JUN 20,
2015 @ 6:40 PM
Forbes
Tim Worstall ,
What with
the nearing denouement of the Greek debt crisis the real question is, well,
what actually should be done? And that in turn means that we’ve got to decide
whose interests should be paramount. There’s perhaps three groups that we
should be thinking about and how we weight their interests is going to tell us
what should in fact happen.
The first
group are those who insist that the European Union is the culmination of
history, that ever closer union is something near holy. I know that sounds
excessive but having actually worked in EU politics there really are people who
think that way. Absolutely anything can be, and is, justified by this need to
keep the juggernaut rolling to one unitary state. The euro is of course an
aspect of this and allowing a country to leave the eurozone would be a terrible
betrayal of this dream. Given that I’m a eurosceptic (to give you a sense of my
bias on this issue, I’ve worked for and been a candidate for Ukip, the British
political party saying we should leave the EU altogether) I place very little
weight indeed on the demands of the federasts.
The second
group is the citizenry of the other eurozone nations. If Greece defaults
and or leaves the euro then many billions (hundreds of billions of euros in
fact) of theirs will disappear along with the country’s departure. And we might
indeed place good weight on their hopes, desires and cash. However, the turth
here is that this money has already been lost. All that remains is to work out
when and how that loss is going to be recognised. That it’s gone is already
known. There’s no way at all that Greece is going to pay back €330
billion or so. And that money is almost all owed (whether through the EFSF,
ECB, Target 2 funds or whatever) to the citizens, the taxpayers, of other
eurozone countries. It might be that the losses come as the result of
inflation. The very long maturities and the low interest rates of the current
loans are going to mean significant real losses over the decades. Or it could
be that Greece
leaves now, or defaults, and the losses are crystalised and made obvious right
now. So while we might place weight on their desires and interests, it doesn’t
really make much difference. That money is already lost.
And then
there’s the Greek people themselves. They, obviously, would like to see an
economy that was growing, one that can employ their children, create the tax
revenues to pay pensioners and all the rest. And as Paul Krugman points out,
that really does mean leaving the euro:
Suppose
that there were a way to end this depression. Then Greece ’s fiscal problems would melt
away, with no need for further cuts. But is there any way to do that?
The answer
is, not as long as Greece
remains in the euro. It can pursue reforms that might make it more competitive,
but anyone promising dramatic, quick results has no idea what he is talking
about.
On the
other hand, Grexit would produce a rapid improvement in competitiveness, at the
cost of possible financial chaos.This is not a route anyone has been willing to
go down, but one does have to say that as the crisis worsens it becomes a more
plausible outcome.
Time to
disappoint the federasts, acknowledge that the money is already lost, and get
the Greek economy growing again by a combination of default and exit from the
euro. And yes, I agree that I’m hugely biased here: but still right on the
economics as Paul Krugman is pointing out.
My latest
book is "The No Breakfast Fallacy, why the Club of Rome was wrong about us
running out of resources." Amazon and Amazon.co.uk. $6.99 and relevant
prices in other currencies.
No comments:
Post a Comment