For Many Greeks, Taxes have been seen as Theft…

…and thus massive tax avoidance and the huge informal economy.

The Wall Street Journal explains: (bold mine)

Of all the challenges Greece has faced in recent years, prodding its citizens to pay their taxes has been one of the most difficult.

At the end of 2014, Greeks owed their government about €76 billion ($86 billion) in unpaid taxes accrued over decades, though mostly since 2009. The government says most of that has been lost to insolvency and only €9 billion can be recovered.

Billions more in taxes are owed on never-reported revenue from Greece’s vast underground economy, which was estimated before the crisis to equal more than a quarter of the country’s gross domestic product.

The International Monetary Fund and Greece’s other creditors have argued for years that the country’s debt crisis could be largely resolved if the government just cracked down on tax evasion. Tax debts in Greece equal about 90% of annual tax revenue, the highest shortfall among industrialized nations, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Greece’s new government, scrambling to secure more short-term funding, agreed on Tuesday to make tax collection a top priority on a long list of measures. Yet previous governments have made similar promises, only to fall short.

Tax rates in Greece are broadly in line with those elsewhere in Europe. But Greeks have a widespread aversion to paying what they owe the state, an attitude often blamed on cultural and historical forces.

During the country’s centuries long occupation by the Ottomans, avoiding taxes was a sign of patriotism. Today, that distrust is focused on the government, which many Greeks see as corrupt, inefficient and unreliable.

“Greeks consider taxes as theft,” said Aristides Hatzis, an associate professor of law and economics at the University of Athens. “Normally taxes are considered the price you have to pay for a just state, but this is not accepted by the Greek mentality.”

The above article manifests of rich political economic insights.

 

One, the typical approach by political agents in addressing economic disorders has mainly been to focus on superficiality or the immediacy—in particular “could be largely resolved if the government just cracked down on tax evasion”. 

Political solutions that fail to understand the incentives guiding the average Greeks has been the reason why tax policies continue to falter.

Two, just to be sure that non-payment of taxes hasn’t been the reason why Greeks have been struggling…

Nominal government spending based on tradingeconomics.com and Eurostat data

The above represents Greek’s government spending relative to GDP

Greece’s government debt relative to GDP (tradingeconomics and Eurostat)

Greece and Europe’s welfare state in % of GDP based on OECD data

As one can see in the above, the controversial “austerity” exists only in the mindset of the statist occult. The Greek government continues to spend at a rate more than the statistical economy and thus the ballooning debt which consequently translates to heightened economic burden on the Greek society.

Three, Greece’s (and the Eurozone’s) boom bust cycle have only exposed on the chink in the armor of Greece’s big government.

The dilemma facing Greece today exemplifies the paragon of radical changes in fiscal conditions when the bust phase of the boom cycle emerges.

This can be seen from the article: (bold mine) 

The reason isn’t just political, but economic. The country’s depression has already pushed many small businesses to the brink of collapse. Forcing them to pay more in taxes would put even more out of business—and more Greeks out of work.

“The Greek economy would collapse if the government were to force these people to pay taxes,” one senior government official said.

So the above data shows why many Greeks see their government as “corrupt, inefficient and unreliable” for them to “consider taxes as theft”

It doesn’t require a libertarian of the Rothbardian persuasion to see how taxes are theft. 

All it takes is for one to see with two eyes the real nature of how governments operates. This has been best described in the article as “corrupt, inefficient and unreliable”. 

Nonetheless here is the dean of Austrian Economics, the great Murray N. Rothbard on taxes. (For A New Liberty, The Libertarian Manifesto, p.30 )

Take, for example, the institution of taxation, which statists have claimed is in some sense really “voluntary.” Anyone who truly believes in the “voluntary” nature of taxation is invited to refuse to pay taxes and to see what then happens to him. If we analyze taxation, we find that, among all the persons and institutions in society, only the government acquires its revenues through coercive violence. Everyone else in society acquires income either through voluntary gift (lodge, charitable society, chess club) or through the sale of goods or services voluntarily purchased by consumers. If anyone but the government proceeded to “tax,” this would clearly be considered coercion and thinly disguised banditry. Yet the mystical trappings of “sovereignty” have so veiled the process that only libertarians are prepared to call taxation what it is: legalized and organized theft on a grand scale.

For the Greeks, the logical solution would seem as to dramatically pare down government spending and taxes or real austerity. These should ease tax burdens on the entrepreneurs or the productive agents that would allow them to channel resources to productive means. This should entail real economic growth.

In doing so, the informal economy should flourish and grow for the latter to integrate with the formal economy voluntarily.

But it’s not just taxes, there is the exigency to incentivize entrepreneurial activities via liberalization from excessive politicization of economic activities, specifically regulations, mandates, controls and all other politically erected anti-competition obstacles favoring entrenched interests. 

Importantly, the Greeks should embrace sound money by preventing the government from tinkering with interest rates, and the currency via the central bank and allow real competition in both the currency and the banking system.

Of course, given the size of the debt burden, debt that had benefited politicians and cronies of the past, such debt has to be defaulted on. Creditors who took the risk in financing the previous government excesses should pay their dues.

But of course, parasites would not want to end their privileges so this will hardly be the route taken. 

Politicians will continue to sell free lunch politics in order to get elected and stay the course. 

So after winning on such populist platform, the Tsipras government’s sellout to the Troika and the Eurogroup reinforces this dynamic

But since Greek’s problem has been about economics, the solution will always be about economics. Yet political solutions that fails to address the real (and not statistical) economic issues will have inevitable economic consequences.

I am reminded by this gem from author and professor Thomas Sowell:

The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.

Yet my ideal solution is the Rothbard solution; end organized theft.

Quote of the Day: The IMF Gets It Wrong (again)

Christine Lagarde admits that the International Monetary Fund “got it wrong” when it chastised the British government’s austerity plans. One year ago the IMF’s chief economist Oliver Blanchard claimed the U.K. was “playing with fire” by cutting its budget.

With the benefit of hindsight, the IMF has changed its stance. The U.K. economy is set to grow 2.9% this year, the fastest among the G7 nations. Furthermore, the growth is being driven by investment spending, not consumption as the IMF had long thought necessary.

Though she stopped short of apologizing for the Fund’s poor recommendations in the past, Lagarde allude to begging for forgiveness. Rather than seeking forgiveness after the IMF makes a mistake, why doesn’t it stop giving out bad advice so that it doesn’t find itself in these embarrassing situations in the future.

This is from Professor David Howden at the Ludwig von Mises Canada.

Quote of the Day: The crisis of government paternalism

This “crisis” of government paternalism was accelerated by monetary and related interventionist policies in the United States and Europe that produced another “boom-bust” cycle in the first decade of the 21^st century. It has had all of the hallmarks of the type of business cycle that the Austrians—and especially, Hayek—had explained decades earlier. Financial markets were awash with loanable funds made possible due to aggressive monetary expansion by central banks; interest rates were artificially pushed far below any market-based level; business investment borrowing, home borrowing, and consumer credit borrowing were far in excess of actual savings rates able to sustain them.

The capital, resources, and labor of society were misallocated and misdirected into various directions throughout these economies, all of which was going to necessitate a significant “adjustment” period when the “bubbles” of the boom finally burst. But rather than allowing the required adjustments and reallocations of capital and labor, and accepting that government welfare and related spending had to be permanently reduced or eliminated, governments have resisted these needed changes.

In many countries, the presumed “austerity” policies have really involved little or no reduction in the levels of government spending and redistribution, but noticeable increases in taxes. “Austerity” means squeezing the private sector to maintain a blotted government sector. The implicit psychology of many in Europe and the United States is that if the current crisis can “somehow” be gotten over, then the trend line of intrusive and growing government spending of past decades can be returned to in the future.

This is from Austrian economic professor and former President of Foundation for Economic Freedom Richard M Ebeling in an interview with the Austrian Economics Center (AEC).  This crisis of paternalism has spread to Asia.

Portugal Bond Yield Spikes on Worsening Political Squabbles

I have been saying that in the face of rising interest rates, the risks of a debt crisis can emerge out of multiple potential flashpoints. 

Portugal could just be one candidate as seen by the unfolding developments in the political spectrum

From Bloomberg;

Portuguese borrowing costs topped 8 percent for the first time this year after two ministers quit, signaling the government will struggle to implement further budget cuts as its bailout program enters its final 12 months.

Secretary of State for Treasury Maria Luis Albuquerque replaced Vitor Gaspar at the Ministry of Finance. That prompted Paulo Portas, who leads the smaller CDS party in the coalition government, to quit, saying the new minister would offer “mere continuity” of the country’s deficit-cutting plans…

Portugal’s 10-year (GSPT10YR) bond yield jumped to 8 percent earlier today, the highest level since Nov. 27, and was hovering at 7.65 percent as of 11:10 a.m. London time. The nation pays an average 3.2 percent for loans it received as part of the aid package.

Prime Minister Pedro Passos Coelho is battling rising unemployment and a deepening recession as he cuts spending and increases taxes to meet terms of a 78 billion-euro ($101 billion) rescue plan monitored by the European Union, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank, known as the Troika. Coelho announced measures on May 3 intended to generate savings of about 4.8 billion euros through 2015 that include reducing the number of state workers…

The difference in yield that investors demand to hold 10-year Portuguese bonds instead of German bunds is about 600 basis points, exceeding this year’s average of 461. The gap is down from a euro-era record of 16 percentage points in January 2012.

The political turmoil in Portugal, which seems representative for most of the crisis stricken Eurozone, has been about the resistance to reform and the struggle to preserve the unsustainable privileges of the political class via the welfare-bureaucratic state.

The failure of the economy to recover has been falsely blamed on “austerity”.

The reality is that there hardly has been “austerity” 

The % change of government expenditures in Portugal as well as most of the European countries (with the exception Ireland and Hungary) has been mostly positive from 2007-2012. 

What has been happening is a decline in the rate of increases rather than a net decline of expenditures.

The same can be seen in % change in debt/gdp.

Yet the preferred path of more regulations and higher taxes (amidst cosmetic reduction of government spending) punishes rather than provides the incentives for the real economy to grow. Thus the austerity strawman.

Such resistance to reform will amplify the risk of a credit event which has presently been reflected on the bond markets. Charts from Zero Hedge. 

While the political class thinks that there is an inexhaustible Santa Claus fund, the markets are saying otherwise.

As of this writing European stocks are trading significantly lower (Bloomberg)

US S&P futures are moderately down. (investing.com)

It remains to be seen if the current deterioration in Europe’s political landscape will worsen market conditions elsewhere

In the meantime, 10 year JGB yields has been trading on the upper bound (.88-.90%) of the current range. A spike beyond the 90s would likely put even pressure on global markets.

Iceland’s Recovery: Hardly about Currency Devaluation

Alan Reynolds at the Cato Institute blog explains, (italics original, bold mine)

Iceland’s recent devaluation was highly orthodox policy condition for wards of the IMF (strings attached to a $2 bn. loan). Unfortunately, such devaluations often backfire by inflating commodity costs, interest rates and the burden of foreign debt. The Icelandic krona fell from 64 to the dollar in 2007 to 123.6 in 2009, before strengthening with the economy to nearly 116 in 2011.

Since oil, grains and metals are priced in dollars, the 2008-2009 devaluation inflated Iceland’s cost of production and cost of living.  Inflation rose from 5.1 percent in 2007 to 12 percent or more in 2008 and 2009; real GDP fell by 6.8 percent in 2009 and 4 percent in 2010.  Faced with a collapsing currency, the central bank interest rate was hiked to 18 percent by October 2008.  It could have been worse.  If Iceland’s Supreme Court had not nullified loans indexed to foreign currencies in June 2010, devaluation would have doubled the cost of repaying foreign debt.

Devaluation was supposed to boost GDP by making imports costly and exports cheap, thus narrowing the trade deficit. The current account deficit did fall after 2008, but that always happens when recessions slash imports. Ireland had a current account surplus from 2010 to 2012 without devaluation, even as Iceland’s current account deficit was still 7-8 percent of GDP.

Iceland’s economy grew by 3.1 percent in 2011 when the currency appreciated and the budget deficit was deeply cut to 4.4 percent of GDP.  Devaluation explains the previous spike in inflation and interest rates, but little else. 

Iceland’s statistical growth recovery following the 2008-2011 crisis.

Some notes from the above:

Devaluation policies serves the interests of political agents and their affiliates, allies or cronies than of the general economy.

The devaluation panacea oversimplifies a complex economy operating spontaneously on millions of independently moving parts. The natural result from such conflict: policy failure.

The devaluation snake oil therapy, which operates on the principle of getting something for nothing, also deals with solving short term quandaries that comes with larger long term costs.

Bottom line: Micro issues can hardly be resolved by using macro tools which mistakenly sees the economy as a mechanical machine. Individuals think and act on purpose. Macro economic policies assume otherwise.

Iceland’s recovery has largely been allowing for markets to clear (by not saving banks), and importantly, by the reversal of inflationist policies.

War on Savings: Australia Doubles Retirement Taxes

Crisis or no crisis, Cyprus may have set a trend for governments to seek ways to tax private sector savings. 

Australia has reportedly doubled taxes on retirement savings.

Here is the eloquent Simon Black of the Sovereign Man

Though Australia’s national balance sheet is comparatively quite strong, the government has been running at a net deficit for years… and they’re under intense pressure to balance the budget.

The good news is that Australia now has a goodly number of investor-friendly immigration programs designed to bring productive foreigners into the country, similar to the trend we’re seeing across Europe.

On the flip side, though, the Australian government has just announced new rules which penalize citizens who have responsibly set aside savings for their own retirement.

Any income over A$100,000 drawn from a superannuation fund (the equivalent of an IRA in the United States) will now be taxed at 15%. Previously, all such income was tax-free.

The really offensive part about this is that the government is going to tax people’s savings ‘on both ends,’ meaning that people are taxed on money they move INTO the retirement fund, and now they can be taxed again when they pull money out.

The Cyprus debacle drew a line in the sand– fleecing people with assets, or income, in excess of 100,000 dollars, euros, etc. is now acceptable. This is the definition of ‘rich’ in the sole discretion of governments.

And make no mistake– if it can happen in Australia, which still has reasonable debt levels despite years of deficit spending, it can happen in bankrupt, insolvent nations like the US.

We can see from the following charts why.

The Australian government has embarked on a spending spree since 2009. Australia’s fiscal balance has been deteriorating since.

This shows of the Emmanuel Rahm syndrome or Austrian economist Robert Higgs’ ratchet effect where crises have always been an excuse to justify government expansion.

And by doing so Australia’s government has been ramping up debt. External debt grew by about 30% since 2009, while debt to gdp has began to reverse from years of austerity or fiscal “discipline”. 

And as I have earlier pointed out, Australia has also been manifesting signs of bubbles

Australia’s credit to the private sector as % to gdp is now about 128%

 

While the banking sectors exposure account for 145.76% of the gdp in 2011.

And like almost every country, low interest rates have been a principal factor in driving credit expansion

Despite the above, Australia’s stock market has hardly recovered from the 2008 global financial debacle. (all the wonderful charts above are from tradingeconomics.com)

This means much of the credit expansion has been directed to the property sector, as measured by the phenomenal manic growth of housing prices (chart from vexnews). 

This proves that much of today's statistical economic growth have been Potemkin Villages

Yet once the global pandemic of bubbles pop, we can expect governments coordinate the dragooning of the public’s resources via more confiscation of savings to advance the interests of the political class via bailouts and more quack Keynesian fixes.

Of course this relationship will persist until people tolerate them. However, eventually the curse of the laffer curve will prevail or a financial repression (tax) revolt can also be an expected response.

Quote of the Day: Real Austerity is Economic Freedom

But what is austerity? Real austerity means that the government and its employees have less money at their disposal. For the economists at the International Monetary Fund, “austerity” may mean spending cuts, but it also means increasing taxes on the beleaguered public in order to, at all costs, repay the government’s corrupt creditors. Keynesian economists reject all forms of austerity. They promote the “borrow and spend” approach that is supposedly scientific and is gentle on the people: paycheck insurance for the unemployed, bailouts for failing businesses, and stimulus packages for everyone else.

Austrian School economists reject both the Keynesian stimulus approach and the IMF-style high-tax, pro-bankster “Austerian” approach. Although “Austrians” are often lumped in with “Austerians,” Austrian School economists support real austerity. This involves cutting government budgets, salaries, employee benefits, retirement benefits, and taxes. It also involves selling government assets and even repudiating government debt

(bold mine)

This is from Professor Mark Thornton at the Mises.org.

The mainstream has been resorting to the strawman argument by distorting the definition of “austerity” and by repeatedly trying to link bankster “Austerian” approach, which has been a failure with, the Austrian school’s real austerity.  

Real austerity is about economic freedom

Canadians Have Overtaken Americans in Wealth

From the USNews.com

For the first time in recent history, the average Canadian is richer than the average American, according to a report cited in Toronto's Globe and Mail.

And not just by a little. Currently, the average Canadian household is more than $40,000 richer than the average American household. The net worth of the average Canadian household in 2011 was $363,202, compared to around $320,000 for Americans.

If you're thinking the Canadian advantage must be due to exchange rates, think again. The Canadian dollar has actually caught up to the U.S. dollar in recent years.

"These are not 60-cent dollars, but Canadian dollars more or less at par with the U.S. greenback," Globe and Mail's Michael Adams writes.

To add insult to injury, not only are Canadians comparatively better-off than Americans, they're also more likely to be employed. The unemployment rate is 7.2 percent—and dropping—in Canada, while the U.S. is stuck with a stubbornly high rate of 8.2 percent.

Besides a strengthening currency and a better labor market, experts credit the particularly savage fallout from the financial crisis on the U.S. economy and housing market, which torpedoed home values and gutted household wealth. According to the report, real estate held by Canadians is worth more than $140,000 more on average and they have almost four times as much equity in their real estate investments.

In contrast to most of mainstream reporting, Canada’s strong currency has been imputed as manifestation of a relatively “superior” performing economy than the US.

Of course commodity exports have been partly responsible for the this but has barely been an indication of the resource course: the Dutch Disease.

Canada’s strength, according to the report, has been founded on two aspects: one relatively “better” labor market, and two, America’s boom bust cycles which has “torpedoed home values and gutted household wealth”.

While there are many other factors to consider for comparison, I would focus on three;

One, Canadian banks has outperformed the US. Like in the great depression, the US financial crisis of 2008 barely dinted on Canada’s banking system.

Two, Canada tops the US in Economic Freedom…

Canada ranks 6th in the Heritage Foundation’s world’s country ranking of economic freedom index compared to the US…

The economic freedom in the US has been in a steady descent.

Finally, Canada’s government has been relatively fiscal prudent than her neighbor.

As Cato’s Chris Edwards writes

The spending reforms of the 1990s allowed the Canadian federal government to balance its budget every year between 1998 and 2008. The government's debt plunged from 68 percent of GDP in 1995 to just 34 percent today. In the United States federal debt held by the public fell during the 1990s, reaching a low of 33 percent of GDP in 2001, but debt has soared since then to reach more than 70 percent today.

Bottom line: Economic freedom and fiscal prudence are once again depicted as key to economic prosperity.

Understanding Political Terminologies 2: Social Justice, Greece, Austerity and Insurance

Political language have been deliberately mangled to suit and promote the interests of political agents and their followers. I have given a few examples earlier.

More examples:

1. SOCIAL JUSTICE

Once again here is the brilliant Thomas Sowell on “Social Justice”

If there were a Hall of Fame for political rhetoric, the phrase "social justice" would deserve a prominent place there. It has the prime virtue of political catchwords: It means many different things to many different people.

In other words, if you are a politician, you can get lots of people, with different concrete ideas, to agree with you when you come out boldly for the vague generality of "social justice."

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catchword can stop thought for 50 years. The phrase "social justice" has stopped many people from thinking, for at least a century -- and counting.

If someone told you that Country A had more "social justice" than Country B, and you had all the statistics in the world available to you, how would you go about determining whether Country A or Country B had more "social justice"? In short, what does the phrase mean in practice -- if it has any concrete meaning?

In political and ideological discussions, the issue is usually whether there is some social injustice. Even if we can agree that there is some injustice, what makes it social?

Surely most of us are repelled by the thought that some people are born into dire poverty, while others are born into extravagant luxury -- each through no fault of their own and no virtue of their own. If this is an injustice, does that make it social?

The baby born into dire poverty might belong to a family in Bangladesh, and the one born to extravagant luxury might belong to a family in America. Whose fault is this disparity or injustice? Is there some specific society that caused this? Or is it just one of those things in the world that we wish was very different?

If it is an injustice, it is unjust from some cosmic perspective, an unjust fate, rather than necessarily an unjust policy, institution or society.

Investing guru Doug Casey also shares more verbal twisting (Greece and Austerity)…

2. GREECE

it's not "Greece" we're talking about, but the Greek government. It's the Greek government that's made the laws that got people used to pensions for retirement at age 55. It's the Greek government that's built up a giant and highly paid bureaucracy that just sits around when it's not actively gumming up the economy. It's the Greek government that's saddled the country with onerous taxes and regulations that make most business more trouble than it's worth. It's the Greek government that borrowed billions that the citizens are arguably responsible for. It's the Greek government that's set the legal and moral tone for the pickle the place is in.

3. AUSTERITY

the term "austerity" is used very loosely by the talking heads on TV. It sounds bad, even though it just means living within one's means… or, for Europeans, not too insanely above them. But who knows what's actually included or excluded from what the EU leaders think of as austerity? Take the Greek pension funds, for example: exactly how are they funded? I'd expect that private companies make payments to a state fund, as Americans do via the Social Security program. I suspect there's no money in the coffers; it's all been frittered on high living and socialist boondoggles. Tough luck for pensioners. Maybe they can convince the Chinese to give them money to keep living high off the hog…

4. I would add INSURANCE as camouflage for the Welfare State

From Murray N. Rothbard,

The answer is the very existence of health-care insurance, which was established or subsidized or promoted by the government to help ease the previous burden of medical care. Medicare, Blue Cross, etc., are also very peculiar forms of "insurance."

If your house burns down and you have fire insurance, you receive (if you can pry the money loose from your friendly insurance company) a compensating fixed money benefit. For this privilege, you pay in advance a fixed annual premium. Only in our system of medical insurance, does the government or Blue Cross pay, not a fixed sum, but whatever the doctor or hospital chooses to charge.

In economic terms, this means that the demand curve for physicians and hospitals can rise without limit. In short, in a form grotesquely different from Say's Law, the suppliers can literally create their own demand through unlimited third-party payments to pick up the tab. If demand curves rise virtually without limit, so too do the prices of the service.

In order to stanch the flow of taxes or subsidies, in recent years the government and other third party insurers have felt obliged to restrict somewhat the flow of goodies: by increasing deductibles, or by putting caps on Medicare payments. All this has been met by howls of anguish from medical customers who have come to think of unlimited third-party payments as some sort of divine right, and from physicians and hospitals who charge the government with "socialistic price controls" — for trying to stem its own largesse to the health-care industry!

In addition to artificial raising of the demand curve, there is another deep flaw in the medical insurance concept. Theft is theft, and fire is fire, so that fire or theft insurance is fairly clear-cut the only problem being the "moral hazard" of insurees succumbing to the temptation of burning down their own unprofitable store or apartment house, or staging a fake theft, in order to collect the insurance.

In the world of politics,lies, distortions and equivocations are the norm.

Don't fall for them

Shelve the Greece Moment; Greeks are Pro-Austerity After All

We had been repeatedly told (if not lied to) by media and neoliberals that Greeks has been anti-bailout.

The election nears conclusion and the results run opposite to what has been bruited.

From Bloomberg,

New Democracy won 130 seats in the 300-seat parliament, according to Interior Ministry projections with almost 90 percent of the vote counted. Pasok, which has alternated in power with New Democracy over the past four decades, won 33 seats, enough to forge a coalition that backs the creditors’ austerity demands.

Syriza Demands

Syriza matched its second-place ranking of last month by stepping up demands to abandon the fiscal-tightening program.

Alexis Tsipras, the head of eight-year-old Syriza, had vowed to keep Greece in the euro while winning concessions on the rescue terms from European leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He said New Democracy and Pasok, which united last year to back further fiscal tightening by a caretaker government, had “lowered the Greek flag and surrendered it to Angela Merkel.”

Tsipras signaled yesterday that Syriza won’t join a government with New Democracy and Pasok, saying his faction “will be present in all developments as the main voice of the anti-bailout vote in Greece.”

With 166 out of 300 or a 55% vote (New Democracy and Pasok) for the pro-austerity camp, reality finally trumped fiction. The victory cannot be considered as marginal in race among about 8 political parties, namely, New Democracy, Syriza, Pasok Party, Independent Greeks, Golden Dawn, Democratic Left, Communist Party and Ecologist Greens

This squares with accounts of capital flight and resistance to pay taxes (mostly in reaction fears over a Greece exit) which implied that Greeks did not want to exit the EU. This has also been consistent with earlier polls which indicated that a vast majority of Greeks wanted to remain part of the EU.

Demonstrated preference prevails over statist canard.

Only in the eyes of neoliberals and rabid inflationistas, who salivate for massive devaluation as panacea to social ills, has reality been skewed. So there is no Greece moment for now.

The Greece pro-austerity victory does not diminish the crisis. As earlier explained, Greece in or out of the EU will mean inflationism. The difference lies on who will do the inflating. What the pro-austerity victory does is to simply buy off time with the ECB functioning as the main bridge financier, but whose costs will be borne mostly by the Germans overtime. For as long as strong parasitical relationships remain in place, and without real reforms, this crisis will continue.

Greece will now form a government. The ECB should be expected to unveil another region-wide monetary rescue program and perhaps cut interest rates. One thorn has been temporarily taken out. The next is to wait for the announcement of concrete measures from major central banks not limited to the ECB.

With fears of an exit diminished, capital flight in the crisis affected EU nations will likely ease. This would have an impact on the monetary systems of many economies who functioned as shock absorbers. Volatility remains.

Greece’s real reform must be made through economic freedom, not from the illusion of having to turn economic knobs and shower money to the public from helicopters as elixir to economic woes as recommended by experts trying to get social plaudits.

Italy’s Pro-Growth Tax Increases Backfires

Economic reality flies in the face of the “pro-growth” policies prescribed by politicians and which has been endorsed by mainstream experts.

Italians join Greeks in dodging tax increases, which demonstrates their refusal to feed big government through the strangulation of the private sector.

From Bloomberg,

Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti is facing signs that tax increases are beginning to backfire as his new levy on real estate goes into effect.

Value-added tax receipts have declined since Monti’s predecessor, Silvio Berlusconi, raised the rate by 1 percentage point in September as the economy was slipping into recession,government data released June 5 showed. The amount collected fell in the 12 months ended April 30 to the lowest since 2006.

Finding the right deficit-reduction mix as Monti fights to meet budget targets is critical for Italy to avoid becoming the biggest victim yet of Europe’s financial crisis. A slump that is driving up welfare spending is adding urgency to Monti’s effort to make the economy more competitive amid a growing backlash across Europe against austerity.

“This government has raised taxes too much,” said Alberto Alesina, a professor of political economy at Harvard University. “It would be much, much better to lower spending.”…

The decline in VAT revenue figures may bolster the government’s efforts to postpone a further increase in the rate after October by 2 percentage points to 23 percent. That would put Italy on par with Greece.

The emperor has no clothes. Pretentious knowledge has been exposed via the law of unintended consequences

Again from the same Bloomberg article, (bold emphasis added)

Monti planned to tap more than 4 billion euros of projected savings from a government spending review to put off the VAT increase, which his deputies acknowledge may deepen the recession.

“The economy shows signs of strong deterioration,” Finance Undersecretary Gianfranco Polillo told the Senate in Rome on June 6. “In light of the fall in domestic demand, betting on a further VAT increase would be incomprehensible and even wrong.”…

Under Monti, Italy’s tax burden, the ratio of tax revenue to economic output, will rise to 45.1 percent this year from 42.5 percent in 2011, and won’t start falling until 2015.

Monti, a former university president and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) adviser, was brought to power in November to rein in bond yields and bring down debt. His 20 billion-euro austerity package raised retirement ages and was followed by measures to ease firing rules and promote competition. Increased rates on gasoline were enacted in December and on luxury goods earlier this year, while the first property tax payments are due next week.

“I don’t want to deny that we could have done more and better,” Monti said in a June 7 speech. Still, his reforms have produced results, he said.

Dodging Tax

The government had 99.8 billion euros in VAT receipts in the 12 months ended April 30 tied to internal trade, or transactions among domestic counterparties. That compares with 100 billion euro in the 12 months ended March 31 and 101.3 billion euros in the period ended April 30, 2011.

“VAT revenue does depend on growth in domestic consumption,” said Ian Roxan, director of the Tax Programme at London School of Economics and Political Science. “It is also not immune to evasion. It is certainly possible that in a time of austerity people become less willing to pay VAT.”

Italy loses more than 120 billion euros in unpaid taxes every year, according to the Equitalia tax-collection agency. The country retrieved 12.7 billion euros from the fight against evasion in 2011, up 15.5 percent from 2010.

This also exposes the propaganda that the public has been “anti-austerity” which is nothing more than media's manipulation of people’s minds. Because if Italians have indeed been anti-austerity, they would have rushed to the tax collection agencies to pay their share. Duh. Or maybe Italians came to realize they are NO free lunches.

The harsh lesson from reality is “If you tax something, you get less of it.”

Estonian President Slams Paul Krugman

When apologists for the state don’t have developments going their way, they intuitively employ verbal sleight of hand as defense mechanism.

Given that Estonia has recently been recognized as the pro-austerity model of success, which I recently posted here, Keynesian high priest Paul Krugman quickly wrote to downplay on such progress. Mr. Krugman's comments drew a vitriolic rebuke from the Estonian president.

From the Huffington Post (hat tip Cato’s Dan Mitchell)

The president of Estonia chewed out Paul Krugman on Wednesday, using Twitter to call the Nobel Prize-winning economist "smug, overbearing & patronizing," in response to a short post on Estonia's economic recovery.

Krugman's 67-word entry, entitled "Estonian Rhapsody," questioned the merits of using Estonia as a "poster child for austerity defenders." He included a chart that, in his words, showed "significant but still incomplete recovery" after a deep economic slump.

President Toomas Hendrik Ilves responded to Krugman in a series of outraged tweets, taking offense to Krugman's tone and writing that Krugman didn't know what he was talking about.

"We're just dumb & silly East Europeans. Unenlightened. Someday we too will understand," he tweeted. "Guess a Nobel in trade means you can pontificate on fiscal matters & declare my country a "wasteland". Must be a Princeton vs Columbia thing."

Estonia, which in 2011 became the latest country to join the eurozone, has been heralded by some as an austerity success story. That year, it clocked a faster economic growth pace than any other country in the European Union, at 7.6 percent. Estonia is also the only EU member with a budget surplus, and had the lowest public debt in 2011 -- 6 percent of GDP. Fitch affirmed its A+ credit rating last week.

Politics becomes a religion when people resort to lies and misrepresentation to desperately defend ideas that has been proven to be based on faith and wishful thinking than from reality.

Bloomberg Ticker lists Greece’s Drachma

Either this signifies as the proverbial writing on the wall or part of the orchestrated propaganda campaign for Greece to exit the EU

From the RT.com

Traders around the world have been staring at their Bloomberg screens, hardly believing their eyes. The electronic information platform has been showing details for possible Greek Drachma trading.

The Bloomberg helpdesk described it as "an internal function which is set up to test."

The news comes in the wake of the heated discussions over the future of the euro zone and the membership of Greece. While many experts insist that Greece should leave the Euro and default, some suggest it should remain the union and introduce a parallel currency to the Euro to repay the country’s debt.

The Head of the European Investment Bank Werner Hoyer said on Tuesday that Greece will be able to remain a member of the union. “Greece will have the opportunity to solve the huge problems that it is facing. Continuing support from the EU will contribute to this, in case, of course, the very Greeks would want that,” Hoyer said.

And a survey at the weekend showed that Greeks prefer to stick to the Euro and not revert to the old drachma.

The Greek Drachma details have now been taken down from the Bloomberg service.

It has been impressed upon the mainstream that the solution to Greece debt problems will only be through “drachmaization” (euphemism for devaluation or inflationism).

When it comes to the prospects of outright defaults there has been a mental black hole. Outright default under the EU umbrella has hardly been discussed or ever considered an option. That’s because the mainstream fervently disdains a private sector (free market) solution. Supposedly nobody wants austerity (fiscal discipline), and alternatively everybody wants free lunch (spending other people's money).

But illusions melt when confronted with reality.

The clangor from repeated media blasts from these omniscient experts, who mostly hail from outside these crisis affected nations, has only been heightening the risks of such scenario and prompting for unintended consequences.

The local citizenry from these nations have been incited to withdraw money from their banking system, consequently send these elsewhere in the region or abroad for safekeeping from the risks of devaluations. The massive bank runs, thus, shows how ridiculous and out of touch with reality these proposals are.

Yet the addiction to inflationism has just so entrenched. Whether this clamor for the devaluation elixir will become a self-fulfilling prediction or not, remains to be seen.

Nevertheless inflation is a policy that WILL NOT and CANNOT last.

Austerity in Spain?

Juan Carlos Hidalgo at the Cato Institute investigates claims that Spain has been suffering from “austerity”

Writes Mr. Hidalgo, (bold emphasis mine)

There is a wide consensus that Spain’s economic troubles are the result of an enormous housing bubble—even bigger than the one that hit the U.S.—that burst in 2008. Just the year before, Spain boasted healthy fiscal indicators: a general government budget surplus of 1.9% of GDP and a gross consolidated debt of just 36.2% of GDP. However, once the bubble burst, government revenues collapsed and stimulus spending was injected into the economy, resulting in a fiscal deficit of 11.2% in 2009 and a gross debt that has increased over 30 percentage points of GDP in just 4 years.

Paul Krugman and The Economist argue that this evidence shows that, unlike Greece, Spain wasn’t fiscally profligate. However, the devil is in the details. Spain did run budget surpluses prior to the crash, but those surpluses weren’t caused by restrained government spending, but by ballooning tax revenues (thanks to a growing housing bubble). If we look at total government spending in the last decade, we can see a steady and significant rise until 2009:

* Using GDP deflator.
Source: European Commission, Economic and Financial Affairs.

Government spending in nominal terms increased at an annual rate of 7.6% from 2000 to 2009. Ryan Avent at The Economist says that “the push for austerity began in 2010,” and thus we have to look at nominal spending after that year, when according to Avent, it fell “substantially” due to austerity measures. In reality, it went down by just 1% in 2010 and a further 3.6% in 2011. If these cuts seem “substantial” to Avent, then a yearly average increase of 7.6% for almost a decade must be staggering.

Moreover, if we look at spending in real terms, using constant euros from 2000, there hasn’t been any decrease in the level of government spending.

If we look at government spending as a share of the economy, Spain appears as fiscally prudent: Spending was 39.2% of GDP in 2000 and exactly the same figure in 2007. However, as has been noted by Juan Ramón Rallo, Ángel Martín Oro and Adrià Pérez Martí of the Juan de Mariana Institute in a recent Cato study, “the data should be interpreted with caution, given that the GDP was growing at an artificially high rate.” The point is proven by the fact that when the economy came to a halt in 2008 (it grew by just 0.9%), government spending as a share of GDP leapt 2.3 percentage points to 41.5% in just one year. Government spending as a share of the economy remained constant during much of the 2000’s not because the government was spending too little but because GDP was growing too fast.

Moreover, once the crisis kicked in, government spending as a share of GDP reached a peak at 46.3% in 2009 (due to a combination of still more stimulus spending and a contracting economy). It later fell to 43% in 2011, still a higher share than in 2008. Government spending in Spain has indeed come down in the last two years, but not in a dramatic fashion as some people would have us to believe.

What about taxes? As has been the case in Britain, France, Italy and Greece, in the last two years the Spanish government increased taxes to tackle the soaring deficit: personal income tax rates went up in 2010 and two new brackets of 44% and 45% were introduced for higher incomes. Tax credits to self-employed workers were revoked. The VAT rate went up from 16% to 18% and excise duties on tobacco and gasoline were also raised. All these tax increases took place before the large tax hike introduced this year by the conservative government of Mariano Rajoy, which turned Spain into one of the highest taxed countries in Europe (and explained at length in this Economic Development Bulletin).

In short, austerity in Spain, described by Paul Krugman as “insane,” consists mostly of significant tax increases and timid spending cuts.

So Spain’s economy has been enduring economic strains hardly from spending cuts but mainly from HEFTY TAX INCREASES, rigid labor regulations and the welfare state.

On asphyxiating labor environment the Economist noted last February,

Spain’s labour laws, which date back to the Franco era, have condemned half the workforce to unemployment or to temporary jobs while the rest enjoy ironclad contracts and huge redundancy pay-offs. The new law blurs this insider/outsider divide and may thus get more people into stable employment. The decree comes on top of a January agreement by unions and employers to limit pay rises over the next three years. Mr de Guindos thinks most Spaniards see the need for labour reform. But its success in terms of growth may depend on unions’ choice between protecting jobs and keeping up their members’ pay.

The same statist FALSEHOODs have been thrown to Greece, where supposed “devaluation” from an “EU exit” would have posed as “elixir” to Greek economic woes.

Yet the ramifications from such absurd mainstream propaganda has been to SPUR a stampede out of the Greek banking system or systemic “bank run” or “capital flight” into safe havens as Germany and the US, as Greeks feared the loss of savings from forcible conversion of their euros to “drachmas”.

And the same tax hike prescriptions from statists has led Greeks to drastically avoid paying taxes.

In short, statist medicines have been blowing up right smack on their faces.

Yes, polls have it that 80% of Greeks want to stay in the Euro!!!

Statist imbeciles engage in deceptive phraseology to promote their political religion. As George Orwell once wrote,

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defence of the indefensible... Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness… Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them…The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism.

The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.

False prophets, these statists, are.