Not really. I'm saying their program has pretty obviously failed so we should try something else. There are plenty of economists who agree. Hell, even the IMF at this point has come out and said that Greek debt will need to be written down.
None of that changes all the ridiculous shit you said earlier that was either totally stupid or dishonest.
No one is arguing that Greece will ever pay its debts in full. (Well, except the occasional Greek.) They are arguing over whether Greece will be allowed to take on new debts which will also never be paid in full.
I'd be willing to bet that not a single economist, be he professional or Internet amateur, who is arguing that Greece should be given more money without major structural changes has actually personally invested in Greek bonds. As always, proggie economic policies are best carried out with other people's money.
People who think that the problem is Greece didn't cut enough, read the IMF's 2013 review:
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2013/cr13156.pdf
They knew the problem was austerity for at least 2 years, and they continued with the program as if they learned nothing.
Yes, let's.
3. Fiscal policy was pro-cyclical. Some argue that Greece was the country that gained most from euro adoption (Fernandez-Villaverde et al, 2013) with borrowing costs falling sharply. As a direct fiscal dividend, government interest expenditure dropped from 11½ percent of GDP in the mid-1990s to 5 percent of GDP in the mid-2000s. However, these savings were more than swallowed up by increased spending on wages and pensions. The economy turned down in the wake of the Lehman crisis and the general government deficit reached 15½ percent of GDP (after incorporating data revisions), up from 4 percent of GDP in 2001. Public debt was 129 percent of GDP at end-2009, with 75 percent held by foreigners. There were also significant contingent liabilities due to public enterprises borrowing under state guarantee, while the pension system had become underfunded as a result of increasingly generous entitlements and an aging population.
26. About half of the adjustment in the primary deficit reflected lower spending. As a result of the expenditure measures undertaken during the SBA-supported program, primary expenditure declined by 4 percentage points of GDP in 200911, but still exceeded the 2005 level by about the same amount. Moreover, the wage bill remained high compared with other EU countries; programs for social protection remained largely untargeted and inefficient (OECD, forthcoming); and health care reform had yet to be completed.
27. Fiscal consolidation proceeded, but momentum on fiscal structural reforms flagged. Measures taken contributed to strong upfront consolidation (wage and pension cuts, VAT hikes) and to improved long-term sustainability (pension reform). A far-reaching pension reform was approved by Parliament in July 2010 that was designed to substantially contain increases in pension benefits over the long run (see Box 3). Fund TA also led to improvements in expenditure and commitment controls and to better fiscal reporting and budgeting practices. However, tax administration reforms encountered setbacks due to political resistance and capacity constraints. Although TA led to improvements in on-time VAT filing, there were few signs by the end of the SBA-supported program that collection efficiency was being improved on a permanent basis (see Box 4).
If one looks at the tables, Greek wages and public welfare program spending both increased much faster than the EU average, and that average includes countries which are fiscally sound.
Slightly off topic. Why are non Greeks and Euro zone people so passionate about Greece?
I know there are market dangers however it seems like the market was expecting Greece to default. The US market has barely reacted to the turmoil.
Is it an opportunity to show austerity doesn't work so well and an example of a spend more than you can pay government causing the endless bickering?
A core plank of progressive policy is that nations can borrow more money every year, forever, without adverse effects. Another core plank of progressive policy is that austerity (meaning spending less than last year, even if last year was an exceptional event, is always ruinous. Thus Greece threatens two key progressive beliefs. For these not to fall, Greece must be loaned more money, and we must pretend not to notice when that money is not paid back. This is why when conservatives say no one is willing to loan Greece more money without major systemic reforms, progressives only answer that Greece must be loaned more money.
For conservatives, Greece shows that a nation cannot simply borrow money, then borrow more money to make its payments plus even more for new spending, without eventually running out of other people's money.
It's two simple but opposing core beliefs, whether or not a nation can forever spend more than it takes in (or if you prefer, consume more than it produces) which must be defended by each side because it has lessons for all nations, even though the correlation will never be exact.