Mr Khan said:
I meant it in the context of democratic institutions refusing to impose austerity due to the will of their constituents. I mean, who the hell will take on a platform of "Fewer benefits and higher taxes?"
Papandreu himself seems to have been taken down within his own party under the very idea that he would cooperate with this.
I'm well aware of the economic consequences of this, i'm just saying that they would have to come about if the people will against it, but so much of our modern economy is founded on pure willpower (Confidence itself is the most significant asset, and a lack thereof more damning than any debt) that i imagine a system of wilfully defied debt could work out if everyone agreed to it. Total revolution is also a way to go debt free, since i can't imagine any foreign banks that bought War Bonds off of the Tsar ever saw any of that money, nor American banks who may have lent to the Shah.
My point was rather a missive against democratic institutions and their inability to act responsibly when given direct control over matters of foreign affairs such as this
|
Yes, but, even in these scenarios, there will be a financial system collapse (which is the point of this discussion). If the banks do not get their money back from Greece, no matter how this happens - be it default, defiance, revolution, then there will be a second credit crunch. With the key difference between the last credit crunch, and the one we're talking about here, is that there's no one left to bail out the banks.
No matter what path Greece takes, now, they will be subject to a lower quality of life. If they default, I've seen reports that they could see their economy decline by up to half, if they defy, they will be subject to hyper-inflation, if there's some kind of revolution... then they will get out of some problems, but will still be facing a world going through a second, and more severe, credit crunch - and after the crunch, they'll still be seen as an extremely high-risk country to lend to ("hey, they're the country that would rather revolt than face higher taxes to pay what they owe").
I don't think it is a problem of democracy. Afterall, Switzerland is a democracy, and they seem to have maintained very sane economic policies over the past few years. I think the real problem is that too many politicians subscribed to keynsian economics, and they sold their constituents keynsian economics. I do think we have a problem in the EU, with leaders putting their pro-EU political ideologies ahead of rational economic thought, but that's not a problem of democracy, just one of the EU. We'll see how the Ron Paul candidcy goes, before I denounce democracy on the whole. :P
I would like to point to Ireland, actually, who seem to have done exceptionally well, seeing as they were one of the first countries that had a debt crisis. They took austerity seriously, and the effects on the economy have not been as bad as what many people would have believed. For one thing, Ireland was the only Eurozone country that saw its PMI positive last month. A lot could be learned from the way Ireland handled itself in the debt crisis.