punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 If so, whats your point? Far better we should borrow money to bail out the Euro than they should have to do it themselves? France wants Eurobonds so they can do it themselves and that is clearly one solution. Maybe that is what we should be talking about instead of having the argument we are having. That is my point. All the people in this thread making accusations about the Euro countries being like drunks or whatever are not helping or contributing to the solution of what could a large scale global economic collapse. It is something that needs real discussion not the disservice provided in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) If a bailout comes it wont be for France it will be for Spain or some other PIIGS. At this point in time this argument needs not be about the Welfare state in Europe. It needs to be about the Canadian economy. Europe goes tits up oil goes below 80 dollars a barrel so we can say good by to the tarsands until that goes up. They have already closed the development of the second Pot Ash mine in Sask. Commodities go underwater and we are screwed aren't we? Not to mention manufacturing will be decreasing and so on. I am not saying we should give them Billions. I am saying framing the argument the way you guys are and acting as if there will be no repercussions to us is clearly wrong. What we are witnessing is the repercussions of living too far above their means for too long. If that doesn't change, all we could do is delay the screwing at our own expense. I agree with Argus, if countries like France aren't prepared to make any sacrifices of their government spending to ward off disaster in the Euro zone, why should we care or expect that we could make any real difference in the eventual outcome. Edited June 9, 2012 by Wilber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 A good article that covers a lot of bases. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/keeping-greece-in-the-euro-zone/2012/05/28/gJQASI7OxU_story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westguy Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Mulcair in the commons demands that we borrow billions of dollars and give it, not loan ,but give it to the private rich euro bankers, because it is our duty. And at the same time give kadr a mil or 2 while we are at it. of course, its not Mulcair's money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 What we are witnessing is the repercussions of living too far above their means for too long. If that doesn't change, all we could do is delay the screwing at our own expense. I agree with Argus, if countries like France aren't prepared to make any sacrifices of their government spending to ward off disaster in the Euro zone, why should we care or expect that we could make any real difference in the eventual outcome. No that is not what is going on. Sorry again you are taking a very complex situation and trying to turn it into some sort of moral argument. France is in they are throwing money into the kitty so I don't know where you get this idea that they aren't ready to make sacrifices? Seriously I thought we learned something from the depression but I guess not. Who cares how a country got into some mess, if not helping them means 15% unemployment in Canada (I am not saying this will happen) but that was the question then I would go with helping them. This is the debate we should be having when is the point we help? When Canadian GDP shrinks by say 5%? When are you willing to throw in or is your moral argument above all that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westguy Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 France just LOWERED its retirement age from 62 back to 60. Apparently, as far as the French are concerned, there's really no problem. Meanwhile, we just RAISED our retirement age to 67. Do you seriously think we ought to give these people money so they can retire seven years earlier than us? Never mind the fact that, since we still have a deficit, we'd have to borrow the money! great point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 (edited) great point But it isn't a great point at all. If it was a great point then France wouldn't be able to borrow at record low rates. It is simple point that ignores all the details what we are talking about thus it plays to your belief system. Edited June 9, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 But it isn't a great point at all. If it was a great point then France wouldn't be able to borrow at record low rates. It is simple point that ignores all the details what we are talking about thus it plays to your belief system. Sometimes people like to over complicate things, if we send money to europe, are we not sending money to europe? If that is money we don't have will we not have to borrow it? I dont understand why we should pay to help countries that have better benefits than we do. It could be argued that we should have better benefits too, but that isn't the current reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Sometimes people like to over complicate things, if we send money to europe, are we not sending money to europe? If that is money we don't have will we not have to borrow it? I dont understand why we should pay to help countries that have better benefits than we do. It could be argued that we should have better benefits too, but that isn't the current reality. My question is what is the price for not sending our money to Europe and if the price we pay is more then sending the money then are we just punishing our selves? Why is no one addressing this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 My question is what is the price for not sending our money to Europe and if the price we pay is more then sending the money then are we just punishing our selves? Why is no one addressing this? Because its a stopgap measure, nothing permanent. I'm all for avoiding economic hardship for us by helping the EU but we need to assured that there will not be a repetition of this in a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 My question is what is the price for not sending our money to Europe and if the price we pay is more then sending the money then are we just punishing our selves? Why is no one addressing this? So you are saying that it is in our own interest to give them money so that they can enjoy a lot more stat holidays than we do? BTW, Harper was seeking more trade with Europe because up till now we do very little. If Europe goes under perhaps our low volume of trade with them would mean the effect on our economy would not be as large as you suggest. I still don't understand all the ramifications of your argument. It seems to me that you are suggesting that simply keeping a lot of trade activity happening is all that is important. If that were all that was necessary for a successful economy couldn't we just draft everyone into the Post Office and grow rich sending letters to each other? Someone needs to sell. That someone needs to get paid. If he has to give a debtor the money to pay him back I don't see how that can work. If the debtor can pay his debts with devalued dollars I don't see how that can work either. And I still think that we all have an obligation not to take on more debt than we can afford. Did those European bankers put guns to the head of Greek politicians and FORCE them to borrow their money? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Because its a stopgap measure, nothing permanent. I'm all for avoiding economic hardship for us by helping the EU but we need to assured that there will not be a repetition of this in a few years. Not sure how you can claim this. Europe took on much much more debt after WW2 and still paid all of that off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Not sure how you can claim this. Europe took on much much more debt after WW2 and still paid all of that off. I wonder why they need our money then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 So you are saying that it is in our own interest to give them money so that they can enjoy a lot more stat holidays than we do? BTW, Harper was seeking more trade with Europe because up till now we do very little. If Europe goes under perhaps our low volume of trade with them would mean the effect on our economy would not be as large as you suggest. I still don't understand all the ramifications of your argument. It seems to me that you are suggesting that simply keeping a lot of trade activity happening is all that is important. If that were all that was necessary for a successful economy couldn't we just draft everyone into the Post Office and grow rich sending letters to each other? Someone needs to sell. That someone needs to get paid. If he has to give a debtor the money to pay him back I don't see how that can work. If the debtor can pay his debts with devalued dollars I don't see how that can work either. And I still think that we all have an obligation not to take on more debt than we can afford. Did those European bankers put guns to the head of Greek politicians and FORCE them to borrow their money? Yes you have made it quite clear with your post off example that you don't understand what I am saying. I am not saying that we need to bail out Europe but I am saying that if every Organization in the whole world cuts back at the same time we enter a depression. The world economy is not a delicate thing but if the whole world tires hard enough we can all starve I assure you. Demand drives economies and not all nations that are in trouble got there by spending government money. Again Ireland and Spain (the problem right now) got there by deregulating their banking sectors and letting them run wild and free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 I wonder why they need our money then... Come on. Again I ask you do we ever throw in? What did it take to get out of the last depression? Lots of government spending. Now I think our government should spend it here and not over there but it needs to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Yes you have made it quite clear with your post off example that you don't understand what I am saying. There are two possible explanations for this. The first is that there is something wrong with my capability to understand your argument. The second is that perhaps there are flaws in YOUR argument! Or maybe the real explanation is a combination of both! I am perfectly willing to admit that I can (and sometimes am) wrong about something. As a Lefty, are you ALLOWED to do the same? :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 There are two possible explanations for this. The first is that there is something wrong with my capability to understand your argument. The second is that perhaps there are flaws in YOUR argument! Or maybe the real explanation is a combination of both! I am perfectly willing to admit that I can (and sometimes am) wrong about something. As a Lefty, are you ALLOWED to do the same? :P I agree. However I haven't said that we should bail out Europe. What I have said however is the reasons given in this thread such as "they got there themselves", "It is like giving a drug addict more drugs" and other Morally driven arguments don't address the problems, or the reason why the argument is being made. There are plenty of people out there that are willing to make the case that if Europe goes under we all do. That governments have cut back but because no one in the world is spending money they aren't getting out of the hole, and that countries that are spending right now are doing well. There is a world problem right now and while I don't think giving money to Europe will help our refusal to even plan for what might come worries me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) ...There is a world problem right now and while I don't think giving money to Europe will help our refusal to even plan for what might come worries me. What's to plan for? Do you think the world panicked when Canada teetered on insolvency and slashed spending in the 90's? The absence of inflated wealth does not a depression make. Edited June 10, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) What's to plan for? Do you think the world panicked when Canada teetered on insolvency and slashed spending in the 90's? The absence of inflated wealth does not a depression make. No because the rest of the world was booming. That is when you should be cutting. Edited June 10, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 No because the rest of the world was booming. That is when you should be cutting. Not exactly....remember the Asian crisis? Or how about the collapse of the ruble? Or maybe the Dot-com crash. Life goes on..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) Not exactly....remember the Asian crisis? Or how about the collapse of the ruble? Or maybe the Dot-com crash. Life goes on..... None of those were the depression or worst recession at least that we are in now. It is the whole world. Different situations require different solutions. Which is why we didn't get out of this thing by now. Edited June 10, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 None of those were the depression or worst recession at least that we are in now. It is the whole world. OK...if you say so. I can't decide on the 60 inch or 70 inch HDTV upgrade, sending my 55 inch for recycling. This is not the worst anything...get a grip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 OK...if you say so. I can't decide on the 60 inch or 70 inch HDTV upgrade, sending my 55 inch for recycling. This is not the worst anything...get a grip. Ignore it all you want. That was the solution for those who did well during the depression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 Ignore it all you want. That was the solution for those who did well during the depression. Far from ignoring it, I am exploring ways to exploit current economic challenges and opportunities. I am very wary of socialists and commies who rally to change the rules of the game when things don't go their way...I have already seen that movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted June 10, 2012 Report Share Posted June 10, 2012 Far from ignoring it, I am exploring ways to exploit current economic challenges and opportunities. I am very wary of socialists and commies who rally to change the rules of the game when things don't go their way...I have already seen that movie. That is fine all we need is a majority as this thing gets worse and worse more and more will look for other solutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.