Slashdot Mirror


Valve's Economist Yanis Varoufakis Appointed Greece's Finance Minister

eldavojohn writes A turnover in the Greek government resulted from recent snap elections placing SYRIZA (Coalition of the Radical Left) in power — just shy of an outright majority by two seats. Atheist, and youngest Prime Minister in Greek history since 1865, Alexis Tsipras has been appointed the new prime minister and begun taking immediate drastic steps against the recent austerity laws put in place by prior administrations. One such step has been to appoint Valve's economist Yanis Varoufakis to position of Finance Minister of Greece. For the past three years Varoufakis has been working at Steam to analyze and improve the Steam Market but now has the opportunity to improve one of the most troubled economies in the world.

328 comments

  1. Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't know how to feel about this one...

    1. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The land and and the King are one.

    2. Re:Honestly... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Hey, maybe he can game the system to buy the time necessary to fix things?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll love the Hunger Olympics.

    4. Re:Honestly... by mhlo · · Score: 2

      EU is a fail. Greece surrendering their sovereignty to the EU was a mistake from the beginning.

    5. Re: Honestly... by buswolley · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's because game economies are like real economies in many ways and they know that economies collapse when you have austerity...when too little new money is created.

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    6. Re:Honestly... by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      I'm hoping to pick up an Acropolis during the next holiday or summer sale.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    7. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's because game economies are like real economies in many ways and they know that economies collapse when you have too much debt...when too little debt is paid back.

      FTFY.

    8. Re: Honestly... by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This certainly explains the observed tendency of economies to collapse randomly no matter how they're run.

      However, unlike in game economies, decisions in real economies affect people in addition to economy. Even if austerity actually was a cure to euro's problems, it cannot continue without destroying EU itself. People aren't going to tolerate endless misery just to boost some number, no matter how necessary politicians (who don't share the misery) deem it.

      Either EU gets euro to work without austerity, or it has to abandon it. Demanding sacrifices from the common people who's reward is having less say in their own local affairs is quickly discrediting the entire union.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    9. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      Either EU gets euro to work without austerity, or it has to abandon it. Demanding sacrifices from the common people who's reward is having less say in their own local affairs is quickly discrediting the entire union.

      That was a design bug known from the very beginning. Or, if you're a banker, a design feature. The less prosperous EU nations were interested in having other, more prosperous countries help finance their social programs' largesse. Of course those holding the purse strings saw an opportunity there.

    10. Re: Honestly... by ahodgson · · Score: 2

      What Europe calls austerity, everyone else calls living within one's means. Which, in the long term, is non-optional.

    11. Re:Honestly... by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      EU is a fail by allowing Greece to join in the first place. Greece would have been far worse off today without joining the EU, and the EU would have been better off.

    12. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean how Iceland is way worse off? Greece would be doing much better if they had control of their own monetary policy. They could have just wiped all of their debts away like Iceland and said Fuck You to the rich EU nations.

    13. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the PIIGS were the buyers that drove much of the growth of France and Germany during the last decade or two. Without the easy credit, Greece and its fellow nations would have been unable to buy from the rest of Europe.

      Now the bill is due, and Greece doesn't like it. They can't continue as they were. Either the credit gets cut off, or the spending gets cut off. Either way, the people of Greece suffer, because of their own government.

    14. Re: Honestly... by rasmusbr · · Score: 1

      What Europe calls austerity, everyone else calls living within one's means. Which, in the long term, is non-optional.

      That stops being true when you have the power to print money and have people think your money is legitimate.

    15. Re: Honestly... by ahodgson · · Score: 1

      If you consistently increase the money supply faster than the rate of economic growth, people stop thinking your money is legitimate. Economists call that inflation, and it's used to devalue non-productive savings and make borrowing cheaper, which combined means it's just a way to make rich people richer. It screws everyone else and eventually the inevitable result is a currency crisis.

    16. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Greece the common people are as guilty as the higher ups, tax avoidance is practically a national past time. Yes they have massive corruption too. There situation is completely self inflicted. Greece needs a cultural change in how they deal with government and taxes, you don't get that by spending even more money.

    17. Re:Honestly... by youngone · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Since the EU was formed, (or, more precisely, it's previous incarnations as the common Steel market, Common Market etc) Europe has been at war with itself no times. Over the previous 15 centuries or so since the fall of the Roman Empire, there has been no period of peace as long. I would say the EU has been nothing but success, as it has prevented young men like my Father from being drafted into an army and sent to fight a bunch of young men he had no real quarrel.

    18. Re: Honestly... by jonnyj · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What Europe calls austerity, everyone else calls living within one's means. Which, in the long term, is non-optional.

      Quite apart from the politics and economics, this is a really complex moral issue.

      On the one hand, the Greek people repeatedly elected governments that failed to collect taxes or eliminate corruption, spent money that they didn't have and borrowed money that they couldn't afford to repay. On that assessment, the Greeks deserve every bit of misery they've endured since their creditors decided to stop pouring good money after bad. But the trouble with that view is that a different bunch of Greeks are having to pay the bills: an entire generation is growing up with a broken economy because their parents voted for jam today.

      It's the same with the creditors. In pursuit of political gain and a quick buck, banks and other eurozone governments supported successive corrupt Greek governments in their act of intergenerational theft. They deserve to lose their shirts as the Greeks default just as surely as a payday lender that fails to assess the affordability of its loans deserves to go bust. The problem is that the bill ultimately gets picked up by innocent bystanders - mostly German taxpayers. True, those same German taxpayers voted for their inept government that failed to regulate their banks' exposure to Greece, but that was hardly a major electoral issue at the time.

      So Greek voters and Greek governments connived with European bankers to profit from the German population and younger Greeks. I have no sympathy with any of them. A plague on all their houses!

    19. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >rich people richer
      #1. Are you even reading what you wrote? "devalue non-productive savings". that means someone with a huge bank account loses value just having it sit there, they are forced to push their money back into the economy as an investment.

      #2. people with debt see their debt value decline with inflation.

    20. Re: Honestly... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      On what planet do lenders issue loans at below inflation? (Except to central bankers of course.)

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    21. Re:Honestly... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      It's a shame it's in Athens.
      I went there a couple of years ago and I got the impression of a ruin on top of hill on top of a slum.

      I travel a fair amount and I judge the quality of a city based on my experiences in Athens.
      E.G. : The Athens Test
      1) Visit a city.
      2) Go about your business
      3) Note the nature of transaction being offered by the first unsolicited approach you receive on the streets.
      4) If it's a pimp or prostitute offering sexual services, it fails the Athen's test. If it's anything else, it passes.

      Guess which city failed this test most effectively?

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    22. Re:Honestly... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Athens: Fail (pimp)
      Penang: Pass
      Copehagen: Fail (prostitute, It's legal there)
      Stockholm: Pass
      Reykjavik: Pass
      Mexico City: Fail (Pimp)
      Madrid: Pass
      Jerusalem: Pass (A pot vendor got there first)
      Haifa: Pass
      Tel Aviv: Fail (Prossy)
      Milan: Pass, but it's hard to tell.
      Munch: Pass
      Frankfurt: Pass
      Paris: Fail (Young madame)
      Levi: Pass (too cold!)
      Seoul: Fail (Front door staff of dubious establishments)
      Daejeon: Pass. Nice place.
      Tokyo, Kobe, Osaka, Kyoto, Yokohama, Kumagaya: Pass, Pass, Pass, Pass, Pass, Pass (in fact no one solicited anything in Japan)
      Amsterdam: Special Fail (prossy, and I was walking with my wife at the time)
      Brussels: Pass (but probably only by random chance)

      The UK and US are not included because I've lived in both places.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    23. Re: Honestly... by r1348 · · Score: 1

      Inflation devalues already issued loans, and that's why your bank hates it.

    24. Re: Honestly... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      What the hell kind of feature is, "if we let in poor countries, we could possibly make this whole thing blow up?"

      It's a bug, thought of as a feature. Like the Windows 8 start menu.

      Even if you give all credence to the idea that this was something that let bankers run off with as much money as possible... that's not what would happen. Bankers would run off with a lot of money... that would become incredibly devalued.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    25. Re:Honestly... by r1348 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure exactly what your test proves here, are you really that surprised that you got offered sex for money in Amsterdam?
      I also travel quite some myself and the only time I got approached by a pimp was in Lloret de Mar, but that's basically an open-air brothel.

      On a side note, being from Milan myself, could you elaborate on the "hard to tell"? Just curious.

    26. Re:Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're naive, and overlooking the REAL reasons the poorer countries were allowed to join this newly created club:

      (1) to allow the big businesses of the wealthy countries to buy sensitive state-owned enterprises in the poorer countries (usually off-limits to foreign companies, but suddenly legit when you're part of the same economic bloc)

      (2) to allow their citizens of the wealthy counties to buy-up land in the poorer countries

      So I would turn your premise around: Greece would have been better-off not joining the EU. The EU was a poison pill for Greece.

    27. Re:Honestly... by danomac · · Score: 1

      I was wondering if he could restore to a save point when something doesn't work...

    28. Re:Honestly... by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      My test proves nothing. It's just a thing. Someone might find humour in it.

      The hard to tell comment was referring to the standards of dress.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    29. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what's wrong with dumping the costs on the next generation, who are, pretty much, other people's shitty children? I think it's great that today's young people are so keen for us not to pay off their debts! Fantastic! Let's go spend!

      Ok, I don't think that. But there is an irony there....

    30. Re:Honestly... by mhlo · · Score: 2

      Don't discount NATO and American leadership/presence in Europe for the peace that persists. Furthermore, EU austerity imposed on Greece has created conditions (unemployment, hunger, poverty) that has given rise to radical factions in Greece. Golden Dawn, Syriza, etc. Yet Greeks are not blameless either. Corruption has been rampant. Still, impositions and edicts from Brussels and Germany are not helping Greece. If the EU is truly the federation they imagine they will not continue to impose on Greece the harsh austerity program. The EU must extend the debt and or forgive internist payments. For all the damage Germany has historically caused Greece during the wars there should be no argument.

    31. Re: Honestly... by TehZorroness · · Score: 1

      As a young American I fell very much the same. During my childhood there was a period where my country had no national debt, then all of a sudden we spend more within 8 years then the whole time since we we gained our independence. Then I became an adult. My generation was born into a 14 trillion dollar debt and that we will be paying off for the rest of our lives. For better or worse, sometimes I dream about us defaulting on this debt. It would be better then paying for the baby boomer's idiocy. If only taxation could work in a way where you could only be taxed for policies passed after the point you are allowed to vote.

    32. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. You fell for the propaganda. The reason there was no war in Europe since WW2 was that they could not afford it. The Russians would have stepped in immediately and the most powerful economy was occupied. Of course that didn't stop France from engaging in wars in Africa and Asia (Algeria and China), Belgium from messing up Congo and everybody from meddling with Middle East. Of course, as long as superior Aryan people are not endangered nobody cares. But by all means keep hailing your Euromeisters, citizen, and prepare for war with Russia. Your lords demand it! Pour l'Europe! Heil Europa!

    33. Re:Honestly... by jandersen · · Score: 1

      I don't know how to feel about this one...

      Quick, check your horoscope. That's what I do every morning, otherwise I don't know how I feel.

    34. Re: Honestly... by jandersen · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, the Greek people repeatedly elected governments that failed ...

      I think you know the flaw in this viewpoint: no democracy is guaranteed to offer up candidates that ought to be allowed into public office, and you only get to vote for those that actually run for election. I think a lot of it has to do with education, especially what one could call 'moral' education - by which I mean secular, moral education; as soon as religious interests get into education, it tends to go the wrong way. Democracy and freedom work best if everybody understands and accepts concepts like fairness and human rights in the same way.

      It's the same with the creditors.

      I agree. What do you call a creature that passively feeds on what others produce? In biology the answer is simple: a parasite. Another lesson from biology is that parasites can bocome valuable to the host - if they are somehow subverted and made to work for the host. If one were to carry that line of thought over to society, then it is quite possible that all credit should be nationalised, so that it would work for the whole of society. BTW - you do realise that what you are saying implies the end of capitalism as we know it? I think that would be a very good idea.

      I have no sympathy with any of them.

      So, you are an unsympathetic person? I, by contrast, feel a lot of sympathy with the Greeks; I have been in a similar situation many years ago on a personal scale. When you are in debt, it can be almost impossible to find a way out, even if you are clever, honest and industrious.

    35. Re:Honestly... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Frankfurt will definitely fail if you are in the city centre at +50.1086, +8.6658

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    36. Re: Honestly... by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >Bankers would run off with a lot of money... that would become incredibly devalued.

      Do you really think the kind of bankers who run of with such a lot of value can't convert it into other currencies BEFORE it gets devalued ? Indeed, actually accelerating the devaluation for everybody else when they buy all those dollars and pounds and yens in bulk ?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    37. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I dream about us defaulting on this debt. It would be better then..."

      Nope.

    38. Re: Honestly... by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Money is Debt, you clearly have no idea how money works

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    39. Re: Honestly... by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      America has always had a national debt. Might want to check your memory and preconceptions.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    40. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a little bit more complicated than that. Social protections are far more generous in the northern countries than the southern ones (except in Britain). In this light, maybe something else is the problem?
          I would suggest looking at uneven fiscal policies, and the consequence of capital movement.
          It's fine as long as there is freedom of movement for labour, but here is the snag: it is far easier for a large company to move their headquarters to a more fiscally attractive locations, and most of their profits and taxable income there, than it is for the majority of people in a latin-language country to a saxonic language one - speaking in broad terms, this as a coarse reference. This happens with common industries, and with financial institutions, who are taking the lion's share of profits from this crisis (and yes, the pool of money still increases.) This is just a part of the problem, a hint of something more than the "lazy southerners" hypothesis - though sadly this does not sound good enough to play on fox news.

    41. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

          Go even further than that: how much do you understand of macroeconomics, and how much more proficient than you you think the average Greek voter is? Blaming a country's people for macroeconomic decisions, on such short term when the scale of change is generational - and the people with the purse strings and media conglomerates want you to vote wrong - is naive.
          That was done when even the only true specialists in lending, the lenders themselves, also found no fault with the policies, in that they kept lending for a long time. So, where did it go wrong? most likely in the monetary decisions taken in the late 70's and early 80's but the elite of economists and politicians who can actually change things - and we are only left to wonder if this now is just an experiment that went wrong.

    42. Re: Honestly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apart from norway (oil money) there isn't a single european government that's living within it's means

      so actually what European politicians call austerity is just shifting expenses from social programs to neoliberal programs

    43. Re: Honestly... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      No sympathy for the Greeks, none for the bankers, some for the taxpayers who's money is being stolen to prop up the failed Greek state. But it a larger sense it's there own fault for voting for politicians who supported the EU.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    44. Re:Honestly... by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      correlation is not the same as causation... you can also make the argument that the european union is a symptom of a peace that had already settled in. The EU didn't lead to peace, peace led to the EU. and in that case the EU can claim very little success on that front at all.

    45. Re: Honestly... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      That's why my bank only carries short term debt at floating interest rates. They sell off the fixed rate stuff on the secondary market.

      Most chronic debtors carry rotating, often refinanced, debt if not outright variable rates.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    46. Re: Honestly... by ahodgson · · Score: 1

      Yes, I meant exactly what I said. Without constant inflation, you could save money from working and retire on it. With inflation, you are instead forced to invest that money, generally in financial instruments, and hope that it grows at least as fast as inflation (plus whatever taxes and fees you get charged for the privilege of having your money keep up with inflation). Inflation therefore punishes savers.

      The rich have much greater access to and control over productive assets. They control the financial sector, which gains most of the benefits of saver's money being forced into investments. Constant inflation is the largest cause of growing wealth inequality.

    47. Re:Honestly... by Methadras · · Score: 1

      Why? It's leftism that got them into this mess and this marxist is going to put them right back into it again.

    48. Re: Honestly... by Methadras · · Score: 2

      Austerity doesn't collapse governments. Oh wait, it does, you know why? Because austerity reveals the fat, bloated, obese pigs that government are and have become and austerity as an economic diet makes them collapse under their own weight. If you have a trimmed down government, a government that lives within its means, a government that doesn't over-promise and under-deliver doesn't require austerity because it will be a government that works to stay out of the way of it's people to let them be as prosperous and as successful as possible while maintaining it's owns girth.

    49. Re: Honestly... by GPTurismo · · Score: 1

      Game Economics are nothing like Real Economics. In games you can quit (in life that would be suicide) but outside of that necessities are not existent in a game. You do not have to buy the best gear or grind raids/pvp to achieve goals or to exist in the game. Those are things you impose on yourself by yourself or from pressure of others. In real life you have to have food, shelter and consumable water to survive, no matter what you or others think. You can believe you don't but in the end you will die or end up in the hands of people who know better. TVs, Computers, Cars, Laptops, Wagons, Knowledge are ultimately all societal ideals that are perceived to be necessary but are not for a human's survival. Money, virtual or backed by necessities is nothing but a representation of bartering which in the end is nothing but value equivalent trade. No new money has to enter a market. Money can dry up, it's called deflation which something has the US Fed needs to do before the Dollar becomes useless (ie by over-inflation which would be countered by reduction or stop of printing of new additional currency and raising of interest rates so the Fed can absorb money out of the market.) As long as people are fed and sheltered, success beyond that is highly a subjective ideal. Austerity isn't the issue, it's the fact you have different style economies, societies, and governments (private, public, gov) trying to share the identical virtual ticket to represent their economies. It's why the initial Confederacy that became the Federal Government of the US had to exist, to regulate the entities that reside within it's bounds to escape the exact same problems the EU is facing today, different taxes, economies and peoples in different recognized states. Ultimately there will be war before the EU is able to even impose federalization of the nations of Europe under it's thumb.

    50. Re: Honestly... by jonnyj · · Score: 1

          Go even further than that: how much do you understand of macroeconomics, and how much more proficient than you you think the average Greek voter is?

      You don't need to be an economics nerd to understand that voting for a government that promises to spend money that it doesn't have is hardly likely to end well.

    51. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      I know exactly how money works. Money is durable, divisible, easily transported, maintains its value, and is resistant to decay. Gold is money. Promises to pay gold in exchange for notes are currency. Promises not to pay gold in exchange notes are fiat currency.

    52. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      Tell you what - please take a look at the new money generated by the Fed to give to the banks in exchange for their "assets" since 2008. The banks will hold dollars instead of bonds and mortgage paper. They currently hold twice the amount of dollars in their excess reserves alone than existed in the monetary base prior to 2008. You don't think they're in a much better position because of the massive money creation that directly went to them? I get that the money's worth less and less, but what people never seem to comprehend is that whatever money is left after the debt collapse will have purchasing power. Only the banks will survive the cascading debt defaults, and as a result they will own everything.

    53. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      You're not reading the news, are you? On this planet, the central bank loans money to the government and commercial and commercial banks at well below the inflation rate. The europeans are actually paying the Swiss to borrow their currency now! http://www.bbc.com/news/busine... http://www.theguardian.com/bus...

    54. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      BTW - people don't loan TO the Central Bank, as you said, but borrow FROM it.

    55. Re: Honestly... by digsbo · · Score: 1

      No, an *increase* in expected inflation rates devalues loans. The anticipated inflation rate is already priced in to loans. The Fed's program of purchasing loans in exchange for digital dollars provides a strong incentive for banks to lend at lower rates than they otherwise would, because they are able to ignore the likelihood of increasing inflation rates. Once you hand off the loan, why do you care what the rate of return will be on the debt?

  2. Badges by space_jake · · Score: 5, Funny

    EU trading cards to the rescue!

    1. Re:Badges by netsavior · · Score: 4, Funny

      And hats, hats, as far as the eye can see!

    2. Re:Badges by golden+age+villain · · Score: 2

      Damn, too late for the TF2 jokes...

    3. Re:Badges by bug1 · · Score: 1

      Never too late for hat jokes, drop them in randomly.

    4. Re:Badges by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Half-Life 300 confirmed.

  3. Yay trading cards by bigalzzz · · Score: 1

    Time to swap those Euros for trading cards!

  4. All we have to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...is farm more gold. That'll solve all of our economic woes!

  5. Brave Man by jratcliffe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Finance Minister of Greece ranks pretty high on my list of "you could pay me enough, but it would be A LOT" jobs.

    1. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finance Minister of Greece ranks pretty high on my list of "you could pay me enough, but it would be A LOT" jobs.

      Preferably in a foreign currency, right?

      On the other hand, I guess it could always have been Finance Minister of Zimbabwe.

    2. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Along with every other job you're not qualified to do, presumably.

    3. Re:Brave Man by Flavianoep · · Score: 3, Informative

      Preferably in a foreign currency, right?

      FYI, there is no "national currency" in Greece, anything is paid in Euro.

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    4. Re: Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they had that kind of money they probably wouldn't be so desperate for a finance minister

    5. Re:Brave Man by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what he said. In foreign currency. No more euros, US dollars please or British pounds.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    6. Re:Brave Man by digsbo · · Score: 2

      Swiss francs.

    7. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like every finance minister in the history of Greece so far...

    8. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like every finance minister in history.

    9. Re:Brave Man by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Not like there's much room for options. Here's how it's gonna go down:

      New Finance Minister nee Valve Employee: Ok, goodbye austerity, hello ballooning spending! Ok, loan us money at tiny rates we can afford. Oh, I think I see some. Let me fire the portal gun at the wall so I can get it.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    10. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gold or silver.

    11. Re:Brave Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hats.

  6. Valve's time by Kinwolf · · Score: 4, Funny

    If he's working on "Valve's time", then he'll produce the first draft about possible solutions around 10 years after Greece has ceased to exist as a country.

    1. Re:Valve's time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he's working on "Valve's time", then he'll produce the first draft about possible solutions around 10 years after Greece has ceased to exist as a country.

      he would ask Civ 5 team to develop a 'reality CIV' game where we get to play the game to improve Greece's dreadful situation.

    2. Re:Valve's time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So 11 years from now?

    3. Re:Valve's time by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Not at all. They'll move to a rapid release schedule. There will be discrete episodes.
      Episode 1 will be the removal of previous measures.
      Episode 2 will be an announcement that the end of all problems is coming soon.
      Then they'll spend 6 years promising episode 3 is coming soon.

    4. Re:Valve's time by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, Civ players are masochists but even they draw the line somewhere.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    5. Re:Valve's time by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i think to be a game... it needs to have a win condition no matter how implausible. i don't think greece qualifies.

  7. Soon: Greece abandons the Euro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    and transitions to a diversified, hat-based economy.

  8. This doesn't sound... sound by medv4380 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't really want to compare Yanis to a gambling murderer, but I am anyways. This sounds a bit too much like John Law getting appointed to fix the French Economy. That turned out great for everyone didn't it. Appointing someone to run your economy who's primary job in economics was to make a bunch of gambling addicts to improve steams revenue doesn't sound like the kind of person who should be fixing an economy. But who knows, maybe he'll do something good and be crowned a genius.

    1. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Informative

      I know it's fashionable to jump on the Valve-hating-bandwagon, but would it be too much of an effort to, you know, not follow the flock and use some common sense instead? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... lists a lot of reasons for why he seems like a good person for this, like e.g. the following exerpt on his academic career:

      After training in mathematics and statistics, Varoufakis received his economics doctorate in 1987 at the University of Essex. Before that he had already begun teaching economics and econometrics at the University of Essex and the University of East Anglia. In 1988 he spent a year as a Fellow at the University of Cambridge. From 1989 until 2000 he taught as Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Department of Economics of the University of Sydney. In 2000 he moved to his native Greece where he is still Professor of Economic Theory at the University of Athens (currently on leave). In 2002 Varoufakis established The University of Athens Doctoral Program in Economics (UADPhilEcon), which he directed until 2008. Since January 2013 he has been teaching at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.

      This guy has written several books, he appears as guest analyst for news media like the BBC, CNN, Sky News, Russia Today and Bloomberg TV and he seems to be quite well-respected everywhere. But no, you just focus on the fact that he also happens to work for Valve.

    2. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not going to judge based on what his last job was, if he's actually technically qualified to do this one.

      I just wonder what their plan is. Austerity is not a happy thing, but it is definitely possible to make things worse. With their economy in its current state, the usual leftist option of borrowing and spending their way out of it may be very limited. Not to mention that it sort of got them there to begin with. And the people likely elected these guys because they want their benefits back, somehow. Sadly democracy does not always make for good economic policy.

      It would be interesting if there was some clever model that could get them out of this mes.

    3. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There plan is not borrow and spend. That is how they got here.
      There plan is to stop paying the borrowers. However that is still not enough. Rise the retirement age above 60? Collect taxes? A lot of choices.

    4. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Leftist borrowing and spending? As opposed to the Right's strategy, which is to borrow much more and give it to your rich business partners?

      Austerity is a cynical euphemism for supply side economics, which is another cynical euphemism for intentionally creating income inequality. Which will kill your country. Every time.

    5. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know ... looking around what has happened in the last few decades ... I think being a trained economist makes you eminently unqualified to run an economy.

      Economics is as much ideology as it is "science" -- what you think will happen depends on what you believe happens. Economics is not some intrinsic natural law.

      It seems like trained economists are just as likely to fuck up an economy as would be trained monkeys -- because at the end of the day you have shockingly little control over things, and probably less of an understanding that you claim. Let's not start pretending that economists actually know anything about the economy. They know what their ideologically driven view of economics tells them to they know.

      I think calling economics a "science" is a complete joke -- because it's not.

      Of course, the biggest thing facing Greece is they can't wave away their debts and their problems -- never been certain the austerity program was going to work for them, but they basically drove themselves into the ground and won't get out by telling Germany et al "thanks for the money, now piss off".

      When you have no cash, and nobody is willing to give you credit ... this new government seems to be living in a fantasy if they think they can just make that all go away.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    6. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Generating a different payment plan might be useful, although as you pointed out, nowhere near enough.

      Unless they intend to get forgiveness... or default. I am not sure that Greece is "too big to fail" where they can do that.

      Greece needs long term thinking. Austerity might well be a knee-jerk reaction, so hopefully they can reasonably do what you suggest, like changing certain parameters and becoming more efficient at collecting taxes. On the other hand, collecting taxes is not always so straightforward a solution.

      Politically, the right solution is probably more obvious than it seems. What may be lacking is the will to execute on it. That's usually the case with politics.

    7. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by medv4380 · · Score: 1

      You're right. I focused on what he's actually done for Valve which is make a gamblers economy which is eerily similar to what John Law did.

    8. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Gaygirlie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's not start pretending that economists actually know anything about the economy.

      Let's not start pretending that you actually know anything about economists or economy. Sounds much more like ignorance and axe-grinding to me.

    9. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Economics is a joke, and economists are even worse jokes. All you've established by your post is that probably no one can truly predict what happens to the economy with any impressive degree of accuracy.

    10. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are spot on about what economics is about.

      They have tons of formulas for all of this stuff. Except they *all* boil down to variables that are undefined or pretty much impossible to define. Such as 'utility' and 'happiness' how do you boil that down to a number? You cant.

      You can only make broad strokes in saying what will happen. Like 'lets lower taxes'. What does that mean? It means lower buying from the gov but higher for everyone else. But maybe everyone else depends on the gov spending that money for them to be enabled to do it. But you can not predict what will happen. Economics is very bad at predictions. It is good at finding optimums if you have the right information, which you usually do not.

      Of course, the biggest thing facing Greece is they can't wave away their debts and their problems
      No kidding. As the people who have the money just simply will not give them more without strings attached. They have a base problem of not making enough things to sell that people want (want being a combination of cost and desire). Germany was basically requiring 'austerity' to insure they fix those issues.

    11. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not claiming I have the answers ... but I'm flat out saying the economists who tell us WTF the economy is doing and why are so completely full of shit as to be laughable.

      Economics isn't a science, it's fucking ideology.

      The idiotic policies of Alan Greenspan almost directly led to the housing bubble ... and even he admits his notion of "free money" was idiotic and wrong.

      Economics is NOT a fucking science and never has been, it's intrinsically linked to politics and ideology.

      People who claim it is some kind of objective science are either lying to us, or to themselves. Science doesn't yield different outcomes based on your political leaning.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    12. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by drfred79 · · Score: 1

      There is no more tax to be collected. Greece has suffered a liquidity drain because they aren't trusted to control their finances. Increased taxes on a dead economy only creates more inefficiencies, black markets, and lost revenue. Greece has only one option. Stop spending. Cancel pensions, eliminate most the government employees, enact free market liberalization. Greece won't do this so mommy Germany is going to have to finally cut their losses and shut off the trust fund.

    13. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What part of Greece's lefty spending decline into the ground do you not understand? I think anything is better than Greece's socialism.

    14. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      Leftist borrowing and spending? As opposed to the Right's strategy, which is to borrow much more and give it to your rich business partners?

      I don't know how folks like you can live in the real world and parrot these lines over and over again with nothing to show for it. When the left "borrows and spends", the "spending" side all goes to rich business partners. Every single time.

      Why do you think that the "recovery" in the US has gone mostly to the top 10%? What do you think about Solyndra? Geeze. Get out of the partisan gutter and join us here in the real world.

    15. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong. Borrowing and spending is a totally legitimate way of dealing with the issue... if you can do it without doing long term damage to your economy with it.

      Economics comes down to hard and fast numbers for some things, but it is just as much based on the mood of the people and how and where they spend their money. If you can make them more optimistic, you can pull out of it, if your fundamentals are not completely devastated.

    16. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With their economy in its current state, the usual leftist option of borrowing and spending their way out of it may be very limited. .

      Who in their right mind would lend to the Greeks? The way it is looking now, the German taxpayers will be paying for it . . . and they are not enthusiastically pleased about it, to say the least.

      Having Greece and Germany share a common currency was a shit-brained idea. In one hour, German workers shove off a couple of Porsches and Mercedes of their production line. In one hour, Greek workers roll a few dolmades and stuff a few gigantes in a can.

      And yes, I worked with some guys from Greece on a European Research project. Guys from the Athens Technology Center (ATC) and the National Technology University of Athens (NTUA). They took a month to do what student from the UK, USA or Germany could do in an afternoon.

      I have the feeling that Varoufakis is just going to be another flak in the "Blame the EU" for problems of our own making choir.

      Well, if you don't like the EU, Greece, don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out.

      I'm not well versed in Aesop's Fables . . . is there one about biting the hand that feeds you . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    17. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Gaygirlie · · Score: 2

      You're right. I focused on what he's actually done for Valve which is make a gamblers economy which is eerily similar to what John Law did.

      No, you foolishly assume that it was all his decisions and that he actually wielded so much power in the company as to be able to steer its direction as he wishes all the while ignoring the fact that he only joined Valve in 2012 when the company was already very much doing what they are doing now.

    18. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by xevioso · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And yet some economists, like Krugman or Greenspan, are quite prescient with their predictions, and were/are right more often than they were/are wrong about what will happen in the future. It makes more sense to pay attention to someone who has a good track record...Krugman didn't win a Nobel prize because he was lucky or didn't know what the hell he was talking about...

      Economists are like poker players. Yes, there's a lot of luck involved and half the time no one knows what they are anyone else are doing, but it IS possible to be a good economist.

    19. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Solyndra was a good investment that didn't pan out because it was difficult to foresee that absolute flood of chinese panels. What used to be a niche high tech, high profit industry is now commoditized. (Check out LED lighting for another example. 10 bucks for sold performing bulbs 20 times more efficient than incandescent)

      I think it's an inconsequential incident that's parroted by right-wing-circlerjerk media and the dumb shits that eat it up.

      Like you.

      Partisan gutter and real world indeed. Both sides are not the same. Stop rationalizing.

    20. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by ledow · · Score: 2

      If you'd not question Valve hiring the former Finance Minister of Greece to manage the economy of their market, why would you question the reverse?

      The guy's an economist. That's what you want. Meritocracy and all that. And Valve are hardly suffering for his presence in their organisation from what I see, even though they haven't put out their blockbuster game promised nearly 10 years ago.

      They're obviously doing SOMETHING right, attracting millions of people and tens of millions of item sales every day.

    21. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by AchilleTalon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Economics isn't an ideology. Are you retarded or just ignorant? You are telling us about Greenspan's policies. Policies aren't economics, they are policies, they are politics and they are ideologies. But economics isn't an ideology. And of course it is interwined with politics, it doesn't mean at all it is an ideology. What you are saying is like saying physics is just mathematics.

      You are just refraining complains from social science people who do not understand anything about economics because it requires some knowledge of math. And again, it is like you are saying physics cannot be a science because there is many unproven theories that coexists. Frankly, you are an idiot.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    22. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

      I have a question for you – what do you see as the difference between extending payments and defaulting / writing down on the debt?

      IIRC, the last round of "extending payments" effectively reduced the net present value of the debt by 20%. At a certain point, the difference between restructuring and defaulting comes down to semantics.

    23. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by HornWumpus · · Score: 3

      You realize Krugman and Greenspan have more or less opposite views?

      Have you been paying attention to recent Nobel prizes? They (peace and econ anyhow) into political popularity contests.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    24. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you are Hayekian then :P

    25. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      Solyndra built cylindrical solar panels. Because somebody thought they would collect more power in a day then flat panels. That person _failed high school calculus!_

      It was a horrible idea that barely sounded plausible to lawyers. It was a payoff to political supporters.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    26. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by digsbo · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points, you're so excruciatingly correct. Have you ever checked out the Austrian School economists, who reject empiricism largely in favor of recognizing that individual actions drive economic activity? You might like it. Look up "praxeology".

    27. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Bigby · · Score: 1

      It was NOT a good investment, because there was only one bidder and that bidder had deep pockets. If it were a good investment, someone else would have stepped up,

    28. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Prune · · Score: 5, Interesting
      They need to leave the euro (as does every other member). Monetary union doesn't work unless you have fiscal and economic union as well, and Europe is too diverse for that any time soon. Trade imbalance results in the most efficient exporter (Germany) beggaring their neighbors and accumulating cash, since the rest can't adapt by floating exchange rates -- it's classic merchantilism. What's worse is that only the heads of the German economic engine really benefit from it, due to wage suppression at home (which is part of what fuels their trade surplus).

      borrowing and spending their way out of it may be very limited

      I don't think you understand macroeconomics. There is a too limited money supply that is significantly worsening a recession/derpession. Greece gave up one of its primary rights as a sovereign -- issuing its own currency -- and so lacks one of the most powerful policy tools for intervention in its own economy. If it wasn't part of the euro, it wouldn't have to borrow from anyone but itself. Even the US mainly borrows from itself: the majority of its debt is not held by foreigners but is simply a number registered between treasury and federal reserve, which is an accounting fiction akin to debt between husband and wife. There are primarily political reasons some of the US debt is held by others, but it's not a basic requirement of its monetary system. The typical argument against government spending is inflation, but that doesn't happen if the spending is targeted as to decrease unemployment and thus increase aggregate demand -- which is exactly what's needed in a recession. The devil is in exactly how the spending should be carried out (things like a job guarantee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J... come to mind) and should not be carried out (Bernanke's quantitative easing).

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    29. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Economics isn't an ideology.

      Bullshit, it sure isn't objective science, it's models, based on dubious assumptions which aren't reflective of anything other than the beliefs of the person who made them, and then using mathematics of dubious quality to "prove" what your ideology tells you.

      Are you retarded or just ignorant?

      Are you an asshole or a douchebag?

      I'm saying that when people say "if you cut taxes it will stimulate the economy", that is a purely ideological position, not grounded in objective fact. And economics serves no purpose if it isn't down to implementing policy, which is inherently idological.

      And again, it is like you are saying physics cannot be a science because there is many unproven theories that coexists.

      No, I'm saying physics still boils down to actual objective reality, and in no fucking way shape or form does economics do that, and never has.

      Frankly, you are an idiot.

      Frankly, you're an asshole who thinks too highly of his own opinion.

      So far you've failed to offer anything intelligent, just the cowardly ad hominem attacks of a worthless moron with nothing new to add.

      So, I'll tell you what, here's a piece by someone who has a fucking Nobel prize in "economic science".
      One problem with economics is that it is necessarily focused on policy, rather than discovery of fundamentals. Nobody really cares much about economic data except as a guide to policy: economic phenomena do not have the same intrinsic fascination for us as the internal resonances of the atom or the functioning of the vesicles and other organelles of a living cell. We judge economics by what it can produce. As such, economics is rather more like engineering than physics, more practical than spiritual.

      There is no Nobel prize for engineering, though there should be. True, the chemistry prize this year looks a bit like an engineering prize, because it was given to three researchers - Martin Karplus, Michael Levitt, and Arieh Warshel - "for the development of multiscale models of complex chemical systems" that underlie the computer programs that make nuclear magnetic resonance hardware work. But the Nobel Foundation is forced to look at much more such practical, applied material when it considers the economics prize.

      The problem is that once we focus on economic policy, much that is not science comes into play. Politics becomes involved, and political posturing is amply rewarded by public attention. The Nobel prize is designed to reward those who do not play tricks for attention, and who, in their sincere pursuit of the truth, might otherwise be slighted.

      Why is it called a prize in "economic sciences", rather than just "economics"? The other prizes are not awarded in the "chemical sciences" or the "physical sciences."

      Fields of endeavour that use "science" in their titles tend to be those that get masses of people emotionally involved and in which crackpots seem to have some purchase on public opinion. These fields have "science" in their names to distinguish them from their disreputable cousins.

      So, seriously, fuck off and grow up.

      Economics is descriptive how what complex systems involving humans do. But is is NOT measuring some innate natural properties of how that actually works.

      As soon as economics goes from measuring and describing, and steps into applying policy .... it utterly ceases to be a science.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    30. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

      There is no more tax to be collected.

      About two years ago, I read that the main industry of the Greek oligarchs is "tax evasion". I doubt that has changed.
      In any case, it will be good to have a fresh set of eyes on the issue.

    31. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Bonzoli · · Score: 1

      Are you telling me a politician lied, stood on a podium and actually lied, to get that job? Noooo..... Perhaps he was just too ignorant to understand the problem?

    32. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      That consideration is a factor, but governments tend to be long lasting entities, so they could certainly eventually pay off the debt, if they shrunk or even deferred payments for awhile. Something is usually better than nothing for a vendor, as long as the cost of administering the debt is less than what they bring in.

      The best thing for Greece to do financially is to restore solvency. Austerity may not be the best solution, but it is certainly on the right track. Defaults or borrow and spend can work, but *only* if they take the short term windfall and do something useful with it. Otherwise, they've trashed their financial future.

      Unfortunately, financial solvency doesn't provide for retirement for people directly, although for any realistic social insurance program, you need to have long term financial stability and capacity. That means that even though austerity may actually work, there is clearly not the will to see it through.

      It may be a good idea for Greece to default and deal with it, but that will end their ability to get anything like good loans in the near future. And I don't think the extra money from no longer paying on the debt will fix the quality of life problems that the people in Greece have right now.

    33. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bullshit, it sure isn't objective science, it's models, based on dubious assumptions which aren't reflective of anything other than the beliefs of the person who made them, and then using mathematics of dubious quality to "prove" what your ideology tells you.

      Maybe the next time you get hurt in an accident you shouldn't go to the medic. You know, they don't do science either. Most of medical knowledge is based on causal medical inference (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQGeupmZFyE). Same thing for economics. You can't scientifically apply a theory to test it, halt the world, go back in time and test something else. Or run "two countries" with different policies and everything else equal. You never will be.

      Dissing economics only because it is impossible to meet your hypothetical standards is unrealistic.

    34. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by maestroX · · Score: 1

      He will need all of his expertise in game theory to negotiate and try to get debts written off and a new batch of money.
      The public has been promised as much and a grexit to Drachmes will immediately drop Greece into a 3rd world country (Greece depends fully on import).
      So, EU will grudge and give some as EU's internal bank system is a shithole of interloans.
      France, Italy and Spain will also want some after that.
      Of course, in northern countries things start to get rumbling as well; all savings, retirement pays etc. are QE'd and bonjoured southwards..

    35. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Straif · · Score: 1

      Krugman is probably the perfect example of how most economists are actually just ideologues pretending to be scientists. His pieces for the NYT often read like the rants on DailyKos.

      His predictions as to the success or failure of a plan are almost entirely based on who is currently in power (and he has a terrible track record on real world predictions of global financial events from the housing bubble to the state of the EU) and his post analysis almost always centers around the same points (increased government spending being one of this favorite gotos) as to why something either worked or wasn't as bad as it could have been with no real data to back up his suppositions.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    36. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      I do understand the problem of a limited money supply, but I don't think they're seriously considering leaving the euro, so talking about an independent monetary policy is pointless. They need to bring in more money, and while they maintain the euro, they either need to borrow or somehow change monetary policy related to the euro to suit them. Borrowing still seems more likely than a change in Eurozone monetary policy.

    37. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      What i find hilarious is that people are looking at this backwards. Valve hired him BECAUSE he has the credentials to run a nation's economy.

      --
      Good-bye
    38. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      "Economics is not some intrinsic natural law."

      Even this is debatable..

      --
      Good-bye
    39. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... didn't win a Nobel prize ...

      Ah, yes. The fake Nobel prize, as in: The Martha Stewart Nobel Prize in Home Economics.

    40. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by T.E.D. · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I just wonder what their plan is. Austerity is not a happy thing, but it is definitely possible to make things worse. With their economy in its current state, the usual leftist option of borrowing and spending their way out of it may be very limited

      Austerity for an entire government simply sucks. Cutting expenses is a great idea for an individual, but for a government that's more like trying to balance your checkbook by taking a lower-paying job close to home (Hey! Gasoline expenses are way down!). Or more accurately, a company trying to balance its ledger by selling less products. Adherence to this idea is why Europe is still deep in recession while China and the USA have been back to economic growth (and in the USA's case, falling real dollar deficits) for over a year now. If it needs to do so, a government should cut expenses during a recovery, not during a recession.

      Greece has some systemic problems that helped get them into this mess (eg: tax cheating is practically a national sport). But when faced with a recession they have 2 basic problems. The first is that they aren't AAA borrowers like the USA, so their government can't just borrow money at will. If they want to borrow large sums, they have to cajole it out of someone (like the EU). The second is that they are shackled to the Euro, which means all the monetary policy options that the US relied on to pull itself out are not available to Greece. That means leaving the EU, or borrowing more money from it, are really their only 2 options.

      It would really behoove the EU to develop some analog to the US's Fed to run their monetary policy. The problem is everything there seems to run on consensus, and I simply don't see how that's possible when you have such divergent members. They'd have to get themselves a semi-independent policy board, like the US has, or unify all their national budgets and expect to have to regularly pour EU tax dollars into poorer members, like the US does every year with Mississippi.

      One thing is pretty clear though. The current middle ground the EU is trying to run just isn't working.

    41. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by digsbo · · Score: 1

      As soon as economics goes from measuring and describing, and steps into applying policy .... it utterly ceases to be a science.

      Exactly. This is why Paul Krugman is a jerk, not an economist. When he said in the interview he envisioned economics as ideal for him, because it made him feel he could control the future, like in Asimov's "Foundation" books.

    42. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please.

      Stop using "Nobel Economy Prices" propaganda. Nobel prices in economy do not exist, Mr Alfred Nobel was deeply against it.

      If you refer to this:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences

      Keep in mind that this price was created by Central Banks, in order to confuse the dogma that gave them more power at each given time, with real science.

    43. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by ahodgson · · Score: 1

      Borrowing and spending only makes sense if the borrowing leads to enough additional income in the future to justify paying off the interest on the loan. That generally means infrastructure spending, for infrastructure that is actually needed to create real growth.

      Borrowing for anything else just makes you poorer in the long term.

    44. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Economics is a soft science, woven throughout with politics and ideology.

    45. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Borrowing and spending their way out of it, combined with a national past time of cheating on the taxes. Combine with politicians elected based on angry backlash instead of logic and there's going to be a lot of upcoming economic troubles to make austerity look like the good old days.

    46. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Krugman didn't win a Nobel prize because he was lucky or didn't know what the hell he was talking about

      Obama's magical negro prize questions your assumption of the qualifications to receive a Nobel prize.

    47. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

      That consideration is a factor, but governments tend to be long lasting entities, so they could certainly eventually pay off the debt, if they shrunk or even deferred payments for awhile. Something is usually better than nothing for a vendor, as long as the cost of administering the debt is less than what they bring in.

      I think you missed my point here.
              Greece could default, and replace the old bonds with new bonds at 80% of par. I lose 20% of my value.
              Greece could cut the interest payments from 10% to 5%. I lose 20% of my value.
              Greece could push out the repayment schedule from 10 years to 15. I lose 20% of my value.

      Any way I cut it, I as an investor lose 20%. Psychologically it may be less damaging to my repayment is pushed back by 10 years but the immediate economic damage is the same.

      So why is shrinking better than deferment? I think that there are differences but I would like to hear your viewpoint.

      Unfortunately, financial solvency doesn't provide for retirement for people directly, although for any realistic social insurance program, you need to have long term financial stability and capacity. That means that even though austerity may actually work, there is clearly not the will to see it through.

      We might have the same opinion here, but I will point out that any unfunded pension is a liability. What moral argument can you make that private pension plans that invested in Geek bonds should take a hit while the public plans don't? And I think you can make that argument – but it does make the point that public pensions need to be in the mix of future obligations that need to be cut.

      It may be a good idea for Greece to default and deal with it, but that will end their ability to get anything like good loans in the near future. And I don't think the extra money from no longer paying on the debt will fix the quality of life problems that the people in Greece have right now.

      I will slightly disagree with you here. I personally think Greece's big problems are structural. Too much bureaucracy, inefficient collecting of taxes, etc. Reforming these items would not cost the government anything, but there would be a painful period of adjustment for the common man. However, the end result would be a stronger, more efficient, rational economy.

      However, I would tend to agree with you that a clean bankruptcy is better than a messy partial default. Expect that there is no real mechanism to Greece to default. If I understand correctly, it would be easier for Greece to exit the EU, convert to the Drachma, and devalue the currency.

    48. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by digsbo · · Score: 1

      Scarcity of goods and services is the closest thing to an intrinsic natural law in economics, but you're right, it is debated, but really only by Krugman (and those like him), who believes that destruction of goods leads to economic prosperity by "stimulating demand". Sane, honest people know better.

    49. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They aren't considering leaving, the rest of the Euro is seriously considering kicking them out.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    50. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What strikes me actually is how Gabe (Valve) had such a heavyweight in-house to work on improving Steam's marketplace. Wowza!

    51. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by ultranova · · Score: 2

      Unless they intend to get forgiveness... or default. I am not sure that Greece is "too big to fail" where they can do that.

      It is. EU is not a nation, it's a collection of nations, and "European identity" is weak at best. Anti-EU movements are already growing, and won't have any trouble taking power if it starts to look like EU is a threat to the nations people actually identity with.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    52. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're pushed out of the eurozone, then the brunt of the damaging influence of the merchantilism that the euro makes possible will be born by the next weakest member, until its economy is also destroyed. Repeat until no more eurozone. The alternative is to restore sanity and drop the euro now -- or let the germans complete an economic and fiscal takeover (which eventually will be a political one as well -- I guess after failing twice to take over Europe (militarily), third time's the charm (monetarily)).

    53. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Sibko · · Score: 1

      We just don't have an actual established science of economics yet.

      Today's study of economics is like Astrology and its connections with Astronomy 8,000 years ago. You've got a bunch of old men who noticed patterns in the stars and the seasons and could predict things like full moons or eclipses or when to plant crops and when to harvest - it looked like magic to those who didn't understand, and even those who caught the patterns and exploited them never truly understood what they were observing and predicting; and they would create stories and fables and gods and divinity to explain and control. You had to become a priest to learn their secrets, you had to join their secret societies and open brotherhoods and worship their gods to learn, and then you too could profit from the knowledge.

      And when someone comes along and says, "Hey, I figured it out! This is how it all actually works!" they are persecuted, because they upset a certain ignorance amongst the population that a select few were able to exploit for their own personal gain.

      This is exactly what economics is like today. There are people out there gaming the system because they've noticed or figured out something the rest of us haven't. They've created entire economic ideologies to waylay anyone looking to bring forth actual knowledge, because the pervasive ignorance of economics is profitable for them, and common understanding and knowledge of how it all really works isn't.

      Inevitably the control will slip, as it did with astronomy. Whether thanks to technology, or something else. And ten thousand, or twenty thousand, or a hundred thousand years from now there will be people looking back at our economic policies today, chuckling quietly to themselves about how silly, superstitious and primitive we were about a science that's so easy to understand.

    54. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put 50 economists into a room, you get 51 different opinions.

      (Said by a PhD in Economics)

    55. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What? It might not go so well for Spain and Italy but most of the Euro zone has similar enough economic conditions that they can survive under similar fiscal policies.

      Greece should have never been allowed in.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    56. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      It appears that Greece is pretty much screwed. The people aren't willing to sacrifice to pay back the debt. I'm pretty sure the bankers have already given all the ground they're willing to give. At this point it looks hopeless. You've got an opportunist politician now running things who has won by telling people what they want to hear. I wonder what's going to happen when it becomes obvious he can't deliver?

    57. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Solandri · · Score: 1

      It seems like trained economists are just as likely to fuck up an economy as would be trained monkeys -- because at the end of the day you have shockingly little control over things, and probably less of an understanding that you claim. Let's not start pretending that economists actually know anything about the economy. They know what their ideologically driven view of economics tells them to they know.

      It's not really the economists' fault. Theirs is a profession based on predicting human behavior, which is unpredictable at best. A trained economist can make some basic, fundamental predictions which will correctly improve economic efficiency, especially in a developing economy. But once you get to a well-developed economy, most of the efficiency gains have already been made. And economic direction depends more on random variances in individual people's decisions.

      Normally you can get around this problem by using a huge sampling size to average out the variances. But economics has the added twist that everyone knows what everyone else is doing. And if housing prices start going up, people think "wow, other people must know something I don't know, and I'd better start investing in housing" even though they have no idea why it's going up. That herd mentality messes up even averaging out the variances, and can turn even the perfect economist's predictions wrong.

      The best engineering analogy I can come up with is a dynamically unstable (chaotic) system. You can predict the long-term (decades) and overall trends. But the day-to-day and year-to-year motions are highly irregular. But nobody cares about the long-term trends, and take economists to task for incorrectly predicting year-to-year movements.

    58. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      Because the US Democrats aren't leftist, they're center-right.

    59. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, you said it: CNN. Get this fucker a one-way ticket to Kiribati instead of Greece, haven't the Greeks suffered enough? Not like you need yet another "anal"yst anyways there hahaha

    60. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no more tax to be collected.

      About two years ago, I read that the main industry of the Greek oligarchs is "tax evasion". I doubt that has changed.
            In any case, it will be good to have a fresh set of eyes on the issue.

      Not just the oligarchs, it is practically a national pastime. The same people complaining about the austerity are the reason they are in this mess to start with.

    61. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

      The people aren't willing to sacrifice to pay back the debt.

      What if the question was not about "wanting to pay back their debt" but about their ability to pay back their debt. IIRC their debt stands at 170% of GDP plus they are paying 10% on their bonds. IIRC, Germany actually has a slight negative interest rate. We can debate how bad things have to be before they can't pay back their debt. However if they are not there they are getting pretty close.

      If Greece were a person or a company they would file bankruptcy. Assets would be sold, reforms would be made, and liabilities would be cut. Life goes on.

      Should countries borrow more than they can afford? No. Should bankers lend to countries that can't back. There is enough blame to be spread around to both parties and so both parties should suffer. Expect that Greece can't declare bankruptcy so they have back themselves into a corner.

    62. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      ...he has a terrible track record on real world predictions of global financial events from the housing bubble to the state of the EU...

      If by "terrible track record" you mean "extremely good" and "the best in the business" then yes, otherwise no.

      Though humorously put this is a nice summary of his very good prognostication record.

      I perused a number of sites claiming to show his "errors", but mostly they either (like you) have no specifics about these "errors", or else if consists entirely of made up stuff. Krugman is not always right about everything in economics, but when he is wrong he admits it and analyzes why he erred, and thus he learns from his mistakes (unlike so many others).

      But he is an unabashed liberal, and you hate that - I get it. You've made an emotional commitment to hating him, and thus have no use for actual facts.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    63. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      So, seriously, fuck off and grow up.

      gstoddart, I'm your father.

      Seriously, you don't know anything about economics. You are confusing economic policies with economics itself. Economics can lead to choices and can be used to support ideologies, but it isn't an ideology by itself. That's what you are not understanding. If you consider climatology and cosmology are sciences, economics is surely a science too.

      In fact, even psychology is a science and sociology too.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    64. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would the world be a better place if they were a war-mongering people who conquered and pillaged the resources of weaker nations to prop-up their economies? I'm looking at you, US / UK.

    65. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by mjwx · · Score: 1

      This guy has written several books, he appears as guest analyst for news media like the BBC, CNN, Sky News, Russia Today and Bloomberg TV and he seems to be quite well-respected everywhere. But no, you just focus on the fact that he also happens to work for Valve.

      Of course we do, there's no joke to be made in the fact this guy is a qualified, experienced and respected economist.

      Now take your new Greek Austerity hat and move on you humourless sod.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    66. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Economists are like poker players. Yes, there's a lot of luck involved and half the time no one knows what they are anyone else are doing, but it IS possible to be a good economist.

      The poker player analogy is a good one.

      All of the best and most successful poker players are experts at bluffing. Those that suck at bluffing rely on blind luck and rarely get anywhere.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    67. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's models, based on dubious assumptions

      So are hard sciences (that is, models)--and I say that despite respective these a great deal more than, say, psychology (I'm surprised at passing having openly mocked several of the professors on different sections of the course at university, along with a few other hard-sciences students in that class). Personally, I like the utility of the acid models to demonstrate how material sciences can, objectively, be fully provable in experiment/ience, yet still proven to be "wrong", which is why folks have started to talk about their goal as being "less wrong."

      ...which aren't reflective of anything other than the beliefs of the person who made them...

      Then they're doing it wrong. You do know that there is a whole set of economists who specialize in critically detecting this problem, right? And then elaborating better theorems and models.

      I'm saying that when people say "if you cut taxes it will stimulate the economy", that is a purely ideological position, not grounded in objective fact.

      I'll disprove you now: my father sells carpet and installation labor. He often gets a budget that's non-negotiable--the consumer is already stretching or using credit and it's as far as they can go, period. End of story. They're already risking x,y,z--perhaps the dog sh** all-over or something, or the kid dropped a flaming pan on some of the fibers and it go torched and they've finally rebuilt the room.

      But what ever the case, even having someone go back three times (which he can do, because all his business comes through his massive network, built since he was 14 years old, through personal referrals--gold basically), they often can't budge the price. Then they still want qualities x,y,z--certainly lasting more than 6 months, or able to insulate a home (one of the major functions of carpet besides trapping the dust and filtering the air) because it gets cold in the winter for them.

      And we find we can match that price...before tax. We have the best possible account to acquire it (him having known a major producer's founding president as a child, been a personal friend, growing-up working under him, and therefore...well his account would be coveted by that Carpet Exchange behemoth), impossible for anyone else to get! (Literally.)

      Even if they give it to us at cost...it's a basic material though. There is no more wiggle-room. Some economic law with a fancy name probably applies here (unless negated by another, e.g. give-away something to sell something related--but that's distraction besides the point) but if he gives away the material and charges no tax (though he'd still have to pay it on the sale) only then can it move...which is uneconomic.

      That is, not doable. Real--or currency representing real--inputs and outputs, factors of production, are being in some way traded in this interaction (whether the oil gone into the carpet or in the fertilized into the food into the body of the laborer phoning the request and then installing it) and if they aren't at the least equal, the whole thing is impossible--or harm's somebody. The tax...is in the way. Economists call this "distortion" btw.

      And I've seen that on "the cheapest you've got" too. "But it's only an 8.5% tax!", you might say, for city X, or whatever someone else might say in disbelief because they're clueless that valid economics represents rigorous attempts to measure...real things. But when you're talking thousands of dollars having to exchange hands, that's a lot of money--I won't even take a loan over 2%. Been there and done that: I would be an IDIOT.

      And it's even more when you factor inflation has devalued your monetary currency to almost nothing of its former self...in a matter of decades. I don't mean the CPI number or its twin (which interestingly, can be used as a rough--probably too low--estimate/measure of what true inflation is). When you're losing 6% per a

    68. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      p.s.

      As soon as economics goes from measuring and describing, and steps into applying policy .... it utterly ceases to be a science.

      Duh--they all do that. The situation goes from "science" to...the skill of the practitioner to use that knowledge well. This is why the old-school knowledge-knowers (epistemologists, metaphysicians, etc.) lamented how politicized "science" had become--it produces (predictably) obvious errors of thought and speaking (perhaps more irritating to them), not to mention in other activities, which altogether disrupt thought and sound action alike.

    69. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever checked out the Austrian School economists

      Ah ... a student of historical economic theories. How au fait are you with the physiocrats?

    70. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he has a terrible track record on real world predictions

      Krugmann?! Seriously ...

      Oh and how's your silver faring Straif?

    71. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      What they really need to do is to declare war on the US and / or the EU. It's the only proven way to get their economy going again.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    72. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think that the "recovery" in the US has gone mostly to the top 10%?

      How is what happened in the US "recovery" relevant to "leftist borrowing and spending?" How is Solyndra relevant to Greece?!

      I don't believe that SYRIZA will get Greece out of the hole (good luck with that guys!) ... but what has occurred under successive rightish (pro-market) governments in the US (or to some random tech company receiving government support), doesn't give us much insight into what the far-left in Greece will get up to.

    73. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with no real data to back up his suppositions.

      ...kind of like your post, in fact. Imagine the nerve of the man, filling the OPINION PIECES he writes for the NYT with opinion.

      If you want studies and analysis, read scholarly works. If you're reading the NYT, take it for what it is.

    74. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You def have no idea at all. Look at Finland, and THEN say cutting expenses is not the way to go.
      Finland is SO over taxed because of the HUGE expenses that companies are fleeing en masse, and people are slowly following the trend too.
      Huge masses of engineers are unemployed in the meantime as companies cannot afford to hire anyone and takes jobs outside of the country.

      In the meantime, Finnish transport safety agency (which is misleading name) has some 350 employees having more than 5500€ monthly gross salary and 2 months annual paid leave ... and that's just the tip of the iceberg.
      The government in Finland is full of needless jobs, and jobs where they basically are doing their damnest to find some justification for their job, ie. coming up with things to do ... such as the job safety agency which primary focus is to harass small companies with inexplicable, idiotic rules which makes working much slower.

    75. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
    76. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adherence to this idea [austerity] is why Europe is still deep in recession while China and the USA have been back to economic growth (and in the USA's case, falling real dollar deficits) for over a year now.

      There are other explanations to the crisis in Europe (which is actually the crisis of southern Europe. Poland, Czech, UK, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands are doing ok). One of them is the view that Germany could stop paying for the Euro zone. As it stands today, Germany makes stuff, sells it and then underwrites greek (or the rest of the club med) spending. If Germany stops underwriting it, Greece is fucked anyway.

      And about the USA, you see, they are one country. The EU isn't. As such, germany can give money to greeks, but it can't tell them how to spend it. So they just keep on wasting it (really, they have like a crazy huge public sector, which is even more useless than usual). So no, it isn't anything like California financing Mississippi.

    77. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by silfen · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to judge based on what his last job was, if he's actually technically qualified to do this one.

      Nobody is technically qualified to be chief economist for a socialist government because nobody can actually make that dream work.

    78. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by sjames · · Score: 2

      Case in point, the paper that convinced everyone austerity was the answer was found to have a math error that flipped the results. Everyone knows it but austerity marches on because the top economists say what their masters want them to say.

    79. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      To the bank it doesn't make all that much difference between wanting to and being able to. They want their money. If you can make the case that they should wait and get most of it or push and get nothing they might wait. What happens when they finally figure out they made a mistake in loaning the money in the first place is not a good thing. They'll cut their losses and Greece will have to figure out how to live on what they have.

    80. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by robot5x · · Score: 1

      But no, you just focus on the fact that he also happens to work for Valve.

      To be fair, the stupid article is somewhat to blame. You rightly indicate that a far more appropriate title would have been 'Widely respected Professor of Economics appointed Greece's Finance Minister'. Which has the apparent downside of:

      • actually sounding like a very sensible thing to do, and
      • apparently having no relation to 'news for nerds'
      --
      Hej! Nasi tu byli!
    81. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a version of economics(and others) that attempt to be objective.

      I would strongly recommend this

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKYir4MxrgA

    82. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would be buying the shit out of Bitcoins if I was Greek.

    83. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >When you have no cash, and nobody is willing to give you credit ... this new government seems to be living in a fantasy if they think they can just make that all go away.

      You mean like Iceland did ? The worst thing that could happen to Greece is they may lose their EU membership if they do. That may not be so bad if they are hellbent on NOT doing what the rest of the EU wants them to do.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    84. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So investing in a company that your own advisors are saying is likely to go bankrupt is a good investment strategy? And you call someone else a dumb shit...

    85. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is possible for economics to be worked on as a science, but most economists are hard-working dumbfucks, who end up thinking tht buy getting a degree they are immediately qualified - because of formulas they were taught. Most economists don't model - they use models. Peer-review in economics? pffft! http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22223190 and you can google for the paper yourself.
            Economists are like pop stars - occasionally one does know about broader music, they just don't do it. Best you get is Lang Lang.
            I have, however worked with one in the past who was trying to change things through politics, though he wasn't as good in politics as he was in his job.

    86. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Never mind that the chief economist, minister of the economy, finance, or whatever in most countries are significantly less qualified.

      Usually at best (if you can call it that) is that they worked for one of the big investment groups like Goldman, or Lynch or something.

    87. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      And about the USA, you see, they are one country. The EU isn't. As such, germany can give money to greeks, but it can't tell them how to spend it.

      Exactly. That's why I said their current middle ground isn't working. The United States started out in that same wishy-washy decentralized manner with the Articles of Confederation. After about 12 years it was clear to everyone that it wasn't working, and the Constitution was written which created a stronger central authority. The EU is most likely eventually going to have to either go that direction, or disband.

    88. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by DarenN · · Score: 2

      However, I would tend to agree with you that a clean bankruptcy is better than a messy partial default. Expect that there is no real mechanism to Greece to default. If I understand correctly, it would be easier for Greece to exit the EU, convert to the Drachma, and devalue the currency.

      Except that all those debts are denominated in Euro, so exiting and devaluing makes things worse. So they need to exit and default. This means that they've lost the advantages of being in the common trade area, their currency will be worth very little (which might boost tourism to a point) but no-one will lend them money so they will either inflate at a very high rate or be forced to do their own austerity and either way it does not improve their prospects.

      --
      Rational thought is the only true freedom
    89. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      you know what i have to say about that?

      hats off to you.

    90. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Straif · · Score: 1

      Would advocating for the housing bubble raise to the level of an error to you?

      Of course he denies, post bust, that he even actually advocated for the Fed to aid in creating the bubble in the first place but his long list of statements to the contrary don't help his cause.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    91. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beware of anything that has to label itself a 'science' to get respect.

      Political science, social science, economic science...........all about worldviews that are ultimately irrefutable.

    92. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      You def have no idea at all. Look at Finland, and THEN say cutting expenses is not the way to go.

      Interesting. I took you up on that challenge, and even a simple Googling of Finland Recession tells me Austerity has been a nightmare for them.

      Hit 1 title: "Finland: Double-Dip Recession or Depression?"

      Hit 2 title: "Finland's Economy is headed for a 'perfect storm'"

      Hit 3 title: "Finland Economy falls back into recession", digest: "Finland entered its third recession in six years, preliminary data showed, as government efforts to halt debt growth collided with the longest ..."

      My personal favorite, the title of hit 7: "Pro-austerity Finland falls into triple-dip recession"

      Yeah. Gotta get me some of that in my country!

    93. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by alexander_686 · · Score: 1

      You are half right but that is not the plan.

      The game plan for the Greexit would be to convert everything, both assets and liabilities, into Drachma. Euro bonds issued by the Greek government are controlled by Greek law. Or any debt issued under Greek law. There will be some messy cases.

      As you say, after a Greek exit from the Euro their currency would be worthless which is kind of the point. They get to pay their debts with worthless currency. The local currency becomes worthless making their exports (such as tourism in a oddly back end way) more competitive.

      And yes, they would lose the benefits of being part of the EU. Personally I think the long hard road of austerity is the better choice but I do acknowledge that there is a second road out there.

      The last time Greek flirted with an exit everybody who could kept their money out of Greece. I heard about some interesting cash sweep transactions to minimize any money that had to stay overnight in Greece. i.e. keeping money in safer German banks, figuring out on a daily bases what was being paid to and from local suppliers, and then moving only just that amount of money over.

    94. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Destruction of goods can lead to prosperity. In 1939, the US was in a depression. War spending kicked in, and pushed the economy hard. War spending is effectively destruction of goods, lots of them literally and other goods being spent making things that have no civilian use. The US produced tens of thousands of Sherman tanks. Many were literally destroyed, and the remainder were largely surplus that nobody wanted come September 1945.

      This caused the US economy to boom. It also built a lot of demand, since most people were working (millions unproductively from an economic point of view), they were getting paid, and there wasn't that much to buy. Despite widespread fear, the economy remained dynamic after the war ended.

      It takes special circumstances, but it can work. Economies are complicated, and sane and honest people know that.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    95. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by digsbo · · Score: 1

      That's not correct. The recovery started after the war, due to the existence of pent-up demand for good and services backed by the available household/personal savings glut which had developed during the war.

    96. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Austrians and praxeology is the contrary to what OP advocates - instead of trying to make economics into a proper science (which is eminently doable, since it concerns with events manifesting themselves in a physical world, which is governed by laws of nature), they embrace this whole idiotic "observations don't matter so long as I can construct a neat model in my head" thing. Since constructing models in one's head is inevitably based on one's (subjective) premises, and since praxeology denies the normal scientific method of testing those models on real data, it's basically all just mental masturbation, and is one of the worst economic schools in terms of practical results. Really, the only good thing about them is that they're honest about the fact that they're quacks.

    97. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      forced to do their own austerity

      At some point, isn't the question here whether the size of their existing debt is basically large enough? i.e. their choice is between austerity necessary to paying it off, vs austerity to dig themselves out of the hole that they'll get into by defaulting and not being able to lend more money... but which way is better for them depends on how much they owe right now, no?

    98. Re:This doesn't sound... sound by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      People had jobs during the war, which was a whole lot better for a lot of people than during the Depression. After the war, the pent-up demand meant that there were still a lot of jobs, but that pent-up demand was from paying people to make things that were either destroyed or economically useless The reason for the savings was that people were making money, but couldn't find things to spend it on, because a lot of what they produced was useless in civilian life.

      This works when the economy is significantly underperforming what it could. In a case like that, an increase in spending, which can come from destroying things that need to be replaced, can make the economy perform better.

      Economics is complicated, and there's a lot of counterintuitive stuff in it (or, to put it another way, intuitive stuff that doesn't work).

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    99. Re: This doesn't sound... sound by DarenN · · Score: 1

      The problem with this

      The game plan for the Greexit would be to convert everything, both assets and liabilities, into Drachma. Euro bonds issued by the Greek government are controlled by Greek law. Or any debt issued under Greek law.

      is that it was gamed out quite a bit during the first crises and the consensus is that it is not legal to unilaterally change the currency of the bonds. That means that Greece would have to get its creditors to agree to re-denominate them in Drachma which would effectively be writing them off.

      Greece has a massive merchant marine (or at least Greek flagged merchant ships). Argentina, in a much less compromising situation, has had ships seized. This is not a situation the Greeks want to be in because it's a signifcant part of their economy.
      Greece also runs a food deficit - it buys in a significant percentage of its total food production. They won't be able to afford it with the Drachma.
      Lastly, Greece will not be able to pay their army and given that it was a military dictatorship until 1974 this is also making people nervous.

      The pace of reforms can be debated, but the need for them will not be. Greece is something of a mess and needs to continue with sorting out the crazy tax-evasion problems that they have. If the govenment wanted to, it could use the resentment that is being directed outward to force through some increased taxation on their oligarchy.

      That said, the European banks that lent recklessly to banks in Greece and the likes of Ireland, Italy and Spain will have to take the medicine sooner or later. Nothing else is going to work to get the debts to manageable levels. Germany is going to have to start spending too - I'm surprised that they haven't taken the opportunity for some larger infrastructure projects.

      --
      Rational thought is the only true freedom
  9. Valve, yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, he's worked with Valve but the the clickbait article makes it seem like that's all he ever did before being appointed.

    Wikipedia has a page about him: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yanis_Varoufakis

  10. Way to kill foreign investment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I can't help but think I'm not alone in deciding to wait to invest in Greece until all the DLC comes out and the price goes down.

  11. With all their greek gods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you'd think he'd believe in at least one of them. Damn atheists. Get him to a nunnery, quick!

  12. Look for a Presidents Day sale! by Yakasha · · Score: 1

    Digital Drachmas, 75% off!

  13. Yanis Varoufakis by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

    He basically wants Eurozone banks to have a single rescue fund, for the ECB to issue bonds, and the EIB to invest into the periphery economies to get out of the crisis.

    There's just one problem. Even if they make sense none of those things can be done by Greece alone. I hope he has a Plan B.

    You can see him explain his views on the current economic crisis in this video.

    1. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He looks and sounds like a Bond villain. I'm waiting for him so say, "no Mr. Euro, I expect you to die!"

    2. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      There are more plans than that. e.g. linking debt repayments to growth not to the budget.

    3. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      The problem is that rewriting your debt repayment obligations without the consent of the debt holders is called "default", and the results can be fairly drastic.

    4. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      That's why a large part of his job is going to be negotiating with the EU.

      He's absolutely right too. When all those little countries gave up their own currencies, they also gave up control of their own monetary policy. That means it has to be run from the EU, or its not being run at all. Its like everyone jumping on a big ship with nobody at the rudder, trusting in its own sheer size to keep everyone safe. That might not be a problem while everything's going great, but if there are reefs or an iceberg ahead, and nobody is trying to steer things, all kinds of nasty disasters become likely.

    5. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Nobody said anything about "without consent" there are about to be negotiations.

    6. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      So in other worlds he is off in a fairy land and will simply let Greece sink into massive unrecoverable debt. In the real world when you are broke and in desperate need of support you don't get to dictate the terms of that support. perhaps this could lead to finally kicking Greece out of the EU.

    7. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by daninaustin · · Score: 1

      Yes, but look at Argentina and the fight over them trying to do this. Everyone wont' agree and they will still be bound by the terms of the original bonds. Fortunately for the US our bonds are denominated in dollars so we can just inflate them away...

    8. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would any of them enter into negotiations in this scenario, Greece has been given support with terms they must meet in order to maintain that support. They have decided they don't like the terms and now wish to dictate new terms. I can't see any of the other countries backing down.

    9. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bet is if they continue to push this all they will get is the little support they have cut. Countries weren't happy having to bail them out to start with as they had basically cooked the books to get themselves into the EU as they were already a basket case when they joined. These countries upset a lot of voters with the bailouts as it is and the austerity measures weren't just about Greece, they were also the only way they could make the package even remotely palatable to the countries that had to go against their voters to provide this support.

    10. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      If you listen to his talks what he says is that a lot of countries cooked their books to get into the Eurozone. He says Greece simply borrowed the same creative accounting technique Italy used to get in the Eurozone so by the same metric Italy shouldn't have been in either. He also stated that Germany also used creative accounting by counting the gold they had in their treasury as income in order to erase the debt of their federal states.

    11. Re:Yanis Varoufakis by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      ...and its not like it was a secret this was going on at the time, and only coming out now. Everyone knew these countries were lying, and still let them in with a wink and a nod (unless of course that country happened to be majority Muslim, in which case the rules were applied stringently, but that's another rant for another day). So countries like Germany do not really have a right to act "Shocked, Shocked!" about it now when its convenient for them to do so.

      The only thing particularly special about Greece is that they happen to be the weakest member, so all the crap gets dumped on them first.

  14. Cannot WAIT for the Greece Summer Sale! by Quarters · · Score: 0

    I've been wanting to buy a good bunch of grappa. But, the reviews have been iffy so I've been waiting for it to be marked down.

    1. Re:Cannot WAIT for the Greece Summer Sale! by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Grappa is Italian, you're thinking of Tsipouro -- even if they're mostly the same thing.

      And you're only about the 4th person that I've ever encountered besides me who will admit to liking grappa -- I know old Italians who wince at the mention of it. :-P

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Cannot WAIT for the Greece Summer Sale! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I'm still drinking Brazilian rum I got for $.99/750ml when they crashed their currency.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Cannot WAIT for the Greece Summer Sale! by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Grappa is Italian, you're thinking of Tsipouro -- even if they're mostly the same thing.

      And you're only about the 4th person that I've ever encountered besides me who will admit to liking grappa -- I know old Italians who wince at the mention of it. :-P

      I love grappa. I mourn the end of the bottle I got in Garda several years ago, where my host Mario said "Don't get the muck at the supermarket, I'll show you where to go" and he did.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  15. Counter-Strike servers please by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    That is some unexpected news, as I was reading an interview of a French economic newspaper with this guy.
    Let me chime in for a personal revendication which might be useful for the working or modest or youth classes. Counterstrike 1.x is lacking servers both in quantity and quality, a small few are nice but it is a pain to suffer 24/7 dust2, zombie mods (wtf?) and too many gun game servers. We should organize to provide community servers with good map rotations, good map voting (but servers without voting as in the good old times too) and ensure popular education with such classics as cs_militia, de_aztec (CS 1.5 version), de_prodigy, de_nuke (old version where you can climb on roof), de_ccble you name it. Even a hundred servers ought to require not many hardware resources these days, they probably could run on one box.

    Counter-Strike 1.6 also allows anyone to compete as it will run on a modest PC and even with a really crappy OpenGL driver (linux) at high framerates, actually a low end CRT monitor at 85Hz is plenty fine there. Counter-Strike 1.5 is even less demanding, doesn't need Steam and can still be run though there's the little aspect of no CD key checking on the network (everyone gets 2^32 - 1 as the CD key)

    No need to get in debt to buy recent PC parts!

  16. Out of the frying pan, into the fire by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 1

    Assuming Alexis Tsipras is unsatisfied with his old job, maybe he's leaving just to blow off steam. But I don't know how much good that will do him: the job of Finance Minister of Greece is bound to be a pressure cooker. I just hope the problems there don't boil over.

  17. Not sure it's a good job choice by daninaustin · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Greece is seriously screwed and the election of the communists is only going to make things worse. On the resume this is going to look about as appealing as the entry for the guy who designed the brown zune.

    1. Re:Not sure it's a good job choice by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Election of who?

    2. Re:Not sure it's a good job choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're already past the "make things worse" stage. That's what austerity brought.

      Shit's hitting the fan and that's why the radicals are showing up

    3. Re:Not sure it's a good job choice by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      They're already past the "make things worse" stage. That's what austerity brought.

      No, austerity didn't bring it. If anything, trying to spend within your limited means will postpone making things worse. Do it long enough and things might even get better.

      But borrowing and spending isn't going to make it better, even if they can find someone from whom to borrow.

    4. Re:Not sure it's a good job choice by gerddie · · Score: 1

      They're already past the "make things worse" stage. That's what austerity brought.

      No, austerity didn't bring it.

      Well, saving the banks did initiate it, but austerity made it only worse (2011 is the year of the haircut).

  18. Valve sale on Greece debt! 75% off! by sinij · · Score: 1

    Valve sale on Greece debt! 75% off! Limited time only, until insolvency supplies last.

  19. I'd look behind me. A lot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The only thing he's going to find in Greece is what we all know is already there.

    Systemic, ingrained, centuries old culture of corruption. Literally multi-generational families living rich off bribery and graft. So bad that is strangles the Greek economy and the reason they are in the shitter today.

    The only thing he'll get by exposing and publicizing Greek economic issues is an early grave.

  20. Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 4, Funny
    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

      Venezuela has always been at war, with its neighbors and itself. Plus you fail to acknowledge the outside provocateurs.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 1

      Venezuela has always been at war, with its neighbors and itself.

      And with Eastasia...

      Plus you fail to acknowledge the outside provocateurs.

      What sort of "provcateurs" can explain the quadrupling of murder rate there since 1998? And the supermarket shelves, which aren't just underwhelming, but outright empty?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    3. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the rightist financial establishment did such a great job in 2008 before being handed everyone else's money to bail them out from their corrupt schemes.

    4. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit like this, usually.

      And how would you propose to disallow the radical left from running a country, when that country is a democracy and the people vote for it?

      Oh, yeah, I forgot. Silly me.

    5. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

      You don't remember how Chile's economy was sabotaged before Allende was taken out? Venezuela's resources are just too valuable for the pirates to leave to the competition, been that way for what, about 500 years now? Your position here reflects a certain 'transparency' of where your loyalties lie.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 2

      Shit like this [Chile coup, Pinochet -mi]

      Chile's Pinochet, upon stepping down (show me one Left-dictator to have done that!), has left his country as the top Latin American economy. And their homicide-rate today is 3.7 per 100K people — compare that to Venezuela's 67!

      And how would you propose to disallow the radical left from running a country, when that country is a democracy and the people vote for it?

      By not voting for the assholes — and by persecuting them wherever they appear with the same vigor as the other brand of collectivists is being persecuted already.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    7. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 2

      Venezuela's resources are just too valuable for the pirates to leave to the competition, been that way for what, about 500 years now?

      Well, if it has been a problem for 500 years, please quadrupling of the homicide rate in the country since 1998. And the 23-fold increase in kidnappings over the same period... Are you going to blame the CIA for it?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    8. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't remember how Chile's economy was sabotaged before Allende was taken out?

      Sorry, but as an outside observer, Venezuela's troubles are 100% of its own making. Trying to deflect the problem as "external saboteurs", sorry, that's just bullshit.

      No one really cares about Venezuela, except Venezuela and they are fucking themselves over. Venezuela has not only fucked up with respect to oil, they have mortgaged it with the Chinese. The economy is a complete basket case precisely due to their own actions.

      If Venezuela turned 100% communist tomorrow, it doesn't really matter to anyone else except Venezuela. If you are trying to play the games pretending US cares, sorry, but they do not really. Since USSR doesn't exist, there is no "threat" from South America. US had a policy of not allowing communism to expand in South America during Cold War because they viewed South America as "their" zone of influence, like USSR viewed China, and most of central Asia. But USSR doesn't exist anymore. Russia is not USSR. Russia doesn't matter economically anyway. China is the "threat" and China does not give a rats ass about South America except how to exploit it.

      So you bringing up CIA crimes like Allende, well, sorry, CIA is preoccupied with people in funny hats and with creating a police state than about Venezuela. The only people in America that give a rats ass about Venezuela are Exxon suing them trying to get some money back for their seized assets.

      TL;DR? Let me put it this way. Venezuela is not important. Its internal policies do not matter to anyone in US or EU. Venezuela is the Zimbabwe of South America, fucking itself over and blaming "colonial powers" or "saboteurs" or whatever.

    9. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's a better link to an article from The Economist: http://www.economist.com/blogs...

      AS one country after another on the periphery of the euro zone had to swallow painful reforms and fiscal austerity as the price for their bail-outs between 2010 and 2013, the surprise was that by and large they accepted the medicine without a large-scale populist revolt. But Sunday’s result in the Greek election marks a turning-point because Syriza, the radical-left party that has prevailed at the polls, campaigned on casting aside austerity, backtracking on the reforms and renegotiating the vast debt that Greece owes its European creditors. These policies are unacceptable to the euro-zone countries, especially Germany, that have lent Greece so much money. The outcome of the election could also have wider implications. Why does the Greek result matter?

      A clash is impending because the Greeks see their recent history in a very different light from that of the Germans and other Europeans who have bailed them out. From the perspective of Northern creditor nations, Greece was the architect of its own misfortune by mismanaging its public finances on a staggering scale. It has been lent an astonishing amount of money in not just one but two bail-outs, amounting to €246 billion ($275 billion), worth more than the country’s entire economic output. From a Greek perspective, however, the country has suffered a calamitous decline in GDP, which at its low in late 2013 was 27% down on its pre-crisis peak. Harsh spending cuts and tax rises have been imposed again and again as conditions for further economic support. Greeks feel that they have lost control of their country, which is now instead being directed by the hated troika: the European Commission, the IMF and the European Central Bank.

      Syriza won on Sunday because Alexis Tsipras, the party's leader, offered a message of hope to a country still in despair, even though the economy is now recovering. But the difficulty with his plan for Greece is that it requires other Europeans to finance it—or to countenance a reversal of reforms they regard as vital for Greece to cope with euro-zone membership. If Mr Tsipras makes good on promises of higher spending and lower taxes then Greece will fail to meet its objective of running a big primary budget surplus (ie, before interest payments), which would make it far harder to get its debt down from 175% of GDP. And if he reverses reforms such as the ones that have brought down wages, then Greece will head back towards the uncompetitive economic mess that, along with budgetary mismanagement, got it into trouble in the first place.

      In the negotiations that will now occur between Mr Tsipras and Greece’s creditors, Germany will give little ground. Angela Merkel, too, must pay attention to domestic opinion, which would be hostile to any concessions. The German chancellor also has to reckon with the wider impact of any deal that appeared to reward Syriza in emboldening populist revolts in other countries in the euro area, notably in Spain. For any country to leave the euro will be destabilising because it would break the supposed irrevocability of membership. But if Mr Tsipras were to get his way then the euro area would become a club where borrowers rather than lenders called the shots, which would be unsustainable. That is why Mr Tsipras will, before long, face a difficult choice between backing down on his demands—or presiding over a ruinous Greek exit.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    10. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      show me one Left-dictator to have done that

      I guess you must have missed the dissolution of the USSR. It wasn't widely reported at the time due to left-wing bias in the media.

      By not voting for the assholes

      That doesn't disallow anything, if the people want a radical left government then your vote against is not going to prevent that.

      and by persecuting them

      Uh-huh, yeah, persecution of the majority by a minority has a solid track record through history. Remember, we are talking about a situation where the people democratically elect a radical left government. Anyway, do you really want to propose "persecution" as a valid tactic? Next thing you know, you'll be an apologist for war criminals ... oh, wait.

      BTW is thepeoplescube.com the persecuted, or the persecution? It looks like an Onion spinoff.

    11. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but as an outside observer...

      Well, there you go. What would know about it then?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    12. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Are you going to blame the CIA for it?

      Tell me why I shouldn't. If they're destabilizing the place like in the middle east and south Asia and Africa(The US has 'operations' in over 100 countries. Many are work for hire), high murder rates are going to be normal.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    13. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a lot easier to blame boogeymen than the actual bullies in charge. Have you bought in to their lies, or are you one of the liars?

    14. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Things in Venezuela weren't exactly rosey before the leftists took over.

      The place was run by a bunch of crooks who were essentially a bunch of puppets for foreign (US) oil interests. Everyone was poor save some political elite and those working for the oil industry. Massive wealth in oil was pumped out every year and the public didn't' see a dime of it.

      Not saying it's much better now. (Radical leftists run a good revolution but are nearly always shitty leaders.) But at least it's a mess of their own making, instead of being exploited by someone else.

      The elites and those running the oil infrastructure left, taking with them a bunch of money and institutional knowledge. (Which is why production sucks, and China is being brought in to help) There' here in the US telling their tales of woe about how they were kicked out of their cushy gig by a bunch of dirty communists.

      Point is the story is complicated, and you're hearing a lot of of one-sided tales from people that were once the perpetrators of a different kind of evil.

    15. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 2

      Tell me why I shouldn't.

      Go ahead. Be sure to cite facts, though. With Wikileaks and Snowden out there, you ought to have plenty to work with. Take your time.

      If they're destabilizing the place like in the middle east and south Asia and Africa

      Begs the question, does not it?..

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    16. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Who hires the bullies?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    17. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      'Facts'? When did people start believing them? If they are where you say they are, then you too know where to look. There's too many to list, and they say things you don't want to hear. Citing precedence is more than sufficient. Of course not for you, but since you will simply spend your time poking holes to prop up the beliefs you cling to, I'm going to leave it that. And be happy, the mods are on your side.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    18. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The 'front man' used to obfuscate the funding and other resources you may be interested in: 'National Endowment for Democracy'

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    19. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by gerddie · · Score: 2

      Shit like this [Chile coup, Pinochet -mi]

      Chile's Pinochet, upon stepping down (show me one Left-dictator to have done that!), has left his country as the top Latin American economy.

      Really? Then why is this organge line indicating the average of Latin America above the blue line indicating Chile between 1970 and 1991? There is also a different story to tell.

    20. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by hibiki_r · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That article hits the nail in the head. For Europe, this is not about Greece: Their economy is small, and by itself, if they sank nothing would matter. It's what it says to Spain, a country with a general election coming pretty soon, and who has its own new, populist left wing party that runs against corruption and austerity.

      The Eurozone can handle anything that happens to Greece. But if Spain decides to ignore the troika, beware.

    21. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 1

      'Facts'? When did people start believing them?

      Thank you for admitting, you don't have any.

      If they are where you say they are

      They aren't there (as far as I know) — which ought to have told you something. Had there been anything, you would've seen it Guardian and NY Times 20 times already...

      Citing precedence [theguardian.com] is more than sufficient

      No, it is not sufficient.

      you will simply spend your time poking holes

      By announcing your own not believing in facts, you really left me nothing to poke holes in... How disappointing.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    22. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Facts that are hidden from view are no less valid. But very simple deduction and precedence(the courts cite it all the time in deciding cases. If it works for them, then I can use it too) can and frequently does suffice. Eh, all this is pointless while your personal bias blocks your vision. You fail to treat authority (especially that of your peeps) for the adversary that it is. Please, don't try to cry innocence with me. This is a proxy war amongst the great empires (the five families). And so is Greece for that matter, since that was the original subject. They also suffer from the influence of outsiders. This is what crashed their economy. The money was simply stolen, just like my pension.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    23. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 2

      Then why is this organge line [wikipedia.org] indicating the average of Latin America above the blue line indicating Chile between 1970 and 1991?

      Because life sucked in the country, and the Marxist Allende (elected in 1970) proceeded to further destroy the economy until stopped by Pinochet in 1973. A series of reforms — commonly known today as "Miracle of Chile" — were necessary. The upswing in the blue line, that outperforms the orange line so convincingly today started in 1984 — with a minor hiccup in 1988, when Pinochet stepped down after losing a referendum.

      Pinochet rules, Chavez drools.

      There is also a different story to tell.

      Yea, yea. In the face of Chile prospering doing, what they hate, while Cuba and Venezuela are faltering doing what they love, the Collectivists are anxious to find excuses...

      Decades-long economic experiments — when similar (or identical) peoples lived under different economic regime: Estonia (within USSR) vs. Finland, East vs. West Germany, North vs. South Korea, Mainland China vs. Taiwan, Cuba (or Venezuela) vs. Chile — how many more examples does one need before admitting, allowing the Left to rule in earnest is an error (when it is not a crime)?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    24. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 1

      I guess you must have missed the dissolution of the USSR.

      I lived in the USSR at the time of its dissolution, you anonymous moron. It was an economic collapse, not a step-down by anyone disappointed in lack of popular mandate and support from immediate circle. Not one of the Communist rulers has stepped down on their own.

      if the people want a radical left government then your vote against is not going to prevent that.

      My point is, those "people" are making a mistake.

      Uh-huh, yeah, persecution of the majority by a minority has a solid track record through history.

      Not the majority voting, but the tiny minority asking for votes. All Collectivists — whether they have a red-star beret or a tiny mustache on their clothing — lead to disastrous policies. Either immediately (from inherent evil) or soon after their good intentions fail and they must find excuses.

      BTW is thepeoplescube.com the persecuted, or the persecution?

      The particular link does a hilarious job comparing the various Collectivists... Woosh much?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    25. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 2

      Though unlikely to change your opinion, Krugman has an interesting piece on how they're not so radical after all, but pretty much following textbook macro. Don't like Krugman? Well, he predicted the economic quagmire that we're in now. Bill Gross was so off he got kicked out of his own firm.

      If you're reactionary, everything pretty much looks like radicalism,

    26. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like authoritarian dictatorships fail while a robust democratic government that responds to its citizens succeeds.

    27. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by nnappe · · Score: 1

      Today, 30% of Chile's income is because of the state owned Codelco. Chile's copper was nationalized by Allende.
      Chile's current economic state is partially supported by the surge in copper price in 2005 http://www.infomine.com/invest... (at the same time, Venezuela is being hit by a record low oil price, not that that excepts all of Venezuela's mistakes)
      If Allende had not nationalized the copper, Chile would need to increase taxes by 50% to maintain current budget. That wouldn't come easily to the economy.

      Statistics aside, Chile is no wonder. It's very hard to people with dependents (both older people and kids). In my personal experience, based on how I've worked with chileans in IT, they are below Argentina and Brazil (in my anecdotal evidence, *way* below).

      Chile's last right wing president ended his term with the lowest level of public support since the return of democracy, and resulted in a comeback of the very moderate left.
      Also, you probably would find it interesting to read about the portuguese Carnation Revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C....

    28. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. It was not too long ago that the US was very concerned about Chevez and Venezuela.

    29. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 1

      Today, 30% of Chile's income is because of the state owned Codelco.

      Irrelevant — whether the company is publicly owned or not, the income it produces still counts towards the GDP.

      partially supported by the surge in copper price in 2005

      Their economy economy started going up in 1984 at the rate largely unchanged since — despite all of the fluctuations in the copper price.

      Statistics aside

      Yes, sure. We should put statistics aside and make decisions based on individual anecdotes...

      In my personal experience, based on how I've worked with chileans in IT, they are below Argentina and Brazil

      Ask your colleagues, if they'd rather work in Venezuelan IT...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    30. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by mi · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like authoritarian dictatorships fail while a robust democratic government that responds to its citizens succeeds.

      An authoritarian dictatorship is certainly worse, than a robust democratic government.

      However, between authoritarian dictatorships, a "Radical Left" one — like that of Chavez or Castro — will bring certain misery and economic collapse, whereas a Right-wing one may set the country in the right direction.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    31. Re:Radical Left allowed to run a country... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus you fail to acknowledge the outside provocateurs.

      While privileged countries like the US succeed because everybody likes them? What bullshit.

  21. Greece doesn't need an economist... by JoeyRox · · Score: 0

    they need a magician. They are broke and no amount of populism or rhetoric is going to create wealth out of thin area. That said, nearly every major nation is broke, including the USA - the difference is there are still people willing to lend at reasonable rates to those other nations. There will come a day where that will no longer be the case and as Greece goes so will go the world.

    1. Re:Greece doesn't need an economist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't actually broke they just need to stop paying the interest on their debt and they have a budget surplus, they only borrow to pay debts

    2. Re:Greece doesn't need an economist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't actually broke they just need to stop paying the interest on their debt and they have a budget surplus, they only borrow to pay debts

      If they do that, no one will lend to them. Then again, maybe not allowing Greek politicians borrow money would be a good thing?

    3. Re:Greece doesn't need an economist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not paying interest could be acceptable if central banks and economist would not preach inflation targets bigger than 0%. Otherwise not paying interest is stealing from your creditors. Though "defaulting" is a nicer term for the same thing.

  22. Well... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

    I for one welcome our new virtual-currency overlords.

    Geddit? Because Valve made Half-life 2, and...

    Oh, forget it.

  23. Why the atheist mention? by TodoRojo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The fact that he is atheist has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it?

    1. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in case there's ever a jewish finance minister, now it won't look odd to mention it? : >

    2. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because fanboys need a drum to beat.

    3. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that he is atheist has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it?

      Supposedly, Greece is a "Christian" country. They even traded citizens with Turkey (made Greek Muslims into Turkish citizens in exchange for Turkish Christians becoming Greek citizens).

    4. Re:Why the atheist mention? by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Because a lot of Greeks consider being Christian Orthodox as being part of the package of being Greek. TBH believing in the god stuff likely isn't as imporant but going through the motions is. There is more of a superstitious element to the belief than elsewhere I've seen and it's not like the more hard-line Christians in the US. Tsipras decided not to have his vows administered by the bishop, but to have a civil ceremony instead. I think this is the first time that has happened (although the PASOK governments did weaken the power of the church in governement, IIRC).

    5. Re: Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do I rly need to flood the posts witch the almost infinite list of religious leaders that caused the death of countless of humans?

    6. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There aren't many atheist leaders out there. I, for one, was interested to hear that.

    7. Re:Why the atheist mention? by schlachter · · Score: 1

      It's important news that matters for nerds...because real nerds don't like seeing delusional whack jobs (i.e. Christians) in positions of power fighting science and progress. Having an Atheist is historic like having a historically persecuted minority in a position of power.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    8. Re:Why the atheist mention? by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Because its interesting? The Prime Minister is Atheist as well, and refused to take a ceremonial diety-based oath. This is apparently a first in Greece since the war ended (if not ever).

      I'm Christian myself, but I'm strongly for religious freedom, and I find it interesting. In an ideal world this wouldn't be big news, but it is to Greeks, so it is. That's what progress looks like.

    9. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 1

      The fact that he is atheist has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it?

      This says a lot more about the nationality of the author of the summary than about the new Greek PM...

      Alexis Tsipras : radical left, engineer, European, has 2 kids but is unmarried. It would be a big surprise if he would be religious...

    10. Re:Why the atheist mention? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The fact that he is atheist has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it?

      The Greek Orthodox church is very powerful in Greece. One of SYRIZA's platforms is removing the benefits the Greek Orthodox church gets.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    11. Re:Why the atheist mention? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      The fact that he is atheist has nothing to do with the story. Why mention it?

      Because this is Slashdot, and it makes him cool.

    12. Re:Why the atheist mention? by silfen · · Score: 1

      Because the Orthodox Church used to be in bed with the government in Greece.

      You know, like, for example, Germany is governed by a Christian democrat and has a Lutheran pastor as its president.

    13. Re:Why the atheist mention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Greek Orthodox Church is seen by many as vastly corrupt and cajoled with the old system of power.
      As an elected atheist, Tsipras has a reason less to pay them lip service.

    14. Re:Why the atheist mention? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      This - the superstitious element - is, for some reason, very typical for orthodox Christianity. Same thing happens in Georgia (the country, not the state) and Russia.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    15. Re:Why the atheist mention? by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      Interesting. It could be because there's little preaching in church and there's little force-feeding of dogma. So the church blends more into the background and pagan superstitions, such the evil eye, and the Kallikantzaroi can become more easily attached to it.

  24. Greeks Act Like Children by drfred79 · · Score: 1

    So I've heard that the Greeks haven't enjoyed austerity. What they really don't like isn't austerity, it's living within their means. I hope Germany finally cuts out it's problem child. No economist in the world can save Greece from itself. Greece can't save itself from stopping austerity. That's like blaming your doctor for telling you to stop drinking with liver psoriasis. There are good and bad economists. Bad economists think they can control or even foresee the economy. A good economist whispers in the government's ear that they aren't immortal and can't fight market theory.

    1. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What they really don't like isn't austerity, it's living within their means.

      Wrong, the austerity measures implemented a dependency on living outside the means of the country, without the ability to devalue their currency in a controlled fashion like Iceland did, this makes recovery not possible. You don't get a man out of debt by lending more money to him and forcing him to accept it while following specific terms on how to make use of it.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    2. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By 'devalue their currency' you mean default on their debt. Greece still has the ability to default on its debts.

    3. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't get a man out of debt by lending more money to him and forcing him to accept it while following specific terms on how to make use of it.

      Actually, that's exactly how you get a man out of debt. Debt consolidation loans allow people to pay off their high interest loans and consolidate their debt into a single lower interest loan. Obviously when a lender issues a debt consolidation loan they issue specific terms that the loan must be used to pay off existing debt.

      The real problem is the Greeks want to keep spending money they don't have.

    4. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by drfred79 · · Score: 1
      They cannot devalue the Euro any further. Real economics is not a laboratory so politically simple answers like devalue their currency does not work. Switzerland has already caught into the game and other countries would equally meet the Euro in devaluing their currency if it were so simple.

      How does asking Greece to stop spending so much encourage them to spend more? They explicitly signed onto fiscal responsibility when they joined the Euro. The Euro has clear deficit thresholds which Greece violated.

      Let's get something else straight. Greece is not a victim for Germany borrowing them money to save the Euro. Germany probably makes very little export sales to dead broke Greece already and Greece continues to hold Germany's fiscally responsible currency in a choke hold demanding more money

      You don't get a man out of debt by lending more money to him and forcing him to accept it while following specific terms on how to make use of it.

      Oh really? I thought that's exactly how borrowing worked regardless of Greece somehow being coerced into not meeting their huge payroll: 1. Person borrows money 2. The person giving the money sets terms and conditions on how the money is used and when it is paid back.

      Greece is incapable of realizing that their form of socialism has not worked. They need free market reforms and a reduction in government. Even if they leave the Euro they cannot devalue their currency enough to fix their problems. Ask the Weimar Republic. I can't believe ninety year old failed policies are coming back into vogue. At least Germany remembers.

    5. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Greeks seem to hate Merkel and Germany for not sending them more money. I can ensure that there are many countries in the Euro zone where people hate seeing their tax money flow into this bottomless pit. In most of them there are poor people, worn down hospitals, deteriorating health service, less state money put on culture and youth etc. because of Greece. I for one hope Greece will default on it debts, will leave the Euro and be towed away from Europe.

    6. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free market reforms and a reduction in government is what has been happening for the past 5 years bringing an increase in Debt/GDP ratio, a 25% dive to Greece's GDP and close to 30% unemployment. At some point the people in charge of this plan (both the Greek government implementing, as well as the "lenders" who were demanding those conditions) should have realized that the strategy was making things worse.

      Give some credit to Varoufakis, he's an accomplished, widely respected economist. I can't think of a better person in charge of an economy in crisis such as this one.

    7. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      They cannot devalue the Euro any further.

      No shit, let's not forget that the Euro politicians prevented them from moving off the Euro which lead to this sad situation.

      How does asking Greece to stop spending so much encourage them to spend more?

      They are propping up Greece by funding it instead of letting Greece leave the Euro, move to their own currency that is sustainable.

      Greece is incapable of realizing that their form of socialism has not worked.

      Greece was the first to try to leave the Euro the moment they saw it was not sustainable. In return the Euro politicians replaced their democratically elected officials to try to take control of the situation and only making matters worse.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    8. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 2

      By 'devalue their currency' you mean default on their debt.

      No, I don't. I mean do exactly what Iceland did, where a slow, controlled printing of money was used to devalue themselves to match their economic strength. None of this requires defaulting on it's debts.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    9. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by drfred79 · · Score: 1

      I have never read anything that hypothesized that poor Greece tried to leave the Euro but mean Europe made them borrow and keep overspending. Why would Greece ever choose to leave their sugar momma? The politicians in Greece scapegoated other countries to cover their failed socialist policies. Greece is going to have a hard reality when they aren't propped up by stable, fiscally responsible countries.

    10. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I have never read anything that hypothesized that poor Greece tried to leave the Euro

      I will provide you with just one reference you can see and hear then, https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      Why would Greece ever choose to leave their sugar momma?

      The 'why' doesn't matter, the fact they attempted to in the beginning and the union politicians prevented it is the important thing.

      The politicians in Greece scapegoated other countries to cover their failed socialist policies.

      Honestly, I have a bigger problem with the politicians in the Union that ignored the auditors and advisors that told them that Greece could not sustain the economy in their current state and still brought them into the Euro zone. I couldn't careless whom is scapegoating whom.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    11. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Printing money to reduce the value of the debt and pay it with money that was not produced through economic activity is equivalent to default on full payment of debt.

    12. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll let my bank know. They may have lent me US dollars, but I'll pay them back in Zimbabwe dollars. Why would they complain? The Zimbabwe dollar matches my economic strength if I'm unemployed.

    13. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      Printing money to reduce the value of the debt and pay it with money that was not produced through economic activity is equivalent to default on full payment of debt.

      Ask Iceland's creditors how badly it went for them and how this is exactly the same as defaulting on a payment.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    14. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I'll let my bank know. They may have lent me US dollars, but I'll pay them back in Zimbabwe dollars. Why would they complain?

      If they would,. it would likely be because the credit agreement explicitly dealt in U.S. dollars and you're paying back in another currency entirely.

      The Zimbabwe dollar matches my economic strength if I'm unemployed.

      You'll need to convert it to the right currency first they expect to be paid in.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    15. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they would,. it would likely be because the credit agreement explicitly dealt in U.S. dollars and you're paying back in another currency entirely.

      What, you mean like the agreement where Greece borrowed Euros?

    16. Re:Greeks Act Like Children by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      What, you mean like the agreement where Greece borrowed Euros?

      Much like how Iceland paid their creditors back in USD.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  25. Greek DLCs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is nothing new... I remember my 1999 "all inclusive" vacation to Greece.

  26. Hat Act 1732 by tepples · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And hats, hats, as far as the eye can see!

    There'd be precedent for that in the European Union. England had a law in effect from 1571 through 1597 to make failure to wear a British-made wool cap in public a crime.

  27. Let us compare France to Greece by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    France has had more (actual and technical) defaults on its debt in the last 500 years than Greece has had on its own debt. France's average time to resolve a default (renegotiate debt) is less than 1 year. Greece's average time to resolve a default is 44 years.

    Conclusion: The core problem Greece has is that its people are stubborn and blame the lender for Greece's bad spending habits. It is time for the Greek people to say
    "diko moi lathos" and make even deeper cuts to government spending.

    1. Re:Let us compare France to Greece by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      France has had more (actual and technical) defaults on its debt in the last 500 years than Greece has had on its own debt. France's average time to resolve a default (renegotiate debt) is less than 1 year. Greece's average time to resolve a default is 44 years.

      Conclusion: The core problem Greece has is that its people are stubborn and blame the lender for Greece's bad spending habits. It is time for the Greek people to say
      "diko moi lathos" and make even deeper cuts to government spending.

      Oops, that's 250 years.

  28. Next up.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bread lines, rationing, shortages, and a complete lack of toilet paper.

    1. Re:Next up.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bare shelves as well... and probably laws against photographing the evidence.

  29. Looks like a good choice by the Greeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It will be good to see Greece moving away from policies that were deliberately designed to keep creditors afloat, when banks irresponsibly lent them un-repayable amounts of credit. Hopefully Greece will now default, and shut down the insolvent banks.
    Europe's most successful era was that of the application of socialist policies. The corrupt neo-liberal bank/frauster mentality needs to be eradicated, and a return to socialist values implemented.
    I don't understand the mention that their leader is an atheist. I guess that most people with normal levels of brain power will be, given that believing in witches, gobblins, santa claus, the tooth fairy, god, mohamud, trolls, or jesus is just supersitious mumbo-jumbo. Surely nobody intelligent enough to rise to a position of real political power (at least not in a democratic country), is going to be stupid enough to believe any of that contemptibly childish nonsense.

    1. Re:Looks like a good choice by the Greeks by ledow · · Score: 2

      Shutting down the insolvent banks only solves the bank problems. It doesn't solve the country's and, as you rightly point out, the banks should not be that tied to the country policy.

      In many ways, making the banks insolvent is a death warrant to future credit and investment. Who's going to start a bank in Greece now? And who's going to bail out Greece when they can't afford healthcare any more, get invaded, etc.?

      The problem is bigger than the banks, hence focusing on the banks is erroneous. What they've done, however, is thrown out all the measures demanded by other countries and banks that would have saved them money enough to be solvent again some day. And tied those measures in with "greedy bankers". By throwing out the austerity measures, you've basically said "We don't care about saving money or what we spend on things we don't need", and that further destroys your credit as it stinks of mismanagement.

      And, ultimately, a lot of these promises they won't be able to fulfil. What they are saying is that they'll default on loans, remove the money-saving measures already implemented and then SOMEHOW get back in the black. Nobody's quite worked out the somehow.

      It's like a bankrupt telling you they'll go bankrupt, but keep drinking and gambling as before, and somehow they'll get back in the black if only those damn debtors would go away and stop helping them pay their debt off in easy monthly payments.

    2. Re:Looks like a good choice by the Greeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Europe's most successful era was that of the application of socialist policies.

      Europe's most successful era was when they deregulated, with a little kicker from the Marshall Plan.

      > I guess that most people with normal levels of brain power will be

      Wow, you're a real hell of a bigot, aren't you.

    3. Re:Looks like a good choice by the Greeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was socialism that got them into this mess.... and socialism that will make it worse, you ain't seen nothin yet.

    4. Re:Looks like a good choice by the Greeks by silfen · · Score: 1

      Hopefully Greece will now default, and shut down the insolvent banks.

      The "insolvent banks" are partially government owned. In the end, the German tax payer will foot the bill.

      I don't understand the mention that their leader is an atheist. I guess that most people with normal levels of brain power will be,

      Well, Germany is governed by an outspoken Christian chancellor and has a Lutheran pastor for its president. Obama proclaims loudly to be a Christian. Atheist leaders are somewhat unusual in Western democracies.

  30. Did anyone else just double check the date? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making sure it wasn't April 1st?

  31. taxes, civil servants, by ahoffer0 · · Score: 2

    My knowledge of Greek economics doesn't go much beyond NPR, but the changes needed seem pretty straightforward:

    1. Reform civil service
    2. Aggressively prosecute tax fraud
    3. Tax church assessts (i.e. church either make is assets poductive or sells them to someone who will)

    An angry coalition leftists and iconoclasts might be pretty good at 2 of these things. Maybe all 3?

  32. Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by TheSync · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't be mislead by the debt problem. If Greece had economic growth, it would not have a debt problem.

    Greece rankes "mostly unfree" on the Index of Economic Freedom:

    Greece's economic freedom score is 54.0, making its economy the 130th freest in the 2015 Index. Its score has declined by 1.7 points since last year due to a substantial deterioration in the control of government spending and smaller declines in business freedom, labor freedom, and fiscal freedom. Greece is ranked 40th out of 43 countries in the Europe region, and its overall score is below the world and regional averages...the rule of law remains problematic, with property rights weakly enforced, tax evasion on the rise, and corruption pervasive. Despite efforts to create a more business-friendly regulatory environment, the labor market remains rigid and slow to adjust to market realities...The overall pace of regulatory reform lags behind other countries. With no minimum capital required, launching a business takes five procedures and 13 days. However, completing licensing requirements still takes about four months on average...

    By the way, regarding "austerity", Greece's public expenditures equal 58.5 percent of domestic output. That does not sound very austere to me.

    1. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the way, regarding "austerity", Greece's public expenditures equal 58.5 percent of domestic output. That does not sound very austere to me.

      Yes, 58.5% is really high, but most of it is for servicing its huge mountain of debt (175% of its GDP).

    2. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by Solandri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, 58.5% is really high, but most of it is for servicing its huge mountain of debt (175% of its GDP).

      Japan has more public debt than Greece. But its government only spends about 35% of its GDP.

    3. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is correct, but Japan pays a quarter of a percent interest on its debt while Greece pays much more than that (the ft link gives 10% for Greece, but that's the price in the secondary market, Greece doesn't have access to the bond markets right now).

    4. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by Ixpath · · Score: 1

      According to wiki government spending was estimated to be 48.5 in 2014 (and 50.5 in 2008), a few points higher than Germany. However, Greek nominal GDP is down over 25% since 2008, meaning they had to make equivalent cuts to government spending just to maintain the same ratio.

    5. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      Japan can also print its own money, which gives it the ability (at least in theory) to wipe out all public debt with the stroke of a pen. There are consequences to that action, but when your debt is counted in your own currency, you can largely ignore the public debt, as long as inflation is kept in check. Most non-eurozone countries (including the US) do the same thing. In fact, inflation has long been used by most nations to decrease the impact of public debt, as the fixed-dollar debt can be reduced to a smaller %age of the GDP. It's how Great Britian and the US 'paid' for World War II, for example. As another example, recall the talk about a "trillion dollar platinum coin" during the most recent US government shutdown, which would have paid off a trillion dollars of debt as well as instantly and drastically inflated the dollar (among other things).

      Greece doesn't have a national currency. Their debt is in Euros, and must be repaid in Euros. Greece can't unilaterally inflate the Euro to reduce their debt load. The situation is closer to the economy of California, which is also heavily in debt. California doesn't get to print its own money, and it doesn't have the option of creating inflation to reduce its debt load.

      Greece and California have two choices: Make their payments, and hope inflation happens on its own, or default and accept they won't be able to borrow money for a substantial amount of time. Growing their economies makes both options more palatable, but doesn't solve the problem by itself.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    6. Re:Greece's problem is lack of ecumenic freedom by silfen · · Score: 1

      Well to be fair, it lacks both "ecumenic" and "economic" freedom...

  33. Idiot redistributionists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Idiot redistributionists. Apparently they do not understand the basic problem of running out of other people's money. And it's gone. Zip. Zilch. Nada. He has no bargaining chips whatsoever.

    I feel like taking bets on when the rioting starts and make some REAL money.

    1. Re:Idiot redistributionists. by jbssm · · Score: 2

      Yeah, capitalism ends when bankers run out of the other people money to bail them out.

  34. Just what greece needs to bolster its economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another socialist..

  35. Misleading title by umafuckit · · Score: 1

    Calling him "Valve's Economist" implies that this is Yanis Varoufakis' main role in life. It's not. He's done some economics research at Valve and some consulting there. He's mainly known for other stuff, as you can see from other posts here or from Googling him.

  36. why is this rated a troll? by johncandale · · Score: 1

    This more correct than incorrect

  37. EU cannot work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The EU cannot work. A common currency is incompatible with the indolent and politically unstable south and the industrious north. The Germans don't have enough money to support all of the taker nations. The ECB should write off Greek debt and cut them loose. It will be better for Greeks too, who, effectively contained, can pursue their socialist fantasies to the dead end.

  38. Austerity by nobuddy · · Score: 1

    The patient died, but the operation was a success.

  39. This is unlikely to end well by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

    Germans, in general, are not willing to work 60 hour weeks to support Greeks working 20 hour weeks. All the necessary reforms are things that are anathema to the new Greek administration, who (by all accounts) intends to double-down on everything that has made the Greek economy what it is today. We'll see how that works out for them.

    1. Re:This is unlikely to end well by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Typical German bullshit. German working week is 35 hours and Greek working week is 40 hours.

      http://www.theguardian.com/new...

    2. Re:This is unlikely to end well by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Typical German bullshit.

      . . . so the factory German manager visits a factory in Greece. He asks, "How many people work here . . . ?"

      The Greek factory manager answers, "Oh, about 60%".

      German working week is 35 hours and Greek working week is 40 hours.

      "Don't tell me how much you are working . . . tell me how much you get done."

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  40. Taleb's take? by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

    Modern Economics is basically about picking up pennies off the ground, while standing in front of a steam roller.

    Trying to predict with any degree of accuracy something as random and chaotic as the market (In Greece none the less) is bound to end up going poorly on a long enough time line.

  41. This American Life Episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The radio program This American Life had a good show on the Eurozone in general and the Greek situation in particular:

    http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/455/continental-breakup

    It's a little old but offers good insight into what's going on there and why it matters to the rest of us.

  42. Foreclose by Rande · · Score: 1

    Why not treat Greece like a Company or an Individual?
    Send in the Administrators and the Baliffs. Greece still has lots of assets, sell them off, starting with the museums, some of the islands.
    Fire the entire civil service and make them reapply for their jobs, supervised by some people who know how to run a government - maybe the Swiss and Austrians?

    Or simply let Germany foreclose on the entire country and no more debt! And all the people are then the responsibility of the German govt to house and feed.

    1. Re:Foreclose by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Your basic mistake is assuming it's the government's job to house and feed the people. That kind of thinking is what got Greece into this mess in the first place.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Foreclose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you foreclose someone's property, it's not your job to find them a new place to live. If they stay, they have to pay rent.

  43. Don't kid yourself by daninaustin · · Score: 1

    It can get a lot worse.

  44. Because only STEM gets funding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fact

  45. Lazy stupid fuck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good god! The proper spelling for "prizes" was even right there in the link you posted but you sure as fuck couldn't be assed to fix the rest of your shit. Lazy bastard!

  46. Getting Greece to be 99% self-sufficient by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 2

    My suggestion from 2008 when Greece ran out of tear gas: https://groups.google.com/foru...
    "Now, does this make any sense if you understand the possibilities of open manufacturing or an open society? In Greece you have a warm climate, access to oceans, lots of sun and wind, an educated populace with a 2000+ year history of democracy (on and off :-), no obvious external enemies declaring war, and so on. And they are so worried about their future ability to make and use things (which is how I translate "fears for Greece's economic future") that they are running out of tear gas? This all makes no *physical* sense. The place should be a paradise. Instead it is in "self-destruct mode" according to one editor. It must be *ideology*. Or, more correctly, ideology *embodied* in a certain type of productive infrastructure. ...
    So, ironically, we have the worst of both systems. We could have a really centralized system run efficiently with a tiny fraction of the workforce now, with a lot less variety perhaps (that is, all the old Soviet Central Planning stuff would work now that we have the internet and great software and great designs and great computers if we accept some voluntary simplicity), but with everything very cheap (essentially, just given away) and 99% of the population doing whatever they wanted with their time. Or, we could have a freewheeling diverse gift economy of local open manufacturing where people just make whatever they want in an open way, with all sorts of useful and useless items. (Aspects of the two extremes may even converge, since what are the 99% of people going to do with the generic stuff but customize it? :-) Instead, we have a system in the middle that produces some variety at a huge expense of human effort taken away from family and civic duties, and it is a system now with so many questions about its uncertain future (including that anyone who is young will have a dignified place in the economic scheme of things) that an entire country has just run out of tear gas. This makes no sense (except of course, that some people do benefit from this, like tear gas manufacturers, school teachers who get paid to keep kids off the streets preparing them for non-existent jobs, people who are near the top of the economic hierarchy already and feel secure, etc.).
    Anyway, this suggests one target of open manufacturing could be a community of size ranging from Iceland (about 300,000 people) to Greece (about 11,000,000 people). That's certainly an interesting size range. I would think 99% closure of those economies by mass should be easily doable. Computer chips, some medicines, and maybe some other specialized components might be the major imports after the system was set up. Note that while one may not expect Greece or Iceland to "self-replicate" any time soon, the ability do do so ensures it can be self-repairing.
    Anyway, it kind of comes down to how much economic security is worth to a country compared to minimum effort. Given the massive youth unemployment in Greece, and the economic fears of depending on a global economy, it would seem like maximizing productive efficiency through participating in global production would not be at the top of their priority list now that they are out of tear gas. Unfortunately, they did not invest in this research ten years ago. So, this is only theoretical at this point. It might take a very expensive crash program to bring together thousands of researchers for a year to make headway in any time that might make a difference. Still, politically, that is an out for Greece. We could all move there, recruit all the educated youths off the streets, and spend a year figuring out how to make Greece work for everybody and be 99% self-sufficient by mass. :-) But, no need to move with the internet really. Maybe somebody on the list could coordinate moving the rioters off th

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    1. Re:Getting Greece to be 99% self-sufficient by silfen · · Score: 1

      So, ironically, we have the worst of both systems. We could have a really centralized system run efficiently with a tiny fraction of the workforce now, with a lot less variety perhaps (that is, all the old Soviet Central Planning stuff would work now that we have the internet and great software and great designs and great computers if we accept some voluntary simplicity)

      Soviet style central planning doesn't work no matter how much Internet and software and design you throw at it because it is impossible for computers to obtain the information necessary for planning. In addition, such systems will be abused by rent seekers and totalitarians, so even if the economic part of it worked, the political part wouldn't.

      And simplicity that is imposed by the economic system on individuals isn't "voluntary". It isn't "voluntary" even if a majority of people votes for it.

    2. Re:Getting Greece to be 99% self-sufficient by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

      Many economic models are possible (including subsistence, gift, exchange, and planned, or a mix). The choice depends what sort of society you want and what your priorities are and what your cultural history is. For example, "Palace Economies" and "Water Empires" have lasted for centuries:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

      I'm not holding central planning as an ideal though. What I write was that at one extreme, one can imagine a reasonable well-planned society that supplies the necessities of life to everyone for essentially no labor needed, leaving everyone lots of free time to do other stuff (including make more things for themselves, raise children, hang out with friends, participate in politics, whatever). There are societies like the ancient Incas that were modeled around this for centuries (explained in the Palace Economy Wikipedia article). It worked for many people for lots of time.

      Even the USSR economy "worked", but with lots of problems, including the USA trying to undermine it. If the USSR had not "worked" for decades, why was the USA so afraid of it?

      One question to ask is, for most people, is what we have now as a "free market" (although we don't; it is more corporatism and oligarchy), especially in a place like Greece suffering from economic turmoil, better than this planned model, especially given today's materials and automation and so on?

      The fact is, so much of our economy is "planned" in so many ways in advance. How many people are involved in deciding what the next iPhone looks like, for example? Granted, it Apple guesses wrong, it may make less profits -- although Apple is a bit of a monopoly in a sense at this point as a close system of apps and such, so almost anything not terrible will sell to the Apple faithful.

      However, there are other models people may like better for various reasons.

      Imagine, for example, an economy where everyone used the "like" button on Facebook to control what goods would be produced. Limit the number of "likes" per person and you essentially have an economy directed by individuals with a "basic income".

      I also wrote there that at another extreme, "... we could have a freewheeling diverse gift economy of local open manufacturing...".

      The internet has many aspects of a gift economy. Coupled with improved 3D printing for local on-demand production, this may totally transform our economy, since even if it is hard for a planned economy to get right how many blue shoes people, it is much easier to plan to ensure everyone has a certain amount of raw materials for their 3D printers and enough electricity to run them (or 3D print solar panels or maybe someday cold fusion devices).

      What would you object about, say, a plan to create a FOSS commons of free designs and to put a (futuristic, multi-material) 3D printer in every home with enough material and power to use it to print a wide range of consumer goods from shoes to car parts to solar panels? With food supplied from mostly automated indoor agriculture? What is wrong about that as a a baseline from which people could build from in a troubled Greece? Or, what is wrong with the idea, except, of course, that it might put a lot of current industries out of business and change the balance of power in Greek society (and Europe) back to the average citizen?

      The Debian project is a bit like an economy controlled by email and IRC chat messages. :-) Mixed with a gift economy. And also exchange with paid workers like at RedHat working on init stuff -- unfortunately pushing stuff like systemd perhaps so RedHat can take over Linux and profit from that as suggested by someone else in such discussions on Slashdot?

      There can be many virtues to the market in delivering goods people think feel want. I say "feel" because of advertising. Some people also get addicted to drugs after a drug pusher gets them

      --
      A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
    3. Re:Getting Greece to be 99% self-sufficient by silfen · · Score: 1

      Many economic models are possible (including subsistence, gift, exchange, and planned, or a mix). The choice depends what sort of society you want and what your priorities are and what your cultural history is.

      "Choice"? Whose "choice" are you talking about? If it's a "choice" that is made for an entire society or nation, then it necessarily tramples on the rights of many people.

      If you believe that individuals have the right of self-determination and that majorities don't have a right to oppress minorities, none of those systems are feasible "choices" as economic systems. Some of them are completely inconsistent with individual liberties, and others are consistent with individual liberties in that people may choose such transactions but may not be forced to participate in them (e.g., gift exchanges).

      When a country runs out of tear gas, isn't that a hint that it is possible for something to go wrong seriously with a market leaving many people unhappy?

      What does anything that's going on in Greece have to do with "markets"? The Greek economy is in the toilet because of the corruption and crony capitalism of the German and Greek governments. Neither Germany nor Greece have anything resembling a free market, and both are vehemently opposed to liberalism.

      But the same is true of free markets in practice, given monopolies, wealth centralization, regulatory capture, lobbying and (legal) vote buying by the wealthiest, and a host of other potential problems.

      Every single one of those problems is a problem with government, not with free markets. And bad as those problems are in our "regulated markets" and ochlocracy, they get a whole lot worse in all other systems that have ever been implemented.

      The one system we have never tried is a liberal government and free markets.

      Coupled with improved 3D printing for local on-demand production, this may totally transform our economy,

      The example of software is quite apt. You cannot freely gift physical objects in the US today, as you could in a liberal free market. However, the inability of government to regulate such exchanges means that we have taken that power away from government and restored the natural, liberal state of affairs. Techniques like desktop fabrication may do the same for physical objects. Bitcoin tried to undermine the ability of government to interfere with voluntary financial and business transactions; that struggle is still on-going, but government is likely to lose it too.

      A "gift economy" isn't an alternative to a clasically liberal free market economy, it is simply part of such an economy. And bit by bit, as technology gives people more control over their lives, we may realize liberal free market economy despite the corruption of our government and the totalitarian aspirations of our neighbors.

  47. Jane Jacobs suggested you want more currencies by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J...

    That is what is deeply wrong with the Euro (although the European Union was probably otherwise a good idea). The Euro went the wrong way. A solid currency needs to be backed by a community, city, state, or nation that has a well-defined common constitution governing the issuance of the currency according to the community's needs. The Euro never had that. Also, Jane Jacobs said currencies need to fluctuate based on the management of those communities -- so the more currencies you have, the finer grained-signals can be sent about people's confidence which helps communities self-correct their policies and manufacturing base and similar factors underlying their overall wealth production (including from "import replacement" as their currency becomes low valued relative to others and imports become expensive). Jane Jacobs outlines how the economic life of cities can be self-correcting if they have their own currencies, but if you have only one currency for many cities, then this only applies to the most powerful capital city and the rest of them tend to suffer relatively. So, the Euro was a dumb idea. Especially dumb in an age of computers and digital currencies that can be instantly converted. And now many countries in Europe (including Greece) are paying for it in human suffering.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  48. He has a "modest proposal" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yianis is one of the very few economists that actually has a proposal to fix EUs broken economy. Look it up: modest proposal.