timppu: I keep hearing that claim, but I haven't heard which were the exact reforms which "destroyed" the Greek economy, especially compared to the theoretical scenario that no bailout program would have been arranged at all, but Greece would have been left to try to cope with it alone. Would the Greeks be better off right now in that alternative scenario?
Phasmid: The Greeks would be better off right now if they'd defaulted in 2009 as they should have. They will default, they cannot pay the money back, ever, it is inevitable- and if they'd done it six years ago their economy would be 25% bigger than their austerity ravaged current one.
25% bigger? Wow, you have exact numbers. Based on what? :)
Some clarifying questions:
- Why didn't Greece "default" (I presume that to mean both missing paying their debts, and leaving the euro zone) in 2009, and decline the bail out by IMF/EU/ECB?
- Why even now, Greece and Syriza still want to remain in eurozone? The latest news today are that a Greek finance minister is threatening to sue ECB for not increasing their support to Greek banks, and in case they do anything to force Greece out of eurozone. (Other eurocountries can't do anything to force Greece out, but ECB could take measures that would make it increasingly impossible for Greece to remain in euro. But I consider even that quite improbable, so most probably Greece stays in euro as long as they want, they will exit only voluntarily).
I personally believe that most of Greeks understand being part of eurozone has been extremely beneficial to them, even if they hadn't taken any cheap debt money.
Phasmid: The ultimate reason why austerity has destroyed the Greek economy is simple, neo liberal policies target poor people, while poor people actually spend money while rich people don't in a recession.
May be, but it still doesn't create sustainable economic growth, and remain only as long as debt money is pumped into there. This may be a workable short-term solution when the economic problems are seasonal (ie. you merely need to wait out for economy to recover, and pumping money at the bad times let people to cope better with the bad times, but not really when they are structural. In the latter case, they will make matters only worse, increasing the debt even more.
Don't forget that this pension money is currently for the most part taxpayer's money from other EU countries. Shouldn't I demand that my tax money is spent of Finnish pensions, not Greek pensions? Will Greeks at some point pay our pensions? I doubt it, why would they want to do that, even if they could afford? The sick thing is that we are also living on debt currently, so basically we are increasing our debt in order to pay Greek pensions and public sector wages.
(lots of ideological leftist diatribe how rich people are evil removed, as it doesn't really have anything with my question)
Phasmid: So, fundamentally, austerity is not aimed at helping Greece or its people, it's ideological.
No.
IMF and other euro countries basically took debts from the banks for the most part, in order to calm down the situation. At that point, part of the debts were also cut, and Greece also got lower interest rates, longer repayment deals etc. At that point, the new creditors also wanted that Greek would try to fix its economy to a more sustainable level, in hopes that eventually it could take matters on its own hand again, and get more money from the market.
In retrospect, maybe that was too optimistic, partly also because Greece is increasingly fighting against the reforms.
Of course the creditors are hoping to recoup their money back at some point, but it is increasingly looking less and less likely that we can recoup it at least fully, also because Greece doesn't simply want to pay them back. Why would they? Why would anyone want to repay his big debts, if there was a way to weasel out of it? It's all profit, the more you can avoid it.
So should we simply forgive Greece all its debts that we took from the British, German and French banks? Or should we still try to get at least some of it back? What's in it for us, shouldn't we similarly think about our own pensioners and people on social welfare, as Tsipras is thinking for Greeks? I guess the question boils down to this: should our poor pay the price for Greek poor? The debt will not simply vanish from both parties, someone has to pay.
Just to make sure you realize that it is not institutions and corporations (banks) against Greece, there are real people in real countries on the other side now.
I personally agree and hope that at least Finland would have stayed the hell away from the bailout program. I'd like to be like the Brits, Swedes, Norwegians, Swiss, Americans and New Zealanders, who can just look at this from the outside and give their advice from above, like "austerity is baaaaaaad!". After all, it is not their money in it anymore (other than the little through IMF, I guess).
Especially the Brits have been damn fortunate in this whole deal. British banks also had big debts in Greece, but Brits dodged the bullet by eurozone countries willingly taking over those debts. Now the Brits can act as outsiders to the whole mess, while in practice many of their banks were saved with eurozone countries' taxpayers' money.
It might have been a good deal also to Germans and French (compared to the scenario that they would have had to save their national banks themselves), but at least e.g. Germans taxpayers still feel it in their skin, they have the most debt towards Greece at the moment. Unlike the Brits, for instance.
Too bad for countries like Finland that had nothing to do with the mess ("Finnish" banks, the few there are still and haven't been bought Sweden or Denmark, didn't have much debts to Greece), were stupid enough willingly take part into the bailout operation.
Oh well, too late to ruminate anymore for that, now have to think what from now onwards. My first suggestion: no more bailout money to Greece. At all. Don't increase the debt at all, which we won't get back anyway. Then think what to do next, without further bailouts.