With a constant a message custom and polishedBranches need to have a broader radar visionThere was also an obvious error of timingIt is one of the most dynamic sectors of the EditionThe result of the vote fell in the eveningThe policy of site is fundamental in our strategyThe investigation should last several monthsIt should except surprise throw the spongeObjective to seven times better than average Swedish householdHow get out of the rutThere is no miracle solutionIreland marchet - it really in the footsteps of the Greece At first glance, their stories are quite nearby. In the crisis that rocked the world since 2008, the Celtic Republic is the second country in the future euro area claim the assistance of the European Commission and the IMF to rescue its finances at risk, after the Hellenic Republic. The two countries are "devices", to the borders of the Union. In their strong growth in the 2000s, with wages at the Gallop (5-6 increase per year compared to 2 on average in the euro area), they accumulated excess. Need them therefore to each 100 billion euros to recover flow. For Europe, the two episodes have the same meaning: it better monitor, better discipline.
Except that the stories are quite different. Therefore, lessons they also different. The two countries are in reality very distant, and not only in geographical terms. Economically, Athens is turned towards the Mediterranean, with its tradition of profligate public finances. Dublin looks to the United Kingdom and his fascination with private finance. Before the crisis, the Ireland was in surplus (3 of GDP surplus in 2006, with a debt limited to 25 of GDP) while the Greece has never approached the balance (the least bad sales 4 deficit in 2006, with a debt already flirting with the 100).
The events of recent months reflect these differences. With three major differences. First, the Greece saw a crisis of public finance, the Ireland a private financial crisis. Athens has let the expenses of the State to the French, and then aggravated his case by concealing the reality. Dublin has left banks do anything, English. Course, the Irish Government had to nationalise troubled institutions. The crisis is then de facto become public (with a public deficit staggering of) 32 of the GDP this year), and Dublin cynically pushed the banks to massively apply for the Fund of the ECB. But the origin of the Irish crisis is well, while it is in Greece - where banks have cashed the shock.
This difference leads a second difference of behavior. Athens appealed desperately to Europeans, because there was more money in funds for repaying borrowers or pay officials. Conversely, Dublin could take more months because the Government had accumulated hazelnut for financial winter and its banks could continue to refinance with the ECB. But the ECB had tired to buy rotten Irish products and others feared the effects of contagion - the Spain for its public debt, the United Kingdom to its banks. These are European countries that led the Irish Government to accept a plan to bail out its banks.
The third difference between the two countries is even greater. One was considered a dunce long while the other was the favourite. The Greece had been admitted to the European Union to preserve its democracy, and then in the euro despite its bad notes, only because it was a country that seemed too small for jeopardizing the monetary building. Its crisis confirmed European principles: monetary union, must be strong budgetary vigilance. Otherwise all with the Ireland. It was the perfect student of the Union. Copy weather: the country had known to take advantage of the subsidies paid by the Union to produce an economic boom. Also copy in the storm, which began here as early as the end of 2006: the Government has applied to the letter the country struggling under massive manual the
