“Das Transnational Institute beziffert die Kosten auf mindestens 747 Milliarden Euro und kritisiert, dass die Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaften für ihre früheren Fehler noch belohnt werden…”Das Geschäft mit Bankenrettungen” In einer aktuellen Analyse beziffert das “Transnational Institute” die Kosten der angeglich “alternativlosen” Bankenrettung auf mindestens 747 Milliarden Euro, die die europäischen Steuerzahler meist durch Erhöhung von Staatsschulden und mit jährlich immer neuen Zinszahlungen bestreiten mußten. Dazu kommen noch über 1,2 Billionen für Bürgschaften und Garantien. Read More »
‘Barely a year after its launch, a new European law that was supposed to put an end to bank bail-outs looks set to be failing already.
20 billion Euro. This is the total size of the cheque the Italian government is getting ready to sign, once again, to bail out Monte dei Paschi, the country’s third-largest bank, and possibly several other of the country’s ailing lenders. A drop in the ocean considering Italy’s public debt, which now stands at an eye-watering 2,224 billion Euro. And still, the bill would amount to some 334 EUR for every man, woman and child in the country. Ten years after the onset of the global financial crisis, taxpayer-funded bank bail‑outs could be back with a vengeance. How did this come to pass?
Since the beginning of 2016, a new European law ‒ the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive ‒ has been in force to stop governments, once and for all, from bailing out big banks with taxpayers’ money arguing that they were “too big to fail”. The objective was clear: like any normal company, banks that fail should be liquidated. Banks that are too big to be liquidated in one fell swoop should be restructured and/or wound up at their investors’ expense, a process known as “resolution”. No longer should taxpayers foot the bill for bankers’ mistakes. If this sounded too good to be true, it probably was.
“The political appeal of protecting a large bank from being put into resolution is obvious.”
The new law already had some exceptions built in, allowing politicians to protect a bank from being wound up if its demise was likely to cause serious problems for the wider economy. To qualify for a taxpayer-funded rescue – or “precautionary recapitalisation” – that bank would, however, need to be fundamentally healthy and able to prove that its need for government support is only temporary. Moreover, it was made explicit that public funds could not be used to cover losses that have already occurred or which are expected to crystallise in the near term. Now experts across Europe question whether Monte dei Paschi, which is now on its third state-funded bail-out (after 2009 and 2012), complies with these criteria. By contrast, the European Central Bank – which is responsible, together with the Single Resolution Board, for ordering the bank to be restructured or wound up – appears to be satisfied it does. It will be up to the European Commission now to judge whether the Italian government’s rescue plan complies with State Aid rules. Regardless of whether or not that plan will ultimately pass muster – it looks as if the EU’s new legal framework for dealing with failing banks has been deftly sidestepped at its first big test.’
The financial crisis has shown that there is a significant lack of adequate tools at Union level to deal effectively with unsound or failing credit institutions and investment firms (‘institutions’). Such tools are needed, in particular, to prevent insolvency or, when insolvency occurs, to minimise negative repercussions by preserving the systemically important functions of the institution concerned. During the crisis, those challenges were a major factor that forced Member States to save institutions using taxpayers’ money. The objective of a credible recovery and resolution framework is to obviate the need for such action to the greatest extent possible.
He was noted for his wide-ranging political connections and foreign travel, in which he met with many foreign leaders. His fortune was estimated at $3.3 billion at the time of his death in March 2017.
Riverside South is a proposed skyscraper development in Canary Wharf, London. Some below ground-level work was completed by 2014 on behalf of investment bank J.P. Morgan & Co., which bought a 999-year lease on the site with the intention of making the building its London office, but the firm has now moved into an existing Canary Wharf building. Future plans for Riverside South have not been publicised.
“After World War II, Germany built a federal system where wealth is distributed between states, under the supervision of the federal government.
This was coupled with a corporatist economic model that incorporates the economic elites into the leadership structure and strong social safety nets that prevent social upheaval.”
Thanks Forbes for this precise outside view on our problem of corruption at highest levels.
So state welfare is a “shut up and be happy” bonus for all those trouble makers that would and could interfere in the economic elites business models.
Let us not forget – it is supposed to be a democracy. But well Bismarck thought of democracy being ruled by corrupt technocrats. Exactly what we have now.
So the German question is just as in any western Nation – a question of – how to fight corruption – how to allow transparency and a free share for everyone from the economy and the planets resources – how to limit greed for power and control – how to prevent undemocratic governments such as the EU Rat/EU Kommision/ECB leadership.
I can tell you: By decentralizing government and self organization – small parts being responsible for themselves – rather than big overarching structures far away that people can not relate to.
But well the New World Order and monopolists has other plans.
They want to expand the monopolies.
So what happens is – one day – there might be one bank – one company doing anything (Amazon?) – one government – one currency – just as Hitler wanted it to be.
Hello Big Brother and George Orwell.
“This entire social-political structure relies on an economic model that is heavily dependent on exports.”
Yes – that is what happens if you let big companies like Siemens do whatever they like. They cut jobs, wages and maximize their profits/exports.
No matter the social or environmental costs.
Completely reckless behavior of the economic elite.
They are off to the Bahamas if the whole thing goes up in smoke and flames.
Who cares about the poor working class? Nobody.
They can not afford lobbyists and bribery.
“A weak and occupied West Germany saw membership in the European Economic Community (the European Union’s predecessor) as a way to peacefully return to the international community after two world wars.”
Interesting – did not know that – but very correct – we are still US-occupied. (*pssst* don’t tell anybody… just count the military bases and make up your own mind)
“The political and economic integration of Western Europe was actually a French idea encouraged by a great deal of U.S. pressure. After Germany’s reunification in 1990, the creation of the eurozone followed a similar pattern. Paris saw the introduction of a common currency as a way to bind France and Germany so close together that another war between them would be impossible. At the time, the idea of another Franco-German war did not seem as far-fetched as it does now, and to a large extent losing the deutsche mark was the price that Germany had to pay for reunification.”
Haha! This is just a joke – If Chancellor Kohl says – Euro and Europe is about preventing war – than he traded real war for economic war – and the euro was hugely beneficial for the economic elites.
So i don’t buy this “make pace not war”.
Those people are so far away from everyday life of citizens as the king and queens before the french revolution.
So i think it is fair to say – the Euro was made BY the economic elites FOR the economic elites – including the Banks.
“But the euro’s arrival deprived some of Germany’s main trade partners of the ability to devalue their currencies to compete against their neighbor in the north. At the time the bargain seemed fair, since countries in Mediterranean Europe were suddenly able to issue debt at Northern European interest rates, which they did enthusiastically. Access to cheap debt made many countries in the eurozone delay the introduction of structural reforms in their increasingly less competitive economies.”
Sorry to say this but this is BULLSHIT.
Since brettonwoods – we know – you can not fix the currency of multiple nations with different strong economies. IT JUST DOES NOT WORK 😀
Maybe i and Goldman Sachs are the only one’s knowing that but well…
“The coming storm in the eurozone does not necessarily have to destroy it.
The U.S. government could decide to avoid a trade war with its allies in Europe.
Moderate forces could win the general elections in France and Italy, and Greece and its creditors could find yet another last-minute agreement.
But the fact that the eurozone has reached a point where the entire system can collapse because of an election, a bailout negotiation or measures taken by a foreign government speaks volumes of its fragility.”
Yeah – let us just completely ignore that the Euro was NEVER about sustainability or saving the planet.
Listen to Bernard Lietaer and you will know why “monetary monocultures” are fragile.
Let us also forget how non-democratic the EU Kommission / EU Rat / ECB board is formed… and people feel ignored here just as in the US.
“Even if the doomsday scenario is averted in 2017, the relief may last only until the next election. In Europe, as in the United States, there are millions of voters who feel that the alleged benefits of globalization have not reached them, and who believe that their economic problems could be solved by putting an end to the free movement of people, goods and services — the very principles upon which European integration was built.”
Well i guess the strongest voting ballot is not during elections – but in the everyday life – it is called money.
And the Euro has taken away a lot of buying power from Germans… so they feel fooled and are HIGHLY skeptical of anything that non-democratic Brusselocrats are doing…
I can tell you how to restore peace and order:
Give every family 1 hectar of land and show them how to grow food on it.
Give them solar power to become independent from evil nuclear and oil monopolists.
Give them the right to use water for free.
Dismantle monopolies and large power structures and break them down to local smaller ones.
The future will be decentral and local.
You could do all that – but you either lack the consciousness to such simpleness or the will or both.
I don’t think Russia will invade if the Euro-Zone collapses. They have their own economic problems plus growing gap between rich and poor.
Whatever may be the case – continuing the old paths just piles up the amount of waste and mayhem we will have to clean up later anyway…
The question is – will Mr Kohl survive the Euro-Zone or will the Euro-Zone survive aging and sick Mr Kohl?
He was a corrupt and an asshole of a family father… no one will mourn him.
“Feb 07, 2017
(PARIS)—Francois Fillon on Monday defiantly refused to drop out of the race to be France’s next president despite an investigation into whether well-paid political jobs he gave his wife, son and daughter were genuine, a scandal that has knocked him from his perch as favorite in the April-May voting.”