NOVANEWS
The Real Truth about Greece and the EU
by Mike Stathis
In order to understand the progression of the economic and political chaos in Greece, one must review several key events from recent years, all while reading between the lines from official statements made by the global banking syndicate and their puppet politicians in both the EU and U.S.
First, I begin with my analysis of statements made by certain members of this crime syndicate after the April 2009 G-20 Summit. As you will recall, this meeting took place within weeks of the global equities markets having reached multi-year lows. Politicians and establishment economists from around the globe met to discuss their “solutions.”
At the time, consensus forecasts had concluded that the global economy would record a decline in growth; the first time in 60 years.
“At first glance, their [IMF] recent official forecast for a 1.3% decline in the global economy for 2009 seems to put to rest any thoughts that they have downplayed (either by incompetence or intentionally) the reality of the economic meltdown.
Despite the fact that this would be the first time in over 60 years since the global economy shrunk, their forecasts are overly optimistic and will be revised downward several times over. You can bet on it.
As you might recall, just four months ago the IMF predicted a 0.5% growth for the global economy in 2009. That represents a huge miss. Despite their forecast of a 2.8% negative GDP growth for the United States in 2009, other nations have it much worse, with Japan’s economy expected to shrink by 6.2%.
The IMF continues with its forecast for positive growth for the global economy in 2010 of 1.9%. This is very doubtful. In fact, I expect the global economy to continue negative growth next year. However, keep in mind this will depend on how much the central banks flood the globe with currency and how many fiscal stimuli are passed.
But consider this. If you’re handing out huge amounts of money that you don’t have in order to boost economic activity, can you really claim that you’ve created a net amount of economic activity?
Given the massive amount of funds already committed, I would say definitely not. Regardless, you should expect much more money to be passed out. This could create a global bubble down the road. The effects would be even more devastating than those seen today. At the very least, Washington is mortgaging away the future of America.
What the IMF did not discuss was the likelihood of having to bail out Mexico, much of Eastern Europe, possibly the UK and a several other nations.
During the G-20 meeting, Obama discussed the global commitment of bailing out developing nations. You might also recall the G-20 meetings called for a ‘global New Deal,’ as well as over $1.1 trillion to the IMF in aid for the global meltdown.
While there were no definitive signs of a victory for a continuation of Washington’s pseudo-free market policies, there appeared to be a continued commitment for avoidance of protectionism.
‘Still, the meeting eased fears that leaders would repeat the failure of a similar gathering in 1933, which was followed by a surge of protectionism that prolonged the Great Depression. The leaders also agreed to ‘name and shame’ countries that erected trade barriers, intended to resist growing protectionist sentiment.’
This is an example of how the media is trying to build support from U.S. citizens for protectionism. The fact is that protectionism actually made the depression less severe.
Despite the push by many nations (especially Europe) for global banking regulation, the U.S. was able to weasel out of this.
What they aren’t telling you is that much of the ambivalence from Germany and France from the G-20 meeting was [based on] their unwillingness to be stuck bailing out Europe. This is something that could threaten the European Union down the road. If not, there are many other things that will.
I expect the tensions between European leaders and the White House to grow. Germany has no intention of being stuck bailing out Eastern Europe.
It is likely that America will end up being on the hook for the majority of the bailout funds needed for Eastern Europe via the IMF. As for the fate of the UK and Japan, things are looking really ugly.
In the end, I feel the long-term fate of the European Union will be threatened; not so much for economic reasons as for the continued destruction of each nation’s sovereignty.
Already, common laws of the union are causing social disruptions based upon cultural differences. It is perhaps for this reason that the union has aggressively opened its doors to nations outside of the union as a way to dilute the cultural and racial identities of each nation. But we have already seen a glimpse of what this offers—mass riots, arson and destruction. No doubt, the tensions will worsen due to the severity of the global meltdown.
One thing is for certain. In order for the union to succeed, all nations must be provided with a somewhat equivalent infrastructural base. Otherwise, the disparities in commerce will present problems.
Let me give you a simple example of this. Arguably, Germany has the most modernized road system in Europe. This enables an efficient means of transportation for a vibrant consumer and business activity.
In contrast, Greece’s transportation infrastructure is horrendous. As a result, the cost structure for goods and many services is higher by necessity. This disparity leads to a relative difference in the strength of the Euro depending on which nation you are in. But there are other economic uncertainties, such as who will bail out troubled nations.
Given the economic, social and sovereignty issues, it is possible that by 2020, Germany will pull out of the union, most likely for economic reasons alone. If that happens, you can bet France will soon follow.”
Source: AVA Investment Analytics, June 2009 Intelligent Investor. May 27, 2009.
A year later, I discussed more dire projections for the EU based on my projections of further deterioration of the unified economy as well as the intended mechanism of fiscal consolidation, as expressed by the Jewish bankers and puppet politicians in charge of the EU.
In this analysis, I pointed out that even the IMF admitted that upon entry into the European Monetary Union (EMU) the South East Area (SEA) European member states began to record a current account deficit, reflection the various economic and infrastructural imbalances within the Eurozone.
“These demographic trends can only be altered by forces of nature. But governments can AND WILL alter retirement and healthcare benefits.
Thus, the demographic trends faced by the EU are likely to be met with some combination of significantly higher taxes, fewer benefits, and a significant increase in labor participation rates, especially in the elderly population.
You should expect to see minimum retirement age raised in most EU nations several times over the next few decades. This is process has already commenced. While the U.S. also faces a similar situation, it is not as severe.
The effect of this demographic shift, along with the effects of the global economic crisis will be present for several decades. These trends will adversely affect consumption, per capita GDP and living standards.
According to official data from a variety of sources, the current accounts in seven nations within Southern Europe (i.e. Southern Euro Area, SEA) have imploded since the mid-1990s. For instance, in 1994, these nations maintained an overall average current account balance (which can be likened to an annual trade surplus) to an average deficit of 10% in 2008.1
When the current accounts of Northern Europe (the Northern Euro Area, NEA) are examined, eight nations have accumulated current account surpluses over the same period.2
What can explain this rapid demise in SEA economies?
Numerous sources including (even) the IMF and other economic organizations have acknowledged that the decline in the current accounts of SEA countries coincided with their joining the European Monetary Union (EMU) and continued after their subsequent adoption of the euro.
Over the 1994–2008 period, the deterioration in current accounts coincided with a large decrease in private saving rates and, to a lesser extent, with a rise in investment rates, while public saving actually improved.
Yet, according to the IMF, it was the creation of the EMU and, especially, the introduction of the euro, that drove the declines in current accounts by allowing countries to maintain their investment levels above what could be financed from lower domestic saving.
According to the IMF…
‘Hence, economic integration improved access to the international pool of saving, but it did not necessarily make it optimal or sustainable.
Even in countries in which an increase in investment played a more important role in the current account deterioration (Spain and Slovenia), most of the increase took place in less productive nontradables sectors, such as construction.
Although the current global financial crisis has forced some reduction in current account deficits, they are expected to remain high in the medium run as a result of the countries’ low productivity and weak competitiveness.’
Thus, the unionization of Europe has largely been responsible for the current economic problems seen in Greece, Italy, Spain, and other nations. It was doomed from the beginning.”
1 The SEA consists of Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain. SEA-4 denotes the four largest SEA countries: Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain; the latter three joined the EMU in 1994 and the euro area in 1999, and Greece joined the euro area in 2001. The remaining SEA countries, SEA-3 (Cyprus, Malta, and Slovenia) joined the EMU in 2004 and the euro area in 2007–08. Not included in this analysis is Slovakia, which joined the EMU in 2009.
2 The NEA comprises Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.
Source: AVA Investment Analytics, July 2010 Intelligent Investor. July 5, 2010.
In 2011, I followed up on my previous assessment of the IMF’s handling of the Greek economy. First, I will summarize that assessment.
Thereafter, I present an updated analysis which should be taken to serve as a general blueprint for what lay ahead for Spain, Portugal, Italy and perhaps even France.
“The graphs on this page are especially disturbing. The first chart illustrates an estimate of Greek public debt assuming the recommended level of asset sales (the baseline) versus a lower level.
As you can see, there is not much difference.
If these estimates are accurate, they imply that Greece will gradually be forced to sell off even more of its assets down the road after they have allowed the vultures to enter.
The second chart shows three scenarios for debt obligations. As you can see, the red dotted line shows that Greek sovereign debt is expected to soar if economic growth is permanently lower. This is precisely the fate faced by Greece. Thus, it serves no purpose to sell off vital assets in order to satisfy bankers.
I am certain that if Greece goes forward with plans for further assistance by the IMF and EU, it will be in much worse shape in coming years. Furthermore, if Greeks allow their nation to be auctioned off to bankers, eventually, Greece will be run by the private sector. As a result, Greeks will be taxed and fees will be levied for services previously provided based on local and federal taxes. The entire nation will be rigged with electronically monitored parking meters, the roads will have tolls throughout, property taxes will soar, etc.
As I have discussed in the past, the only solution for Greece is to defect from the European Monetary Union, and later to defect from the European Union. This is 
also the best choice for Italy, Spain and Portugal.”
Source: AVA Investment Analytics, August 2011 Intelligent Investor, Part 4. August 12, 2011.
Finally, from the May 2012 Intelligent Investor…
“The so-called bitter medicine otherwise known as “austerity” being forced on Europe by bankers and their puppet politicians continues to harm the economy.
Austerity measures have not been balanced but have been specifically structured as a pro-cyclical fiscal policy, which is designed to tighten the budget.
The theory behind this measure is to create enhanced competition through an internal devaluation of the economy through a reduction in unit labor costs such that export trade becomes more competitive.
Now in its fifth year of recession, the unemployment rate remains near record-highs, unit labor costs remain among the highest in the euro zone, while Greece’s Real Effective Exchange Rate remains higher than prior to its recession in 2006.
Therefore, the internal devaluation sought by this pro-cyclical strategy has not worked.
While we are opposed to the approach being taken by the U.S. which has flooded the global with dollars, because Europe has not countered with the same strategy, this has accentuated its economic problems.
After nearly five years of a severe recession, even the most optimistic projections of GDP recovery to pre-recession levels are not encouraging (around 12 years) when compared to other nations that were crushed during previous financial crises.
For instance, Argentina’s GDP recovered in three years. However, Argentina defaulted on its debt and was thus not held to the severe austerity measures that would otherwise be imposed on it by the IMF.
By the spring of 2010, European leaders finally realized that several euro zone nations would need a great deal of financial assistance. In response, they created the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) to provide support to euro area member states in financial difficulty. This facility was first utilized by Ireland in December 2010 and Portugal in May 2011.
However, the Maastricht treaty prevents fiscal transfers across euro area nations. This has made it difficult to use taxpayer money from some countries to fund nations in most need of financial assistance.
In response to escalating problems in Europe, the EFSF’s lending capacity was nearly doubled to €440 billion in spring 2011.
When the problems became much worse in Spain and Italy, its mandate was increased in summer 2011 to allow for precautionary lending and additional flexibility.
Since the IMF’s First Review of the Stand-By Arrangement in September 2010, the organization (which is staffed with thousands of analysts and economists who are paid very handsomely) has consistently underestimated the severity in Greece’s economic contraction. In total the miss in GDP by the IMF since this time has been greater than 7%.
This is a huge miss, especially considering the short time span of the estimates, the access of the IMF to official data, and the huge number of IMF staff members dedicated to this nation. 
There is absolutely no way even the smallest economic organization staffed with competent individuals could makesuch a huge miss. Thus, either the IMF is incompetent or they have intentionally understated their estimates.
I feel the optimism in projections from the IMF has been intentional so as to inspire their privatization plan, which will turn over valuable public assets (70% of which are real estate) in Greece to the private markets.
In fact, it has been reported by highly reputable sources that more much less optimistic projections were not being made public.
In response to its own incompetence (or even complicit fraud), the IMF continues to ratchet down on Greece further, insisting that more austerity is needed.
Although revenue increases are expected to continue through 2012, the IMF has planned for drastic spending cuts during the 2013-2014 period, promising an even more severe economic recession.
Even if I am wrong in my assumption pertaining to the intentional reporting of excessively optimistic economic estimates for the Greek economy, at the very least, IMF head Lagarde should be forced to resign and a complete overhaul of this taxpayer-funded organization should commence.
In the wildest case of optimism possible, even if Greece were to begin its recovery later this year, since its pre-recession peak, it will have lost 15.8% of GDP, making it one of the most severe losses of economic output seen from all financial crises in the 20th and 21st 
centuries.
Of course, Greece is not going to begin a recovery in 2012, 2013, or 2014. Thus, by the time the IMF is finished with its destruction, Greece could set a new record in terms of economic destruction. We estimate that it will take Greece at least 18 years to reach its pre-recession GDP.
Greece has already suffered a huge toll in social and human costs as a result of the economic siege by the international crime syndicate. Access to healthcare has declined; there have been numerous suicides and violent crimes have soared.
Virtually every economic and financial measure of Greece’s economy remain in a downtrend, from the stock market, retail sales, and current account balance, to GDP, PMI, bank deposits and new car registrations; many continuing to make new lows.
The notable exceptions are the new highs being made in Greece’s interest burden on its debt, spreads with euro bonds, its unemployment rate (now at nearly 22%), and unit labor costs. Even the IMF’s optimistic la-la land forecasts place the Greek unemployment rate at 17% by 2016.
During the 2010-2011 period, Greece cut spending by a whopping 8.7% of GDP. In 2012, the IMF has approved spending cuts of 2.8% of GDP, most of which are in the 
form of revenue increases (as opposed to spending cuts). Much of this revenue boost is expected to come from a clampdown on tax collection from wealthy citizens, while the rest will come from privatization.
In addition, the IMF has “convinced” Greek officials to slash 150,000 government jobs by 2015 and weaken collective bargaining. The minimum wage was recently cut by 20% for workers 25 and over, and by 32% for those under 25.
The 2013-2014 period promises to cause much more pain for Greeks, as the IMF has pushed Greek officials towards spending cuts, specifically from pensions, social transfers and defense.
Part of the blueprint of IMF banking syndicate is to privatize a great deal of Greece’s public assets, enabling the vultures to squeeze as much money from Greek citizens as possible.
In the meantime, Greek property owners are now required to pay a special emergency property tax which has been linked to their electric bill. If this tax is not paid by the due date, it’s lights out.
Projections by the IMF rely heavily on the private sector to extract large sums of money from Greeks (€35 billion over the next two years, or 15.4% of GDP) in order to “improve 
productivity.” But the ambitious dreams of theIMF’s plans of privatization will most likely not measure up as expected.
The IMF’s approach to austerity in Greece represents an obvious case of economic destruction. Moreover, as the situation in Greece worsens, it has opened the door for more of the IMF’s banker colleagues to steal Greece’s most treasured public assets at pennies on the dollar.
Careful observers are witnessing the mechanism by which the IMF always functions. To those of you who are reading this, we hope you note this for future reference because the destruction caused by the IMF certainly is not going to end with Greece.
It is indeed ironic that regulators advocate reasons for unified monetary and economic policies through greater control that could arise from a global body when it suits their interests. Yet, when it comes to practicing what they preach at a time when it could prevent the economic destruction and theft of entire nations, they have stalled.
Rather than focus on addressing longer-term issues, the bankers have continued to cut government spending, wages, and many other things all of which have adversely affected the economy. Greece serves as a perfect example of banker-led destruction at its best.
The next series of charts show Greek GDP and unemployment rate projections by the IMF for each of its five reviews. As you can see, in every case, the IMF has consistently had to 
lower its GDP and raise its unemployment estimates in subsequent reviews.
The first chart shows the IMF’s Fifth Review of Greece, published in December 2011. It also shows the results of all previous reviews. With each review, GDP estimates have been revised downward.
Between the First and Fifth Reviews, the downward revision in Greek GDP has been huge despite the fact that the time between these two reviews has been less than two years. We see a similar situation with Greek unemployment rate projections.
Again, the IMF has made extraordinarily optimistic projections and has only made modest revisions with each review in order to lure Greek officials into accepting their privatization plan. In my view, this represents a form of economic extortion.
Even this latest series of estimates made by the IMF are optimistic and will be reduced in coming weeks. The fact that nearly all of Europe is now in recession adds to this expectation.
In the analysis of Greece’s economic health it is also important to consider the interest burden on its sovereign debt. Greece has the highest interest burden of all nations in Europe, at nearly 7% (although recent data show Spain with a slightly higher rate). In fact, there are only a few nations in the world with a higher interest burden on its sovereign debt. 
Clearly, the IMF has made Greece’s recession more severe. And because the worsened state of the Greek economy has led to a higher interest burden, should not the IMF step in to subsidize the additional costs with “no strings attached” since it has been the IMF that has led to at least a good portion of these additional refinancing costs since 2010
The media has teamed up with establishment economists to paint a very inaccurate picture of Greece; one that places sole blame for its economic problems on Greek officials and the Greek people.
This strategy is similar to the one used by activist groups who shun cigarette smokers as if they are evil people when the fact is they are merely innocent victims of tobacco companies which sell highly addictive products.
While it is certainly true that Greece has a very high level of tax evasion, is not as competitive as nor is as open to trade most E.U. member states, the fact is that this system of commerce has served Greece well for centuries.
The fact is that Wall Street banks were largely responsible for the current problems in Greece through fraudulent refinancing deals and the flood of consumer credit that began when the EMU formed.
Similar to many other E.U. members, Greece was coaxed into joining the E.U. without being told it would need to relinquish its sovereignty.
As has happened with every other E.U. member state, the adverse effects of this phase of globalization orchestrated by the globalization crime syndicate continues 
to take its toll on the Greek people.
Currently, much of the fate of Greece’s economy and future rests on the upcoming elections in mid-June. If the pro-bailout New Democracy Party wins, Greece will be finished as the banking criminals will receive continued harsh austerity and theft of Greece’s public assets”
Again, I would advise the Greek people to remove all current politicians from office by any means necessary if they want to preserve their nation. Otherwise, as I have stated in the past, this will be the end of Greece. After the nation’s most valuable assets are sold, the Greek people will face an indefinite period of economic extortion and social reengineering at the hands of the Jewish bankers.
The one thing Mr. Duke gets wrong in the following video is his statement that the banks are controlled by “Zionist Jews.” The banks are controlled by Jews, most but not all of which are Zionists.
It’s always safer to blame ALL criminality purpetrated by the Jewish mafia on Zionism because this approach directs the issue more at politics.
YouTube
YouTube
YouTube
YouTube
YouTube
