Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Mad As Hell

The End of the American Dream blog has a scary post listing 20 reasons why under 30s are giving up on the economy. In a word: unemployment.

Tragically the same scary picture applies to Ireland. I've copied the chart from a recent post on True Economics highlighting the horrendous rise in youth unemployment in Ireland. It's even worse for young men.

We are - in Giuliano Amato's memorable phrase - eating the future of our young. Golem XIV takes a similarly somber view of the ongoing rescue of Europe's bankers bondholders struggling eurozone members:

If the EU approves the plan to expand the EFSF then they are embarking on a gigantic Collateralised Debt Obligation, taking the yet-to-be earned income of European taxpayers and throwing it at the banks to prop up their traumatised balance sheets. Ultimately just lining the pockets of the wealthy bankers from this leveraged up booty.

In short, they are plundering from the future because it’s not around to protest against it.
 Of course, if our young don't get jobs then there won't be anyone to pay the taxes needed to repay the loans. Some how I don't think our under 30s will have other concerns when the time comes... 


  1. I was disappointed to see the "lining the pockets of the wealthy bankers" shibboleth appear in this respectable forum.

    The world banking crisis is primarily - not exclusively - about saving depositors' funds.

    You can see this in Ireland.

    Sean FitzPatrick and his fellow "wealthy bankers" are ruined, along with most of those who placed their trust in bank shares. In other words, the risk-takers (some of whom were unaware that they were such)lost out.

    Those who supplied them with 90% of their resources, via low-risk bonds and "risk-less" deposit funds, are protected. Many of those were banks, too, of course, but it was not their "lining the pocket" money, was it ?

    Otherwise, good post as usual, Gerard, and thank for the links :-D

  2. Fergus - I think saving depositors' funds is a handy (politically, economically and socially) outcome of saving the banks. But not the purpose.

    Otherwise, why is a haircut for bank bondholders considered anathema, yet governments everywhere have already declared than only a portion of an individual's savings (say, the first €50,000) will be protected by governments?

    Haircuts for savers but not for bondholders?


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...