Subject: »PIIGS - economics problems

I, personally, dont live with debt !!
I personally too..

but.. hey look here:
don't you??

(edited)

the personal debt is a choice the state debt its not...

hehe, good joke :-). If there is party which will promised you balanced state budget you dont need debts, but of course social benefits or pension will be then much poorer :-(

try find Slovakia first :-)

And I dont like people who vote parties which like debts and are giving nice promises. But yes, it is problem of people, it is not cos some "system"

Slovakia has bigger debt maybe.. it is now around 35% of GDP..but we are preparing law that no one party can exceed 55% of GDP, 60% debt will be reason for end of such a government by law, not by their willing.

do you see this difference, I like and I am voting parties, which will not improve my pension or benefits, but I know what is good and what is bad, I am responsible man !

But democracy allows also sheep can vote, so yes, it is problem, but again... problem with people, not problem of system.

we havent a party saying that like depths
they was telling that all is right and we dont have problem...
they tricked people...

But whats the problem if some investors loose money for bad investments?

no party "like" debts, they will just promise you better state salary, better pension, better social benefits and people are sheep, are not able understand that this is not possible make without huge debts....

yes but you dont answer me about the responsibility of the investers?
people are responsible but investors do not know where they invest?
To earn the interest is well but losing their money is bad?
Within the game is to lose their money and is what will happen

I think there should be state bankruptcy allowed, so investors can lose their money, so yes, it is mistake that EU is defending them ! I dont doubt that EU help is not just for you, but for french and german banks of course....

now you talking...
;)

And is not right bank profits to reap the bankers, but the damages paying by the states!
Let state banks then to be responsible and the losses and gains

anyway... nobody forced you to take so much loans, but I can understand, we have such a government party too, which is able to take big loans.... so our people in last election vote for another parties.

40% get one our party which is promising good conditions, social benefits, good healthcare, good pension. Most of people who have poor life vote them. But our 4 or 6 other small parties rather join together (and it was hard connection, they have various interest so are often arguing but they have same enemy, party SMER and loans) to stop taking next loans.

But now our government fell down cos EFSF, one party refuse it and our government go down :-(

But you can see on Slovakia example, that this is really just about people, not "system"....

nobody forced them to give so much loans too...
and the system has many errors and recognized by all

giving can not be forbidden, that is nonsense :-)

of course not, i didn't said be forbidden
but knowing the risk that can not get their money back...

you are wrong, there is a rule of core tier one of own funds of banks of 9 %. Below this limit you are supposed to increase your capital, not loan more money ( especially money you don't have ).


(edited)

I am not advocate/supporter of current financial tools (especially that tools which allow you to create money from nothing) but this is just one part of problem. Second are "users"...