El Instituto para el Nuevo Pensamiento Económico

http://ineteconomics.org/ideas-papers/collections/greece-and-the-eurozone/p2

Los signos de la crisis financiera en Europa, China y los Estados Unidos

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/signs-of-financial-turmoil-in-europe-china-and-the-united-states

Enviado desde mi Samsung Mobile de Claro

GRECE PAR BLANCHARD

Bonne question
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/imf-greece-debt-restructuring-by-james-k-galbraith-2015-06

FRANCE: MYTHE DEFICIT 3% XSEUX

http://blogs2.lesechos.fr/dominique-seux/l-histoire-du-critere-de-3-a15011.html

RT en Español: El gran armagedón financiero (E749) - Keiser Report en español

RT en Español: El gran armagedón financiero (E749) - Keiser Report en español. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwmbPrsiE

Ante el laberinto de obstáculos globales y domésticos, la salida para América Latina: “un ajuste inteligente.”

Ante el laberinto de obstáculos globales y domésticos, la salida para América Latina: “un ajuste inteligente.”

systeme monetaire mondial, benassy-coeure

http://www.davidmourey.com/article-le-systeme-monetaire-international-une-introduction-par-agnes-benassy-quere-113244870.html

De la crise financiere a la crise economique,vallet

http://www.davidmourey.com/article-video-de-pierre-jaillet-cloture-du-colloque-de-la-crise-financiere-a-la-crise-economique-113261217.html

piketty

http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/fr/recent

Fwd: G20 rectifica, pero, quién paga ahora el cuantioso daño causado - un abrazo GS.

http://notthetreasuryview.blogspot.com/2012/06/after-two-wasted-years-g20-pivots-back.html

After two wasted years, the G20 pivots back towards fiscal sanity

By Jonathan Portes

The G-20 has come (almost) full circle. In April 2009 in London, the communique set out leaders' commitment to a massive coordinated fiscal stimulus:

            "We are undertaking an unprecedented and concerted fiscal expansion, which will save or create millions of jobs which would otherwise have been destroyed, and that           will, by the end of next year, amount to $5 trillion, raise output by 4 per cent, and      accelerate the transition to a green economy. We are committed to deliver the scale of sustained fiscal effort necessary to restore growth.

            While the degree of coordination was somewhat exaggerated, there was a genuine collective determination to do what was necessary to ensure the financial crisis did      not become a prolonged depression".

And it worked - perhaps too well. By June 2010, in Toronto, it appeared that recovery was indeed underway. The new priority was fiscal consolidation: the communique noted approvingly that:

            "Sound fiscal finances are essential to sustain recovery, provide flexibility to             respond to new shocks, ensure the capacity to meet the challenges of aging       populations, and avoid leaving future generations with a legacy of deficits and debt...    Advanced economies have committed to fiscal plans that will at least halve deficits     by 2013 "

For the UK government, this was a diplomatic triumph; not only did the G20 endorse the UK's approach to fiscal consolidation, it commended it to other countries:

            "I think the British budget has been noticed here in the G20 and has been      appreciated," finance minister George Osborne said. Citing the summit communique,             he said the group had formally recognized that "countries with serious fiscal       challenges need to accelerate the pace of dealing with them, and of course that is             exactly what the budget did."

Others were less positive; Paul Krugman's reaction:

            "The deficit hawks have taken over the G20. The right thing, overwhelmingly, is to do things that will reduce spending and/or raise revenue after the economy has recovered — specifically, wait until after the economy is strong enough that monetary policy can offset the contractionary effects of fiscal austerity.

            But no: the deficit hawks want their cuts while unemployment rates are still at near-record highs and monetary policy is still hard up against the zero bound. Utter folly posing as wisdom".

And indeed it is now clear this premature "pivot" to fiscal consolidation, as the IMF described it, was a huge mistake, both for the G20 as a whole and for the UK. The supposed commitment to halve deficits by 2013 has been quietly (and rightly) forgotten, derailed by weak growth. Indeed, in the UK, most of the deficit reduction so far has come through cutting public investment; belatedly, the government has recognised the folly of this approach, and is trying to think of ways to reverse it without admitting that it got it wrong, as I explain here.

Meanwhile, in the eurozone, matters are even worse. Austerity has proved self-defeating even in its own terms, with fiscal contraction leading to lower growth and higher unemployment, in turn exacerbating deficits and leading to further losses of credibility, both political and economic.
But the good news is that at this week's G20 in Los Cabos the message does seem finally to have got through to world leaders. Although most press attention has focused on the rather inconclusive discussion of the eurozone crisis, it is worth noting the communique text on fiscal policy:

            "All G20 members will take the necessary actions to strengthen global growth and restore confidence. Advanced economies will ensure that the pace of fiscal consolidation is appropriate to support the recovery, taking country-specific circumstances into account and, in line with the Toronto commitments, address concerns about medium term fiscal sustainability. Those advanced and emerging economies which have fiscal space will let the automatic fiscal stabilizers to operate taking into account national circumstances and current demand conditions. Should economic conditions deteriorate significantly further, those countries with sufficient fiscal space stand ready to coordinate and implement discretionary fiscal actions to support domestic demand, as appropriate. In many countries, higher investment in education, innovation and infrastructure can support the creation of jobs now while raising productivity and future growth prospects. Recognizing the need to pursue growth-oriented policies that support demand and recovery, the United States will calibrate the pace of its fiscal consolidation by ensuring that its public finances are placed on a sustainable long-run path so that a sharp fiscal contraction in 2013 is avoided".

As usual, there is something for everyone here. But the change of tone is marked. Instead of the mistaken and damaging view of 2010 that immediate fiscal consolidation was urgent to sustain recovery and boost confidence, there is a recognition that cutting deficits too fast could damage growth; that higher investment would boost both output and jobs now and productivity over the medium term; and that further stimulus may well be necessary, given the continued depressed state of much of the world economy. All this is welcome; it is a pity they didn't say this two years ago. Let us hope it translates into policy.

Fwd: Macroperu Why Wall Street fears a Socialist French leader

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: José Luis Segovia Juárez <jlsegoviajuarez@gmail.com>
Date: 2012/5/6
Subject: Macroperu Why Wall Street fears a Socialist French leader

 

 

Why Wall Street fears a Socialist French leader

May 4, 2012: 9:06 AM ET

• 
  

Financial executives are worried about tougher regulations should Socialist leader Francois Hollande win the French presidential election. They should be.

By Cyrus Sanati

Sarkozy and Hollande faced off in a debate.

FORTUNE -- France's presidential election has Wall Street and the global markets worried – and for good reason. The election of Socialist party leader Francois Hollande to France's top job this coming Sunday would introduce an air of instability into the global economy at a time when it desperately needs a steady hand.
But beyond the instability, there are concrete reasons why the markets should be concerned with a new Socialist-led government in the Elysee Palace. If elected, Hollande will inevitably push for tougher financial regulation in France and on the continent, and unlike his predecessor, will most likely see them through. This will invariably impact and eventually restrict the way Wall Street and the City of London does business, both on the continent and, quite possibly, at home. And if he pushes hard enough, he could disturb the carefully crafted agreement with the European Central Bank that is keeping the euro on life support, setting off a chain of events that could have dire worldwide economic consequences.
Wednesday's much hyped television debate between incumbent President Nicholas Sarkozy and his challenger, Francois Hollande, was nastier than expected. The candidates barked insults and spoke over one another for over three hours on everything from nuclear policy to who would be the toughest on Islam. While the debate did not provide any earth-shattering revelations from either man, it did solidify Hollande's commanding lead over Sarkozy.
MORE: Morgan Stanley is betting against Europe's weakest
It is no surprise French voters would be looking for a change in leadership given all the economic turmoil in the country. Voters and parliaments across Europe have pushed incumbent governments out of power, regardless of ideology, as the financial crisis has deepened. Germany is the only exception, but only because its elections are scheduled next year. Governments in Spain, Ireland, Italy, the UK, Portugal, Greece and most recently, the Netherlands, have all fallen in the last year or two.
In the eurozone, the changes in leadership have been viewed as mostly positive by the markets -- they have brought with them the tough changes needed to help stabilize the seemingly endless European sovereign debt crisis. A change in leadership in France should therefore be viewed the same way, right?
No. Hollande has said that he would shake things up once he gets in power and would not toe the line with Germany or anyone else. That means anything is on the table, including agreements Sarkozy had carefully worked out with his European counterparts in taming the sovereign debt crisis. In addition, Hollande seems bent on really sticking it to the banks. He is no fan of the City of London and Wall Street and has openly criticized them for the role they played in the financial crisis. "My enemy is not another candidate, it is not a person, it has no face, it is the world of finance," Mr. Hollande said in January. He clearly has an axe to grind, but he may be getting ready to slice off his own hands.
Before he goes after his enemy, Hollande will need to make good on some socialist policies, which could have spillover effects on the rest of the eurozone. He says he will raise the minimum wage, cancel scheduled spending cuts, hire back thousands of government workers and roll back the retirement age from 62 to 60. He also wants to increase government spending to sponsor large infrastructure projects - all in a bid to spur economic growth.
To pay for this, Hollande wants to tax France to death. Anyone making more than a million euros a year will see their tax rate go from 45% to a mind-blowing 75%. He'll then stick it to the banks, raising their taxes by 15%. In addition, he wants to implement a financial transaction tax, which could have dire consequences on France's already weak financial sector. The tax would hurt high frequency trading, wiping out a major profit center for some hedge funds and banks that operate in France. It would also hurt the competitiveness of France's broker-dealers in executing transactions.
MORE: Banco Santander's Emilio Botín takes on the world
To avoid financial firms from leaving in droves, Hollande will most likely push for the tax to be implemented across the European Union. While the UK has successfully blocked attempts to implement a transaction tax in the past, Hollande isn't likely to give up as easily as his predecessors. The French could back the UK into a corner on a number of other political issues to get its way on this one. Wall Street will be watching closely given the Obama administration's view that financial rules and restrictions should be harmonized on both sides of the Atlantic. The fear is that France's financial transaction tax could eventually go worldwide.
Socialist France could also impact the implementation of new international banking standards, known as Basel III. In Brussels, European finance ministers are currently discussing how they will collectively implement new rules that will eventually force banks to hold more capital on their balance sheet. A France run by Hollande will most likely push for a higher rate, jeopardizing the lending capacity of European banks. Any agreement made on Basel III by the Europeans will have a big influence on the rate that ends up being the international standard. Wall Street is in favor of a low rate so banks can invest more of its cash. A high rate would further restrict bank lending – hurting not only bank profits, but also the U.S. economy.
Hollande's war on finance could be limited to tougher regulations or higher taxes, but there is a real fear that he could take it too far. During Wednesday's debate he noted his discontent with the one thing that is holding the euro together– cheap funding from the European Central Bank. He scornfully said, "banks get a loan from ECB at 1% and lend at 6%. I refuse."
MORE: The 7 elections that will reshape the global economy
This seemingly innocuous statement went largely unnoticed by many watching the debate, but it probably set off alarm bells in several European capitals. That's because this pass through of cheap funding from the ECB is the only thing keeping Europe from totally falling apart. The money the ECB is essentially printing is being lent to banks on the cheap so they can turn around and buy sovereign debt. This allows European countries on the periphery to continue funding themselves, avoiding default and a eurozone meltdown. It also allows the banks to lend more to businesses and consumers in order to increase spending in the economy. The spread the banks earn helps to fill the massive holes in their balance sheet so that they can recover from the crisis.
It took almost two years for the ECB to get over its fear of hyperinflation and finally open the spigots. If Hollande refuses to go along with this economic deal with the devil then a worst-case scenario could play out: Bank failures in Italy, Spain and Greece, and even in Germany and France, leading to high yields and crippling sovereign defaults across the eurozone. The euro would be finished. U.S. and Asian financial firms with European exposure would get hit hard, setting off a panic that would make 2008 look like a pleasant stroll along the Champs-Élysées.
To be fair, this dire scenario precludes the possibility of Hollande, who is known in the French parliament to be a strong consensus builder, from changing tack at some point. Socialist politicians usually ramp up the rhetoric against banks on the campaign trail to pick up votes, so Hollande's hatred of the financial system may just be his way of playing to his base. Once in office, he might actually tone it down. Wall Street certainly hopes he does.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/05/04/french-election-sarkozy-hollande/?iid=HP_Highlight&hpt=hp_bn1

     .

forecast europe 2011

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-10/recession-risk-grows-for-euro-region-as-commission-reduces-2012-forecast.html

Spain: deficit fiscal para llegar al 6% PIB

http://www.lesechos.fr/economie-politique/monde/actu/0201577932439-l-espagne-adopte-de-nouvelles-mesures-anti-crise-208196.php

What can the Yakuza explain about Japanese politics anyway?

What can the Yakuza explain about Japanese politics anyway?

August 7th, 2010

Author: Tobias Harris, MIT
Having read and enjoyed Jacob Adelstein's Tokyo Vice, it was with considerable interest that I read his article, `The Last Yakuza` in the World Policy Journal.

Like Corey Wallace, I have no particular expertise with which to assess the role played by the Yakuza in Japanese society. But also like him, I am skeptical about what political outcomes we can actually attribute to organised crime.

In brief, Adelstein argues that after decades of deep ties to the LDP — which organizations didn't have deep ties to the LDP when it was Japan's hegemonic ruling party? — leading Yakuza organisations have shifted their allegiances to the DPJ as it took control of the upper house in 2007 and then the lower house and with it the cabinet in 2009.
The main consequence of this shift, Adelstein suggests, is that the Hatoyama cabinet included Kamei Shizuka, head of the People's New Party, who is known to have links to organised crime. Without questioning those links, I think there is a far simpler explanation for Kamei's presence in the Hatoyama government, an explanation that does not require any reference to the Yakuza. Wanting to streamline decision making in the new coalition government, the DPJ included both Kamei and his SDPJ counterpart Fukushima Mizuho in the cabinet and created a special cabinet committee to coordinate policy among the ruling parties. Kamei, I think, was there so as to concentrate coalition negotiations within the government. The ease with which Kan Naoto cut Kamei loose once he challenged the new prime minister suggests that repaying the Yakuza was low on the DPJ's list of priorities when it came to Kamei.
But this case raises the larger question asked in the title of this post: what does the Yakuza explain anyway? What political outcome over the past half-century or so of Japanese politics is different because of the influence of the Yakuza in Japanese politics?
The most obvious answer is that the pervasive influence of the Yakuza explains the impunity with which gangsters have been able to act since the end of the war (which makes the 1992 anti-organised crime law mentioned by Adelstein a puzzle worth explaining).
But what about bigger questions? The durability of LDP rule? The rise and fall of prime ministers? Foreign policy and relations with the U.S.? What is different because of the Yakuza's power? What can the Yakuza explain that other theories cannot? I suspect not much. It's possible that gangsters may have influenced the outcome of LDP leadership elections during the former ruling party's heyday, given the shady pasts of some leading LDP politicians and the wholly opaque manner in which the LDP selected its leaders for much of its history. If it were possible to identify prime ministers who came to power only because of Yakuza support, it would perhaps be possible to identify indirect consequences of Yakuza influence, but as Adelstein's own career shows, becoming a Yakuza expert requires time, energy, and no small risk to one's person — all for exploring what may be nothing more than an auxiliary explanation.
That's not to say that the Yakuza are of no interest to political scientists who study Japan. One question worth addressing is why the Yakuza are so pervasive in the first place, at which point attention naturally turns to Italy, that other Axis power occupied by and then allied with the United States (which failed to purge and in fact developed links with far-right elements) and governed by a hegemonic conservative party for the duration of the cold war. Additionally, it may be fruitful to study the Yakuza in comparison with other interest groups that had long supported the LDP only to watch their fortunes wane during the lost decade(s). After all, Yakuza groups are interest groups, of a sort: interested in the regulation of organised crime. Like other interest groups, they had to adjust their political strategies in response to uncertain political and economic environments.
As such, while the Yakuza are an unlikely explanation for major political outcomes in Japan, they are a part of the landscape and observers should be cognisant of their role. For that we are lucky that Adelstein is working so hard to expose the inner workings of Japanese organised crime.

__._,_.___

Acuerdo de deuda

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/to-escape-chaos-a-terrible-debt-deal.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/the-president-surrenders-on-debt-ceiling.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

What are the social implications of economic collapse?

by Simon Black · View Comments

June 14, 2011
New York City
For the last few days, we've been having an important discussion about the magnitude of the economic challenges in the west; if you didn't read yesterday's letter, I really encourage you to do so before proceeding because it's important to understand why the west has truly passed the point of no return.
Simply put, the United States and much of Europe are borrowing an extraordinary amount of money now just to pay interest on the money they've already borrowed. They cannot even self-fund their mandatory entitlement programs without going into the hole, and their options are limited:
Option 1: Continue borrowing, keep the party going.
As long as the government CAN do this, they WILL do this.  Regardless of their intentions, though, more debt only worsens the situation, creating higher borrowing costs in the long run, and even more debt. As this happens, the pool of buyers begins to dry up, especially from overseas.
Option 2: Inflation
The more buyers stop purchasing Treasury securities, the more the Federal Reserve will mop up the excess liquidity. In doing so, the Fed essentially conjures up money and loans it to the government.
No matter what the government monkey statistics say, this is inflationary, plain and simple. The more money they print, the greater the level of inflation in the long-term. Meanwhile, as foreigners simultaneously reduce their US dollar holdings, this inflation will become more acutely felt in the US.
Option 3: Austerity
There's going to come a time when the US government is forced to face its economic reality and make some incredibly deep cuts that would be felt across society, from Wall Street and the military industrial complex to project housing on the other side of the tracks.
Option 4: Default
Eventually, the debt burden is simply going to be too much, and the most obvious solution will be to default. Politicians will make China out to be the enemy and they will probably invent a war just to have an excuse to default on Chinese owned debt. Americans will wave the flag and celebrate defaulting on their enemies.
Option 5: Economic Cannibalism
In the best traditions of Atlas Shrugged, the government will continue its persecution of the productive class– professionals, investors, entrepreneurs, and skilled workers. Existing taxes will rise, new taxes will be created, trade barriers will be enacted, and a maze of cost prohibitive regulations will be passed.
The first option (keeping the party going) is what has been happening for years. Politicians make small concessions to show they're "serious" about fiscal discipline, cutting laughably small programs while dumping hundreds of billions of dollars into wars and entitlement programs.
The worse the debt situation becomes, though, the higher the borrowing costs become, and the worse the debt situation becomes. It's not an enviable position. Existing lenders will continue backing away from the US Treasury market, giving option 1 a half-life measured in months at best.
In the longer term, only options 2-5 remain: inflation, austerity, default, and cannibalism. Each of these remaining options will shake the financial system to its core. More importantly, each of these has the power to create widespread social upheaval.
When inflation eats away at a family's already meager standard of living, when austerity eliminates the benefits to which recipients have grown accustomed, when default vanquishes a retiree's savings, when high taxes make workers feel like they're just government serfs– this is when the real turmoil will begin:
* Rising crime: devoid of a job or means to support their families, people will turn to crime out of desperation
* Class warfare: with dividing lines drawn between have's vs. have-not's, it will become unpopular and even dangerous to be successful
* Corruption: low-level public service officials will look to supplement their income through bribery and kickbacks
* Black economy: An underground, cash-only (probably gold or foreign currency) economy will emerge with people getting paid in envelopes
* Censorship: Of course they'll blame it on national security, but the idea will be to prevent public disparaging of government policy
* War: The government will need another major event to distract people from the real problems
* Protests/Riots: This is when things turn bloody
* Police state conditions: The government will close ranks and send the cops out to show all the little people who's really in charge
There are a number of other manifestations, and many are already showing signs of emergence. The US and European police states are alive and well. Crime is on the rise.
In Europe, cops are doing battle in the streets with their citizens. Think it can't happen in the US? Remember tanks in the streets during the LA riots? Remember New Orleans? Remember any number of G8/G20 protests?
Here's the bottom line: all you have to do is glance at the headlines to see what happens when you strip people of their livelihood, of their ability to put food on the table for their families.

The US has been able to kick the can down the road with the most blunt social implications simply because the country benefits so much from a US-oriented financial system. This is coming to an end very, very quickly.
As a rule of thumb, the greater the economic distortion, the harder the collapse. The US economy has been in a fantasy world for so long, and when its dominant primacy is yanked away, the collapse will be at freefall speed.
Listen… I'm not talking about the end of the world here, I'm talking about difficult times ahead, and the things that go beyond economics. It's time to face facts and look at how society will change (and has already changed).
Tomorrow, I'd like to write more about what we can do now. Meanwhile, please tell me what you think about this– how do you see society changing from this reset of the financial system?

__._,_.___

Macroperu UK: Protestan contra evasión y elusion de grandes empresas

Reino Unido: inédito motivo de protesta económica

María Esperanza Sánchez
BBC Mundo

Los manifestantes forzaron el cierre temporal de varias empresas.

Está tomando fuerza en el Reino Unido un movimiento de protestas en contra de la evasión y la elusión de impuestos que tiene como blanco grandes tiendas y empresas como Vodafone (telefonía), Topshop (vestimenta) y Barclays (banca).
En los últimos días, los manifestantes forzaron el cierre temporal de varias tiendas en Londres y otras ciudades del país y en algunos casos varias personas se pegaron con cola a los escaparates de las tiendas.
Los manifestantes señalan que combatiendo la elusión y la evasión impositiva se generarían suficientes recursos para combatir el déficit fiscal sin necesidad de aplicar dolorosos recortes fiscales.
UK Uncut, la organización que encabeza estas protestas, señala que sólo con el combate a la elusión, el uso de huecos en las leyes para evitar el pago de impuestos, se generarían US$40.000 millones. Esta cifra es mucho mayor en el caso de la evasión, que es ilegal.
"La evasión de impuestos es un tema crucial y creo que esta es la alternativa para combatir el déficit, en vez de recurrir a los recortes que está promoviendo este gobierno", dijo a la prensa local James Kelly, portavoz de la organización.
Protestas similares se produjeron en octubre pasado en contra de la firma Vodafone, que llegó a un arreglo con el gobierno en torno a una reclamación de evasión de impuestos, pero terminó pagando muchísimo menos de lo que debía.

Las protestas "son justificadas"

Según UK Uncut, si se combate la evasión fiscal, los recortes fiscales no serían necesarios.

Richard Murphy, director de la organización gubernamental Tax Research UK, le dijo a BBC Mundo que las protestas son justificadas.
"Estoy de acuerdo en gran medida con lo que dicen los manifestantes. Hay una gran cantidad de impuestos que deberían colectarse en Gran Bretaña y que no llegan a los cofres del Estado: unos US$40.000 millones por concepto de elusión de impuestos, unos US$110.000 millones por evasión impositiva y otros US$40.000 millones que simplemente no se pagan", señaló Murphy.
Señaló que aunque sería difícil obtener todo ese dinero "se debe hacer un esfuerzo serio para colectarse la mayor parte de ese dinero".
Si eso se hace, destacó Murphy, se podrían recaudar al menos unos US$40 mil millones de ingresos extra cada año. "Esto permitiría reducir sustancialmente los recortes. Es una alternativa que el gobierno tiene y no hace uso de ella. Esto explica el malestar de los manifestantes".
Este martes, el gobierno británico anunció un plan para combatir la elusión de impuestos, que según dijo le permitiría recaudar unos US$3.100 millones extras en los próximos cuatro años.
El anuncio es visto como una respuesta al movimiento de protesta en contra de la evasión, un movimiento que está creciendo y obteniendo gran respaldo a través de las redes sociales.
El gobierno también dijo que estudia la posible introducción del llamado Reglamento para Evitar la Elusión Impositiva, como parte de una iniciativa para cerrar los resquicios legales que aprovechan las empresas.
La Confederación Británica de la Industria rechazó la medida porque, según dijo, el Reino Unido perdería competitividad.
"Creemos que la introducción de este reglamento es contrario al interés del gobierno, de los contribuyentes y de la competitividad del país", señaló el organismo que agrupa a las grandes empresas.

Nada nuevo

Hay una gran cantidad de impuestos que deberían colectarse en Gran Bretaña y que no llegan a los cofres del Estado.

Richard Murphy, director the Tax Research UK

Richard Murphy le dijo a BBC Mundo que el plan del gobierno no tiene nada nuevo, ya que por regla general cada año se colectan unos US$790 millones extras cada año, con medidas para contrarrestar la elusión impositiva. Esto equivale a unos US$3.100 millones en cuatro años.
"Esto ha pasado cada año por lo menos en los 30 años que yo he estado trabajando en este sector", destacó.
No obstante, señaló que la introducción de un reglamento para combatir la elusión impositiva sí sería muy positivo.
Según Murphy, un reglamento como ese tendría un gran impacto, "pero no está claro en lo que se ha dicho hasta el momento si el gobierno va a implementar esta medida con rigurosidad".
El plan fiscal del gobierno británico implica recortes por valor de US$126.000 millones en cuatro años, uno de los programas de ajuste más drásticos en toda Europa.

_

http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2010/12/22/04016-20101222ARTFIG00259-2010-annee-record-pour-les-dettes-publiques.php

Mercados Mundiales y Deuda Euopea,red macroperu

World markets fall amid European debt worries

World markets fall as global sell-off spreads amid Europe debt crisis; Tokyo down 2.5 pct 

• 
  

A man speaks on a mobile phone in front of a securities firm's electronic stock board in Tokyo, Japan, Wednesday, April 28, 2010. Renewed worries about Greece's debt problems spread to Asia Wednesday, sending stock markets broadly lower following sharp declines in the U.S. and Europe. Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average led the region-wide retreat with a 2.5 percent fall to 10,935.99. (AP Photo/Shizuo Kambayashi)

Jeremiah Marquez, AP Business Writer, On Wednesday April 28, 2010, 4:57 am

HONG KONG (AP) -- Global stocks markets convulsed with selling for a second day Wednesday amid fears that Europe's worsening debt crisis would throw the world economic recovery off track.

Asian markets dropped and European shares opened lower as a global sell-off widened. The euro was poised to resume its slide after plummeting to levels not seen in a year, while oil prices dropped below $82 a barrel.

Concerns about Europe intensified after Standard & Poor's downgraded Greece's debt to junk status and cut Portugal's credit rating by two notches on Tuesday -- making it harder for both countries to pay down their debts and raise money to fund their budgets.

Investors have been on edge for months about Greece's fiscal crisis. The country has already acknowledged it can't pay debts due shortly and has asked for a bailout from European neighbors and the International Monetary Fund.

There's now growing anxiety Portugal could be the next weak European economy to require help, followed by the region's other debt-laden countries like Spain. Not only does the crisis undermine the euro, but it threatens European governments' ability to borrow money at a time when they're spending furiously to heal their economies after the world recession.

"The fear is that Greece and Portugal are just the appetizers," said Lorraine Tan, director of equities research at Standard & Poor's in Singapore. "The concern is it is going to spread and have an impact on the financial system and ultimately on the economy."

As trading opened in Europe, Britain's FTSE 100 shed 0.8 percent, Germany's DAX lost 1.5 percent and France's CAC-40 dropped 1.4 percent. Wall Street futures pointed to more losses in the U.S. Wednesday.

In Asia, Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average led the region-wide retreat with a 2.6 percent fall to 10,924.79 as anxiety about Europe overshadowed earnings reports showing solid recovery among Japanese companies.

Elsewhere, Hong Kong's Hang Seng dropped 1.5 percent to 20,949.40 and South Korea's Kospi was off 0.9 percent to 1,733.91.

Markets in Australia and India retreated between 1 percent and 2 percent. Shanghai closed down 0.3 percent.

Should Greece or another European nation fail to make good on its debt obligations, as investors worry is increasingly likely, the global financial system would suffer an enormous shock, analysts say. Lending markets could freeze up, hampering growth just as the global economy is emerging from last year's recession.

"The markets are vulnerable," said Kirby Daley, senior strategist at Newedge Group in Hong Kong. "Investors have priced in a smooth recovery, and as they realize it will be far from a smooth recovery, if a recovery at all, the market will have to adjust to that. And that means equities will have to fall eventually."

In currencies, the euro stabilized after a steep drop the day before to a near 1-year low before slipping again, trading down at $1.3153 from $1.3155. The dollar rose to 93.42 yen from 93.07 yen.

Oil prices dropped for a second straight day, with benchmark crude for May delivery down 82 cents at $81.62 a barrel.

In the U.S. Friday, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 1.9 percent to 10,991.99 in its worst loss in almost three months. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 28.34, or 2.3 percent, to 1,183.71.

__

irlanda: 100 mil millones salvataje,BBC

"Eurozona enfrenta \" : http://www.bbc.co.uk/mundo/noticias/2010/11/101116_eurozona_crisis_irlanda_jrg.shtml?s