Posted on 12/01/2013 9:43:25 AM PST by 1rudeboy
You are both missing my point and lacks any idea on socialism.
Subsidies and plundering are coming side-by-side there.
Same subject might be subsidized and plundered at the same time.
Let me know if you have an example of Cyprus, or any other weak country, being plundered.
What about a confiscation of savings held by banks in Cyprus?
EU might have subsidized some social programs for Cyprus, but is it fair if your account is plundered (especially if you wasn’t a recipient in any of such programs) to cover EU’s own and your government’s mismanagment?
When your bank loses money on mortgages and other bad loans, and Germany doesn't hand you a check, do you feel Germany has plundered your bank account?
>>>What about a confiscation of savings held by banks in Cyprus?
When your bank loses money on mortgages and other bad loans, and Germany doesn’t hand you a check, do you feel Germany has plundered your bank account?<<<
You are missing my point again. If you are to look into a Cyprus bailout it wasn’t about to take 20% of assets from bank A, 25% from bank B and 5% from bank C.
It was about to confiscate 7-60% (the “rich” are losing more) from every account in every bank in Cyprus.
Feel the difference?
Not banks but their clients are targeted. As an account holder I can rightfully call in plundering MY account.
It was about to confiscate 7-60% (the “rich” are losing more) from every account in every bank in Cyprus.
Yes, when your bank loses money and your government doesn't bail them out, depositors lose money.
As an account holder I can rightfully call in plundering MY account.
Yes, your bank plundered your account, not the EU.
>>>As an account holder I can rightfully call in plundering MY account.
Yes, your bank plundered your account, not the EU.<<<
No, exact accounts were taxed. And there were a bailout, plundering accounts of exact people were a part of the deal.
In this case you can see both subsidies and plundering in one set.
Banks got subsidies, citizens were plundered.
If your bank has $10 billion in deposits and loses $5 billion, absent outside money, your accounts are getting a 50% haircut on average.
If Germany doesn't cough up $5 billion, for your bank to give to depositors, that doesn't mean Germany plundered your bank. Sorry if you can't grasp the concept.
Banks got subsidies, citizens were plundered.
Without EU money being given to Cyprus, the citizens would be plundered even more. True story.
No, exact accounts were taxed. And there were a bailout, plundering accounts of exact people were a part of the deal.
If your bank has $10 billion in deposits and loses $5 billion, absent outside money, your accounts are getting a >>>50% haircut on average.
If Germany doesn’t cough up $5 billion, for your bank to give to depositors, that doesn’t mean Germany plundered your bank. Sorry if you can’t grasp the concept.
Banks got subsidies, citizens were plundered.
Without EU money being given to Cyprus, the citizens would be plundered even more. True story.<<<
No, factually you might be right to certain degree but devil is in details.
IMO, it was fair to let these banks crash and burn.
Here we see exact accounts belonging to exact people are plundered based on a sum of money (with the “rich” discriminated specifically).
Losing your money due to a bank bankruptcy is one case, being the bank client taxed (by EU decree!) for being rich for a bank bailout is absolutely another thing. Details matter.
That is exactly how communism works.
In that case, account losses would have been higher than the 7%-60% you mentioned earlier.
Losing your money due to a bank bankruptcy is one case, being the bank client taxed (by EU decree!) for being rich for a bank bailout is absolutely another thing.
You're right. In the latter case, clients lost less money.
That is exactly how communism works.
I don't remember Communism involving bank bailouts with foreign funds. Maybe you're older than me?
>>>That is exactly how communism works.
I don’t remember Communism involving bank bailouts with foreign funds. Maybe you’re older than me?<<<
Look at EU as EUSSR. As far as 1930s communists used resources from one parts of USSR (including Ukraine) to bailout another parts. And up to 1990 they used resources generated by certain branches of their economy to bailout the rest.
>>>IMO, it was fair to let these banks crash and burn.
In that case, account losses would have been higher than the 7%-60% you mentioned earlier.
Losing your money due to a bank bankruptcy is one case, being the bank client taxed (by EU decree!) for being rich for a bank bailout is absolutely another thing.
You’re right. In the latter case, clients lost less money.<<<
Aha, I got it. It is all done for the “common good”. “Ends justifies means” etc. Just from Lenin’s book.
Here we can see an example how EU, contrary to the laws of “capitalist” economy, allowed Cyprus to stay afloat without suffering consequences of bad policies. The rich (including wealthy Cypriot bank clients and German taxpayers) were taxed for that for political reasons. If it is not a communist, what communism is?
Wow! Can I have some of what you're smoking?
Where did I say I supported giving money from the taxpayers in the rich EU countries to the bank depositors in Cyprus? Which post #?
All I did was show that the claim that Cyprus was "plundered", by the EU, was idiotic. You've managed to take it to a whole new level.
Good job! 
Thanks 1rudeboy.
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.