Latest Developments

Alexis Tsipras has sent a letter to Jeroen Dijsselbloem of the euro-group (you can download the letter here, pdf), in which he requests a separate bailout from the ESM, essentially proposing that the ESM take over Greece’s liabilities for a period of two years. Unsaid, but implied, is that this would result in the referendum being recalled. More likely it is just a ploy to enhance Syriza’s chances of obtaining a “no” vote in the referendum.


Image via


Rumor has it that this letter was sent in the wake of “infighting at Syriza” over whether or not to hold the referendum. Reportedly some in Syriza fear that there is a risk that the “yes” vote will prevail and force Tsipras to resign and call for new elections. Anyway, these are just rumors, if not entirely implausible ones. The letter Tsipras sent in any case didn’t change anything, because the stance of the euro-group is that nothing new will be decided until after the referendum.

What struck us as far more interesting however, is how far Angela Merkel was apparently prepared to go in order to accommodate Greek demands. She let this slip when briefing her government coalition partners in Germany, the Social Democratic Party (SPD). She didn’t appraise her colleagues in her own party of this, apparently fearing their wrath. As Der Spiegel reports in its German language edition:


“On Monday evening, Angela Merkel had two messages to distribute. One of them the CDU chief delivered personally to the SPD parliamentary faction: She told the parliamentarians that she had in the end made offers in the negotiations with Greece that went way beyond the official line taken by EU finance ministers. The second message, this one to her own party, was delivered by finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble on the chancellor’s behest. At its core it amounted to: “We haven’t allowed them to pull a fast one on us”.

In reality, it seems that in order to arrive at an agreement with the Greeks, Merkel was prepared to make concessions which her own colleagues would undoubtedly have interpreted as “allowing them to pull a fast one on us”.


In case Tsipras had accepted the extension of the second aid package with its altered conditions, Merkel is said to have offered him the following in a final talk on Friday last week:


  • A third aid program
  • Debt relief, i.e., a partial debt restructuring
  • Investments amounting to EUR 35 billion


Especially the first two points are tricky, as they clearly go far beyond the position hitherto adopted by the euro zone countries.”


Is there anything else you need, Mr. Tsipras?

Photo credit: Stephanie Pilick / EPA


This is quite something. Of course, this wasn’t an “official” offer just a political promise: If you play ball, you’ll eventually get all you want and then some. Obviously, Merkel could neither sell such an offer to her own party, nor to the German electorate. The comments section below the article in “Der Spiegel” is seething with outrage, and probably represents a good overview over what the average German currently thinks about making such concessions.

Note that we have not mentioned the task of selling this offer to other members of the euro-group. They all know that the Greek debtberg can never be paid off. They are merely seeking a face-saving way of admitting it, and if possible, they want that to happen at a much later point in time, preferably when other people are in office.

Anyway, the above shows why in spite of Greece’s IMF default (sorry, “arrears situation”) and in spite of the negotiations having been broken off and the surprise announcement of a referendum, chances are high that the extend and pretend scheme will in the end be continued anyway. The only way it doesn’t happen is if Tsipras and Syriza have actually planned to erect a socialist paradise in Greece along the lines of Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela from the very beginning and have only strung everybody along.


Germany's greek liabilitiesGermany’s total Greek liabilities as of June 30, click to enlarge.


The Root of the Problem

In recent email correspondences we had the impression that we may have been misunderstood, or that it perhaps appeared that our assessment of the situation was partly contradictory. In one recent article, we e.g. pointed out that Greek finance minister Varoufakis is hated by EU politicians/bureaucrats precisely because he is not one of them. Admittedly he seems a bit volatile, but in this case, the underdog clearly has our sympathies.

Next we condemned Syriza and its ideological bent, and expressed bewilderment at Mr. Tsipras breaking off negotiations in which the two sides were only a smidgen apart. In the meantime it has turned out that the creditors had even backed down on a specific sticking point with respect to the VAT issue. Greece has a very complex VAT system, which includes exemptions for the tourism sector. In this case, the Greek government was actually correct in insisting that a repeal of this exemption would be disastrous for the only sector of the economy that seems to be doing well (we made a remark that whether or not such an exemption existed didn’t make a difference, but that was only in reference to the debtberg. It makes no difference with respect to the ability to pay it back).

Anyway, we have discussed our view the fundamental issues many times, but just to clear up where we stand once and for all, we will summarize it here again. Let us begin with the EU. In its current incarnation, it is a largely unaccountable, bureaucratic Leviathan, well on its way to becoming a centralized socialistic super-state. This is not what the European Community was originally meant to become according to its founders (for a detailed discussion of this, see: “The European Idea”).


Shuman,deGasperi and AdenauerShumann, de Gasperi and Adenauer – the founders of the EU. Their vision of the European Community was quite different from what it has become in the meantime.

Photos via Wikimedia Commons


In brief, the founders of the EU wanted to roll back the damage done by the anti-liberal ideologies that had completely swamped Europe between 1914 and 1945, i.e., fascism and socialism. They wanted to restore the Europe that had existed before this time: One in which trade was free and people and capital could move freely as well. We don’t believe they would ever have expected that the supra-national bureaucracy of the EU would one day make decisions such as how much water may pass through a shower-head, or that it would be in a position to outlaw the incandescent light bulb.

In the wake of the 2008 crisis, the underlying problem that bedevils the fractionally reserved banking system came to the fore rather forcefully in Europe. Given the design of the modern monetary system, in which government debt represents one of the most important “assets” held by banks and in which the banking cartel and government are deeply intertwined on many levels, a sovereign debt crisis automatically becomes a banking crisis as well.

Since fractionally reserved banks are in fact only able to pay out money entrusted to them by depositors to a vanishingly small number of account holders “on demand” (in clear violation of the contractual stipulations governing demand deposits), even a small wave of withdrawal requests can bankrupt them immediately. The only reason why they can escape immediate bankruptcy is that the central bank can start up its printing press and lend newly created money to distressed banks in exchange for what are often illiquid assets.

Normally, a similar mechanism applies to governments in debt distress. Everybody knows that not a single government will ever pay back its debts according to term of the contract (at the very least, it will be continually devalued by monetary debasement). Nevertheless, holders of government debt usually rely on the fact that in extremis, if a government finds it can no longer continue the debt roll-over Ponzi, the central bank will print money and bail it out. Too big a bailout may result in the currency losing its value completely, but most debt holders of course believe that they will be able to side-step such an eventuality.


banking-crisisA taxpayer trying to withdraw her share

Cartoon by Ed Stein


However, in the euro area, there is now a supra-national central bank in charge, and its statutes explicitly proscribe the financing of governments. Thus the twin sovereign debt and banking crisis had a chance to fester for a while, reminding everybody of the inherent insolvency of both fractionally reserved banks and hopelessly over-indebted governments. Before things could get out of hand completely, it was decided that the statutes were open to interpretation. In the meantime, the euro area’s true money supply has been inflated by nearly 60% and its current annual growth rate stands at nearly 13%. Problem seemingly “solved”.


Euro area money supplyEuro area money supply – print, print, print and click to enlarge.


And yet, the euro area’s construction means that the costs of bailouts have to be shared, and this is an open invitation for governments to break the rules. It is essentially a tragedy of the commons situation. Hence the efforts to somehow make every country comply with said rules and the need to tie bailouts to conditions. Those who get bailed out have to relinquish quite a bit of their vaunted “fiscal sovereignty”.

For the reasons discussed above, bailouts of governments are always also stealth bailouts of the banking system. The “Guardian” has apparently only noticed this very recently, but the rest of the world has always been aware that the bailout of Greece was in reality a stealth bailout of banks both domiciled in Greece itself and farther to the North. Note here that EU governments were indeed facing a very difficult situation, which results from the very nature of the fractionally reserved banking system.

It would have been best to allow unsound credit to be liquidated and insolvent institutions to go under. However, this would immediately have revealed the situation of depositors, many of whom would have been wiped out. From the perspective of politicians having to decide whether or not to bail out banks and assorted governments, they only had to ask themselves what was more likely to cost them their job: bailouts that are unpopular, but the financial impact of which is distributed across the entire citizenry and stretches far into the future, or bankruptcies in which countless depositors lose the bulk of their savings right away.


Scenes no politician wants to see: People line up outside the Postscheckamt in Berlin to withdraw their deposits in July 1931

Photo credit: DPA – Bildfunk


The credit bubble that has been festering since Nixon unilaterally cut the final tie between money and gold has grown to such monstrous proportions, that a liquidation of the unsound debt claims the system has created would be politically completely unpalatable. Those who demand a “debt jubilee” have to keep in mind that every balance sheet has two sides. If someone’s debt is wiped out, so are someone else’s assets. Many of those on the asset side of the equation are not really there voluntarily. Depositors generally believe the bank has their money; the fact that this is not so, is not something they have voluntarily agreed to.


What Needs to be Done

Another question we received was: What would you do? What’s the solution? There is one interesting remark in the above mentioned Guardian article that requires comment in this context. After listing where all the bailout money went, it is noted that:


“Less than 10% of the bailout money was left to be used by the government for reforming its economy and safeguarding weaker members of society.”


Since when is money required to “reform the economy”? And if a government has to worry about “safeguarding weaker members of society”, what keeps it from shifting its spending priorities? Governments that spend between 50 to 60% of total economic output every year surely have room to maneuver in this respect.

It is certainly true that the bailout of Greece was largely motivated by the desire to bail out banks. This in turn was driven by the desire to postpone the eventual bankruptcy of the entire “third way” welfare/warfare state system, this allegedly so wonderful mixture between socialism and capitalism. It is not true that bailout money is needed to reform Greece’s economy and administrative system. All that is needed for this is the willingness to implement reform.

This willingness is practically non-existent among all Western governments. The only situation in which they are prepared to take the often unpopular but necessary measures to reform their sclerotic economies are severe crises. It is also untrue that a devaluation of the currency is required to deal with an economic crisis. The devaluation “solution” is nothing but smoke and mirrors. It benefits only a small sector of the economy, and even that benefit is strictly temporary.

If we look at Europe, we can see that the Baltic nations retained the euro pegs of their currencies when they were struck by crisis and embarked on a truly wrenching austerity retrenchment, involving GDP declines by 30% or more. Naturally, with such a large proportion of “GDP” these days attributed to government spending, large spending cuts will make this phantom growth component disappear. For the past several years, the Baltic nations are the envy of Europe in terms of economic growth and in terms of the small size of their public debt.


greece-government-spending-to-gdpThe ratio of government spending to GDP in Greece. This essentially shows that GDP has declined, but government spending hasn’t declined commensurately.


Even Spain and Ireland – which were beneficiaries of bailouts (contrary to the Baltic countries) – can boast of sporting some of the best economic growth rates in the euro area over the past two or three years. They were also forced to accept far-reaching reforms and wrenching adjustments as their huge capital malinvestment bubbles deflated.

It has been suggested to us that our criticism of Syriza and its Marxist ideology implied that we thought previous Greek governments were better. This is not the case. None of them have in fact done what needed doing, or alternatively, have done too little. The problem with Syriza is that it is even less likely to implement the kind of reforms Greece needs. The “troika” in many ways represents quite an obstacle as well, mainly due to its nonsensical insistence on tax hikes in the middle of a depression.

If one wants to see Greece return to a sustainable growth path, an effort should be made to cut through what is best described as a Gordian knot. It could actually be argued that important foundations for growth have by now been laid, as a lot of malinvested capital has definitely been liquidated in Greece. In a severe economic depression, people need to be given a chance to help themselves. In Greece, this is one of the biggest problems. Its byzantine labyrinth of regulations and inefficient bureaucracies is smothering all attempts by people to get something going on their own initiative.

We have previously discussed the example of a company run by young Greek entrepreneurs who wanted to sell olives over the internet. Given that the company is selling food items, it requires permits. In the US, it received all necessary permits within 24 hours. In Greece it was involved in a ten-month long unnerving and costly battle with intransigent bureaucrats, who seemingly did everything to stop this business from coming into being. In one hysterical development along the line, one of the bureaucracies that needed to give its placet even demanded that the owners of the web site supply it with samples of their stool.

Given that there are tens of thousands of often contradictory regulations and an impenetrable jungle of decrees and responsibilities, the complexity of which is such that ministers often have no idea what their own administrative apparatus is doing and whether it will actually implement their directives, radical surgery has to be applied. How difficult can it be to simply put over-arching laws in place that unmake this tangle by taking precedence over it? Why hasn’t this been done long ago already? Our guess is that the culprit is the clientelism of Greek politics. Statesmanship doesn’t pay. The party that gets the majority of the vote, receives an extra 50 seats in parliament. As a result, only the interests of relatively small voting blocs need to be satisfied in order to remain in power.

The most essential tasks in Greece are the liberalization of the economy and streamlining of the bureaucracy. The latter is more difficult, but surely it is not impossible. Syriza should use the support it currently enjoys to make the effort, but this would be contrary to its ideology. As Aristides Hatzis recently remarked, many in Syriza are laboring under the misconception that Greece is already some sort of neo-liberal paradise. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Naturally, we do agree with the argument often forwarded by Mr. Varoufakis that the entire extend-and-pretend bailout scheme was madness from the very beginning and is even more unsustainable today than it was before. However, as the leak of Mrs. Merkel’s offers mentioned above indicates, it is certainly possible for the Greek government to eventually get out from this debt straightjacket. It only requires a bit of diplomatic finesse.


Greek debtThe Greek sovereign debtberg



Greece should really give the free market a try. Meanwhile, the “institutions” should be careful not to create fresh obstacles to economic growth by insisting on more and more tax hikes. Greece’s private sector is battered more than enough already. Greece also doesn’t need promises of even greater showers of money in the form of EU-funded “investments”, which usually end up producing little but white elephants. What it needs is genuine reform.


Greek debt paymentsSchedule of Greek debt payments until October 2015 – click to enlarge.


Charts by: Der Spiegel, TradingEconomics, ECB




Dear Readers!

You may have noticed that our header carries ab black flag. This is due to the recent passing of the main author of the Acting Man blog, Heinz Blasnik, under his nom de plume 'Pater Tenebrarum'. We want to thank you for following his blog for meanwhile 11 years and refer you to the 'Acting Man Classics' on the sidebar to get an introduction to his way of seeing economics. In the future, we will keep the blog running with regular uptates from our well known Co-Authors. For that, some financial help would be greatly appreciated. A special thank you to all readers who have already chipped in, your generosity is greatly appreciated. Regardless of that, we are honored by everybody's readership and hope we have managed to add a little value to your life.


Bitcoin address: 12vB2LeWQNjWh59tyfWw23ySqJ9kTfJifA


7 Responses to “Greece: The Problem and the Solution”

  • My solution for Grease is for it to reassert its sovereignty by issuing a debt free drachma and tender it at a considerable premium against its debt, which was garnered through a monetary/credit fraud perpetrated against the citizens of Grease by a Eurotrash bankster cartel.

  • herepog:

    Re: “For the past several years, the Baltic nations are the envy of Europe in terms of economic growth and in terms of the small size of their public debt.”

    The only rush of immigrants to the Baltic states are NATO employees on the spring/summer tour in armored tour “buses.”

  • Crysangle:

    Also I would like to bring in the meaning or definition of society , social , socialism , and its relatives .

    I don’t think that a fuller understanding of economics is possible without including these concepts from a relatively neutral perspective .

    If we trace the evolution of man-kinds economies , we would undoubtedly start with something tribal, where authority and duty was either pre-established by a hierarchy or tradition. This community would be designed to function efficiently under the circumstance .

    As agriculture and productivity introduced itself there would be more leeway for individual expression and pursuit , for individual profit also . So you would eventually end up with the closer tribe of family , friends and associates , and the wider tribe of what would start to look like an ethnic society .

    Somewhere along the way you could add in a wider trade of goods , accounting , and the start of a more distant form of legislature to manage the whole .

    Eventually that legislature would become what we know as government , maybe so far removed from the essence of basic need and tribal sentiment that direct participation became the compromise and norm , democracy .

    Democracy then decided it would compromise society in the name of itself , and hence we end up with socialism , the deep state , presiding over individual equality . The mechanisms of profit were empowered to finance and social management set in with the complicity of legislative needs .

    That is not what I really wanted to talk of though . Somewhere in that evolution exists the freedom of enterprise , freedom of market , freedom of movement , defence of property and so on , combined with individual ability to calculate effort and profit accordingly , to produce and be rewarded fairly – the tenets of Austrian economics if you will . Those do not necessarily have to conflict with state in any way , and they should not conflict with the essence of society as all that a person is doing is contributing his ability and placing it to market .

    Yet somewhere in all of this individual effort/reward seems to have become distorted , whether by financial profit seeking , socialist mis-allocation, capitalist monopoly or a flaccid communism .

    Obligation seems to have outstripped right , ownership has become punitive .

    So in the confusion and stress that exists , we are using Greece as an example here , where does a person turn to ?

    He will turn to tribe I think , he will not turn to some economic ideal but to the people he knows and trusts most . First family and friends … then local society and associates … then his ethnic society or nation … then his government if those do not have an answer , he will choose a government which has the closest answer to his observations.

    So there is no wonder that people will choose a government that will help them , especially after having tried mass private individualistic offerings only to find the result completely distorted and the ensuing legislatures corruptly influenced .

    Are you going to blame socialism for impeding a free expression and successful evolution , or are you going to blame financial corruption and greed for sending a country in a false direction … with just a little more to do to get there … and next year … and the year after too … ?

    Whichever you choose , people will blame the one that seems to unfairly profit from them , the one that will openly take everything they have worked for away , not just a % , the one that showed no personal regard except their own ability to profit . It is no wonder people turn to the left and nationalism , foreign investment does not care for Greek society any more than turning a profit , and it has taken those without that scruple with it .

    • rodney:

      We can keep running in circles forever wondering what the problem is once we forget the simple fact that not enough people defend free market economics and the ideas of liberty.

      Things become a lot clearer when you define your terms precisely. Socialism means public ownership of the means of production. Financial corruption and greed is a product of central banks and the banking cartel’s extreme privileges … themselves a product of statist ideology. When it comes to socialism, we don’t need to go further than Mises; he explained what is wrong with it, both on economic and moral grounds.

      Socialism, fascism, statism … these ideas propose coercively imposing their plans upon individuals. Which is to blame? all of them.

      Never forget that financialization of the economy is not possible under true free markets, a sound money system, and free and full reserve banking. In such a setup, financiers have to produce something of value to make a living, just like anybody else, and the share of the financial sector relative to the size of the economy shrinks considerably.

  • Crysangle:


    Though I doubt you intentionally missed a step when stating :

    “Given the design of the modern monetary system, in which government debt represents one of the most important “assets” held by banks and in which the banking cartel and government are deeply intertwined on many levels, a sovereign debt crisis automatically becomes a banking crisis as well.”

    Maybe it would be worth considering that the root of the sovereign / banking crisis in fact originated from a banking crisis . Most EU countries were happily spending their ‘fair’ share of the boom up until 2008 , with minimal deficits and ‘acceptable’ levels of sovereign debt . It was only after the (mostly housing based) asset boom and associated activity stopped that both national accounting , and banking accounting , failed . The national accounting was temporarily rectified by increased borrowing (which continues at the cost of debt/GDP to this day) , increased taxation , and in the name of ‘austerity’ , slowed increase in government spending, with sometimes a look for efficiency thrown in (rewarded by lower central rates of course) .

    This national accounting meander allowed for the support of bank accounting and the accounting of the general public . Banks were rewarded indirectly by the new flow of money into the economy via public debt , that money went into the pockets of citizens who could no longer pay off private debt , it helped support prices across the economy so supporting the financial framework upon which it was built . It both bailed out the banks past mistakes , the established sector of society that was financed or held assets , as well as public activity in the economy and public obligations based on previous activity .

    Add to this that governments stepped in directly to bail out banks at public liability , and not only that , they boosted bank profits with ‘high grade’ sovereign debt from which to carry a secure profit and rebuild their accounts .

    It is , in my opinion , only at this point that the sovereign debt crisis becomes a banking crisis .

    The above description is for several EU countries , and surely in other parts of the world the relationship between banks and sovereigns has a slightly different history . So in sum , I don’t think anyone would be far wrong to blame FRL and the financial system for today’s impasse , not forgetting of course that it is the government and national law that encourages or allows it to exist as it does in the first place – something the citizenry seems not too concerned about .

    The reason for that acceptance by the public is that the vast majority of people in the western world are subscribed to that system , if they don’t hold public employment they hold assets and savings , and if they have neither they may appreciate the state being at hand either way .

    What should be borne in mind is that this whole set up is principally for the older generations , for the value systems they created , for their pensions , the history of nation they experienced .

    Look at Greece or Spain though , you have 50% youth unemployment for under 25’s . I cannot believe that those in the established position can be that stupid , it unsettles me that they miss the idea of youth and enterprise and opportunity , it sickens me actually . When you consider that the youth will often have been trained and promised the sky for their learning , and either way only to find no place and no access to a minimally decent lifestyle beyond reach due to the propped up economics designed to maintain the worth of the already owners (public or private) , even more so .

    This is bad , this is really bad , I have no other words for it , and it leaves that younger generation at the mercy of whatever torment might whip up change . There is no use trying to explain how difficult things were in your own youth , how you had to strive to create what you own – that is irrelevant to the paradigms the youth of today face , and they face it with only a ruptured, visibly corrupted society, as a backdrop of support .

    • zerobs:

      Add to this that governments stepped in directly to bail out banks at public liability

      Once that occurs, it ceases to be a banking crisis and becomes government bankruptcy – both financially and morally.

      Despite his other flawed thinking, Milton Friedman was at least correct in his solution to a banking crisis: the insolvent institution is CLOSED and the printing presses are used to make the depositors “whole”. You make the depositors whole (numerically speaking) to avert the crisis spreading to other banks that can survive without a run – and the useless, bankrupt institution vanishes.

      Instead, the West keeps the useless bankrupt institutions around which only serves to reward incompetence and criminality. Sure, Friedman’s solution isn’t “fair” in the strictest sense as the printing debases everyone’s cash wealth, but the bailouts do the exact same thing and then expand the unfairness by rewarding the stewards of the insolvent institution – the worst that happens to them is they get some parting gifts.

      The only fiscally sound decision Ben Bernanke ever made was letting Lehman collapse. Naturally, the man regrets his one fiscally sound decision. But this is what welfare states and their puppet masters do. They cannot operate any other way, otherwise they are no longer welfare states. Welfare states by definition are morally bankrupt and in practice fiscally bankrupt. They survive on the notion that its supporters would rather be enslaved than impoverished.

      • HitTheFan:

        The Banking rules in the EZ are going to mean that banks will self fund the depositor compensation scheme, for those with up to 100,000€.

        That’s a perfect set up. Above 100,000, let the buyer beware.
        Ordo-liberalism, combined with a supra national central banking system, and gold settlement, and we’re on the path to better days.

Your comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Most read in the last 20 days:

  • Perversity: Thy Name is Dollar
    Perversity: Thy Name is Dollar If you ask most people, “what is money?” they will answer that money is the generally accepted medium of exchange. If you ask Google Images, it will show you many pictures of green pieces of paper. Virtually everyone agrees that money means the dollar.   Image credit: Cildo Meireles   Breaking Down the Dollar Monetary System What does it mean to have a dollar? If you hold a piece of paper with green ink on it, which says “ONE...
  • What’s In Your Loan?
      Opposing Monetary Directions “Real estate is the future of the monetary system,” declares a real estate bug. Does this make any sense? We would ask him this. “OK how will houses be borrowed and lent?” “Look at this housing bond,” he says, pointing to a bond denominated in dollars, with principal and interest paid in dollars. “What do you mean ‘housing’ bond’,” we ask, “it’s a bond denominated in dollars!” “Yes, but housing is the...

Support Acting Man

Austrian Theory and Investment


THE GOLD CARTEL: Government Intervention on Gold, the Mega Bubble in Paper and What This Means for Your Future

Realtime Charts


Gold in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Gold in EUR:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Silver in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Platinum in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



USD - Index:

[Most Recent USD from]


Mish Talk

    Buy Silver Now!
    Buy Gold Now!