Olá, Visitante. Por favor entre ou registe-se se ainda não for membro.

Entrar com nome de utilizador, password e duração da sessão
 

Autor Tópico: Grécia - Tópico principal  (Lida 1845137 vezes)

vbm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 13839
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2780 em: 2015-04-20 21:29:43 »
Os acontecimentos parecem encaminhar-se para a Grécia entrar em ruptura de pagamentos, sem sair do euro, e distribuindo 'vales'-'dracmas' de pagamento futuro, moeda virtual, negociável entre particulares; uma boa oportunidade para os especuladores entrarem no jogo de roleta de casino a feijões!

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2781 em: 2015-04-21 00:17:45 »
UPDATE 2-ECB's Constancio - default no reason to quit euro as Greece cash pinch worsens
* Greece facing increasingly difficult cash squeeze

* Constancio says any capital controls must be temporary

* Says ECB still convinced Greece will stay in euro (Adds detail, comments)

By John O'Donnell and Jonathan Gould

FRANKFURT, April 20 (Reuters) - A country that defaults would not have to leave the euro, the European Central Bank's vice president said on Monday, in frank remarks about Greece that also touched on possible capital controls and showed how acute Athens' problems have become.

Speaking as Greece ordered public sector entities to transfer idle reserves to the central bank to help with a cash squeeze, Vitor Constancio discussed the possibility of a debt default and controls on the movement of money, saying neither necessarily meant a departure from the currency bloc.

"If a default will happen ... the legislation does not allow that a country that has a default ... can be expelled from the euro," he told the European Parliament, saying that Greek banks had been told not to increase their exposure to the state to avoid "a possible credit event regarding the state".

The comments from the typically reserved Constancio underscore the seriousness of Greece's predicament and are the most open yet from the ECB, which is providing 110 billion euros of liquidity to the country and its banks.

Constancio also touched on the possibility of capital controls.

"Capital controls can only be introduced if the Greek government requests," he said, adding that they should be temporary and exceptional. "As you saw in the case of Cyprus, capital controls did not imply getting out of the euro."

Constancio underscored ECB support for Greece, telling lawmakers he was sure it would stay in the currency bloc.

"We are convinced at the ECB that there will be no Greek exit," he said. "The (European Union) treaty does not foresee that a country can be formally, legally expelled from the euro. We think it should not happen."

As it stands, the central bank is approving an ever growing amount of emergency funding for Greece's lenders. While Constancio said this could not continue regardless of the circumstances, he hinted that the ECB would be loath to pull the plug.

"If the state defaults, that has no automatic implications regarding the banks, if the banks have not defaulted, if the banks are solvent and if the banks have collateral that is accepted," Constancio said.

Greece is close to having to repay the International Monetary Fund about 1 billion euros in May and officials at the ECB are growing concerned.

The ECB has analysed a scenario in which Greece runs out of money and starts paying civil servants with IOUs, creating a virtual second currency within the euro bloc, people with knowledge of the exercise told Reuters last week.
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2782 em: 2015-04-21 00:23:39 »
Krugman; Greece Shouldn't Have Joined The Euro But That Doesn't Mean It Should Leave


This all sounds reasonable to me. At least the logical process used to reach the conclusion is correct, although I think I still come up with a different end solution, which is that Greece should still leave the euro. For I’m rather of the view that the structural changes needed to make an economy part of an optimal currency area are very much larger than most seem to think. Meaning that while the immediate effects of Greece leaving would not be nice, not leaving would be worse. Simply because there would be another crisis along in a decade or three and the whole thing would then play out again.

Having said that, the logic Krugman is using here seems just fine:

You can make a pretty good case that the costs of this adjustment were so large that Greece would have been better off exiting the euro in 2010. You can make an even better case that Greece would have been much better off if it had never joined in the first place. But at this point these are sunk costs. If Greece can negotiate a halfway reasonable compromise, one that more or less pauses further austerity, it’s hard to see that the risks of exit would be worth it.

Krugman’s evidence there being that the economic pain in Greece these past few years has been absolutely horrendous (outside wartime not really something we’ve ever seen in any other advanced economy) and so they probably would have been better off by now if they’d never taken part in the experiment in the first place. OK, so, now the pain has taken place why not stay where they are and not have the further pain of Grexit?

Perfectly reasonable view but one that I think fails for the following point. Which is that this isn’t paying due attention to the underlying theory here, that of optimal currency areas. I was writing about this back in 1998/9 (you can search the archives of sci.econ if you’re interested enough to try and find it): the point is that we don’t know what the actual problem will be if unsuitable economies are shoehorned into the same monetary system. But we do know what form the problem will take. We don’t know which countries, or for what reason, but when some economic shock comes along that has asymmetric effects on those different regions, economies, then we’ll not be able to alter economic (in this case, monetary) policy to solve both problems. Consider, just as an example, a single currency area that includes both oil producing and oil consuming regions. A change in the price of oil will obviously have asymmetric effects. But we can’t change interest rates to beat the problems that both of them face. What the shock is doesn’t matter: it’s that given unity of the policy area we’re not able to deploy the appropriate tools to both areas.


So, think of this current Greek problem. Sure, Krugman’s right, the pain of this adjustment has already been suffered so why suffer more through Grexit? But that is to assume that we’re not going to have any other asymmetric shocks that affect the eurozone in the future. Or, alternatively, to assume that this current round of reform in Greece will sufficiently alter the Greek economy that it is part of an optimal currency area with, say, Germany. That first contention, that there won’t be any more such shocks, is ludicrous. The second I simply don’t believe (and therefore you are entirely free to believe it if you wish). The standard line is that it took the US near 150 years to become an optimal currency area. And that itself required the fiscal unity of the growing Federal government post WWII. I don’t think Europe, in the obvious absence of that fiscal unity that isn’t going to happen anytime soon, is going to manage it in under a couple of decades. Despite times and technology being different.

Thus, to me, the point of Grexit is not to increase the pain of the current adjustment but to return to the drachma so that the next adjustment doesn’t have to employ this pain again.

Tim Worstall / Forbes
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 00:26:10 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2783 em: 2015-04-21 00:54:38 »
Os EUA têm zonas que produzem e não produzem petróleo, e possuem uma moeda única. E não possuem transferências declaradas entre Estados (embora algumas sejam implícitas devido à forma como estão organizados com um Estado Federal a tomar bastantes responsabilidades).
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2784 em: 2015-04-21 00:58:21 »
Os EUA têm zonas que produzem e não produzem petróleo, e possuem uma moeda única. E não possuem transferências declaradas entre Estados (embora algumas sejam implícitas devido à forma como estão organizados com um Estado Federal a tomar bastantes responsabilidades).

existem transferências entre o estado federal e os estados. e basta. é a mesma coisa que haver transferências entre estados. apenas existe um mediador que é o estado federal.

L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Kin2010

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 3989
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2785 em: 2015-04-21 01:13:09 »
comparação das capacidades militares da grécia e da turquia
a grécia é sexagésimo. a turquia é a décima potência militar do mundo.
com um vizinho destes, que já provou que usa o seu poder militar quando bem entender, o desarmamento unilateral era uma loucura.

L


Discordo. Precisamente devido à disparidade de forças, um pequeno país não terá chances de se defender só com as forças armadas convencionais em caso de ser atacado violentamente. Por isso, a melhor política é nem sequer tentar ter as mesmas armas convencionais do país inimigo maior, e em vez disso ter uma boa política de alianças com potências fortes que o possam defender do país inimigo, e em último caso, apostar numa guerra de guerrilha apenas. Este mix de soluções que apresentei acima é de longe mais racional para um país pequeno, e além disso de longe mais barato. Os submarinos, tanques, e quejandos, nem sequer se compram, poupa-se muita massa.

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2786 em: 2015-04-21 02:06:54 »
Os EUA têm zonas que produzem e não produzem petróleo, e possuem uma moeda única. E não possuem transferências declaradas entre Estados (embora algumas sejam implícitas devido à forma como estão organizados com um Estado Federal a tomar bastantes responsabilidades).


existem transferências entre o estado federal e os estados. e basta. é a mesma coisa que haver transferências entre estados. apenas existe um mediador que é o estado federal.

L


Essas transferências é suposto não serem desequilibradas (embora o sejam). O seja, não existem transferências do tipo que a Grécia espera obter (para colmatar dificuldades orçamentais, etc).

As transferências implícitas resultam de que os serviços do Estado Federal em cada Estado não são equilibrados com as contribuições, porque as contribuições estão indexadas a uma realidade (salários, etc) e os serviços a outra (reformas, apoios à pobreza, etc). Não resultam de uma intenção de favorecer Estados específicos.

Podes ver aqui:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 02:13:22 por Incognitus »
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2787 em: 2015-04-21 07:31:20 »
Os EUA têm zonas que produzem e não produzem petróleo, e possuem uma moeda única. E não possuem transferências declaradas entre Estados (embora algumas sejam implícitas devido à forma como estão organizados com um Estado Federal a tomar bastantes responsabilidades).


existem transferências entre o estado federal e os estados. e basta. é a mesma coisa que haver transferências entre estados. apenas existe um mediador que é o estado federal.

L


Essas transferências é suposto não serem desequilibradas (embora o sejam). O seja, não existem transferências do tipo que a Grécia espera obter (para colmatar dificuldades orçamentais, etc).

As transferências implícitas resultam de que os serviços do Estado Federal em cada Estado não são equilibrados com as contribuições, porque as contribuições estão indexadas a uma realidade (salários, etc) e os serviços a outra (reformas, apoios à pobreza, etc). Não resultam de uma intenção de favorecer Estados específicos.

Podes ver aqui:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state


não percebi onde é que discordas do que escrevi...

L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2788 em: 2015-04-21 10:50:47 »
Apenas no facto de que as transferências não são dirigidas para responderem a problemas pontuais. Não são arbitrárias. Existem devido à forma como o sistema está estruturado.

Ou seja, não é possível ao Estado Federal dizer "bem, o Arizona está com problemas orçamentais pelo que vamos para lá enviar uma pazada de dinheiro". Ou "bem, o Arkansas não consegue cumprir com as suas obrigações para com o Estado Federal pelo que vamos dar-lhe uma borla".
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Automek

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30976
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2789 em: 2015-04-21 11:42:31 »
primeiro despejaram para lá 74.000M e agora é que querem apertar a regras ?
BCE prepara-se para apertar o cerco à Grécia

tommy

  • Visitante
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2790 em: 2015-04-21 11:44:28 »
BCE e os alemães são uns anjinhos...ainda não perceberam como funciona a mente parasitária. Espero que a Merkel perca as eleições para alguém mais responsável.

http://observador.pt/especiais/e-se-a-grecia-nao-pagar-ao-fmi/

Citar
Somália, Sudão, Zimbabué, Iraque, Afeganistão, Libéria, República Democrática do Congo, Serra Leoa, Zâmbia, Perú e Sérvia. São pouco mais de uma dezena os países que tiveram em atraso, por um período prolongado, pagamentos ao FMI que deviam ter sido feitos para reembolsar empréstimos dados pelo Fundo a esses países.

Destes onze países, apenas três continuam nesta lista: Somália, Sudão e Zimbabué. Calculado à taxa de câmbio desta segunda-feira para os direitos de saque-especiais (SDR, sigla em inglês), no final de março estes três países deviam 1.442 milhões de euros ao FMI.
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 11:53:58 por tommy »

vbm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 13839
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2791 em: 2015-04-21 13:00:07 »
Não obstante as abreacções psicológicas,
assim como as lógicas, baseadas
em regras estabelecidas,

se o banco  de Frankfurt agir
como Victor Constâncio acha irá ser,

o Tesouro Grego será como qualquer outro
devedor particular de uma quantia em euros
ao seu respectivo credor.

Ou seja, importante vai ser pagar ao FMI,
porventura por causa do que nele se estipule
para a comunidade internacional
no  caso de incumprimento
ao Fundo...

Mas, para todos os demais credores da Grécia,
a dívida será como a de um qualquer particular,
corporação ou cidadão.

De modo que, esse incumprimento acomodar-se-á
do modo objectivamente possível, e sempre na sombra
acolhedora e semi-avalizadora do banco emissor de Frankfurt.


Bem calculado pela Grécia.
Péssimo plano arranjista
da parte europeia da Troika.
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 13:00:52 por vbm »

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2792 em: 2015-04-21 14:38:06 »
Apenas no facto de que as transferências não são dirigidas para responderem a problemas pontuais.


as maiores até são capazes de ser.

como quando o Katrina destruiu New Orleans ou o Sandy arrasou a costa de NJ.
houve transferências imediatas de bis - nomeadamente dos fundos do FEMA.
O FEMA é federal mas suportado pelos impostos dos cidadãos de todos os estados.
No momento em que uma transferência federal é feita, é como se os outros estados estivessem a contribuir para a mitigação do desastre.
Na realidade já contribuíram - constituindo os fundos do FEMA - e contribuirão no futuro para os repôr depois de terem sido consumidos no desastre.
há transferências net de um estado para o outro. e não são empréstimos. O Louisiana ou New Jersey não ficam em dívida nem passam a contribuir mais por terem sido vírimas de uma catástrofe.

Dei o exemplo de desatres naturais como podia dar o exemplo de 15 % de desemprego num estado e 5 % noutro. o excesso acima da média  das contribuições federais para o fundo de desemprego são na realidade suportadas solidariamente pelos outros estados. sempre através do estado federal. não há transferências directas nem nunca ninguém disse que havia.

L
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 14:39:54 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Deus Menor

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 1972
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2793 em: 2015-04-21 14:49:21 »
A Europa , ao deixar adiar uma decisão , está a permitir um aumento
do buraco como os 74 bi do BCE já são exemplo cabal.

Ninguém, no seu perfeito juízo, pode dizer que a UE e BCE não fizeram tudo para
 uma solução duradoura que permita resolver o problema da dívida Grega.
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 14:51:50 por Deus Menor »

marreco

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Mensagens: 44
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2794 em: 2015-04-21 15:49:34 »
Os estados unidos são um país. A UE não passa de uma amálgama de povos que se detestam mutuamente.

valves1

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 1160
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2795 em: 2015-04-21 16:31:01 »
Citar
A única forma de reduzir o orçamento militar seria um tratado de paz mediado e controlado pela NATO e a resolução da questão cipriota.
A Turquia não me parece inclinada para qualquer uma das coisas. E com a radicalização islâmica conduzida pelo Erdogan, cada vez menos.
Já nem sei até que ponto é que a Turquia é útil para a NATO.


A Turquia  faz fronteira  com alguns paises entre os quais  a Siria  o Iraque e a  Russia; Por muito que Erdogan seja radical nas suas posicoes a Grecia  e ainda e um dos seus  vizinhos mais  fiaveis;
A Turquia concretizar as suas ambições  territoriais no Mediterraneo a custa da grecia tornar-lhe ia um alvo muito mais vulneravel em relacao a russia por exemplo com quem tambem tem disputas territoriais; Para agravar mais a situacao  a sul  confronta-se tambem com imensas faixas de territorio iraquiano ou Sirio nas maos do Islamic state;   A preservação  da turquia como estado  ( uma vez que nem de uma nacao se trata  )   depende muito da Turquia nao levantar muitas ondas com os vizinhos sob pena de nao so perder terrenos nas fronteiras em disputa com os varios estados com quem faz fronteira como se ver a bracos com guerras civis internas ( ver caso do curdistao ) isto para nao falar  nas ambicoes expansionistas do islamic state em territorio turco;
Mas tu proprio ja referiste o grande motivo pelo qual a grecia esta a investir em armamento : ( contentar os parceiros de coligacacao de extrema direita de  quem precisa para governar )

Cumpts
"O poder só sobe a cabeça quando encontra o local vazio."

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2796 em: 2015-04-21 17:41:27 »
Greece crisis
Financial crisis and defense cuts: The view from Greece  1

The financial crisis that hit Greece in 2010 has forced the country to undertake severe public spending cuts as demanded by both the International Monetary Fund and the European Union in order to get access to bailout funds. The defense budget has not been immune to these measures.

However, if compared to other public sectors such as welfare, transportation and education, the defense budget has suffered a relatively lower share of cuts. Consequently, despite cuts amounting up to 30% since 2010 and the economy having shrunk by 25%, Greece’s defense budget is still one of the highest among NATO countries (European NATO members averaging at 1.6%) in terms of percentage of the GDP (approximately 2.3% in 2013).

The main reason can be found in Greece’s perception of external threats such as Turkey and the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, ones that keep a strong hold on the people’s mindset as well as on its foreign policy. During the 1980s, Greece allocated 6.2% of its GDP to defense spending, a percentage that gradually decreased to a 3.8% during the 1990s and finally reached a 3% low during the 2000s.While defense cutting today is moving at a slower pace, one needs to point out that Greece has been successfully shrinking its defense budget during the last three decades.

In contrast to its European partners, Greece does not perceive its national borders to be secure. This perception is stirred up by two main foreign and security issues. Firstly, Greece was and still remains today under the threat of a casus belli[ii] by its neighbor Turkey. Moreover, ever since 1974 and the Turkish invasion of The Republic of Cyprus, Greece had to bear witness to the undermining of its territorial sovereignty by successive Turkish demands and allegations.

To name a few, besides the casus belli concerning its international customary right to extend the length of its territorial waters from 6 (as of 1936) up to 12 nautical miles[iii] (which is every country’s right according to the International Convention of Montego Bay of 1982), disputes regarding its continental shelf as well as a few thousand islets on the eastern Aegean Sea[iv] are still on the forefront.

It is noteworthy that the two countries’ NATO membership does not curb the fear regarding conflict. As clearly seen during the Cyprus Incident of 1974, NATO decided not to intervene, stating that the North Atlantic treaty would come into force against an external enemy but not against a member-state.

Secondly, the other security issue concerns a territorial dispute with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)[v]. FYROM seems to hold a claim on Greece’s northern territories, allegedly housing an ethnic “Macedonian” minority as being part of the “wider Macedonian” territory, as evidenced by its Constitution[vi]. Whereas this article’s purpose is not to go into detail about the legitimacy of these demands or the validity of these allegations, its focus is to stress the reasons and ramifications behind Greece’s lack of deep spending cuts in the defense department.

The Greek economy’s diminishing returns, its systemic issues and the disparity in its imports and exports’ balance sheets required moving forward with drastic reforms regarding the country’s way of thinking as well as putting a new spin on the state’s priorities.

However, due to the foreign policy issues mentioned above, the country was unable to put aside the accumulated grievances with its adjacent countries and move forward. One could certainly argue that these concerns should be non-existent due to Greece’s membership in the European Union[vii] given the sense of security and solidarity that this relationship entails.

Nonetheless, one should take into account the fact that the European Union is not familiar in dealing with matters of this nature and desperately lacks the necessary institutional groundwork and political drive. To make matters worse, Greece’s membership since 2010 has deteriorated and has been put to the test, while its perception as a weakened or even failed state has gifted the country’s “adversaries” with the perfect opportunity to eventually further their claims. Furthermore, Greece’s NATO membership requires certain military commitments that have to be met.

This is the conundrum that Greece is facing. On the one hand it needs to hastily fix and rebuild its economy with the most efficient remedies at its disposal, while on the other it needs to maintain a strong defensive presence acting as a strong deterrent against external threats. Seeing as this is not an easy task that requires a coordinated defense doctrine and foreign policy perspective, progress on this front is moving at an alarmingly slow pace.

Another matter that has to be accounted for, is the one deeply rooted in the country’s geographical position in the wider region of the European Union. Greece, along with Italy and Spain, represents for most of the European Union’s immigrants the easiest and nearest access point. In 2010, 90% of the European Union’s immigrants came through Greece. To put it bluntly, Athens holds the key to the EU’s illegal middle-eastern immigration wave of the previous and possibly next decade.

Hence the implication that Greece has a vital responsibility as a member-state, an obligation that limits the defense department’s budget-cutting even further while its prominent security shortcomings are in plain sight. This issue, coupled with the country’s ineffective, mismanaged and shorthanded police force gave rise to the political party of the Golden Dawn – well-known and denounced in most countries due to its ideological affiliation with the neo-Nazi movement. Despite the above-mentioned politically damaging connection, the party and its paramilitary forces were able to take advantage of the State’s inability to deal with its internal security failings, all the while establishing a presence that could develop – if left unattended – into a state within a state, a hopefully farfetched scenario where the will of the strongest overthrows common sense, strong-arms public opinion and destabilizes the country’s priorities.

Needless to say that while budget-cutting is considered by some as virtually non-existent in the national defense department, the same cannot be said regarding public safety and police matters. While demonstrations are not in vogue nowadays, crime is rampant in disadvantaged areas and the police forces are growing accustomed to protecting political figures rather than ensuring the safety of Greek citizens. Every once in a while peaceful protests are hijacked by anarchist forces that effectively terminate any possibility of legitimate demands being heard and met. One needs to look no further than the events of February 2012[xv] when a significant area of Athens was set ablaze and historical buildings were burned to the ground, while the police and Special Forces were ill-prepared and unable to manage the events of that infamous night.

One must highlight that one of the prerequisites of the bail-out package of 2010 was that Greece would fulfil the obligations related to the arms deals with Germany and France it had agreed to. This means that despite the State’s financial situation and the necessity for austerity measures, those contracts would have to be honored[xvi].

In contrast, military training centers were shut down[xvii] and repurposed, giving way for further trimming of military training and facilities[xviii]. For instance, the number of training flights of the military aviation has been reduced severely. Since 2010, the military’s operational costs have dropped by nearly 30%, while military salaries have taken a 37% reduction, one that was implemented – as in other public expenditures – retroactively.

This means that employees not only saw a decline in their monthly pay, but also a monthly percentage of their salary taken back, those reductions needing to have taken place the year before. In the context of reducing the salaries of the public and private sector, the police was affected as well[xix]. This led to a feeling of discontent widespread throughout the members of the police force, severely underpaid with an income disproportionate to the requirements and dangers of their work[xx]. Progress, however, has been achieved in moving forward with a restructuring and a repurposing of the police personnel formerly assigned to the protection of political personalities. As of late, the police presence in cities has risen and new Special Forces with specific powers are being trained, this restructuration is considered to have dealt a significant blow to crime and corruption.

If anything, the financial crisis has forced Greece to adjust its defense spending according to its recently undermined perception of sovereignty, while at the same time pushing forward with budget cuts marginalizing the state’s presence in the day to day life of its citizens. Although the dissatisfaction of the military and the risk of regional instability led to some warning of a possible coup d’état, such a predicament is improbable and a product of fear mongering and financial speculating. The real danger that the Greek political system and the country are facing is the rising popularity of the Golden Dawn, an influence that – despite successive political scandals and arrests[xxi] – seems to be here to stay.

fonte
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 17:57:31 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2797 em: 2015-04-21 17:42:25 »
Citar
One must highlight that one of the prerequisites of the bail-out package of 2010 was that Greece would fulfil the obligations related to the arms deals with Germany and France it had agreed to. This means that despite the State’s financial situation and the necessity for austerity measures, those contracts would have to be honored[xvi].
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2798 em: 2015-04-21 18:12:01 »
German 'hypocrisy' over Greek military spending has critics up in arms
Athens' fondness for weaponry, and willingness of Germany and France to feed it, under fire as Greece struggles with debt crisis
Akis Tsochadzopoulos
 
A few months before submarines became the talk of Athens, Yiannis Panagopoulos, who heads the Greek trade union confederation (GSEE), found himself sitting opposite Angela Merkel at a private meeting the German chancellor had called of European trade unionists in Berlin.

When it came to his turn to address the leader, he instinctively popped the question that many in Greece have wanted to ask. "After running through all the reasons why austerity wasn't working in my country I brought up the issue of defence expenditure. Was it right, I asked, that our government makes so many weapons purchases from Germany when it obviously couldn't afford such deals and was slashing wages and pensions?"

Merkel's reaction was instant. "She immediately said: 'But we never asked you to spend so much of your GDP on defence,'" Panagopoulos recalled. "And then she mentioned the issue of outstanding payments on submarines she said Germany had been owed for over a decade."

Greek profligacy may be blamed for triggering the debt crisis that now threatens to tear the eurozone apart, but if there is one area where Berlin is less excoriating of state largesse it is in Athens's extravagant taste for arms.

Behind the frequent exhortations that Greece rein in spending after living "beyond its means" – admonishments made most loudly by Merkel and her finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble – there is another reality that paints Germany in a less than flattering light, according to MPs, military experts, economists and scholars.

"If there is one country that has benefited from the huge amounts Greece spends on defence it is Germany," said Dimitris Papadimoulis, an MP with the Coalition of the Radical Left party.

Greek arms imports



"Just under 15% of Germany's total arms exports are made to Greece, its biggest market in Europe," Papadimoulis said, reeling off figures from a scruffy armchair in his party's parliamentary office. "Greece has paid over €2bn (£1.6bn) for submarines that proved to be faulty and which it doesn't even need.


"It owes another €1bn as part of the deal. That's three times the amount Athens was asked to make in additional pension cuts to secure its latest EU aid package."

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), France is not far behind. Some 10% of its total arms sales go to Greece, which is a member of Nato. From 2002 to 2006, Greece was the world's fourth biggest importer of conventional weapons. It is now the 10th.

"As a proportion of GDP, Greece spends twice as much as any other EU member on defence," said Papadimoulis, who is also a former MEP.

"Well after the economic crisis had begun, Germany and France were trying to seal lucrative weapons deals even as they were pushing us to make deep cuts in areas like health."

Under the latest EU-IMF-sponsored rescue programme – which is propping up the near-bankrupt Greek economy with an extra €130bn in emergency loans until 2015 – Athens has agreed to cut defence expenditure by €400m. Even so, its military budget accounts for nearly 4% of national economic output, compared with the eurozone average of around 2%. The country has cited perceived security risks from Turkey and, in addition to state-of-the-art submarines, has bought hundreds of Leopard tanks, howitzers, Mirage fighter planes and F-16 jets from Germany, France and the US since the late 1990s.

Speculation is rife that international aid was dependent on Greece following through on agreements to buy military hardware from Germany and France.

Greek defence spending



"Since the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus, Greece has spent an estimated €216bn on armaments, although I am 100% certain that in absolute terms its defence expenditure is much greater than official documents would show due to the so-called secret funds the state has access to," said Katerina Tsoukala, a Brussels-based security expert.

"The problem is that unlike Britain, for example, Greece has never had a transparent and democratic defence procurement strategy. Instead, everything is veiled in secrecy and people like me have to go to Sipri to find out information that in other countries would be readily available."

The murkiness has ensured that over the years the Greek arms trade has become increasingly associated with high-level bribery and corruption – the very practices abhorred by Berlin, Athens' main provider of rescue funds.

This week the former defence minister Akis Tsochadzopoulos was jailed pending trial on charges of accepting an €8m bribe from Ferrostaal, the German company that helped oversee the scandal-marred sale of four Class 214 submarines to the Greek navy 12 years ago. To date, Athens has taken delivery of only one of the subs after the vessels were found to have technical glitches.

Tsochadzopoulos, the most senior official yet to be arraigned in connection with corruption, stands accused of funnelling the cash, initially deposited in a Swiss bank account, via offshore companies to buy two properties in Athens, including a luxury home on the capital's most expensive boulevard. His wife and daughter also appeared in court on Thursday accused of money laundering. They, along with the veteran socialist, denied the charges.

In the course of a two-year investigation by prosecutors in Munich, senior Ferrostaal employees, including its chief executive, resigned after acknowledging that money had been exchanged to secure the sale of submarines to Greece and Portugal.

Last year, after publicly apologising for its role in the furore, Ferrostaal agreed to pay a €140m fine.

In a similar case the German engineering group Siemens recently reached an out of court settlement with Greece following claims it had bribed cabinet ministers and other officials to secure contracts before the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens. Tassos Mandelis, a former socialist transport minister, admitted he had accepted a €100,000 payment from Siemens in 1998.

The settlement has paved the way for the company to bid for public procurement tenders in Greece, but it has also highlighted the unsavoury business practices of leading German firms. "There's a level of hypocrisy here that is hard to miss," said Papadimoulis. "Corruption in Greece is frequently singled out as a cause for waste but at the same time companies like Ferrostaal and Siemens are pioneers in the practice. A big part of our defence spending is bound up with bribes, black money that funds the [mainstream] political class in a nation where governments have got away with it by long playing on peoples' fears."

At the time of the settlement, Siemens said it was "committed to ensure, going forward, full and overall compliance to sound corporate principles".

Given Greece's financial predicament – illustrated last week by IMF managing director Christine Lagarde's refusal to rule out a default – growing numbers have begun to question the probity of the nation's defence expenditure.

Deputy prime minister Theodore Pangalos publicly rued the fact that Athens was spending so much money on arms, exclaiming during a visit by the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, that Greece was being "forced to buy weapons we do not need".

No other area has contributed as heavily to the country's debt mountain. If Athens had cut defence spending to levels similar to other EU states over the past decade, economists claim it would have saved around €150bn – more than its last bailout. Instead, Greece dedicates up to €7bn a year to military expenditure – down from a high of €10bn in 2009.

"Germany became Germany partly because for 62 years it did not have to think about military expenditure," said Angelos Philippides, a prominent economist. "For a long time Greece spent 7% of its GDP on defence when other European countries spent an average 2.2%. If you were to add up that compound 5% from 1946 to today, there would be no debt at all," he said. "It's vital that if the European Union wants to speak about fair deals it should at least guarantee Greek borders [with Turkey] so the country can bring down military spending to 2.2%."

The imbalance has spawned speculation that peripheral countries in Europe with vulnerable frontiers such as Greece are being exploited in terms of defence spending by wealthier states at Europe's core.

Thanos Dokos, a leading Greek defence expert, says rational debate on such military extravagance has been made impossible by the supposed Turkish threat and a fear among politicians of being labelled unpatriotic.

"One could argue that with 1,300 tanks, more than twice the number in the UK, Greece has many more than it needs. But no one forced it to spend so much. It happened because of the threat perception from Turkey and the need to balance Turkey militarily," he said.

He said there was an element of hypocrisy in the criticism being levelled at Greece in France and Germany.

"Knowing the economic situation of the country, and all the talk about Greece's overspending for the last 20 years, one feels like saying 'hold off, gentlemen, with the criticism'," he said. "It's hypocritical to ignore the fact that a not insignificant amount was spent on buying weapons systems from EU members Germany and France."

Guardian
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 18:13:28 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re:Investir na Grécia
« Responder #2799 em: 2015-04-21 18:12:48 »
Military in Greece Is Spared Cuts

BERLIN — The euro crisis has not been good for NATO’s secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Mr. Rasmussen has used every occasion to cajole alliance members into investing and collaborating more in defense.

He said recently that allied defense expenditures had declined by more than $56 billion compared with 2009. Practically all of those cuts happened in Europe, reducing defense spending there by an average of 15 percent.

Speaking at a meeting of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Prague, Mr. Rasmussen added that among the European allies, “only two devoted more than 2 percent of the gross domestic product to defense.”

One of those countries was Greece.

That seems astonishing given that Greece is in a deep economic and financial crisis. Greece’s economy has shrunk by 25 percent over the past two years.

How Much Are Americans Willing to Spend to Defend Europe?
During that time, the middle and lower classes — not the rich business community — have been hit hardest. The International Monetary Fund and the European Commission have imposed stringent austerity measures in return for loan guarantees. As a result, pensions and health care, transportation and education have all been cut drastically.

The armed forces, so far, have gotten away relatively lightly. During the height of the global financial crisis of 2008, Greek defense expenditures accounted for 3.1 percent of gross domestic product. Over the past two years, Greek defense spending still amounted to 2.1 percent of G.D.P.

“In relative terms, defense expenditure has been reduced given how much gross domestic product has fallen,” said Alexander S. Kritikos, an economics professor at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin.

“But the defense budget is still very high. It has been largely insulated from the huge cutbacks borne by the middle classes and poorer people,” he added.

Last August, the €10 billion, or $13 billion, defense budget was trimmed by €516 million. Even at that, Greece is the second-biggest defense spender among the 27 NATO countries after the United States, according to NATO statistics.

More than 73 percent of its budget is for personnel costs alone, making it one of the highest among NATO allies. Furthermore, military and civilian personnel account for 2.7 percent of Greece’s total labor force during, also making it one of the highest in NATO, according to alliance figures.

It is particularly hard to see how the armed forces can justify the current budget, as the money is not spent on supporting NATO or E.U. missions. According to the latest figures from the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, Greece has 10 soldiers based in Afghanistan, out of a total of 102,011 troops from 50 countries.

In its neighborhood, Greece has 118 soldiers serving in NATO’s stabilization mission in Kosovo, out of a total of 5,565 troops from 30 contributing countries.

NATO does not publicly comment about any ally. But officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Greek government has not used the financial crisis to overhaul its armed forces by making the purchase of military equipment transparent, or reducing the personnel count of 136,000, of whom 90,000 are soldiers.

Curiously, the Greek public, which has often protested against the austerity measures, has yet to demand that the armed forces carry some of the burden. One reason, analysts say, is Greece’s residual fear of Turkey, a leading NATO member — despite the improvement of relations between the two countries over the past decade.

“It’s all very well calling for deeper defense cuts, but geography still matters. Certain fears still run deep,” said Tomas Valasek, president of the Central European Policy Institute, a security think tank in Bratislava, Slovakia.

Other analysts agree that the Greek armed forces can always resist big defense cuts by playing the Turkey card. “The generals will always have an excuse to keep the budget high,” Mr. Kritikos said.

Indeed, over the past several months, the Greek media have written that Turkey violated Greek airspace at least once. In response, the Turkish General Staff said its airspace had been repeatedly violated by Greece, Italy and Israel.

There is another political reason for exempting the army from cuts. Closing some of the 500 military bases and 17 training centers would mean sending tens of thousands of young soldiers into the ranks of the unemployed, adding a dangerous component to social unrest, according to Sipri, a Swedish research institute. Perhaps, analysts said, the Greek armed forces will have to wait for any major restructuring until the country’s economy picks up.

nyt
« Última modificação: 2015-04-21 18:14:17 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt