Why A Greek “No” May Be No Bad Thing
Markets shuddered when George Papandreou, Greece’s prime minister, said he would call a referendum on the latest bailout package being offered by Europe’s economic powers. What scared the markets most was apparently the possibility that the Greeks would choose according to their own interests, not those of the euro zone as a whole. The distinction may be a false one.
Greece has brought most of its problems on itself. Its people have a history of evading taxes, and its government fudged the books for many years. But Greece isn’t the only country to blame. The other members of the European Union probably shouldn’t have let Greece join the euro zone; in their eagerness to create a common currency covering as many members as possible, they either missed or ignored the fiscal shortcomings that would have disqualified Greece.
Now the possibility that Greece will reject the bailout – whether by referendum or otherwise – and default on its debts is menacing banks and bondholders across Europe. In the bailout, these creditors would accept something like a 50 percent loss on the face value of Greek bonds, but their action would be conditional on Greece raising taxes and making more budget cuts.
You could certainly understand if some Greeks felt they were being asked to sacrifice excessively in order to reduce the pain elsewhere in Europe. Of course, you could also argue that they should sacrifice for others’ benefit, given their responsibility for the current state of affairs. It’s not clear that this would lead to the best outcome, though.
At the moment, the political situation in Greece is extremely adversarial, and the pressure from the rest of the euro zone is only making it worse. After all, it’s easy to protest against austerity measures when it seems like they’re being imposed from abroad, and it’s easy to lose faith in a government that seems to be kowtowing to foreign powers. If the Greeks had to go it alone, they might take a more constructive attitude.
What if Greece were outside the euro zone, with no chance of a bailout? It would probably start by printing a lot of money. Doing so would devalue its currency and spur exports. But it wouldn’t help Greece to regain the confidence of the credit markets and the ability to borrow. For that, austerity measures and a commitment to budgetary discipline would indeed be required. Yet the Greeks would be able to calibrate the timing and extent of these policies on their own, which would make popular support – or at least acceptance – more likely.
So is the right strategy just to let Greece go? An exit from the euro might tarnish the common currency’s image in the short term, and this is clearly a major concern for big members like France and Germany. But if the decision to drop Greece were accompanied by firm rules about how countries can enter and exit the euro, the currency would be much stronger in the long term. Right now, these rules are missing, creating uncertainty that hurts investment in euro-denominated assets. Officials in Brussels have sent conflicting signals, some saying that Greece can only exit the euro by quitting the union altogether, and others saying that the euro zone is completely prepared for a Greek exit.
I think an orderly exit for Greece could be better for Greeks, the rest of the euro zone, and markets around the world. Putting an end to the string of ineffective bailouts and placing Greeks firmly in control of their own destiny would help to contain the problem, making it more about Greece and less about the euro. In fact, the effect might be quite the opposite of the domino effect France and Germany seem to fear; other fiscally unstable countries, like Italy, might take the Greek exit as a signal to get their houses more in order.
In the meantime, the European Union’s leaders need to recognize that the euro has been a grand experiment that is not quite complete. Its founders failed to take seriously the possibility that a country would leave the common currency, and today’s leaders are falling into the same trap. It’s time to stop denying that this will happen, whether with Greece or another member. Regardless of how Greeks vote, the euro will need new rules for the future.
Photo Credit: Insuratelu Gabriela Gianina / Shutterstock.com
Step inside the unlikely friendship of a former ACLU president and an ultra-conservative Supreme Court Justice.
- Former president of the ACLU Nadine Strossen and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia were unlikely friends. They debated each other at events all over the world, and because of that developed a deep and rewarding friendship – despite their immense differences.
- Scalia, a famous conservative, was invited to circles that were not his "home territory", such as the ACLU, to debate his views. Here, Strossen expresses her gratitude and respect for his commitment to the exchange of ideas.
- "It's really sad that people seem to think that if you disagree with somebody on some issues you can't be mutually respectful, you can't enjoy each other's company, you can't learn from each other and grow in yourself," says Strossen.
- The opinions expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect the views of the Charles Koch Foundation, which encourages the expression of diverse viewpoints within a culture of civil discourse and mutual respect.
Learn how to redesign your job for maximum reward.
- Broaching the question "What is my purpose?" is daunting – it's a grandiose idea, but research can make it a little more approachable if work is where you find your meaning. It turns out you can redesign your job to have maximum purpose.
- There are 3 ways people find meaning at work, what Aaron Hurst calls the three elevations of impact. About a third of the population finds meaning at an individual level, from seeing the direct impact of their work on other people. Another third of people find their purpose at an organizational level. And the last third of people find meaning at a social level.
- "What's interesting about these three elevations of impact is they enable us to find meaning in any job if we approach it the right way. And it shows how accessible purpose can be when we take responsibility for it in our work," says Hurst.
Erik Verlinde has been compared to Einstein for completely rethinking the nature of gravity.
- The Dutch physicist Erik Verlinde's hypothesis describes gravity as an "emergent" force not fundamental.
- The scientist thinks his ideas describe the universe better than existing models, without resorting to "dark matter".
- While some question his previous papers, Verlinde is reworking his ideas as a full-fledged theory.
TuSimple, an autonomous trucking company, has also engaged in test programs with the United States Postal Service and Amazon.
PAUL RATJE / Contributor
- This week, UPS announced that it's working with autonomous trucking startup TuSimple on a pilot project to deliver cargo in Arizona using self-driving trucks.
- UPS has also acquired a minority stake in TuSimple.
- TuSimple hopes its trucks will be fully autonomous — without a human driver — by late 2020, though regulatory questions remain.