How Much Does It Cost To Spray Paint A Bmx

Must Romanians help us think?

Dying for the banks? No thank you

December 10, 2010 România liberă Bucharest

Brussels should she support the bank bailout of the bankrupt? No, says a lawyer Romanian, since maintaining the welfare state is more important. And he cites the example of Iceland, who chose not to fund the rescue of their banks.

Gheorghe Piperea

Between October 2008 and October 2010 the European Commission approved state aid for banks to the tune of 4589 billion euros, Romania's GDP over 45 years. It is not known how many of these state aid went unnoticed because the Commission was (too) generous with this type of financing. Thousand billion have been spent to save banks in 2008 and 250 million in 2009. For all other economic sectors combined, state aid approved during the same period amounted to 73 billion euros (60 times).

State aid from support to firms by public authorities, with public money. They are granted on administrative decisions, decisions fundamentally anti-competitive and opaque, and why citizens are not consulted. Unwittingly, the European taxpayer is involved in this effort, the limit of legitimacy, de sauvetage des banques de la faillite.

Le contribuable ne se limite pas à payer des impôts, c’est également un citoyen. Et le citoyen a des droits, et pas seulement des obligations. Avant de le rendre solidaire des banques endettées au bord de l'effondrement et avant de l'associer aux risques que comportent leurs combines, le citoyen doit d'abord avoir la certitude que ses droits sont garantis, ou du moins l'espoir légitime que tel sera le cas.

Le sauvetage des banques rend caduc le devoir de payer les impôts

Nous acceptons de payer des taxes et des impôts parce que nous nous attendons à ce que l'Etat finance correctement et à temps le système d'éducation, de santé, l'ordre public, la justice et la Défense. Les déficits majeurs de ces secteurs, parce que l'Etat a considéré comme prioritaire le sauvetage des banques de la faillite, rend caduc le devoir des citoyens de payer leurs impôts. Nous ne souhaitons pas payer des impôts pour que l’Etat les balance dans les trous noirs d'un système financier qui est (encore) guidé par le slogan " greed is good " (la cupidité est bonne).

Nous contribuons aux systèmes de sécurité sociale parce que nous nous attendons à ce que, lorsque nous en avons besoin, ces systèmes nous aident avec de l’argent et des prestations sociales qui nous permettent to break the deadlock or lead a decent life in case of disability, illness, parental leave, accident, etc..

These benefits, funded in advance by the contributors, are more important than the need to save a financial system responsible for its own crisis and, as a whole, makes all manner of skulduggery by various benefits in the Trading on the exchange markets, state aid or juggling with virtual money.

banks and their creditors, including bondholders, must bear the risk of bad investments. These are risk professionals, who can assess the risk of investment and resources to take that risk. They even speculate on the evolution of events, at any time accepting the possibility of losing, so they can not and should not be protected.

Individuals, however, lack the same means as banks. That's why they are the recipients of exclusive protection laws (as investors, savers, consumers or taxpayers).

Icelanders, they do not let themselves be impressed

Banks are not the only creditors State: citizens are too. In fact, citizens are the major creditors and many more. Recap: Ireland has not agreed to allow its banks to fail, she has saved, for them paying about 60 billion euros (bringing the deficit to 32% of GDP).

Now, as a state, it is bankrupt, and under the supervision of financial creditors, rather than Irish citizens. However, Iceland has agreed to all its failed banks. Their debts are well supported by their creditors. Icelanders have not been directly affected, although were in any way affected by the crisis.

Iceland has even organized a referendum , where citizens have rejected the bank rescue. They were not intimidated by such phrases as "too big to fail " (too big to fail), designed to manipulate people's minds.

Their president, Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson had said then: " How can we force people to pay for the mistakes of bankers? " It's a good question for a president to a prime minister for a governor. In Romania, as elsewhere.