>
> (1) You say Keynes did not provide enough detail: That is, we are talking
> about a policy that has not yet been formulated, even in theory.
>

John Maynard Keynes taught us this 96 years ago, after the Versailles treaty, in
the The Economic Consequences of the Peace: “Will the discontented peoples of
Europe be willing for a generation to come so to order their lives that an
appreciable part of their daily produce may be available to meet a foreign
payment, the reason of which ... does not spring compellingly from their sense
of justice or duty?” he asked.

And his answer: “In short, I do not believe that any of these tributes will
continue to be paid, at the best, for more than a very few years. They do not
square with human nature or agree with the spirit of the age.” Of course he was
right, but only after disaster struck.

Some Germans today insist that a debt is a debt, and that Greece must repay in
full. They should know better from their own history, starting with Keynes’s
unsuccessful plea to lower Germany’s reparations burden. They should recall the
relief that Germany was granted through the Marshall plan, and the 1953 London
agreement on German debts. Did Germany “deserve” the relief in 1953? That was
not the right question. Germany’s new democracy needed the relief, and Germany
needed a fresh start. It played a major role in the economic recovery and
construction of Germany’s democratic institutions.

We are, thank God, not in any great drama of a postwar settlement. Europe is
rich, prosperous, and democratic. Yet French and German banks made too many
loans to Greece a decade ago, and Goldman Sachs facilitated accounting
legerdemain to hide the rapid buildup of Greece’s sovereign debt. Greece’s
private creditors have already taken a deep haircut on the debt. The bigger
challenge – and one that could be much more easily solved – is the debt owed to
official creditors, sums that are large for Greece but very small for Europe.

Does Greece “deserve” the debt relief? Greek politicians behaved badly; so did
German, French, and US banks; and so have many Greek tycoons who hid their
wealth abroad, out of reach of the tax authorities.

Who “deserves” what remains a difficult question. Yet as with Germany in 1953,
the proper question is whether Greece needs debt relief, and whether Germany and
the other creditors should give it. On that the answer is unequivocal. The
eurozone is heading either for a constructive debt-relief agreement or for a
political crash with potential ramifications vastly larger than Greece.

The solution would not be difficult technically. Greece’s outstanding external
debts should be restructured as very long-term loans at a fixed and low
euro-interest rate, say 0.5% for the next five years, rising to 1% in the 2020s
and beyond. Rather than pulling exact numbers out of the air, some
straightforward debt arithmetic would help to identify a realistic trajectory
for Greece’s recovery.

Debt relief will not solve Greece’s economic problems, but it would open the
door to a solution. The real solution involves hard work by young Greeks to open
new businesses and find new export markets, and for Europe as a whole to launch
an investment-led recovery by building a new, smart, 21st-century European
infrastructure – one that could, for example, enable Greece’s fabled
Mediterranean sunshine and wind to provide some of Europe’s low-carbon energy
needs. The first step is to stop the pain.

full:
Let Greece profit from German history
The Guardian, January 21, 2015.
The Guardian, 
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/21/greece-profit-german-history-1953-debt-relief
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to