ECB Tightens Noose Around Bank Accounts

Locking up the money of unsuspecting depositors to prop up collapsing banks.

By Don Quijones, Spain, UK, & Mexico, editor at WOLF STREET.

The European Central Bank (ECB), arguably the European Union’s most powerful and least accountable institution, apparently needs more power, according to Daniele Nouy, the ECB’s top supervisor. Chief among the fresh powers it seeks is the power to temporarily prevent people from withdrawing their money from their accounts at banks that are in distress, including by electronic fund transfers.

“In my view… the introduction of adequate moratorium power for authorities is needed in order to react with the needed flexibility, if the situation of a bank deteriorates rapidly,” Nouy told a member of the European Parliament in a letter. “Given the potentially swift evolution of liquidity crises, a moratorium tool could be necessary to ensure there is adequate time for ensuring a credible solution,” Nouy said, adding that the ECB will soon publish an opinion on this issue.

The recent collapse and resolution of Spain’s Banco Popular and Italy’s Monte dei Paschi di Siena lent more impetus to this new regulatory push that has been quietly in the works for a while.

Late last year, the European Commission, the same entity that wants to impose increasingly draconian limits on the use of cash in Europe, proposed giving banking supervisors the authority to suspend some deposit withdrawals and payments obligations in exceptional circumstances.

But that was not enough to placate Europe’s senior ranks of central bankers. While the Commission proposal would exclude deposits under 100,000 euros, which to all intents and purposes are insured by their respective national governments, the Single Resolution Board has warned that significant amounts of cash could still leave the bank if the moratorium was “excessively narrow.”

As such, if the new proposal is passed — and given that its passage will involve very little in the way of democratic process, that’s more or less guaranteed — pay-outs to insured depositors could be suspended for five working days, according to an Estonian document recently seen by Reuters. The freeze could even be extended to a maximum of 20 days in “exceptional circumstances.”

All this furtive planning and plotting is happening against a backdrop of supposedly improving economic performance in the EU. On Friday the man in charge of the ECB, Mario Draghi, crowed that the global recovery is “firming up,” with the Eurozone apparently leading the way, while stressing the need, of course, for continued “significant monetary policy.”

As Draghi well knows, if the ECB’s lavish monetary policy was scaled back or, God forbid, withdrawn, its main beneficiaries, including some of Europe’s biggest corporations and, of course, Draghi’s home country of Italy, would not be able to afford the higher interest rates that would result from reduced bond purchases. Higher rates would effectively bankrupt the country. In that respect, Italians see Draghi as their guardian angel at the ECB.

Since the ECB bent its own rules on bank resolution out of all recognition earlier this summer to enable Italy’s government to bailout Monte dei Paschi with taxpayer funds as well as insulate bondholders of all stripes from the financial fallout of the wind-down of the two Veneto-based banks, Banca Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Banca, Italy’s banking sector is apparently on the mend — at least according to the country’s banking elite, which converged this week on the shores of Lake Como for the annual Ambrosetti Forum.

In the words of Jean Pierre Mustier, chief executive officer of UniCredit SpA, Italy’s biggest bank, Italy has very strong fundamentals and its healthy economic growth is pushed by exports, consumers and investments, so “the core banking activity in Italy is actually quite profitable.”

As Bank of Italy data shows, banks’ operating profit for 2016 was down by 27%, mainly owing to a drop in income. And while shares of Italian banks may have jumped almost 8% since June compared with a 1% uptick in the Europe STOXX 600 Banks Index, that’s almost certainly a reflection of investor relief rather than a genuine belief that the Italian banking system’s deep-seated problems have been laid to rest with the recent interventions.

As Jim McCaughan, CEO of Principal Global Investors, told Bloomberg, the European banking system as a whole — and the Italian banking system in particular — has a questionable level of capital and that could lead to problems in the next economic slowdown. “For many banks, prosperity is very dependent on continuity of the economic momentum,” said McCaughan.

And continuity of the current reality something that is far from guaranteed, especially given it depends almost entirely on the continued monetary support provided by the European Central Bank, which boasts a negative policy rate and the biggest balance sheet of any central bank on planet Earth.

The ECB knows that more banks will collapse, which is why it’s taking preemptive steps now to ensure that the next time an important bank begins to wobble, it can swoop down and freeze its customers’ deposits — insured or not. Unbeknownst to hundreds of millions of European citizens, the ECB is quietly tightening a noose around their savings. By Don Quijones.

Even Italian banks are dumping Italian government bonds. Read…  What’s Keeping Italy’s Government Debt from Blowing Up?

Enjoy reading WOLF STREET and want to support it? You can donate. I appreciate it immensely. Click on the beer and iced-tea mug to find out how:

Would you like to be notified via email when WOLF STREET publishes a new article? Sign up here.

  61 comments for “ECB Tightens Noose Around Bank Accounts

  1. cdr says:

    I really have little sympathy for euro citizens hurt by banking rules that subjugate the Euro population. They benefit from low rates and massive debt monetization. They live in a socialized society and pay for their benefits with monetized debt. It’s a free ride that the globalists would like to implement all over the world, if possible.

    The regular people must endure negative rates and cash controls. Negative rates are a form of forced taxation. Cash controls see that the tax is collected. The 1% get the benefits.

    Yet they go along with it like sheep. I guess they like no go zones more than getting decent interest on a savings account.

    • John Graeme Scott says:

      I have to make a point here. It is not only Europeans who are suffering from negative interest rates. Citizens throughout the Western World all have the same problem ! It is long past the time to stop this nonsense and return to a normal rate policy.

      • Dave says:

        A 5-year RMB CD in China gets you 3.75%/yr, A 6-mo Ruble CD yields 7.80%/yr

    • TJ Martin says:

      …. and the fact is to put a point on Mr Scott’s comment … though outwardly we ( US ) appear to be on a different plain …. in reality we’re pretty much in the exact same boat only using different terminology with slightly different methods of manipulation .

      The only real difference being we reap none of the benefits whereas at least they gain a few .

      So much for the myth of the superiority of Hyper verging on Anachro-Capitalsim versus moderate socialism

  2. Gershon says:

    The European sheeple might finally wake up from their coma when the grifters at the ECB use “bail-ins” to seize their bank accounts to pay off the gambling debts of the banksters.

    • TJ Martin says:

      Though you may be right the real question is ;

      When will we American Sheeple verging on deluded sycophants finally wake up from our going on 38 years and counting coma ? And yes the number is significant and intentional

      FYI; Hate to rain on your MAGA parade Gershon but those Sheeple you constantly deem fit to criticize have a higher standard of living along with free education , better public transportation , medical care , retirement etc . Whereas you and I should things go as planned will end up with bupkis .. or as my friends mom used to say… ” ***t on the end of a stick “

      • James Levy says:

        I hate this “sheeple” meme–it implies that the people in Europe don’t vote (they do). What they don’t have, just like folks here in the good old USA, are real options when they pull the lever. You either vote for the interests of the investor class, or you vote for the interests of the investor class plus perhaps a leavening of modest social welfare. The people can throw up alternatives like Syriza and then get them bulldozed by the powers that be, or they can vote for Hollande and some sort of gutless, fake, watered-down socialism, or they can vote for the Right. In none of these cases are they getting out from under the ECB and the reign of the German “regulatory capitalism.”

        • cdr says:

          Agree, but I would describe it differently. The people voted for the EU and subsequent Eurozone. Some saw benefits from a shared interest (the scammed). Others saw a free lunch via a ‘screw your buddy’ scenario. Even the latter is paying out the nose for the free lunch they anticipated. In Europe, the globalist agenda comes across more like an old Saturday Night Live nihilist parody. But they still allow it. Nuts, but true.

          It will end when the free lunch aspects of debt monetization have an obvious cost that hurts the rest A LOT combined with the realization that no go zones are the beginning of mainland Eurozone assimilation into minority culture, forced by Brussels for a reason nobody an fathom.

          A merciful end would be the rest of the world calling BS on ECB QE and ending it sooner than later.

        • michael w Earussi says:

          James, we have exactly the same problem here in the U.S.

          Both the Democratic and Republican parties are totally owned and operated by virtually the same “investor class” you’re complaining about in the EU.

          So as long as the sheeple (which is an almost perfect meme for them) in the U.S. continue to vote for either of the two parties they have no more voice than the sheeple in the EU.

          When the rich own virtually all of the politicians, courts and police the average people are left with no other choice but to work, pay taxes, and shut up.

          So unless you feel like taking up arms against a sea of troubles, just bend over and take it, which is pretty much the only position the poor have been in over the last 10,000 years.

    • JMiller says:

      Only uninsured depositors could lose money in a bail-in. Stockholders and bondholders would be the first to lose money.

      • John Doyle says:

        Yes, I believe it is illegal for a bank to use deposits. If on the other hand you bought a bank bond, that is then for the bank to use and you can lose.
        It’s not clear if the EU is touching up deposits but there would have had to be a change in the law to allow it.

      • Sadasivan says:

        In 2014,November ,Australia the G 20 nations signed a SECRET Regulation,by the FSB.It concerns the TBTFs in case of a bank run.the depositors have to take a “hair-cut”,as they would be considered INVESTORs.The Derivatives,among the Banks get Seniority.Please google for:-
        Bankers’coup Ellen bron

        • Sadasivan says:

          Please google:-
          Bankers’ Coup Ellen Brown

        • JMiller says:

          Sadasivan ,

          First, in the U.S., insured depositors do not take a haircut because they are not part of bail-ins. Uninsured depositors however might be.

          Second, depositors are not investors. They are unsecured creditors. When you deposit money in the bank, you are making a loan to the bank. There is a debtor-creditor relationship with the bank being the debtor and the depositor being the creditor.

          Third, while derivatives may have seniority in bankruptcy, insured depositors get paid first, before bankruptcy, by the FDIC who then in turn stands in place of the insured depositor in bankruptcy. So insured depositors do not stand behind derivatives to get their money as some in the ALT media claim. However uninsured depositors might have to stand in line to get some of their uninsured money.

          Forth, Ellen Brown and others in the ALT-media sometimes do not tell the whole truth. And sometimes they even lie.

  3. scott says:

    Very informative. Global debt prevails! which country is the biggest supplier of ECB debt? Germany?

  4. marco says:

    Never fails. The “little people” pay for all the fraud and manipulation of the rich and their banks .

    Over and over and over again ……..

    • Gershon says:

      This is what the “little people” voted for when they elected globalist water carriers. They purely and simply deserve everything they’re going to get.

      • walter map says:

        People generally deserve the government they get. That should terrify you.

        • Gershon says:

          It does. But as long as 95% of the electorate are sheep and lemmings, there’s not much I can do about it other than brace for impact.

      • TJ Martin says:

        As do we having elected a con artist posing as a barely NeoPopulist never mind bonafide populist . Trust me Gershon … we’re gonna get it … right up the posterior and in spades should the present situation continue much sooner than later .

        Whereas they ? Don’t kid yourself .. long after we’ve descended into global irrelevancy they’ll still be keeping on keeping on .

        FYI; Gershon… the ‘ so called ‘ Globalists are as much conspiracy theory/myth as the ‘ Deep State ‘ is . Suffice it to say if either existed we wouldn’t be having this conversation cause they’d of taken over decades ago if they did .

        PS; walter map – two thumbs up !

        • RD Blakeslee says:

          Three thumbs up and applying for compensation under Americans with Disabilities Act.

  5. Jon t says:

    Recently there was a writing from Yves Mersch, Member of the Executive Board of the ECB. He concluded in his article,

    “There are valid reasons for maintaining cash, from the perspective of commercial banks and central banks alike.

    Given the widespread desire to use cash, banks should facilitate rather than obstruct customers in using their preferred method of payment. Time will tell how the use of cash will evolve once instant payments are introduced in the near future.

    For central banks, cash is a tool to build trust. Cash provides the general public with direct access to central bank money. For an independent institution like the ECB, maintaining that link is important, which is why we place great emphasis on ensuring people’s continued trust in cash.”

  6. walter map says:

    In case you ever wondered what economic warfare looks like, now you know. For the most part, it doesn’t look like anything.

    You, of course, are the enemy. It’s not as if they’re going to come out and tell you how they’re going to pillage you. They don’t want to give you any opportunity to object. They don’t want you to figure out you’ve been shivved until you happen to notice you’re standing in a pool of your own blood and by that time are in no position to do anything about it.

    Remember, the world does not change in front of your eyes. It changes behind your back. And it is about to change profoundly, and not for the better.

    • TJ Martin says:

      Amen , well stated , with nary a hint of conspiracy theory to be found

      • Rob says:

        Who are “they” in Walters post? The people that view us as the enemy?

        Not trying to be a smartass. Asking a serious question.

        • cdr says:

          “They” is a metaphor for the globalists.

          The globalists are a group who want low rates, low wages and flexible labor sources. Monetized debt and cash controls, such as those in Europe, support the low rate initiative. The globalists are mostly the 1% who try to look progressive and pretend to be your friends.

          They use their wealth and influence to put people in key places, such as Congress and the FOMC, and, using ‘think tanks’, dream up theories that become ‘accepted fact’. One such new fact is you can’t raise rates if you don’t have inflation. Bogus theory but accepted as fact.

          Whoever is placed as Fed Chair will tell the tale about the direction of US economics. Will it be another globalist flunky or a Taylor Rule realist?

        • James Levy says:

          I think a legitimate surmise would be that the “they” are the banks that own and control the central banks, the central banks themselves, those with major holdings in those banks, those that are dependent for liquidity on those big banks, and the politicos who either get their funding from them or consider them (as they do in England) as the only comparative advantage the nation has left. And that’s a pretty powerful lineup of interests.

        • Rob says:

          Thanks for the responses. I thought that was what Walter was implying. But earlier TJ said the “Globalists” are a myth. Then he responds to Walter who is discussing these Globalists, yet TJ agrees with him. Trying to wrap my head around these arguments.

        • alex in san jose says:

          And never forget, “globalists” a metaphor for ….

    • Cynic says:

      All animals act according to their nature and training.

      That applies to bankers as much as anything else: top-predators since the 13th century…..

  7. bev kennedy says:

    Excellent points especially the most recent. – don’t care for victim blaming which is what the earlier comments strike me as.
    Back in Canada the plot is just as dark. And it plays out like this…
    The fcac declines to address misconduct of our big banks when it involves their dealer broker retail arms
    Instead it’s solution is to delegate this to the provinces and territories who then use MOU s memos of understanding to pass duties they find distasteful regarding retail investor protection and compliance oversight of industry players to the paid for by industry self regulator entities and ombudsman
    The duties pushed over include items that the crown are fully aware from their own audits are not properly handled by these sros. Despite all the finger wagging from crown to sro
    So why delegate these duties when you are fully aware consumer rights will be mangled and buried unless they fit the sro s agendas?
    This same engineering via backdoor massaged the 114 billion dollar liquidity support aka bailout post 2008 of these same banks. That according the the government at the time never happened. So yes the world does change behind your back!
    We have an aging demographic but the powers that be despite all their posturing and happy talk about planning for seniors well being including financial have clearly no intention of really tightening up on the big banks or investment industry.
    These entities are more to passify the public nothing more when it comes to actually testing how well they will provide redress

    • TJ Martin says:

      ” Victim blaming ”

      A book recommend worthy of your time and consideration ;

      ” Culture of Complaint ” by Robert Hughes

      Suffice it to say like many other things Mr Hughes saw our currently overwhelming state of victimhood coming from a mile away .. published in 1993

  8. Ambrose Bierce says:

    freezing bank deposits is micropolicy and it only works on a small problem (Greece) relative to the banking group in aggregate (ECB) the real issue is can they fix future bond rates, (and thus immunize existing bond holders) and the answer is yes I think so. The policy would be to fix yields and let the par value discount the move, but since price discovery is based on the markets in total, its probably not that hard. Who knows what rates should really be? And bond investors who buy on margin and collateralize this paper to buy stocks for instance would find the deal even more attractive. Its the equivalent of getting an RE appraisal at 120% of market value. Which works believe me. they are ready to orphan everything, deposits, bonds, and even stocks. stock market on hold, bond market orphaned, deposits frozen, then what? then you start allowing people to take out a line of credit on their locked up assets, first basic consumables, then expand it. yes i am buying stocks on a line of credit account from my locked up stock portfolio. finally they unlock the accounts and viola, the monetary base has doubled. mission accomplished…

  9. Bobber says:

    Wouldn’t the threat of a 10 or 20 day deposit lockup be enough to create a bank run? Who would want their money is such bank? I’d be withdrawing the minute it was clear such measures would be implemented. I’d buy gold or put the money under the mattress.

    • Ambrose Bierce says:

      you mean the moment they are lifted, since they aren’t going to warn you first.
      you get 100 the first week, 200 the second week, and by 2050 you might have all your money?
      and if you have your money in a locked account but the bank is still solvent and you look around and see other banks that went under, then what do you do? say thank you for keeping my money safe

    • JMiller says:


      See my comment below about how in the U.S., banks already have the right to lockup your money for at least 7 days for most accounts.

  10. Stevedcfc72 says:

    Great article Donquijones,

    A very good point made is that even after all the TLTRO monies lent to the European Banks to reduce their borrowing costs, their profits are still falling.

    Unicredit as an example has borrowed 55 billion euro’s the maximum it possibly can through this TLRTO.

    With this new ECB ruling as stated it fully expects more European Banks to go under.

  11. Hkan says:

    Awareness is personal responsibility.
    Why people chose not to wanna know….i dont know.
    Uncomfortable information seems hard to absorb. Lucky ECB.

  12. JMiller says:

    In the U.S., banks already have the right to temporarily deny people from taking most or all of their money out of the bank. The Federal Reserve’s Regulation D allows banks and credit unions the right to require that the depositor give at least 7 days written notice to withdraw or transfer all or part of the balance of any savings accounts, negotiable order of withdrawal accounts (NOW), and money market deposit accounts (MMDA).

    Demand deposit accounts, such as checking accounts, are not subject to the 7 days written notice. However many checking accounts consist of two sub-accounts – a checking sub-account and a money market sub-account. The bank has the right to require at least 7 days written notice prior to the withdrawal or transfer of any funds from the money market sub-account.

    Certificate of Deposits (CD), which are time deposit accounts, could require advance notice in cases of an early withdrawal prior to the maturity date. However the bank has the right to deny your request.

    Granted banks normally do not require depositors give them advance notice to withdrawal money from their account but if there is a bank run, the banks could exercise their right and require that the depositor give 7 days written notice for most accounts. And in the case of CDs, deny any early withdrawal requests.

    • gardener1 says:

      Does anyone know if this also applies to credit unions?

      • JMiller says:


        Yes, it applies to credit unions also. Regulation D applies to any state or federally chartered financial institution that is federally insured or eligible for federal insurance.

        A number of credit union websites that I have seen state that they have the right to require at least a 7 day notice of any withdrawal from certain accounts. Here is one example:

        “SECU reserves the right to require a member intending to
        make a withdrawal from any account (except dividend
        checking, non-dividend checking, HSA or CPG accounts)
        to give written notice of such intent not less than seven
        days and up to 60 days before such withdrawal.”

        What is scary is that this credit union could require up to 60 days written notice before you can withdrawal your money.

        • JMiller says:

          After doing some searching I have found a number of credit unions that state that they could require up to 60 days written notice. Here is another example.

          “We reserve the right to require you to give not less than seven (7) and up to sixty (60) days written notice of your intention to withdraw funds from any account except checking accounts.”

          And people say credit unions are safer than banks.

  13. Drango says:

    It’s not a good sign that in this day and age, the ECB wants to be able to stop bank runs, a problem more associated with financial crisis and economic depressions. What does the ECB know that it’s not telling the rest of us?

  14. d says:

    This article Reinforces why All digital money should never be.

    it also reinforces the fact that in the current environment.
    Nobody should have any more liquidity in a bank at any time than the minimum necessary to keep open the required accounts.

    The day your salary is credited, draw the majority of it, even if it is unneeded. Make these activity’s a habit.

    Fighting bank’s is difficult making life a little less easy for them is easy for you.

    Remember for every dollar you have in the bank, the bank Borrows/Levers at least 3 against it.

  15. ML says:

    If a bank account were frozen to prevent a run on the bank and if a cashless society were to become the norm, then surely the entire economy would crash instantly.

    We live in a giagantic Ponzi scheme. Keeping as much money in the bank is the only way to help out. Anything else is wishful thinking: after your (self-sufficiency) supplies have run out, you wouldn’t last five minutes!

    • Gershon says:

      We live in a giagantic Ponzi scheme. Keeping as much money in the bank is the only way to help out.

      Keeping money in the bank at .25% interest rates or some such thing and get robbed by the stealth tax of inflation? – which is far higher than our Soviet-style CPI says it is. No thanks. I’d rather buy tangible goods and things that are going to go up in value while the Fed continues its debasement of the currency.

  16. Mel says:

    When they say “prevent people from withdrawing their money from their accounts at banks that are in distress, including by electronic fund transfers”, does that also mean writing checks, paying off credit cards, and so on? Any of the ways that reduce account balances?

    • d says:

      “does that also mean writing checks, paying off credit cards, and so on? Any of the ways that reduce account balances?”

      Off course it does its a personal funds confiscation, dressed as bank stability measures.

      The Eu the second you put your money in “Their” bank, it belongs to the bank.

      You are just another unsecured creditor.

      • JMiller says:


        Not sure what you mean by “belongs to the bank” but when you deposit money in the bank it does NOT belong to the bank, at least not the way people are making it sound. When you deposit money in a bank or credit union, you are loaning your money to that financial institution. Their is a debtor-creditor relationship. And the depositor has the legal right to get their money back. The same is true when a bank makes a loan to you. Ownership of your money does not change. What really changes is control of your money.

    • JMiller says:

      I would say that it sounds like you can’t withdrawal any money from your account for any reason.

      • Mel says:

        So it really is “We had to destroy the economy to save the financial system.”
        I had some doubts that anybody would actually do that. But it’s not out of line with other things that anybody has already done.

        But I suppose that people with all their money confiscated are great customers for loans. What would I do? I could pay 20% to Mastercard do keep up minimum payments on my VISA. I could pay 8% to VISA to keep up minimum payments on Mastercard. The debt I already had couldn’t get paid — keep compounding interest on that. But the system can handle that. A confiscated bank account can’t be worse collateral than the stuff some of the big guys are using.

  17. Gershon says:

    Don has covered the implications of Catalonia’s bid for independence from Spain, which also has major ramifications for the EU. Might be time for an update soon.

  18. raxadian says:

    Guys and Girls.

    People in Europe have voted AGAINST these kinds of regulations. Then the regulations get passed anyway thanks to the power of the great almighty Eurozone.

    As long as a country is member of the Eurozone it has to accept regulations like this or leave the Eurozone.

    Hence why I keep insisting that long term leaving the Eurozone is good for the UK.

    • Jack says:

      The UK is leaving the EU, not the Eurozone. Thankfully we stayed out of the mess of the Eurozone and kept sterling.

  19. Gershon says:

    Meanwhile, Goldman’s toady at the ECB has (to absolutely no one’s surprise) decided to keep the financial crack cocaine known as QE flowing to “the markets,” meaning the financial sector oligarchs who are the sole beneficiaries of the ECB’s trillions in printing-presss confetti lavished on the banksters. When global Ponzi markets implode under the weight of their own fraud, debt, and fictitious valuations, these “former” Goldmanites running “our” central banks better hope their grifter accomplices save room for them on whatever Gulfstream they’ll be using to flee to some offshore non-extradition hidey-hole.

  20. Jim Graham says:

    “”The day your salary is credited, draw the majority of it, even if it is unneeded. Make these activity’s a habit.””

    I have been doing that for well over 20 years.

    IF I am going to make a check or card purchase I put the money in the bank, write the check or use the card to consume that money.

    Other than that I pay CASH….

  21. Sound of the Suburbs says:

    I had experience of the Icelandic bank Icesave going down.

    As you might expect, the wealthy do find out before it goes down and get there money out before people like me are trapped.

    I did my money back, but spread your money out so the whole lot doesn’t get trapped in one bad bank.

    My money in Icesave was locked up for a few weeks.

  22. R Davis says:

    The ECB – to say that it is unaccountable is to put it mildly.
    To say that they are powerful – ?
    The CEB – is bankrupt – where is the power in this ?
    Let us say that they are ruthless in their efforts to keep their footing on the market floor.
    That they are protected by their dependent power brokers.
    Hanging on to the door jambs for dear life as their solvent competitors try to push them out – to make more room for themselves.
    It is hard to think that the European Central Bank could go under – only because we have been sung the lullaby of “Too Big To Fail. far too often.
    A change is as good as a holiday – out with the old & redundant & in with the new & innovative.
    Everything has it’s used by date – everything – there are new Hush Puppy’s out there – they are the breath of fresh air that the banking & financial world needs.

    • R Davis says:

      The 2007-2008 GFC – it’s been 10 years – The European Union – consisting of 28 member nations is in ruin – and there is no light at the end of the tunnel – how long can this crisis go on ?
      Where is the white rabbit ?
      Someone need to pull the white rabbit out of the magic hat.
      In 10 Years the European Central Bank has tightened every screw imaginable –
      But to achieve what ?
      To reinstate the ECB’s solvency ?
      This is what it looks like – a self saving mission regardless the consequence to the 28 EU member nations & the EU as a whole.
      How is it that the ECB don’t realize that the EU must be made strong & wealthy for them to thrive ?

Comments are closed.