But is what they got the same thing that the Greek people wanted. Were the Greek people honestly and conscientiously represented by the "leadership"? Would the Greek people have consented to cheating to get into the Euro?
You know, I want to say that Greeks would have chosen not to cheat, but I find it very hard to do so. I've always believed that cheating is deeply woven into Greek culture. They cheat wherever they can and at all levels. The ancient Spartans would severely punish boys caught stealing, but the punishment was for the fact that they failed to get away with the crime, not for the crime itself. Greeks, like Russians, tend to place blame on the victim. If you were robbed, well, you paid for your lesson. In the last election Karamanlis ran on an economic reform platform where Papandreou ran on a spend platform. Look who they chose. To my own shock I've heard arguments from Greeks who tear down Papandreou not for his austerity reforms but for ever admitting the truth about Greek finances - they insist they should have been kept secret and continued with the shady dealings to prevent the crisis entirely. Yes, this is madness and is not at all sustainable. Something needs to change in Greek culture and it can only happen through a big shock to the system. People talk about Greece losing it's sovereignty to the EU and IMF. That is my dream, as I do not see Greece ever capable of fixing it's own problems. Greece's problems are far beyond Greece's abilities to fix them. And I'm not saying that because of the size of their debt but how it got that way.
If the leadership committed fraud then they violated their duty and the debts are not owed by the Greek people. This is normal law in most places. If someone in a position of trust fraudulently takes on bad debts in your name then you are not liable.
But you are twisting things here Fluffy. The debt is government debt and it's the government which will pay it. But the government can only pay it by making cuts and increasing taxes. If the store that you shop at is robbed and they lose lots of money, they will pass on the losses to their lawful, paying customers. It's not fair at all is it? But who said life is fair? Wanna talk fair? Talk to kids raised by parents addicted to drugs and gambling. Is it their fault the parents gambled their money away instead of investing in their kids? And the kids don't even get to vote who their parents are. The only hope for the kids is for a greater authority to step in and set things straight. Most importantly, like I alluded to above, the Greek government is a product of Greek society. They chose to do business with the EU in the same manner Greeks do business with each other. Problem is, those methods work only inside Greece, and even then they don't really work.
A new currency and a new banking infrastructure can be set up (should only ever be set up) by law. The country can take over all the dead banks because they are dead, and use that infrastructure to continue commerce. It's not very complicated but people have trouble with that idea because it makes all the paper in their pockets seem worthless, which they are except for the fact that the government has decreed that they can be used for trade.
What you're suggesting *MIGHT* work if Greece were to completely remove itself from the world economy completely and be fully self sufficient. That's not likely to happen ever. So long as the Greek currency would need to be traded for other currencies, Greece would be broke and its pretend money would be meaningless. Hard to run a tourism industry like that.
Yes, it will be a brilliant move to make Greeks accept responsibility for a debt which is not truly theirs. A referendum would destroy the defense that the debt is odious. It's like when debt collectors call you up to pay debts of a deceased parent. Once the estate is settled, no creditor has any right to pursue next of kin but IF you ask and they take on the debt by AGREEING to pay it then you have contracted to take on the debt which you would not otherwise owe.
Well, your analogy is slightly off. A better analogy would be if you lived rent free in your uncle's house and then your uncle passes away. You could let the bank take the house, and thus live on the street. Or take over your uncle's payments. Living for free was nice, but now you got a hard choice to make.
