patrick.net

Ptipking222 says

Actually, no, that’s not the case at all.

Actually, yeah, it is.

http://www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/blogs/money-blog/content.aspx?ID=398084

The BBC reports that as part of the IMF/ EU bailout Greek leaders are proposing the following measures:
* Public sector pay to be frozen till 2014;
* Public sector salary bonuses – equivalent to two months’ extra pay – to be scrapped or capped;
* Public sector allowances to be cut by 20%;
* State pensions to be frozen or cut, with the contribution period up from 37 to 40 years;
* The average retirement age raised from 61 to 63, and early retirement restricted;
* VAT to be increased from 19% to 23%;
* Taxes on fuel, alcohol and tobacco raised to 10%;
* A new one-off tax on profits to be introduced, plus new gambling, property and green taxes.

Regardless of your personal feelings on the pension plans and speculation on the state of tax evasion in Greece, those are the measures being requested of the people in Greece.

Why should they have to pay for the failed speculation of the banks?

...just like why should we have to pay for the same thing here?

Because it's not the speculation of the banks that caused their problem. The Greek problem is very simple: the country pays out way more in wages/pensions than it takes in taxes.

The austerity measures are aimed at reducing government payments and increasing taxes.

Banks have nothing to do with that end of the problem.

The banks are exposed because they lent Greece's government money (you deposit money in the bank, they lent it to the government). Not just Greece's banks, Germany and Ireland and others too lent to Greece's government.

Greece's government was financially incompetent. So this is an issue of Greece's government screwing over the banks (though, I don't shred a tear for the banks, they just shouldn't have bought Greek government bonds).

Either way, Greece needs to default or they need to do austerity measures. I favor default, since they're going to do it anyways, so why waste everyone's time. Either way, the citizens are screwed, and deservedly so, since you shouldn't count on your government for cradle to the grave welfare.

If there wasn't austerity measures and Greece was on the drachma, they would have had hyperinflation and 20% unemployment, which is typical for these Club Med countries pre-Euro.

You can argue that Germans and Irish and other Europeans (and even Americans to a much lesser degree) shouldn't have to bail out Greece and the other PIGS. Other countries citizens end up subsidizing these bailouts because their banks are exposed to Greek debt. That I would agree with you. If anyone deserves to be rioting, it should be in Berlin, not Athens.

But screw the Greek people themselves, you can't have massive pensions/welfare and not pay for it and expect it to continue indefinitely.
kentm says

Ptipking222 says

Actually, no, that’s not the case at all.

Actually, yeah, it is.
http://www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/blogs/money-blog/content.aspx?ID=398084
The BBC reports that as part of the IMF/ EU bailout Greek leaders are proposing the following measures:

* Public sector pay to be frozen till 2014;

* Public sector salary bonuses – equivalent to two months’ extra pay – to be scrapped or capped;

* Public sector allowances to be cut by 20%;

* State pensions to be frozen or cut, with the contribution period up from 37 to 40 years;

* The average retirement age raised from 61 to 63, and early retirement restricted;

* VAT to be increased from 19% to 23%;

* Taxes on fuel, alcohol and tobacco raised to 10%;

* A new one-off tax on profits to be introduced, plus new gambling, property and green taxes.
Regardless of your personal feelings on the pension plans and speculation on the state of tax evasion in Greece, those are the measures being requested of the people in Greece.
Why should they have to pay for the failed speculation of the banks?
…just like why should we have to pay for the same thing here?

kentm says

* The average retirement age raised from 61 to 63, and early retirement restricted;

That's weak. They should have raised it to 75. No wonder their austerity isn't working yet. It's way too limp wristed.

I read in greece you can inherit a pension. But only for unmarried duaghters. So I suppose right after they passed that 'law' the marriage rate dropped in half. hah.

I read about a small city in the US that was banrupt recently they also made it so children and grand children could INHERIT THE PENSIONS of city employees. Talk about cuba!!! we are half way there - rich people are all gov employees in cuba.

Ruki says

Ptipking222 says

the country pays out way more in wages/pensions than it takes in taxes.

You talking about Greece?.....or California or Illinois or New York state or the several hundred cities/towns in the US that are insolvent because of their pension liabilities, if not outright bankrupt because of them?

Obey The Tripods

Several hundred? You are off by an order of magnitude. Probably closer to 40-50% of states, counties, cities, towns, independent authoraties, etc. cannot meet their future pension/health care obligations no matter how much taxes are raised. What has happened so far is the tip of the iceburg, the next 10-15 years is going to be a very rocky ride.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-03/aig-chief-sees-retirement-age-as-high-as-80-after-crisis.html

Says 80 should be retirement age,.

Hmmm... makes me wonder if Pensions and Social Security and welfare seem like a packaged government Ponzi scheme.

Wait... we have that now... DOH! :^{

mikey says

I don't want the dollar store to become the five dollar store.

Don't hold your breath. It used to be called the Five-and-Dime.

(The $ 0.05 and $ 0.10 store, if you will.)

mikey says

I don't want the dollar store to become the five dollar store.

We already have them around here:

80 come on. There's some people (slave drivers) who never want to see others released from the yoke. They think that's why we were all born... to work... for them. Let this failed AIG dork work until he's a 100. There are many though, who don't know what to do with themselves without a job (someone telling them what to do)

There is no reason the retirement age shouldn't be going lower. Due to increased productivity, one person working today produces 4 times what a worker in 1950 produced. Wall street and corporations have gamed the system so they get almost all of these gains.

Thoreau wrote in the 1840s that he was able to produce all he needed for the year by working six weeks in his garden. The balance of his time, he said, was his. Save your money, live reasonably, and retire when you decide, not the government.

Zakrajshek says

Thoreau wrote in the 1840s that he was able to produce all he needed for the year by working six weeks in his garden. The balance of his time, he said, was his. Save your money, live reasonably, and retire when you decide, not the government.

I agree. But to those too stupid to save, their retirement age should be 80. Remember when Social Security was first introduced the average lifespan was something like less than a year after you began to receive benefits.