Should Greece give up its sovereignty, or default like Iceland did?

[chuck_curtis]

Germany tells Greece that, in order to receive a second bailout of $190 billion, an EU 'budget commissioner' must be given power to decide Greece's tax and spending.  Without the bailout, Greece could default by March.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2093028/Extraordinary-proposal-EU-control-Greek-budget-return-bail-cash.html

[D2D]

Bet Greece defaults giving creditors pennies on the dollar if anything at all!

That will send the rest of Europe and the Euro down the crapper!

[Bob Huntress]

It's a gamble if they default, but allowing the EU to control everyaspect of their country is a sure disaster. If they surrender to the EU, they become a puppet. If they default, or more likely appear to be willing to default, they will be in a more advantagous position to negotiate with their creditors. Sure, it is a gamble, there could be enough money on the table to start talking military conquest, but that would mean an end to the UN, as extracting loan payments would be a war of aggression, and if the UN allowed it, that would be the final credibility straw. At risk to the EU, however, is what to do if the other debtor states within their community feel that default is better than surrender. Are they prepared to take such a financial hit all at once? There is no question as to the reality that larger EU states have used these situations to encourage lessor states to borrow money to drive up their debts, as a method of enslavement, not unlike the way Congress, and the president here have done to our debt. By accepting more credit then we can manage, they are enslaving us to our creditors. The nations of Europe could face revolution, if the states surrender to EU, also. Unlike Glen Beck, I'm not so presumptuous to assume either side has a sure win. Any such conflict, combat, insurection could end either way. Unless someone backs down, neither option looks bright for anyone, unless you're a progressive nut former Nazi collaborater(Soros).

[chuck_curtis]

I would rather default on my creditors than get yet another loan from the bank to make the creditor's payments and then give my paycheck to the bank and get its permission before I can spend my money.  It's called going into bankruptcy, and the creditors will just have to take what I am able to give them.  That is the chance and risk the creditors took.

[darkflower]

I wonder how many defaults are really defaults as in not paying the debt, and how many are just being late on interest? What I really hate to see is all the game playing with interest rates to drive nations into this mess when they could have paid it had the rates not gone up on them. Imagine making your loan payments and the bank says, gee, we think you are going to stop paying so we'll raise your rates. And then sure enough, you can't afford it, not because you weren't going to pay but because you now can't as a direct result of them raising the rate. I just wonder how much of that is going on.

I read some countries said no thanks to the debt trap, defaulted and restructured on their own without some multinational group giving them dictates, and a decade later are now prospering. While the ones who accept the kind of controls the eu is pushing are not doing so well (predictably).

So the answer, of course they should refuse. That is a no brainer for any nation in that situation. Tell the eu, the imf, the world bank, all to go screw themselves.

And about the eu, it really is time to disband that thing. It sounded like a good idea at the time, but it has gotten out of hand and nations are losing their sovereignty more and more all the time.

Speaking of time to disband certain unions of states...would not be such a bad idea for this country to seriously consider abolishing the union. Maybe states that are close together and are very similar could form their own smaller unions. We would all be much happier people if the more opposed states went their separate ways. New York and Mississippi for instance both have total disrespect for the other. What sense does it make for them to share a union? None at all.