Greek Debt Wrangle May Pull Default Trigger
I’m not going to quote this article, because it’s mostly pretty dry - but if you’re interested in the future of government borrowing, you should definitely read it.
Basically the problem is this: if the Greek government negotiates a deal with 90% of its creditors to hugely cut the amount of money it owes, does that count as a default? Because strictly speaking it wouldn’t be a voluntary negotiation for that last 10% of creditors, but if those 10% aren’t negotiating in good faith then is that acceptable?
It matters if this is technically a default because of credit default swaps, which are effectively insurance against default. Investors who buy Greek government bonds obviously would prefer to also have CDSs, because if the Greek government defaults then the CDSs would pay out. However, if it’s a voluntary negotiation, then that’s not a default, so the CDSs don’t pay out. (This is almost certainly why that last 10% of investors - mostly hedge funds - are holding out. They would rather get the CDS payouts than any possible deal.)
Note that either outcome has significant negative long-term ramifications. If the CDSs do pay out after renegotiation, then that’s a sign to investors that holding out and refusing to negotiate is profitable. If the CDSs don’t pay out under renegotiation, then that’s a sign that they’re not a trustworthy way to shield your investment, so no one will lend to risky governments anymore. Both are bad news for heavily indebted governments; it’s not clear which is less bad.
Federal documents spark outcry by oil sands critics
The documents, obtained through an access to information request and released by Greenpeace Canada, are a draft diplomatic strategy outlining ways to shape European perceptions of Canada’s oil sands. They show that the government’s messages are intended to shift attitudes in media and among top decision makers regarding the oil sands industry, which faces a possible effective import ban in Europe as the continent pursues a low-carbon fuel strategy.
In the document, environmental organizations and aboriginal groups are shown as “adversaries.” Industry associations, energy companies and the National Energy Board – which is supposed to serve as an independent body evaluating new projects – are listed as “allies.”
Remember that US news article that described Canada as a jingoistic petro-state? Yup. There’s exactly one industry that’s creating new jobs and new employment, and our government is totally unwilling to contemplate any diversification away from that industry. The only diversification we hear about is diversification to more export partners, which is really not the same thing.
If the EU’s plan to tax fuels that take more energy to extract more heavily passes WTO muster, we are more or less effed. There is no way we can divert all our exports to China without years of infrastructure changes, and the US can’t absorb all the excess supply. This is a seriously suboptimal trajectory we’re headed down.
love-and-radiation replied to your quote: In the months to come, our government will…
“Undertake major transformations” = remove our skinsuits and display our devilish metal wings?
I would entirely support this. If nothing else, it would be the only exciting or newsworthy thing ever to happen at Davos.
In the months to come, our government will undertake major transformations to position Canada for growth over the next generation.
Stephen Harper, at Davos. His two specific policy initiatives were making it easier for oil projects to get approval and developing facilities for exporting oil to Asia.
We’ve kind of found our shtick with this whole oil thing, eh? I guess as long as it’s at $100/barrel, “drill baby drill” is all the economic policy we’ll ever need.
Source: The Globe and Mail
someone who had my phone number before me and a Slavic last name I can’t quite catch has substantial unpaid debts
This is getting really annoying, because of course the collections people think I’m lying when I insist that no such person can be contacted at this phone number.
pepperrae replied to your post: android-dreams replied to your post: so I got…
wait. i’m interpreting this to mean i can start referring to my vagina as a schmuck, right? tell me i’m right, because that is the best/at least very appropriate.
Haha probably not. It’s usually taken to mean “dick”, both when referring to the anatomy and also when referring to someone jerkish. But in some German dialects it still literally means “jewel” exclusively.
There are some awesome slang terms for vagina but I can’t remember any of them right now. Not going to lie, I don’t talk about vaginas very often.
another kind of awesome Yiddish word
Zaftig: it literally means “juicy”, but when you use it to refer to a person it generally means curvaceous in the sexy way (i.e., having got much back).
oh apparently “schlong” is a banned word on Grindr
Seriously Grindr? I just like talking about snakes in obscure German dialects, okay?
mar-see-ah replied to your post: android-dreams replied to your post: so I got…
you should use “fun fact: schlong is the yiddish word for snake” as your profile, as that’s both hysterical and says something about you.
Excellent suggestion! Done. (Seriously.)
