This is fun, maybe I can get my points into negative territory!
Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
21–27 of 27 posts
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#22I'm not a libertarian, to say the least, but I think that this writer has a point. I don't know where the saying originates that "a democracy only survives until its citizens realize that they can vote themselves money" -- I believe it was a British historian writing about Athens in the 1750s -- but it's intensely relevant here. Greece, or any country, can only support a large public sector (apparently not overpaid so much as overpopulated) on the back of a large productive sector -- not necessarily a private sector (just ask the People's Liberation Army and its subsidiaries), but something or other that's generating wealth.
I'd also emphasize _delerium's passing comment about a state needing to worry about its future ability to get loans. The combination of the Industrial Revolution and pogrom-proof banking have made this less likely, but as late as the 18th century there was always the possibility of a country running out of money; Philip II's bankruptcy is a particularly famous one. If that (or extreme inflation) starts happening again, it will make everyone's lives harder.
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
In America many civil servants are overpaid when you look at total compensation. The amount of retirement that needs to be paid is ridiculous and most govs didn't actually set aside money to pay it.
That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. Employers in general, public and private, make promises of future payments they can't pay for, don't set aside the money, and just kick the can down the road to the next generation of management. It's one reason so many American companies go bankrupt about 30-40 year…
> That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector.
There's an important difference. If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. If San Jose can't pay the pensions that it promised, I take the hit via taxes.
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. Employers in general, public and private, make promises of future payments they can't pay for, don't set aside the money, and just kick the can down the road to the next generation of management. It's one reason so many American companies go bankrupt about 30-40 year…
> That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. There's an important difference. If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. If San Jose can't pay the pensions that it promised, I take the hit via taxes.
If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit.
Have you heard of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation?
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. Employers in general, public and private, make promises of future payments they can't pay for, don't set aside the money, and just kick the can down the road to the next generation of management. It's one reason so many American companies go bankrupt about 30-40 year…
> That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. There's an important difference. If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. If San Jose can't pay the pensions that it promised, I take the hit via taxes.
Isn't that actually worse? Not only can IBM screw its pensioners, but the pensioners have no recourse: IBM's shareholders get to keep decades of profits gotten on the basis of promises that were later breached, and limited liability means those dividends can't be clawed back to pay the company's obligations.
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. There's an important difference. If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. If San Jose can't pay the pensions that it promised, I take the hit via taxes.
Isn't that actually worse? Not only can IBM screw its pensioners, but the pensioners have no recourse: IBM's shareholders get to keep decades of profits gotten on the basis of promises that were later breached, and limited liability means those dividends can't be clawed back to pay the company's obligations.
> Isn't that actually worse?
For whom? Not for me.
> Not only can IBM screw its pensioners, but the pensioners have no recourse
They made a bet. Since they were willing to take the winnings, they should take the loss.
Re: Maybe Greece Should Go Bankrupt
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That I agree with, but it's a more general issue about the temptation to make future promises you can't pay for, and is also true in the private sector. There's an important difference. If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. If San Jose can't pay the pensions that it promised, I take the hit via taxes.
If IBM can't pay the pensions that it promised, IBM pensioners take the hit. Have you heard of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation?
> Have you heard of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation?
Yes, I have. It's largely funded by companies that offer pensions - it's a huge problem that it isn't completely funded that way. That's not an argument for increasing its taxpayer funding.
Also, the first thing that it does is cut pension benefits.
I'm the only one who is going to pay for my retirement, so I've little sympathy for folks who think that I should pay for theirs.
If you're in a giving mood, feel free to kick in some money for me. If you're not willing to do that, what's the argument that I should pay for someone else's?