.blogspot.com/2015/03/remarkable-interview-on-greek-debt-with.html
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Here is the bottom line, you have repeatedly made assertions which are counterfactual and therefore you have not been able to prove your assertions. Unfortunately, I have read the links you provided, but as is the norm with you, your links do not support your assertions. You have yet to prove Goldman Sachs harmed Greece in any way as you have repeatedly alleged or that Goldman Sachs was in any way responsible for Greece's debt troubles. NONE of the articles you have cited have backed up your assertion Goldman Sachs caused Greece's debt woes. Perhaps you lack the mental acuity to understand what you post and the articles you cite, I think that likely. You have repeatedly and blatantly lied as is your custom. You are not being honest. You just make stuff up.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    From what I posted and linked, you have two possibilities:
    1) Goldman Sachs did not know what the effects of its financial subterfuges would be
    2) Goldman did know

    The first would be incompetence, the second would be at least borderline criminal - if it was all legal, we need better laws. Either one would justify clawbacks under US law.

    What they say Goldman caused was the crisis - the multiplying of Greece's debt to the point of needing bailout. They also point out that Goldman arranged to be free of exposure to the crisis, and in addition to its fees (in the hundreds of millions) made a lot of money both shorting the Greek debt and laying off the bailout costs on various taxpayers.

    Btw: Greece's population is about the same as Illinois - consider Goldman's fees and profits, hundreds of millions, in the context of consulting fees for fraudulently restructuring the Illinois State budget and then shorting its own arrangements.
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2015
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Actually, but not surprisingly, NO; as previously pointed out to you, Goldman Sachs knew exactly what it was doing, and Goldman Sachs did nothing wrong. It did what it was hired to do, nothing more, and nothing less. Goldman Sachs is not in any way responsible for Greece’s debt woes.
    There are three possibilities here:
    1. You are cognitively impaired
    2. You are being dishonest
    3. All the above
    Have you ever asked yourself why no one other than you has raised the issue of clawbacks? Have you asked yourself that having had clawbacks explained to you several times now; you remain unable to understand it and US law?
    Who says, other than you, Goldman Sachs caused the Greek debt crisis? Perhaps you can point out the specific text in the articles you referenced which you believe prove your claim? Then again probably not. You cannot prove something exists when in fact it doesn't. What you are doing is what you always do, cite articles and misrepresent them. What your articles say is Goldman Sachs helped disguise Greek debt, nothing more, nothing less and that really isn’t contentious. Aiding Greece to exploit a flaw in Eurozone entrance requirements, might be morally suspect, but as repeatedly explained, it wasn’t illegal. This was a case where Wall Street investment banks were ahead of regulators. And Wall Street firms, or any other private enterprise, have no obligation, moral or legal, to point out problems with legislation enacted by any government or governmental entity.
    Apparently you don’t know the meaning of the word fraudulent either even after it having been repeatedly explained to you. As previously pointed out to you, in order for there to be a fraud one party must be damaged and only party damaged here is the Eurozone. But the Eurozone wasn’t damaged by Goldman Sachs or by Greece but by how the Eurozone defined its entrance requirements. The Eurozone’s imprecise definition of debt created an opportunity which countries like Greece exploited by employing the services of Goldman Sachs. There was no fraud, period.

    Additionally there is nothing wrong with shorting and you have no idea what Goldman Sachs did or didn’t do with respect to its trades, nor, as previously explained, do you know how much, if anything, Goldman Sachs profited from these transactions because Goldman Sachs has never made that disclosure and only Goldman Sachs knows or has access the that information. The bottom line here is you are making shit up again and mindlessly repeating memes.
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2015
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Well, that Goldman knew what it was doing has been pretty much my assumption throughout. But I don't interchange "illegal" and "wrong". What Goldman did to Greece was very obviously wrong on any kind of ethical or moral grounds, and since we don't yet know I assume no particular version of what actually happened between the handful of Greek officials and Goldman reps involved - bribery, collusion, deception, fraud, sheer incompetence; there are many possibilities, most of them liable to clawbacks and a couple to criminal charges.
    Why is it you don't read the links you claim are so important to you?
    Uh, you do realize that the Greek government and citizenry has been harmed? Also many pension funds and 401ks and other financial setups in the US? Anyone to whom Goldman marketed derivatives with exposure to the Greek debt they had just rigged to go boom would seem to have some kind of claim.
    I'm just going by the assessments of the dozens of pros in the field who have estimated Goldman's take. Goldman has refused, so far, to state the true numbers, but the lowest estimate I've seen is well over 400 million, and the highest is up around a billion counting in all the side bets and subsidiary profit taking. Do you think they are wrong?
  10. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Actually, as pointed out to you numerous times, there was nothing wrong with what Goldman Sachs did, period. Two, you haven’t proven your assertions. The best morality case you can make against Goldman Sachs is that helping Greece disguise its debt was like giving alcohol to an alcoholic. It allowed Greece to continue its fiscal profligacy for a few more years. But it also allowed Greece to gain entry into the Eurozone which brought significant economic benefits to Greece. Contrary to your accusations, Goldman Sachs didn’t create Greece’s debt. It helped it legally conceal it and exploit the law. And let’s remember it was only 2% of Greece’s total debt. Greece had a problem, it was addicted to debt. And as with all addicts, no one but the addict can cure the addiction. The Goldman Sachs – Greek relationship is morally analogous to the person who gives a homeless alcoholic a few dollars to buy food, and the alcoholic then uses the money to buy more alcohol rather than food. That is the best moral case you can make against Goldman Sachs, and that was basically the case the authors of the articles you referenced made.

    You have repeatedly defamed Goldman Sachs. You have no evidence of the bribery, collusion, or deception which you have alleged. Additionally, it has been explained to you umpteen times that a “clawback” is a clause in an employment contract. It isn’t a violation of US law. It isn’t a violation of civil or criminal law. But, hey, you are Iceaura and you don’t need evidence or logic and you are not interested in evidence or logic.
    Who says I don’t? Unfortunately, I do read your links. And unfortunately, they rarely if ever say what you claim they say. Your URL references are a diversion. You have been repeatedly requested to show the specific text from your URLs which support your assertions. And after many requests, you continue to fail to produce that text. Probably because it doesn’t exist, it certainly isn’t in the articles you referenced in your URLs.
    Yes, the Greek government and Greek citizens have been harmed. But the question is by whom, and the answer is by the Greek government and the Greek people. They have harmed themselves. You are doing what you always do, you are scapegoating. So while you cannot see Greece’s role in this, people with any degree of financial and economic knowledge can.

    As for your accusations of harm to 401k and to US investors, not likely, and for several reasons, beginning with the fact the Greece is a tiny microcosm of potential investments and would represent a tiny speck of any well diversified investment portfolio, if represented at all. Professional investors, especially trustees, diversify their investments. Additionally, any professional investor should have seen Greece’s debt woes coming. While Goldman Sachs helped Greece disguise 2% of its debt, 98% of its debt was completely visible and investors have had 15 years to see it coming.

    Do you have any proof Goldman Sachs rigged Greek debt to go boom? Can you explain in any detail how Goldman Sachs rigged Greek debt to go boom as you asserted? No you don’t and no you can't, you are just mindlessly repeating bullshit again.
    LOL…and who are these “dozens of pros in the field” exactly? Name those dozens, name even one. As I have repeatedly told you and contrary to your assertions, no one including myself knows how much Goldman Sachs made on the deal. So when you make these bizarre and unfounded assertions, assertions you can't know, you are just pulling shit out of your derriere which unfortunately is a habit with you.
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2015
  11. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    I think there was. That you don't think so speaks to your moral and ethical principles, not the facts of the matter.
    My accusation is that Goldman's manipulations caused Greece's debt to increase exponentially, and become unpayable. And that Goldman knew this would happen.
    The "Greek people" were not at the table when Goldman presented their highly profitable (to Goldman) deals, in 2000, in 2002, in 2004, in 2009. They were not present at the table when the Eurozone bankers and the IMF bailed themselves out (and set themselves up for lucrative predation) at Eurozone taxpayers' and Greek citizens' expense in 2010, 2012, 2013, and 2015.
    You don't read my links - I already knew that. You can't read an article on the topic without running into a professional's estimate of what Goldman's take was from those deals, and 400 million is the lowest one I've seen.

    But notice what you are denying: you are denying that Goldman and its execs made "hundreds of millions of dollars" on the Greek deals of 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2009. You are also denying that Goldman shorted Greek debt on international financial markets, and that Goldman scrubbed itself of any net exposure to Greek debt after making these deals, and so forth. You aren't just jobitching about somebody not spoonfeeding you info you've already been spoonfed five times, you're denying that these things ever happened. You sure you want to do that, right out in public?

    Reminder: http://america.aljazeera.com/blogs/...did-wall-street-enable-greek-debt-crisis.html
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2015
  12. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    LOL…actually, no it speaks to your lack of reason and evidence. You don’t think, you believe. There is a difference.
    And you have been repeatedly asked to describe how that happened and you have repeatedly failed to do so. You believe Goldman Sachs caused Greece’s debt woes, but you cannot describe how in any detail and you have ZERO evidence of same. You don't even know what these "manipulations" were and can't explain how they "blew up" Greek debt. But, hey, you don’t need evidence or reason. You never have.
    Well, actually, they were present through their elected and duly authorized representatives. And has been pointed out to you umpteen times, you don’t know if the deal was profitable for Goldman Sachs or if it was how profitable it was, because neither Goldman Sachs nor anyone familiar with the deal has ever said anything about the profitability of the transaction. The bottom line is you are making shit up again. By the way, there was no Goldman Sachs deal in 2009, there was a proposal which was rebuffed by the Greek government.
    And you know this how, are you telling me you have ESP? Unfortunately, I have read your links and they were a waste of my time because they don’t say what you claim they said. You have been repeatedly asked to source the specific text from your links which you believe support your assertions, and you have repeatedly failed to do so, because that text doesn’t exist.

    I have known you for some time, and this is the norm with you. It’s obfuscation and you do it in almost every thread and it’s intellectual dishonesty. But it is what you do.
    Actually, that is a serious misrepresentation. Show me where I denied Goldman Sachs and its executives made hundreds of millions in its deal with the Greek government. You can’t because I never once even hinted that. Once again for your edification, I said you nor I know how much Goldman Sachs made on the deal, if anything, because only Goldman Sachs and a few of their employees know how much if anything Goldman Sachs made on the Greek deal and not one of them has disclosed that information. So you cannot know the things you claim to know. That is what I am saying and have said for the umpteenth time now. One more point, executives are compensated on a number of things, not just one deal. I would be surprised if Goldman Sachs didn’t make any money on the deal, because they are very good at what they do. But that doesn’t make them responsible for Greece’s debt. As you have been repeatedly told, if Greece didn’t have a debt problem there would have been no need to hire Goldman Sachs to hide it.

    Further, and for the same reasons, you don’t know if Goldman Sachs shorted any Greek related derivatives. But even if it did, that didn’t contribute to Greek’s debt woes. And as previously validated, you cannot prove ANY of your allegations. In 2009 Goldman Sachs made a proposal to Greece which was rebuffed by the Greek government. In 2005, Goldman Sachs restructured the initial 2001 deal. And you still haven't been able to explain how it is that Goldman Sachs's deals "blew up" as you asserted.

    And here is the thing about spoon feeding, that is just another in a long series of obfuscations on your part. You have no evidence, and you have no reason. But, hey, you have never needed them in the past so why start now? The unfortunate reality for you is Greece is responsible for its debt. It created its debt and it managed its debt. The unfortunate reality for you is Greece, not Goldman Sachs, is responsible for Greece's debt, and as previously pointed out to you, only Greece can solve its debt woes.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2015
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    You keep demanding stuff that's in them, asking questions they've answered, and saying stupid things they would have straightened out for you.
    It's obvious you don't read my links.
    It's where you described the observation as a bizarre and unfounded assertion that I had pulled out of my derriere. Here's the quote:
    So the claim that Goldman made hundreds of millions from its Greek dealings is, according to you, bizarre and unfounded.

    Everybody else - literally, everybody who has written on the matter - just thinks its ordinary, well-supported information.
    Read the links. The lowest estimate is 400 million.
    I know what the dozens of experts say their analysis shows - and I know that refusing to recognize what Goldman has done until Goldman officially admits it is kind of silly. What are we supposed to do, pretend these financial predators had nothing to do with this mess until they admit to it?
    It's in the links.
    So? It's evidence that Goldman knew exactly what it was doing when if set up the Greek economy with burgeoning and unpayable future debt increases.

    And that it was wrong.
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Except, I haven’t been asking questions, I have been asking you for proof of your assertions and your “links” don’t back up your assertions.

    I’ve known you for some time here at Sciforums. You have a habit of making references which do not support your assertions (e.g. Ferguson, Baltimore, et al). It’s an obfuscation tactic on your part and it’s intellectually dishonest. You have been repeatedly challenged in this thread and others to produce the text from your references which you believe validates your assertions, and in all these years, you have yet to be able to produce that text even once.
    Oh, well then it should be easy for you to prove then. So prove it.
    Actually, I described your claims to know things which clearly you cannot know as bizarre.
    “Everybody else – literally, everybody”, Really? Then where are these “everybodies”? You cannot possibly know everybody who has written on the topic. This is yet another example of your careless disregard for the truth. It's another one of your bizarre assertions. And your allegations are far from supported, much less “well supported”. They are mostly speculation based on partisan biases. You are making shit up again.
    Well here is the thing, you have been repeatedly requested to name these “experts” and you have repeatedly been unable to name even ONE. And here is the thing, you presume to know what Goldman Sachs has done without evidence or reason. Presuming to know things you clearly cannot know and don’t know as you do is silly. Making evidence based reasoned a decision isn’t silly, but it is an impediment for demagogues like you. That’s why you don’t do it.
    No it isn’t. One of the articles you references alleges Goldman Sachs shorted a Greek related transaction, but that doesn’t make it so. There is a difference between allegation and fact as evidenced by your posts. Just because someone makes an allegation, it doesn’t make the allegation true. Allegations can be and often are false.

    Since Goldman Sachs does not disclose its trades, you nor any “expert” can know what if anything Goldman Sachs has shorted. What you are doing is mindlessly repeating crap and inventing some along the way to fill in the holes.
    No it isn’t, you don’t know the trading strategy. You don’t know what the Greek contract required of Goldman Sachs. You cannot even explain how Goldman Sachs “rigged Greek debt to explode as you have alleged. And if Goldman Sachs shorted a Greek debt related security as you have asserted, you have no proof it harmed Greece in anyway as you have alleged.

    None of that takes away the fact that contrary to your assertion, Greece is responsible for its debt, not Goldman Sachs.
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2015
  15. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Perhaps no more "good money thrown after bad" after all - Greece to go back to near worthless Drachmas? Starvation, no imported medical supplies, like insulin, etc. may, at least, stem the tide of refugees risking life in small boats?

Share This Page