May 18, 2024

Off The Shelf: Inside the Greek Volcano

It was against this backdrop that I read “Greece’s ‘Odious’ Debt: The Looting of the Hellenic Republic by the Euro, the Political Elite and the Investment Community” (Anthem Press, $29.95) by Jason Manolopoulos.

The author, who is also a founder of an emerging-market hedge fund, sets out to analyze the Greek fiscal crisis and its larger reverberations. “Not a single constituency emerges well from this story,” he writes. “Greek politicians, Greek society, trade unions, leaders of the European Union, the I.M.F., the world’s investment banks — each and every one has scarcely put a foot right in a collective display of hubris, miscalculation, overambition, deception, mis-selling, folly and, in some cases, sheer greed in a saga that has continued for decades.”

If this sounds overly alarmist or polemical, think again: Mr. Manolopoulos backs up his analysis with cool, detached facts. He focuses on Greece’s largely unreformed economy, which is characterized by widespread corruption, business structures run by elites, low levels of investment in new technologies and industry clusters, and dependence on just a few sectors — like tourism, shipping and agriculture.

The book argues that forms of corruption have played a pivotal role in the development of Greece’s inefficient, uncompetitive economy. In particular, the author blames “clientelism” — “interest groups within society requesting favors from politicians as clients, often with little regard to a reciprocal contribution to the economy.”

For example, he says, a bloated public sector has led to lifetime positions that can become bargaining chips for politicians and constituents. This has led to pay raises without links to productivity, to a collective sense of entitlement and to huge pension obligations. It is small wonder that Greece’s 2010 austerity measures, aimed at retirement reform, produced so much unrest.

In a book rife with supporting data, the most memorable statistics are those related to corruption, both in and outside government, as well as to Greece’s retirement provisions. Consider that before last year’s reforms, the official retirement age in Greece was 58, versus an average of 63.2 in other countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. And the average Greek pension paid almost 96 percent of average annual lifetime earnings; versus 61 percent in other O.E.C.D. nations.

Huge pension liabilities, along with tax evasion, an expanding government, large military expenditures, growing trade deficits, an $11 billion price for the 2004 Olympics, and an anemic real economy — combined to increase Greece’s indebtedness, the book argues.

In 1990, government debt amounted to 71 percent of Greek gross domestic product; by 2009, the figure was 115 percent. Until 2007, the availability of global credit, along with misplaced global confidence in the economy’s soundness, helped stoke the fires of the debt. These factors also helped Greece put off meaningful economic and fiscal changes aimed at producing “the sustainable kind of growth that is built on business development, rather than ‘growth’ that turns out to be a debt-fueled consumer binge.”

How could governing elites in Athens, Brussels and New York have gotten the fundamentals of Greece’s situation so wrong for so long? The answers help us understand both the Greek disaster and the broader 2008 financial crisis.

For one, political and business actors relied on inadequate measurements, Mr. Manolopoulos writes. Most obvious was the importance placed on G.D.P. as an indicator of national well-being. G.D.P. gauges a country’s economic activity, not its wealth. Borrowing to consume perishables that don’t raise the level of productive assets, he notes, raises G.D.P. in the short run and creates an illusion of positive economic performance.

A second and more chilling explanation of why elites proved so incompetent at governing the Greek economy — as well as the larger, global one — is related to what Mr. Manolopoulos calls the “Washington consensus,” a faith in deregulation, free trade, mobile capital flows and fiscal responsibility that he considers elitist.

Two elements of this consensus — market deregulation and the liberalization of capital flows — helped create enormous pools of global credit, making it “easier for short-termist governments to abandon the principle of fiscal responsibility,” since spending not financed through tax hikes could be financed by foreign loans, he says.

Last but not least, all this free-flowing capital has prompted bubbles — in housing, finance and other areas — that add volatility to national economies and impose harsh costs, particularly on the poor and middle classes.

This is a brave, complicated and timely book. It would have been even stronger with more attention to how Greece, the United States and the larger global economy could now start avoiding the mistakes made over the last 20 years.

I turned the last page struck by two questions, both of which flow from the book’s wide-ranging analysis: Where are the leaders who will make brave decisions, based on their citizens’ long-term interest? And who among us will light the way to changing our own behavior — changes that will help us reset our economies and move ahead with a collective purpose? In this summer of fiscal volatility and political gamesmanship, we can’t find answers soon enough.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=85e3d1cc5100701cef992db28fd8f9d3

Berlusconi Vows Not to Resign

“The country is economically and financially solid. In difficult moments, it knows how to stay together and confront difficulties,” Mr. Berlusconi said in his first public remarks in a tense month. “Today more than ever, we need to act all together.”

But neither the center-left opposition nor financial markets shared Mr. Berlusconi’s optimism or his confidence in his government’s ability to carry out long-promised reforms. On Wednesday rates on Italy’s benchmark 10-year bond remained above 6 percent, easing only slightly from Tuesday’s record highs.

Addressing Parliament for the first time since it passed a $70 billion austerity package in mid-July, Mr. Berlusconi called on Wednesday for measures that would balance Italy’s budget “by the end of the year,” not 2014 as originally planned.

While delivering the same speech to the Lower House and the Senate after the markets had closed, he offered no concrete proposals beyond calls for unity and saying he would meet with the opposition, as well as business and labor union leaders, to discuss a plan for growth. Mr. Berlusconi said that his government would serve its mandate until 2013, “when we will serenely face the judgment of the electorate.”

He was expected to address the Senate later on Wednesday evening.

Given the ferocity of the markets’ turn against Italy, analysts said the address fell short of what was needed.

“It was a speech without ideas,” said Stefano Folli, the chief political columnist of the financial daily Il Sole 24 Ore, which is owned by the industrialists’ association, Confindustria. “It was very optimistic. I had hoped for a tone more adequate to the difficulties of the moment.”

“If he says the big theme is economic growth, let’s see if proposals emerge. Those have to translate immediately into laws and government initiatives,” Mr. Folli said. “If they stay vague, then the circle closes in a terrible way,” he added, referring to the end of the Berlusconi era.

A born salesman whose peppy speeches once entranced Italians, Mr. Berlusconi in recent months has often seemed more consumed with his own personal legal problems and the fate of his businesses — which include Italy’s largest private broadcaster — than with the fate of his country.

On Wednesday, Mr. Berlusconi was met with boos in the Lower House when he said, “you’re listening to a businessman who has three businesses listed on the stock market and who is in the financial trenches, aware every day of what’s going on in the markets.”

In the Lower House he was flanked by his finance minister, Giulio Tremonti, who has been weakened by a corruption investigation into a former aide.

Following the speech, Pier Luigi Bersani of the opposition center-left Democratic Party renewed his calls on Mr. Berlusconi to step down and call early elections, as his Spanish counterpart, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, did last week.

“Italy is in very big trouble,” Mr. Bersani said. “We have been told we’re better than the others. We haven’t looked this problem in the face,” he added, referring to Mr. Berlusconi’s remarks that Italy’s budget deficit, at 4.6 percent of the gross domestic product in 2010, is below the European average, although its debt, at nearly 120 percent, is Europe’s highest after Greece. However, Italy’s growth rate is hovering around a paltry 1.0 percent.

“The question of how can we pay our debt if we don’t even grow, is a legitimate question that doesn’t come from speculation,” Mr. Bersani said.

Gaia Pianigiani contributed reporting.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/world/europe/04italy.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

High & Low Finance: Europe Must Choose a Currency Union or a Financial Union

European leaders seem to be willing to accept that reality. But persuading publics may be far more difficult.

After more than a year of claiming that Greece could be bailed out without significant costs either for lenders or the rest of Europe, European leaders pledged on Thursday to pump in large amounts of money to try to revive the Greek economy while delaying repayment and reducing interest rates on existing loans.

It appears that the deal will mean solvent European nations will have to write some very large checks. Lenders will suffer losses, and some banks may need more bailouts, which Europe will pay for through a collective fund that will be authorized to borrow money backed by European states individually and collectively.

That fund, called the European Financial Stability Facility, will also take over lending to Greece, at rates close to what the facility is forced to pay when it borrows money.

Other parts of the communiqué issued by the European leaders after their summit meeting in Brussels promise there will be more central control over national budgets and tax policies.

Call it the federalization of Europe.

Unlike in the first Greek bailout, in spring 2010, the European leaders now accept that the Continent has a responsibility not just to prevent collapse but to get the Greek economy moving again.

In effect, the new decisions recognize that a strategy that might have been called “prosperity through austerity” was a hopeless failure. While there is little doubt that Greek profligacy was an important cause of the mess it is in, a combination of reducing government spending and seeking to raise tax collections was never going to produce a recovery that would make it possible for Greece to pay its debts.

Over the 12 months ending in March, the Greek economy shrank by 5.5 percent, while unemployment, at 12.2 percent when the country was first bailed out, rose to 15 percent.

“We call for a comprehensive strategy for growth and investment in Greece,” said the statement. While it removed a reference to “a European ‘Marshall Plan’ ” that was in a preliminary version of the statement leaked earlier Thursday, it promised that the rest of Europe would “work with the Greek authorities on competiveness and growth, job creation and training.”

Pouring money in will not, in and of itself, make Greek industries competitive again and enable the nation to flourish. In fact, it was money pouring in for most of the past decade that helped to create the problem. Then investors were willing to lend money to Greece for basically the same rate they charged Germany, on the theory that a common currency should mean common interest rates. Those savings — Greece’s effective borrowing rate was cut by more than half from 1998 to 2005 — enabled the government to spend more and tax less than it otherwise would have been forced to do.

That was not what advocates of the euro forecast when it was being created more than a decade ago. Then the theory was that countries would enact reforms — in labor markets, fiscal policies and even work habits — to become more like Germany. They would do that because a failure to do so would result in a country losing competitiveness as its costs rose more rapidly than those of Germany while the prices it could charge could not do so, since both countries used the same currency.

Now, Europe claims it will change, but there is obviously some resistance to detailed commitments. The leaked draft included a promise to “introduce legally binding national fiscal frameworks” by the end of 2012. The final communiqué took out the words “legally binding.”

The countries previously promised not to run large budget deficits, but they all did when the world went into recession. This time, though, we are assured they really mean it.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ab662cb147211621e5bc97395953e9d9

Europe Agrees to Give Billions to Greece

BRUSSELS — European finance ministers staved off an imminent Greek default Saturday, agreeing to release a vital installment of financial aid to Athens, while delaying a deal on a second large rescue for Greece, possibly until September.

After a two-hour conference call, the 17 euro zone ministers said they would sign off on an 8.7 billion euro ($12.6 billion) loan that had been expected as part of a 110 billion euro package agreed upon last year. The board of the International Monetary Fund is expected to approve its current contribution, 3.3 billion euros, in the coming days.

Without the loans, the Greek government faced the prospect of insolvency within weeks. The euro zone ministers’ decision followed two votes in Greece’s parliament to approve a tough austerity package, a condition for international assistance.

But, with Greece struggling to restore its finances, European finance ministers also need to put together a second package of loans to help it through 2014. This is expected to amount to 80 billion to 90 billion euros. Though that was discussed Saturday night, the ministers gave few details in a statement, and one official briefed on the talks but not authorized to speak publicly said that completing the new bailout would “not be easy.”

“They are going to have to work really hard, and we don’t expect an agreement before the next meeting of the euro zone ministers on July 11, and possibly not before September,” the official added.

Saturday night’s decision ends weeks of tense diplomacy between the euro zone nations and the I.M.F., which said it required assurances that the Europeans would backstop Greece’s finances for the next 12 months before it could release any more aid. Some countries, including the Netherlands, were reluctant to give such a guarantee without knowing that private sector investors would also play a substantial role in the new bailout.

But, when it became clear that a second bailout would take much longer to put together, the dispute ended with an opaque declaration from the ministers and with no details about the potential scope of the new rescue.

“The precise modalities and scale of private sector involvement and additional funding from official sources will be determined in the coming weeks,” the euro zone ministers said in a statement.

That seemed to satisfy the I.M.F.

“This commitment — together with the recent parliamentary passage of the necessary fiscal measures in Greece — will enable the I.M.F.’s executive board to consider the completion of the fourth review and the release of the next tranche,” Caroline Atkinson, the I.M.F.’s chief spokeswoman, said in a statement.

Greece’s finance minister, Evangelos Venizelos, described the ministers’ action as “a development that boosts our country’s credibility on a global level.”

“What is now critically important is the timely and effective implementation of parliamentary decisions so that we can gradually emerge from the crisis for the benefit of the national economy and the Greek people,” the minister said in a written statement on Saturday. He was referring to two votes in Greece’s parliament earlier in the week that approved a new raft of deeply unpopular austerity measures.

Talks with European banks on a voluntary debt rollover have proved complex enough that they may drag on well into the summer. One consideration is the need to create the package so that rating agencies do not classify it as a default — a blow to confidence that would undermine efforts to prevent contagion.

According to Germany’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, German banks are willing to roll over around 3.2 billion euros of Greek bonds maturing to 2014. France has a plan to involve its banks though the total amount has not been disclosed.

Though Olli Rehn, the European commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, had set a July 11 deadline for a deal on the second package, Greece’s next financing deadline does not arrive until September.

Speaking in Warsaw, Jacek Rostowski, the finance minister of Poland, emphasized the need to spur economic growth in Greece, in addition to cutting government spending.

Niki Kitsantonis contributed reporting from Athens.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=9e056c99b6e76e88ded7423349fba552

Optimism on Greece Pushes Stocks Higher

Greek lawmakers passed an austerity bill that would allow international lenders to release more emergency loans. Meanwhile, in Germany, banks and insurance companies joined the government in a plan to roll over holdings of Greek debt. The news added to optimism about averting a widespread European debt crisis, which has sent markets higher since Monday.

However, a report on claims for American jobless benefits was less encouraging. Worries about the economy and job growth have pushed stocks lower since late April.

Major indexes could eke out a small three-month gain as a volatile quarter comes to a close. The Dow was up 0.6 percent for the three-month period ending in June, but the Standard Poor’s 500-stock index was down 0.5 percent.

In early afternoon trading Thursday, the Dow Jones industrial average rose 121.74 points, or 0.99 percent, to 12,383.16. The Standard Poor’s 500 gained 10.65 points, or 0.81 percent, to 1,318.06, and the Nasdaq composite index added 28.95 points, or 1.06 percent, to 2,769.04.

In Washington, the Labor Department said that slightly fewer people applied for unemployment benefits last week compared with the week before, but the level of claims was still high, at 428,000.

The previous week, applications had jumped to a one-month high. New unemployment claims have stayed above 400,000 for 12 straight weeks, a sign that companies are not hiring at a rate that can sustain job growth. The slowdown in hiring has caused concerns that the economy will take longer than expected to return to health.

Applications had fallen in February to a level that economists consider healthy, but surged in April to an eight-month high.

In Europe on Thursday, stock indexes also jumped after the Greek vote and German bank deal. Germany’s benchmark DAX index closed up 1.1 percent. The FTSE 100 index of leading British shares and France’s CAC 40 both rose 1.5 percent.

On Wednesday, strong signs Greece would pass its austerity bill and a Bank of America settlement over failed mortgage securities pushed stocks higher for a third straight day. The Dow rose 72.73 points, or 0.6 percent, to close at 12,261.42, and the S. P. 500 index rose 10.74, or 0.83 percent, to 1,307.64.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/business/01markets.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Public Workers Strike in Britain Over Pensions

Many schools were operating with skeleton staffs; some were shut altogether. Lectures and classes were canceled at an estimated 75 universities. Numerous government services were affected, including ports and airports, where up to 14,000 staff members of the agency that handles immigration and customs matters were due to walk out.

Other agencies, like the court system, social security benefits offices and unemployment centers had contingency plans to keep going, but might have to offer reduced service with managers taking the jobs of union workers, the government said.

The unions estimated that as many as 750,000 people would join the walkout.

The strike is the latest development in an increasingly bitter dispute between the affected unions — including the National Union of Teachers, the Public and Commercial Services Union, and the University and College Union — and the Conservative-led coalition government.

The government, whose austerity budget is beginning to take affect around the country, says that the current pension system is unsustainable and unaffordable. It has raised the working age and is now proposing that workers should pay a larger proportion of their salaries into their pension plans each month. The government has also proposed recalculating pensions so that they will be based not on a worker’s final salary, but on a “career average” salary, taking into account the worker’s entire working life.

Most workers can currently begin receiving their pensions at 60. One of the proposals being considered would see the age rise to 66 by 2020.

Brendan Barber, general secretary of Trades Union Congress, which represents many of Britain’s unions, said that the strikes were being held in large part by the deep public sector cuts already imposed by the government.

“Nobody wants to see our schools and job centers closed,” he told reporters. “But our resolve is strong, our determination is absolute and we will see this through until we reach a just and fair settlement.”

Francis Maude, the government minister in charge of pension policy, said since talks between the government and the unions were still going on, it was unacceptable for the teachers in particular to go on strike.

“It’s absolutely unjustifiable for parents up and down the country to be inconvenienced like this, forced to lose a day’s work, when they’re trying to go out to work to earn money to pay the taxes which are going to support teachers’ pensions,” he told the BBC.

Dave Prentis, leader of Unison, which has 1.3 million members and is Britain’s largest public-sector union, said that he had not yet balloted his members about going on strike. But he warned the government that that could change if they continued to be “treated with disdain.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=eedcf3d6b41bd97740e3e8bacad48904

Rescue Measures for Greece Advance as French Offer to Ease Debt

With investor pressure mounting ahead of the vote by the Greek Parliament this week, President Nicolas Sarkozy outlined a proposal under which French banks would give Athens more time to pay back loans as they come due over the next three years.

The banks would share part of the cost of the bailout by extending new loans to Athens as old loans mature, but the banks would not have to forgive the debt itself, a concern of many investors.

“We’ve been working on this with the banks and insurance companies,” Mr. Sarkozy said at a news conference in Paris. “We’re committed to going from a principle — the voluntary participation of the private sector — to concrete reality.” Mr. Sarkozy said he hoped that other European countries would adopt a similar plan.

It comes at a critical moment in the long-running drama over how to prevent a default on Greece’s $467 billion debt.

A vote on Greece’s latest $40 billion austerity package is scheduled for Wednesday, with another vote scheduled for Thursday on separate legislation to carry out the reforms. If the measures pass, the European Union is expected to announce the size and details of a new, second bailout package at a meeting of ministers on Sunday.

If the Greek Parliament were to vote the package down, a chain reaction could engulf global financial institutions.

Investor confidence in the debt of countries on the periphery of Europe like Greece, as well as Portugal and Ireland, has been rapidly eroding. European financial institutions hold more than half a trillion dollars worth of their sovereign debt. Private borrowers in these countries, who would also be hammered by a public default, owe Europe’s banks another trillion, according to the Bank for International Settlements.

The French banks’ willingness to chip in underscores just how vulnerable giants like Société Générale and BNP Paribas would be in a full-scale default, a danger also confronting large institutions in Germany, Belgium and elsewhere. It is also why European leaders have the leverage to extract concessions from banks as part of a broader rescue package for Greece.

With European leaders unable to come up with a concrete plan until now and Greek politicians balking at calls for austerity, the picture for Europe’s banks has been growing dimmer by the week. “Investors think policy makers are kicking the can down the road,” said Philip Finch, a bank analyst with UBS in London.

As a result European bank shares have fallen nearly 25 percent over the last four months, helping bring down the shares of their counterparts in the United States, which have lost 13 percent over the same period.

But unlike American banks, which raised capital and wrote off tens of billions of dollars in bad loans after the financial crisis, European institutions have been much slower to acknowledge the problems they face, analysts and investors said. Even without a sovereign debt default, Mr. Finch said, European banks need to raise $150 billion in capital to bolster balance sheets.

French officials said the proposal announced Monday was the fruit of recent meetings between the Élysée Palace, the French Treasury, the Bank of France and the French banking federation.

The initiative is likely to be supported by Jean-Claude Trichet, the departing president of the European Central Bank, who had stood against plans to automatically impose losses on the face value of Greek debt.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c4db6b3b37954de1767fe0c75ebeb197

Distrust of Government Impedes Reform in Greece

Most Greeks say they have little confidence in a political class that they see as corrupt and unaccountable. A recent study by Transparency International in Greece found that 9 out of 10 Greeks believed that their politicians were corrupt, and 80 percent said that Parliament had lost credibility.

“We’re here because we have lost confidence in the present political system, which has brought us to the edge,” Christos Siveris, 35, said last week as he waved a Greek flag outside Parliament during a crucial confidence vote, which Mr. Papandreou won. “This is our Thermopylae,” he added, referring to the ancient battle in which an outnumbered army of Greek warriors held out against a Persian force before ultimately succumbing.

This week Mr. Papandreou will seek parliamentary approval for an austerity package that was agreed on Thursday with European officials and the International Monetary Fund. He is expected to succeed, despite tensions within his Socialist Party and in the face of intransigence from the center-right opposition, which was in power when Greece’s debt soared.

But as the crisis extends into a second year, a growing number of Greeks are turning a critical eye on their own government. They are questioning why members of Parliament have immunity from prosecution unless Parliament votes to lift it, and they want to see more transparency and accountability in party financing.

And having faced across-the-board wage and pension cuts, they have come to question why the lawmakers have benefits that include state cars, generous double pensions (from the government and their own professional guilds), bonuses for attending committee meetings on top of their $8,500-a-month salaries, and personal staff who are widely perceived to attend to a tradition of providing favors in exchange for votes.

In recent years, a number of former officials from both the conservative New Democracy and the Socialist Parties have been implicated in a range of corruption scandals. In one episode, which occurred when New Democracy was in power, the government approved a highly complex land swap in which a Greek Orthodox monastery on Mount Athos received prime, state-owned real estate in exchange for much less valuable land in a rural area. But to date, no officials have been charged with wrongdoing.

Such scandals “add to the frustration and the popular perception that they’re crooks,” said Costas Bakouris, the president of Transparency International’s Greek branch.

Aggravating that perception, the legislators have immunity from prosecution unless the full Parliament votes to lift it, something that has happened only 17 times out of the hundreds of requests since democracy was restored in 1974 after a military dictatorship. Even after they leave office, former lawmakers can be prosecuted only during the parliamentary session in which they are accused of breaking the law and the subsequent session.

In addition to the austerity votes, Parliament is expected to vote this week on whether to broaden an investigation into Akis Tsochatzopoulos, a former defense minister from the Socialist Party who is accused of corruption in the Greek Navy’s procurement of German submarines.

Greece’s Skai television and the related Kathimerini newspaper reported that Mr. Tsochatzopoulos had been living in one of Athens’s most exclusive areas in an apartment purchased from an offshore company. To many here, the case has come to represent everything they consider wrong about the political system, not least because as a former government minister, Mr. Tsochatzopoulos is immune from prosecution. He denies wrongdoing.

In a rare move and an acknowledgment of public sentiment, the two main parties have proposed that his immunity be lifted so that he can be prosecuted.

In another high-profile case, a former Socialist Party transport minister was charged with money-laundering this year after he admitted that he received several hundred thousand dollars from a Greek subsidiary of Siemens.

This month, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, a lawmaker from the New Democracy Party and the son of a former prime minister, caused a stir when he proposed reducing Parliament to 200 members from 300; eliminating double pensions, special payments for serving on committees and immunity for government ministers and lawmakers; and opening up the books on party finances.

“It was received extremely well by the average person on the street by not so well by my colleagues,” said Mr. Mitsotakis, a Harvard-educated former venture capitalist who is clearly positioning himself as the “new” New Democracy, not least because he has said he has criticized his party’s near total opposition to the austerity measures. (Although he, too, said he planned to vote against them.)

“We have a fundamental trust problem in Greece. We asked people to make huge sacrifices that we’re not willing to make,” he said of his colleagues. “There’s something wrong with that.”

In a nod to the growing popular outrage, Mr. Papandreou said in a speech last week that he would form a committee to look at reducing the number of Parliament members and to abolish the law protecting members from prosecution, although it remains to be seen whether he has the political capital to carry out the constitutional changes those moves would entail.

But other analysts believe that anger at the political class is deeper than the government has acknowledged and will not be easily assuaged. In Syntagma Square each night, Greeks from across the political spectrum have gathered to air their grievances. This collaboration of right and left is new in a country that endured both a civil war after World War II and a military dictatorship from 1967 to 1974.

“That’s unique for Greece,” said Nikos Alivizatos, a constitutional lawyer. “I’m not sure the politicians are conscious of that.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/world/europe/26greece.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

I.M.F. Warns of New Austerity Measures Ahead

PARIS — The International Monetary Fund sent a simple message Monday to the Greek people as they struggle to cope with the austerity measures being imposed on them in exchange for a bailout: Prepare for more of the same.

“Consolidation will have to continue,” the I.M.F. said of countries like Greece, Portugal and Ireland that are struggling to close their gaping budget shortfalls. “Continuing fiscal consolidation broadly as planned will support confidence.”

The comments, made in a report after a regular I.M.F. staff mission to the euro zone, come at a sensitive time. Greeks, in particular, are growing increasingly angry about the austerity measures their government has put in place in return for a €110 billion bailout it received a year ago from the fund and European Union countries.

In its report, the I.M.F. also took a broader look at the euro zone and its troubles. It said that if the monetary union is to function, its 17 member states would have to either move toward political union or implement rules that result in tighter cooperation of national budget policies.

Without political union, stronger governance will be “indispensable,” the I.M.F. said. To make a difference, the various policies which are being planned to better coordinate the monitoring of national budgets by other euro zone governments and Brussels “will need to be made more binding and relevant for national decision making,” the report said.

The I.M.F. also said that the debate within Europe about the degree of involvement of the private sector in a second Greek bailout now being discussed was “unproductive.” It said the issue should be settled quickly to avoid the impression that future financial support would be conditional on a voluntary restructuring of debt held by banks and other private-sector investors. The fund has opposed suggestions that the bailout should coincide with private investors being forced to take losses on their Greek debt.

At a news conference in Luxembourg, where he was meeting European ministers, the acting managing director of the fund, John Lipsky, said the I.M.F. would have to be sure that reforms the Greek government has committed to were proceeding before Athens could receive the next slice of aid in the original bailout.

“For a successful review of the existing program with Greece, which means approval of a new disbursement, it requires the I.M.F.’s executive board to conclude that the program is on track and that it is financed,” he was quoted as saying by Reuters.

Greek lawmakers are expected to vote June 28 on a new package of austerity measures designed to increase government revenue after Athens missed fiscal goals it agreed to as part of the bailout it received in 2010.

While the uproar over budget cuts is threatening to topple the Greek government, austerity measures have also brought disquiet in Spain and Portugal. Even in Britain, which is struggling to close a budget gap but which has the highest possible credit rating, plans to raise the retirement age for civil servants have brought the threat of a general strike.

The fund also said that continued financial support for the so-called periphery of the euro zone would still be needed from the core members like Germany and France.

One of the tools created for this — the European Financial Stability Facility — will have to “scale up,” the report said, and there must be a “further extension of its potential uses,” for example, as an instrument to intervene in markets and to guarantee more funding for governments like Greece.

It also suggested ways that the euro zone could move away from its dependence on the banking systems for finance.

“European regulators should welcome and actively support the development of market-based alternatives for corporate finance to reduce the dependency of the euro area economy on the banking system,” it said.

One option might be a new lending facility, operated by the European Central Bank but with the explicit backing of euro zone governments, to help refinance illiquid assets, it said. In general, unconventional monetary measures — a reference to the E.C.B.’s huge program of providing liquidity to banks — should remain in place “until financial market tensions have been addressed,” the I.M.F. said. The results of bank stress tests, expected to be released in July, will provide an important opportunity to begin recapitalizing banks, it said.

The fund also urged the central bank to move “cautiously” as it raises interest rates to counter inflation. It said the E.C.B. should “help limit stress from higher interest rates that could be felt in the periphery.”

A “broadly sound” economic recovery is underway in the region, the fund said, but it also warned that the sovereign debt crisis “threatens to overwhelm this favorable outlook, and much remains to be done to secure a dynamic and resilient monetary union.”

The reforms proposed by the fund are classic free market policies of the kind advocated for years from Brussels, Frankfurt and Washington. These include an “ambitious drive to open up the economy to foreign competition and foreign ownership along program commitments” and privatization.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=89f37567e5ffd82a78c7aadbf1bd4a8d

Economic Scene: The German Example

Germany has been a frequent cudgel in recent fights over the American economy. When Germany has grown faster than the United States, stimulus skeptics like to point across the Atlantic Ocean and say that austerity works. When it has grown more slowly, people who think the American stimulus made a big difference — including me — return the favor.

But the full story is more interesting than any caricature. In the last decade, Germany has succeeded in some important ways that the United States has not. The lessons aren’t simply liberal or conservative. They are both.

With our economy weakening once again — and with Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany visiting the White House this week — now seems to be a good time to take a closer look.

The brief story is that, despite its reputation for austerity, Germany has been far more willing than the United States to use the power of government to help its economy. Yet it has also been more ruthless about cutting wasteful parts of government.

The results are intriguing. After performing worse than the American economy for years, the Germany economy has grown faster since the middle of last decade. (It did better than our economy before the crisis and has endured the crisis about equally). Just as important, most Germans have fared much better than most Americans, because the bounty of their growth has not been concentrated among a small slice of the affluent.

Inflation-adjusted average hourly pay has risen almost 30 percent since 1985 in Germany, the kind of gains American workers have not enjoyed since the ’50s and ’60s. In this country, hourly pay has risen a scant 6 percent since 1985.

Germany also managed to avoid a housing bubble, unlike the United States, Britain, Ireland, Spain and other countries. German children have stronger math and science skills than ours. Its medium-term budget deficit is smaller. Its unemployment rate is like a mirror image of ours: 6.1 percent, well below where it was when the financial crisis began in 2007. Our rate has risen to 9.1 percent.

I’m not saying that the United States should want to become Germany. Americans remain considerably richer. We have the innovative companies — Wal-Mart, Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter — that make other countries swoon. We remain the world’s immigration Mecca.

Yet for all the strengths of the United States, almost nobody claims that the economy is in especially good shape. It so happens that our current out-of-town guests could teach us a few things.

•

The first lesson is that it’s really possible to make government more efficient. Like much of Western Europe, Germany long had a unemployment benefits system that discouraged work. But almost a decade ago, it began to make some changes.

It cut many benefits, in both duration and level, and it reduced the incentives to retire early. It also began trying to move the long-term unemployed into the labor force.

Specifically, the government took a fresh look at people who had not worked in years to determine who could and couldn’t work. The able and healthy were matched with potential employers. If they took a low-paying job, which was often the case, they would still receive a small portion of their benefits for a time. If they refused to work, their benefits were reduced anyway.

“The incentives to take up work were strengthened,” says Felix Hüfner of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, “and also the sanctions were strengthened.” Sure enough, the reforms have nudged more people back into the labor force — and work tends to beget more work, as people develop skills and have more money to spend.

In the United States, short-term jobless benefits are not generous enough to be a major problem. But the Social Security disability program, which is one reason nearly 20 percent of working-age American men are not working, would benefit from some German-like reforms. So would those public sector pensions that encourage people to retire at 55 or 60.

Beyond the job market, Germany has also made a big effort to improve its education system. Eric Hanushek, a Stanford University economist, notes that Germany’s performance on the main international math, reading and science tests have become such a matter of national concern that the name of the tests — Pisa — is now a household word. “In the U.S.,” he says, “Pisa is still a bell tower in Italy.”

The math scores of German students have risen significantly since 2000, extending their existing lead over American students. Germany’s national average is now higher than the average in Massachusetts, this country’s top-performing state. And there is obviously a connection between strong technical skills and a strong manufacturing sector.

But the German story is not merely about making government more efficient. It’s also about understanding the unique role that government must play in a market economy.

That role starts with serious regulation. American regulators stood idle as the housing bubble inflated. German banks often required a down payment of 40 percent.

Unlike what happened here, German laws and regulators have also prevented the decimation of their labor unions. The clout of German unions, at individual companies and in the political system, is one reason the middle class there has fared decently in recent decades. In fact, middle-class pay has risen at roughly the same rate as top incomes.

The top 1 percent of German households earns about 11 percent of all income, virtually unchanged relative to 1970, according to recent estimates. In the United States, the top 1 percent makes more than 20 percent of all income, up from 9 percent in 1970. That’s right: only 40 years ago, Germany was more unequal than this country.

Finally, there are taxes. Germany does not have a smaller budget deficit because it spends less. Germany, you’ll recall, is the original welfare state. It has a smaller deficit because it is more willing to match the benefits it wants with the needed taxes. The current deficit-reduction plan includes about 60 percent spending cuts and 40 percent tax increases, Mr. Hüfner says. It’s like trying to lose weight by both eating less and exercising more.

As I suggested before, the American economy’s strengths may still be greater than the German economy’s. But Germany sure does seem more serious about dealing with its weaknesses.

And us? Well, lobbyists for the mortgage bankers and the N.A.A.C.P. have recently started pushing for less stringent standards for down payments. Wall Street is trying to water down other financial regulation, too.

Some Democrats say Social Security and Medicare must remain unchanged. Most Republicans refuse to consider returning tax rates even to their 1990s levels. Republican leaders also want to make deep cuts in the sort of antipoverty programs that have helped Germany withstand the recession even in the absence of big new stimulus legislation.

There is no getting around the fact that financial crises wreak terrible damage. It’s too late for us to prevent that damage, and it will take a long time to recover fully. It is not too late to learn from our mistakes.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=23df9bd56d09f42582a8fea5d853685e