The tragedy of the Euro: how the European Union finances its sovereign debt

in #money7 years ago (edited)

The thesis of this post is very short and straight-forward: the EU has become so far removed from the classical liberal vision of political and economic competition that it is not worthwhile anymore for European countries to participate in the EU. One way in which it has destroyed monetary competition, and thus stability, is through the introduction of the common currency - the Euro.

Why the introduction of the Euro was a tragedy

The introduction of the Euro has proven to be a huge mistake, because it has enabled fiscally irresponsible governments of such countries like Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain etc. to conduct unsustainable economic policies. In the past, when these states had their own currency, their governments had to finance their budget deficits through the sales of government bonds which resulted in higher government debts. The higher government debts manifested itself in higher interest rates on their government bonds, and a greater money supply would lead to devaluations of their currencies.

To illustrate how the process of government bonds financing works in the European Monetary Union, we could look at the development of 10-year government bonds. The graph below shows the interest rates that governments have to pay to the financiers of their 10-year government bonds from 1995 to 2011:


Interest rates on 10-year government bonds from 1995-2011.

The y-axis represents the rates of interest that an investor receives from 10-year government bonds. Countries that are economically stronger and fiscally more conservative are rewarded with lower interest rates due to the smaller risk that these governments will not pay back their loans. In the case of Germany, a country with traditionally a stronger economy, a more conservative Bundesbank, and a fiscally more responsible government than many other European nations, investors received 7.5% interest on their 10-year government bonds in 1995. Greek government bonds had a yield of 18% in 1995. 1995 was the year in which the European Committee had announced that the Euro would arrive in 2002. Interest rates on government bonds consequently converged in the following years. At the end of 1997 all rates of interest on Portuguese, Irish, Spanish, Italian, French and German 10-year government bonds were more or less equal despite the fact that many of the governments of these countries still spent more than they received in tax incomes. The consequence of sharing a common currency with fiscally more responsible countries like Germany and the Netherlands is that fewer price signals in the form of higher interest rates on government bonds of fiscally irresponsible governments emerge. Irresponsible governments can issue government bonds to the banking sector that transfer these bonds as collateral to the ECB in return for loans. The interest rate that banks pay for the loans of the ECB are issued as profits to their governments. This is in short how ‘seigniorage’, the profits derived from money creation when the costs of money production and the distribution of money are lower than the value of money itself, is created.


Sovereign debt financing in the European Monetary Union.

This process leads to inflation, but the costs of inflation in the EMU are not solely borne by the respective country that issues the government bonds, but by all countries that participate in the EMU. A country like Spain can for example issue government bonds that traditionally would correspond with 10% inflation. However, when other countries like the Netherlands and Germany issue an amount of bonds that corresponds with 5% inflation, Spain benefits from seigniorage as the inflation created by Spain is higher and borne partly by the Netherlands and Germany. A Euro in this regard is beneficial for fiscally irresponsible governments. It is actually a “Tragedy of the commons”.

Abusing the Euro in this way is exactly what countries like Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain and France have done. This works until a financial crisis shows how insolvent the governments of these countries actually are. That has happened in 2008, the moment when interest rates on European government bonds started diverging. The ECB had even decided to buy up Greek government debts in May 2010 in order to lower the interest rates on Greek government bonds. In June 2010, a temporary European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) was founded with guarantees of up to €440 billion to combat the European sovereign debt crisis. It has provided financial assistance to Ireland, Portugal and Greece. The EFSF was later replaced by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) in October 2012 with a total described capital of around €700 billion of which the Netherlands has pledged €40 billion in capital participation.

The Netherlands should leave this sinking ship

The Dutch prime minister, Mark Rutte, had promised the Dutch in 2011 that the Netherlands would receive back the money it has loaned out to Greece in May 2010.[1] The total sum that was loaned to Greece by the Dutch was €3.2 billion. However, in 2012 when the Netherlands loaned out €14.5 billion of the second financial aid package of €130 billion that was pledged by Europe and the IMF to Greece, the Dutch minister of Finance, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, admitted that the Netherlands were losing money. Rutte also admitted that he could not guarantee that the Dutch loans to the Greeks would not be forgiven.[2] Three years later, on July 13 2015, the Netherlands loaned out another €22.6 billion to Greece.[3] It has become clear that such financial pledges of the Netherlands to fiscally irresponsible governments like that of Greece are not beneficial for the Dutch. Even in the long run it is not beneficial for the EU as it supports and prolongs a socialist European system that is deeply rotten to its core and destined to fail. What the EU needs is a radical return to decentralization and political competition - the ideology behind the Treaty of Rome (1957) which stood for the following four freedoms:

  • free movement of goods
  • freedom of movement for workers
  • the right of establishment and freedom to provide services
  • and free movement of capital.

The EU has become a sinking ship. It appears to me that the Netherlands should leave the Union as soon as possible. I do not see how Europe can maneuver itself safely through the next financial crisis that is at the point of breaking out as more banks are on the brink of collapse.[4] I also expect greater centralization of political power within the EU and a greater loss of individual member countries’ sovereignty. On June 27, 2016, the Polish media had reported that France and Germany were taking matters into their own hands and are using the Brexit to unveil their plan to morph the continent’s countries into one giant superstate. Under their radical proposals,

“EU countries will lose the right to have their own army, criminal law, taxation system or central bank, with all those powers being transferred to Brussels.”[5]

References

Bagus, P. (2010). The Tragedy of the Euro.

Dijkstra, M. (2015). Griekse crisis: wat heeft het allemaal gekost?

Gutteridge, N. (2016). European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations ‘to be morphed into one’ post-Brexit.

Hoppe, H.H. (2001). Democracy the god that failed.

Footnotes

[1] See “Rutte geeft verbreken verkiezingsbelofte toe” (2012). http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/2968363/rutte-geeft-verbreken-verkiezingsbelofte-toe.html

[2] See “Griekse crisis: wat heeft het ons allemaal gekost?” http://www.elsevier.nl/economie/article/2015/07/griekse-crisis-wat-heeft-het-ons-allemaal-gekost-2657386W/

[3] See for example “Deutsche Bank tumbles near record lows as yield curve crashes.” http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-13/deutsche-bank-tumbles-near-record-lows-yield-curve-crashes

[4] See “European SUPERSTAT to be unveiled: EU nations ‘to be morphed into one’ post-Brexit.” http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/683739/EU-referendum-German-French-European-superstate-Brexit

[5] See “Dutch PM rejects referendum calls: not in the Netherlands’ interest.” http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2016/06/92520-2/


If you enjoy reading this article, please considering following me. I mainly write about philosophy, economics, and my travels.

Follow me @chhaylin

E-mail: chhaylinlim@hotmail.com

Wordpress: www.chhaylinlim.wordpress.com

Sort:  

Is TARGET 2 an issue in the Netherlands? This is the real time bomb under the European Monetary Union.


Click here to see the chart

The southern European countries are buying Imports from Germany with credit from the German Bundesbank. Right now there are 850 billion Euro in fire for Germany.

Thank you for sharing this graph with us. I've never seen it before. Looking at the graph, there's 100+ billion Euro in fire for the Netherlands. This will surely be an issue for the Dutch. :|

There is one very famous german economist that has discovered this problem, Prof. Hans-Werner Sinn (with a funny beard, btw.) He has written a bestselling book about it. Here is a video in English language from 2012, where he speaks about Target2:

Here is the Target2 chart for the Netherlands:

Source

Great professional review, thanks for your dedication.

Thank you for your comment. It's very encouraging. :)

I think i will follow you, while your approach of critical and also scientific review is rare.

Keep up the spirit!

Thank you, @beesteem. Btw, you have the cutest profile pic I've seen on Steemit so far. ;)

If you haven't seen them yet, thought you may find these Martin Armstrong articles also insightful on the EURO "tragedy":

The euro DID NOT ELIMINATE by any means the member state REAL currency movement as believed most assumed it would accomplish from the outset. The free market will always respond to any such change. In this manner, it was logical that the bond market of each member state would simply become the tradable virtual constructive currency derivative that in effect provides the SAME impact as the old currency would have accomplished. A currency rises and falls based upon CONFIDENCE in the political government underling that instrument. Creating the euro, BUT leaving each nation with its sovereign debt converted to euro, left intact the SAME underlying element of separate and distinct political risk.

Link: The Rise & Fall of the EURO

it has taken 20 years to make this point. Granted, the recent proposal to create a debt for the Eurozone is a compromise, but it is still not a consolidation of the national debts of Europe.

This compromise proposal is ​​consolidating government bonds into asset backed securities (ABS). This is intended to pack the national government bonds into securities in order to ensure the financing of the states even after the end of the ECB’s buying-up program. Draghi has created a huge problem buying 40% of the government bonds. Who will buy when the ECB stops?

Link: The Proposed Euro Bond Issue to Bailout ECB

I haven't read this from Martin Armstrong yet, but I find it very interesting. Thank you for sharing this with us.

When the ECB will stop buying, the Euro will crash and burn. It's good that we hold some crypto ;)

Such a well posed argumentation against the proliferation of the Euro. You have even me doubting the legitimacy of the coin. Food for thought.

I'm happy that I have made you doubt the legitimacy of the coin. That's why we need more competition in currencies, and crypto has radically increased the competition through the decentralization of money production. :D

Interesting :)

Am glad that you find it interesting. I'm trying my best to add highly valuable content, but am still trying to find my niche. By the way, I see that you have reached 100 followers in just 6 days - CONGRATULATIONS!

I hope you do find your niche :)
Thanks for looking !

In many ways the tragedy of the Euro is the tragedy of a mode of thinking, which is that choices do not lead to consequences. This belief, that bad outcomes are unfair and not linked to choices, is the rationale behind why some entity needs to step in and rescue "victims" from fates they do not deserve.

This paradigm or world view is born from conceit, the conceit that we can make reality into anything we want it to be.

But -- surprise! We cannot. We cannot outsmart causality. Choices will always lead to consequences. The only solution is to make better choices.

The Euro was born from the idea that southern european countries were the victims of unfair and unreasonable bond predators, who forced these countries to pay a higher rate on debt than everyone else. Which is kind of like arguing that people with poor credit scores default because they pay a punitive rate on their debt, or that inner city kids fail because of their environment, or that people who can't afford insurance end up going bankrupt from medical bills because they don't take care of medical problems while they are small.

There are small kernels of truth to all of those beliefs, but those kernels only represent a very small portion of the problem. But meanwhile do-gooders bet the whole society on the idea that severing the link between choices and outcomes will make people free. But it only serves to unleash unlimited bad choices, which then proliferate exponentially until they crush the system underneath an overpowering wave of parasitism.

We have voluntarily surrendered the ability to think critically and systemically under the guise of altruism. And this mistake will lead to much more misery than if we would have just stayed hard and practical.

Excellently written, @gwiss.

the tragedy of the Euro is the tragedy of a mode of thinking, which is that choices do not lead to consequences

I love this, and totally agree with you!

Interesting post Chhaylin, thanks for sharing the information what motivate all of us, that we are on the right track with cryptocurrency!!
Cheers!

Excellent analysis and detailed research as always, thanks @chhaylin

Hi fellow Bruce Lee fan. Thank you for your compliment :)

Nice writing Chhay!