Posted on 09/10/2012 6:04:04 AM PDT by shove_it
Taxpayers in Europe (and the United States) who have been terrorized since 2008 by government officials warning about economic armageddon, catastrophe, and pestilence should look to tiny Iceland for a taste of how little there is to fear when the experts can't save the people.
Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, recently branded Iceland’s economic performance "impressive." In the last few years the small island in the north Atlantic has managed to shrink its deficit, reduce unemployment, and allow its economy to grow.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
That’s like the town of Podunk explaining to Chicago how to not deficit spend.
Iceland did what worked for Iceland, that does not mean it will work for a nation with 50x its annual budget.
Exactly how does one's shirking of debt, outright denial and refusal to pay such constitute "impressive?.....
Impressive in the fact that it is much like many of Obama's former homeowners who shirked their debt, demand 'help' and complain about mistreatment?
Sorry, but I don't buy "impressive".....they just ignored their debt and rejected it, dealing for better bankruptcy terms with the rest of the world......
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/iceland-icesave-debt-repayment-no-vote
I’d wager they have a pretty homogenous population with a much smaller portion on the dole and assorted entitlements.
The reason it worked was because the depositors in Icelandic banks mostly lived in other countries. They could just shut down the banks and tell the depositors to go pound sand.
It is a very different thing if the depositors live in the country where the banks are located.
Why should the government put the taxpayers on the hook for bad bets made by investors, on their banks? Put another way, under what other circumstances should investors be bailed out by taxpayers when their investments go wrong? In Iceland’s case, the government wanted to make the people pay for bad investments, and instead the people rose up and replaced the government. How does one argue from a position of limited government and individual responsibility that this was an error?
That is a big part of it. Icelanders are for the most part a family oriented hard working people.
There haven’t been enough really rich ones that have been forced to support the lazy ones either, which is the biggest difference I think.
And, when this country is forced to disavow and denounce its massive debt to China, Saudia Arabia, et al, because its people now don’t ‘like’ the government it voted in did something stupid, will it be an ‘error?’
Your point is correct, but obviously several posters don’t understand the issues at all.
EU depositors from France, Great Britain, Holland, Germany etc lost 5 billion dollars when Icelandic banks collapsed. These depositors were made whole by France, Great Britain, Holland, Germany etc.
Iceland gov’t was then presented with a bill for 5 billion dollars. Icelandic citizens revolted and voted a big no. A big no to be taxed to pay for the sins of privately owned Icelandic banks.
EU has threatened to punish Iceland but so far nothing. There were rumblings about keeping Icelandic fish imports out of Europe but nothing so far
That particular problem already has a planned “solution” which is to devalue the dollar. That, too, steals from taxpayers but only those who have not positioned for it, as opposed to everyone as in 2008 (everyone except the Icelanders, that is).
Well, disavowal of the greedy Icelandic banking system and its government they certainly ‘tolerated’ during the ‘good years’ is one way to offer excuse. They certainly improved their bargaining position with the debt holders, for sure.
The trick is to see how long the memories of the debt holders is when it comes time for Iceland’s need to expand and grow with outside investment. I wouldn’t lend them a plugged nickel.
Exactly how might one have "positioned" himself for it? Buy a Chebby Volt? Does he not eat bread, milk, butter, eggs, meat? What? Heirloom seed gardening, gold, guns, ammo? The truth is that government will find a way to make everyone pay. Taxes on property, confiscation of wealth found, etc.
“Sorry, but I don’t buy “impressive”.....they just ignored their debt and rejected it, dealing for better bankruptcy terms with the rest of the world...... “
No they didn’t they ignored private banks debt, and demands that the whole of Iceland bail them out.
That was indeed impressive, and leaves them alone among nations of late who demand that those who live by risk also die by it without burdening the taxpayer.
We should have done the same.
We differ in opinion.
+1
Hear here. BRAVO!
Well, it is a very different thing when the ‘investments’ are deposits in checking accounts.
Suppose Citicorp went broke and the US government did nothing. If GM or GE had their payroll accounts there, guess who wouldn’t get paid this month?
Well, it is a very different thing when the ‘investments’ are deposits in checking accounts.
Suppose Citicorp went broke and the US government did nothing. If GM or GE had their payroll accounts there, guess who wouldn’t get paid this month?
“We differ in opinion.”
We do, but we shouldn’t - using your points, I think I can perhaps find a way you can agree with me.
If you buy a house with a subprime mortgage, then can’t pay for it, I think you’d agree that it’s your problem, it’s not a problem for the US taxpayers.
That’s Iceland.
The purchase of Mortgage Backed Securities by the Fed, and the pretending that your house, even though you haven’t made payments in years and are still living in it, thereby receiving a direct subsidy that is paid for by every US taxpayer (and every future taxpayer for some time to come)
That’s the US.
Iceland refused to backstop private businesses that incurred steep risks to increase private profits when the bets go bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.