Written by Tom Cleveland, foreign exchange market analyst: While the major foreign exchange event of the past decade would surely be the highly successful introduction of the euro, many may have overlooked the results of the more northern “crown” currencies, those belonging to Scandinavian countries and the Republic of Iceland. Each has tracked well with the success of the euro, but disruption and divergence marked the paths of these currencies following the global economic downturn in 2008. Iceland, hit especially hard, imposed modified currency controls, to prevent the immediate withdrawal of foreign currency investment monies, but conditions are appearing favourable enough to consider their gradual termination at present.
The national currency, the Icelandic krona (“ISK”), still floats in the Forex market, but economists believe that if present controls were removed too soon, then the current scenario of an appreciating national currency and recovering economy could be placed in jeopardy. The five-year history of relationships to the Euro and the U.S. Dollar tell the story of Iceland quite well as shown below:
For the first five years of the new millennium, the krona followed the euro’s gradual appreciation as the success of its introduction began to take hold in the forex market. Depreciation of the currency then overtook the headlines, as the worst recession in the past eighty years swept the globe. A major banking crisis of monstrous proportions swept over Iceland and its progressive economy, exacerbated by what is generally referred to as the “carry trade”. The Monetary Policy Committee, the “MPC”, installed modified currency exchange controls on various investment securities to prevent a wholesale diminution of the krona from occurring.
The krona has appreciated versus the euro and the US dollar over the past year. However, central bank and government officials have hopefully learned a few lessons from its national banking collapse that has been termed, relative to the size of its economy, the largest banking failure to befall a single country in economic history. Prior to the 2008 crisis, Iceland was a leader in real GDP growth, unemployment was low, and there was a remarkably even distribution of income throughout the country. The fishing industry was prospering, and foreign investment was pouring in for opportunities in geothermal and hydropower facilities.
Following the deregulation of the banking sector in the early 2000’s, domestic banks expanded their operations aggressively into foreign markets by taking foreign deposits and borrowing on the interbank market. By mid 2008, banks held over EUR 40 billion in foreign debt when Icelandic GDP was 20 percent of that figure. As the global financial condition worsened in 2008, the krona fell precipitously versus other major currencies. The depreciating national currency suddenly placed domestic banks at high risk, due to their increased foreign debt exposure, an unsustainable position that resulted in the failure of Iceland’s three largest commercial banks in late 2008.
A loan package of USD 10 billion was arranged with the IMF and other countries to protect the value of the krona and stabilise the financial sector. Currency controls were established, the banks were taken over, the stock market lost 90 percent of its market capitalisation, interest rates were raised to 15.5 percent to counter inflation, and criminal investigations were commenced to determine if business leaders or politicians had any undue influence over lending practices within the three commercial banks. Amidst mounting public protests, the then-Prime Minister, eventually accused of negligence by the special investigative committee, and the Commerce Minister both stepped down in January of 2009.
However, the Icelandic economy is making a comeback. The MPC recently decided to allow interest rates to remain at their current levels, representing the end of a long line of interest rate cutting decisions in the past. Inflation concerns have subsided to a degree, if a 1.9 percent rate is cause for celebration. Typically, inflation is a leading indicator of economic recovery. Much attention has been placed on the sudden increase in both hard and soft commodity prices over the past seven months. Gold, silver, cotton, corn, and rare earth metals have all grabbed the headlines of late, signifying a global economic recovery in progress, but emphasising the point that raw material resources are limited.
The financial crisis has had disastrous consequences for the economy of Iceland and its external trade relations, but as economic stability returns, as evidenced by a strengthening krona, the possibility of joining the European Union and securing the broad security that the euro offers has gained wider support. A recent economic study on the issue reported that, “The Icelandic krona acts as a barrier to international trade, and that by joining the EU and adopting the euro, Icelandic trade could increase by 60 percent.” An application was filed in 2010, but the recent debt crisis in Europe has made many query if joining the Eurozone would be best for Iceland in the long term.
For the present, Iceland’s economy is improving, making debates about the future all the more lively. Icelanders remain mixed in their opinion about the benefits of disbanding their national currency in favour of the euro. Time will tell if independence is still a viable strategy.
Tom Cleveland has had an extensive career in the international payments industry with over 30 years of experience in executive management, corporate governance and business development. Tom served as CFO for various Visa International entities from 1980 until 1999, retiring with the title of Group EVP and Treasurer. Tom currently works as a market analyst for Forex Traders, an online resource for the foreign exchange market.
[…] developers also point out that the Icelandic krona has lost 99.5% of its value since 1960 relative to the US […]
Axel wrote :
” >” If the icesave [III] deal is rejected, Johanna will be forced to call for elections, i suppose she could decide to sit anyway no matter what, like Gaddaffi is doing, but i find that very unlikely, ”
I think you have too high opinion of Jóhanna. If she and Steingrímur J had any honour they would have resigned when iceSave II was defeated in referendum.
It will be break up of the coalition that will cause this uselss Red-Green governemnt to have to call new elections.
She will keep going until bitter end of it. ”
Sad but true as expected Axel. Col Gaddafi has gone before Jóhanna.
latest discussions about all this overall thread on ISK here :
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2011/08/16/11-cases-of-iceland-krona-exchange-law-breaches-under-investigation/
*For uninformed like Peter London
I did write :
> “Currency controls extended until 2015 ?
> This politicans are out of they tiny minds. ”
For uniformed like Peter London that is always going on about the onshore vs off shore value of Icelandic crowns.. and that rates we do get is only done with IMF support money.
The Icelandic Economic Situation Status Report does do good job putting all facts into one convenient place. Editor Björn Thor Arnarson has done good job.
On p. 22 it does show graph of ” onshore ” vs ” offshore ” Krona rates.
p. 50 : ” On October 19th 2010 the Governor of the Central bank said that the exchange rate stabilized in the second half of 2009 with no supporting intervention since early November 2009. In 2010 the exchange rate has appreciated by 13% in trade-weighted terms, again without any supporting intervention. ”
So, no IMF money or other money has been spent on supporting Krona since then. Its been actual market based trades of people wanting to buy Krona and sell us EUR USD GBP etc.
+http://www.vi.is/english/status-report/ 2011.04.15 Iceland Chamber of Commerce – Status Report_1820127738.pdf
Also On p. 49 it does remind of the bilateral swap with China 3.5billion CNY/66billion ISK three years maturity and extended if both agree.
Money comes into Iceland and never leaves again.
The “emergency law” introduced in Iceland guarantees just that.
21 century smart theft, think about it.
The good life at the expense of thousands of families in 119 countries.
Correct:
it should say in the other comment:
I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT…
and
YOU WONT SEE ANY INVESTORS WILLING TO PUT THEIR MONEY IN ICELAND AGAIN
The whole icelandic nation danced around the fire of false prosperity their politicians and bankers created and everyone participated of the economic orgy and material feast, from the teenagers without jobs or education driving mercedez benz and buying nice apartments to the grandmas on their shoping raids to the malls of america in Minneapolis, also the businessmen did their part buying this and that shop in other countries and the Icelandic national TV showing all that and proclaiming WE ARE THE RICHEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD!!! So they got even more crazy in this materialist madness of BORROWING AND BORROWING SPENDING AND SPENDING AND NOT SAVING A SINGLE PENNY… AND NOW THAT THE PARTY IS OVER, THE FIRE IS OFF AND NO MORE FOREIGN MONEY IS COMING TO BE THROWN IN THE PILE OF FIRE OF THE ICELANDIC FRAUDULENT ECONOMIC PROGRESS, NOW MANY ICELANDERS SAY: ME??? I HAVE NOTHING TO DO THAT, I VOTED THIS PEOPLE TO BE THERE IN THE GOVERNMENT FOR SO MANY YEARS, BUT I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE OF ELECTING THEM, THEY BRETRAYED US…
PLEASE ICELANDERS, HAVE SOME SENSE OF DIGNITY AND A MINIMUM OF MORAL AND HONESTY AND PAY.. BECAUSE IF YOU DONT PAY THE REST OF THE WORLD WILL NEVER TRUST THIS COUNTRY AGAIN AND YOU WANT SEE ANY INVESTORS WILLING TO PUT THEIR MONEYS IN ICELAND…
THAT WOULD MEAN POVERTY AND HARNESS FOREVER BECAUSE ONLY FISH CANNOT MAINTAIN THE STYLE OF LIFE AND SPENDING YOU WISH HAD NOW LIKE IN THE OLD DAYS.
>Not true. The price of gold is far more volatile than major currencies, halving or doubling in price within a short timespan.
Against what? You can NOT weigh it against a fiat currency in terms of its value; weigh it against other commodities like oil and foods.
Otherwise, show me your sources.
“The prices are always more stable than the printed money, which swings even more.”
Not true. The price of gold is far more volatile than major currencies, halving or doubling in price within a short timespan.
>As a commodity, the price of gold can fluctuate massively. Few would like the idea of giving their life savings to the bank and finding that they’re worth less 10 years later.
Weigh it against something THAT IS NOT A FIAT CURRENCY. The prices are always more stable than the printed money, which swings even more.
@ anonymous1, Investing is a total gamble; you have no idea if you’re going to win or not. The people who invested in the banks, currency and such lost, and those bet against it won. Deal with the lose, your ignorant investment decision is NOT MY PROBLEM.
But I do agree on your second comment, ironically.
New Buchheit interview on Silfur Egils:
http://www.ruv.is/upptokur/vidtol/lee-buchheit
(Changes to English)
>Maybe it is time for a new “banking” system where your money is stored physically as gold reserves and no bankers, governments or politicians can get their hands on it.
As a commodity, the price of gold can fluctuate massively. Few would like the idea of giving their life savings to the bank and finding that they’re worth less 10 years later.
Maybe it is time for a new “banking” system where your money is stored physically as gold reserves and no bankers, governments or politicians can get their hands on it.
No big bonusses for Bank CEO(s) coming from our savings.
No schemes to defraud the consumers.
Straight forward, you pay a small banking monthly fee, but your money will always be yours until you spend it?
Back to banking basics.
@Bjarni – There is no need for banks if we can´t thrust them. Running a bank is not particulary difficult. It is when greed is the basic rule that banks gets in to trouble, either it is greedy bankers, greedy politicans or greedy customers/tax payers – they are genetic quite similar.
To Bromley86 & Oystein-Norway,
Thanks for the vote, but I don’t think I would be very good President. I am way to much of a detail person to be ever able to function as a politician. :-)
Regarding the deposit guarantee increase, I think I would definitely agree with you there. I think in general deposit guarantees are probably necessary to have a effective banking system, that doesn’t crash every time there is a problem.
But, and this is important, most guarantee schemes gives people a false security, since almost any country would have NO CHANCE paying for all the deposit losses, in case of a banking crash. The taxpayers can NEVER have enough money, to pay out ALL the depositors.
The only thing that could potentially keep the system afloat would be to offer only limited guarantee, that helps depositors with part of their losses, while not to put too much burden on the banking system or the government.
This is how the current European system was organized, by offering the uniform 20K Euros guarantee. It worked mostly ok, except of course in Iceland, where even the 20K was too high.
By raising the guarantee, it may look like now everyone is safer. But, if we have another banking crash, which could easily happen this summer, then it is definitely very possible that some of the countries involved. They will not be able to cope with the deposit guarantee payments, even if they are only 20K per depositor.
So raising the limit above 20K could turn out to be very dangerous and have far-reaching consequences later on.
@Peter. Sorry, but membership and voting would not help in this case.
“support the Norwegian people in their fight against the EU on the Implement of the new directive on bank deposit scheme?”
Ah, the problem with not being a voting member of the EU.
@Bjarni – when you become president – as Bromley suggest – would you then support the Norwegian people in their fight against the EU on the Implement of the new directive on bank deposit scheme? As you know, we have an issue there, and do you think if eventually would be an alternative to bring it to the EFTA court?
Ah, looks like there’s finally some traction on the Ragnar Hall issue:
http://www.visir.is/domur-um-heildsolulan-fellur-i-dag/article/2011704019913
Again, Bjarni for President! Or, at the least, Minister of Information.
To Bromley86,
I agree, that there will definitely be some economic damage for Iceland if the Icesave III is voted down. The damage can potential include for example:
1. Delay of assistance from EU/ECB/Nordic/IMF
2. Possible economic sanctions by the EU
3. Continuing forex restrictions
4. Higher interest rates on loans/bonds
5. Possible derailing of the EU Application
6. Possible sovereign default
7. Damage to the reputation of Iceland
Large part of the debate raging now in Iceland, is how much this damage will potentially be, and how likely each one is to happen. If Icesave III is on the other hand accepted, then most of these damages will probably become a non-issue. But these potential damages to Iceland are not the whole story.
If Icesave III is accepted, then the main issue will become how the various issues regarding Landsbanki bankruptcy play out.
The courts in Iceland will still have to decide a) whether the Ragnar Hall issue will be handled, b) who gets what priority in the bankruptcy payouts, c) whether there will be any further delays in the payouts (resulting in higher interest payments), and finally d) whether the new Landsbanki will be able to make all the payments of the NBI bond in 2014-2018 (approximately 1/3 of the total expected Icesave payments).
If the Icesave III agreements are NOT accepted, the story will be somewhat different. Now it will possibly involve instead the EU/EFTA/ESA legal process, which we have already discussed in detail here. The result will determine the legimitacy of the emergency laws, and whether the Icelandic goverment actions violated the equality rules of EU.
When the cases have gone all the way up to the Icelandic supreme court, we will finally know if we have to pay a) nothing, b) less, c) equal, or d) more than we would have to pay through the original Icesave agreement.
The people that are for the Icesave agreements, tend to concentrate on the potential damage to Iceland, and think the final payments will possibly be considerably larger if the issue goes to court. They are generally quite optimistic on the economic factors behind the agreements, and believe that Iceland has the ability to pay.
The people that are against the agreements, on the other hand, tend to think the legal case is good for Iceland, and typically minimize the potential for some economic damage to Iceland. They also are usually more sceptic on the economic factors and believe that the agreements will possibly drive Iceland towards sovereign default.
I myself am currently somewhere in the middle :-)
I believe that the legal case for Iceland is relatively sound, that the economic factors are little bit too optimistic (especially regarding the speed of LBI payouts and the NBI bond). But at the same time, I belive there could be some real economic damage from voting the agreements down. And in the end, I belive morally we should share at least some of the costs in this whole fiasco, even if we are not legally required to do so.
This is one of those rare moments where Fisy & I agree :) . The following Lee Buchheit vid should be required viewing for everyone voting in the referendum – he sets out the issues nicely and tries to inform rather than dictate policy:
http://www.visir.is/buchheit-um-nyju-samningana—myndband/article/2011110229682
>if we refuse we will possibly get the same anyway, but we get to kick them in the n*ts first.
This is not the case. If you refuse, you possibly get to avoid the debt and you possibly incur a higher interest rate. >6% has been mentioned, but that’s only if the court sets it as part of the judgment. If they don’t rule on the rate (and I assume that it’s beyond their scope, but I may be wrong), then you’re talking whatever fantasy figure the market sets.
Either way, there is a probability of economic damage if Icesave III is voted down in the period between the vote and the judgment.
So the situations facing Iceland before the vote and after a court loss are different.
Wow Fisy?
Credit is not based on your willingness to pay, credit is based on your ability to pay the more debt you get compared to your resources the less likely is that you get credit. Forign Investors and lenders are not stupid enough to belive the tale the goberment has sold to ignorant people, that if we accept Icesave we will be showing that “ICElANDERS PAY THEIR DEBTS” they don´t care if “Icelanders pay their debts” what they care is if they have the ability to pay, accepting Icesave will show Investors that Iceland will not be able to take mor debt an pay it, so NOBODY will lend more money to Iceland or invest in it, if anything they will be willing to buy us off at bargain prices once everything is worth even less that it is worth now.
If we bend over on this deal, like the Irish did in their dealings with the EU and IMF we will suffer the same fate as they did,
austerity and misery for a long time, if we refuse we will possibly get the same anyway, but we get to kick them in the n*ts first.
This is not our debt, there is no state guarantee, and if we go to court and win we will set a example for other nations to follow regarding the responsiblity of taxpayers in general for the debts of failed or robbed banks.
It may also raise some questions about savings guarantees and how well EU law framework works.
>i would hardly expect Johanna to pull a magic wand out of her a** and wave it around making all problems disapear,
IceSave III is a reasonable deal.
IceSave I and II were horrible but parliament and our president did their job and stopped I and II.
Jóhanna ” there is no plan B ” Sigurðardóttir and traitor to his supporters Steingrímur J. Sigfússon if had been trusted with htey slim parliamentary majoirity only IceSave I or IceSave II would have been passed !!!
But luckily the checks and balances of our current constitution did work.
Jóhanna and Steingrímur are out of ideas ( not that they did have any good ones to begin with ).
It is important to under stand that the reason things did not go even worse to hell in this country over last 2 years was because in spite of Jóhanna and Steingrímur. Majority of their idiot ideas were constrained by the need for IMF loans luckily for normal tax payer of Iceland.
Steingrímur J. does deserve his credit for persuading IMF stop listening to countries in EU that did want loans stopped until IceSave I and II were passed. But that is it.
Currency controls extended until 2015 ?
This politicans are out of they tiny minds.
The insanity of this soggy idea paper from the Seðlabanki as government policy is clear.
It is ignoring as usual for this useless Red – Green government the things to do to actually get counrty moving. Joining the EU was they only idea.
There was nothing else there in the heads of this administration. They do fire the compentent ones such as the two unpolitical ministers and probably Katrín Júlíusdóttir nearly the last competent one left in whole bunch is next .
>i think we will be even worse off after accepting this debt.
>The proper way to settle this is in court.
I was for to court with Ice Save I and II as any reader of this IceNews will know. That is because those deals were so horrible and unequitible that it would have been true slavery.
Maybe you did not watch two interviews+ ++ with Lee Buichet but he did lead negotiations and although the British and Dutch negotiation teams were exactly the same he did push forward the various points that our parliament did raise and it is clear that the IceSave III deal is reasonable.
The reason I will vote for IceSave III and recommend others do it too in referendum is that we must show world that Icelanders pay they debts.
This is about an unfair obligation in a strict legal sense, but we have practical issue here. That is the need to borrow money NOT from the IMF but normal markets this year as many government loans are due.
If we do accept this IceSave III deal then the markets that we must borrow from will trust Icelandic state and people and loan to us. We now look like far better bet than loaning to governments like that of Ireland or Spain.
If we dont every thing that the govnerment spents on must be cut even more.
Now that IceSave III debt is rasonable and will not put a burden on tax payer that is unreasonable it will not hurt us like Icesave I and II we need to accept it.
+https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/12/06/icesave-draft-details-come-to-light/#comment-454741
++https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2011/02/21/icesave-puts-icelandic-president-in-world-spotlight-once-again/#comment-546451 Both interview and conference with Lee C. Buchheit who did the negotiating as team leader for ICelandic state and guarantee fund, of IceSave III
Fisy
“The thing that IceSave III being passed does do is show that Icelanders do pay they debts”
We do pay our debts, if you want to pay Bjorgolfs debts as well, go right ahead.
It will be interesting to see how the next elections will turn out, given that all 4 major parties have no trust, the IP rap sheet is longer than 50cent’s
Could have not said it better.
I do pay my debts, but Icesave is not my debt, but they are playing a very good nationalistic propaganda campaign, trying to morally transfer the debts of few privats into the “debts of Iceland”.
>There is no plan B, we dont have one any more than the EU does,
Of course the EU (or, more accurately, the UK/NL) has a plan B. Plan A is to negotiate out of court, plan B is to take it to court and plan C is to absorb the loss if the court case goes against them.
It’s impossible to assign probabilities to each of these stages, but the worst-case downside is minimal when divided by 80m people.
[…] por Tom Cleveland, analista de mercado de câmbio Publicado a 27 de Março de 2011 no site […]
Bromley said
“So what’s your Plan B if (not when) Iceland loses the court case?”
There is no plan B, we dont have one any more than the EU does,
if we would accept responsibility for this icesave adventure of the Bjorgolfs i would hardly expect Johanna to pull a magic wand out of her a** and wave it around making all problems disapear,
i think we will be even worse off after accepting this debt.
The proper way to settle this is in court.
Peter
“But you are quite happy to allow the state to take over the debts of Icelandic savers but not other EU members savers?”
The icelandic savers were rescued to save the economy who had been hit by one of the biggest bankruptcys in world history,
and with the icelandic Krona, the overwhelming majority of the freshly printed Kronur dished out that day belonged to a small group of people.
The day after Glitnir fell, Bjorgolfur Thor got a 27,2 bn isk loan from Landsbanki in foreign currency, all of this money was icesave money, much or all of the icesave loot was used to prop up Bjorgolfs business adventures and Landsbanki was left for dead, i would estimate the time of death around 2006.
Fisy
“The thing that IceSave III being passed does do is show that Icelanders do pay they debts”
We do pay our debts, if you want to pay Bjorgolfs debts as well, go right ahead.
It will be interesting to see how the next elections will turn out, given that all 4 major parties have no trust, the IP rap sheet is longer than 50cent’s
http://stebbifr.blog.is/blog/stebbifr/image/897621/
anonymous1
“And when the big investors win, so will I, the honest and small investor”
There is actually a war going on between big investors and bankers,
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,752712,00.html
and in a war there is always collateral damage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZExny-Bhck
To the following,
Newbeen, ROMaster2, “anonymous”, fisy, bromley86, axel, easy.
Iceland will have to face reality and pay up what it owes the investors which it defrauded out of Billions of Euros and Dollars.
Where is this money Iceland? what happened to your Bank guarantees?
What happened to the audit trails and risk analysis in your Banks?
Does Iceland not have forensics people and auditors?
In my humble opinion, the might and power of some of the International Banks and some very big investors is a hundred times more powerful than the whole of Iceland and your Government.
These people will in the end get their money back.
And when the big investors win, so will I, the honest and small investor.
Maybe big European countries will eventually run out of patience and take more direct action to take back what was stolen from their Banks and Investors.
Watch this space Iceland.
Axel did write :
> “i will not pay the debts Bjorgolfur and his gang have racked up,
if i were to accept this it would save the Bjorgolfs necks, and thats not what i want to be a part of. ”
The thing that IceSave III being passed does do is show that Icelanders do pay they debts
Dont cut off nose to spite our face. Let the special prsecutor do what needs to be done and if Björgólfur Thor and Björgólfur Snr and other so called outvasion vikings did wrong they will be charged.
>” If the icesave deal is rejected, Johanna will be forced to call for elections, i suppose she could decide to sit anyway no matter what, like Gaddaffi is doing, but i find that very unlikely, ”
I think you have too high opinion of Jóhanna. If she and Steingrímur J had any honour they would have resigned when iceSave II was defeated in referendum.
It will be break up of the coalition that will cause this uselss Red-Green governemnt to have to call new elections.
She will keep going until bitter end of it.
Polls mean nothing even if people dont want the EU they will force it down on us, just like Icesave, they are publishing polls and polls wher apparently more than 54% want to vote yes on Icesave, still I have not met more than 5 people that acctually will vote yes. But if you say a lie loud enough and long enough people will belive it.
“The people of any state should never be forced to take over the debts of a private bank, even if Brown forced British taxpayers to pay for this it does not make Icelandic people responsible.
Two wrongs dont make a right.”
But you are quite happy to allow the state to take over the debts of Icelandic savers but not other EU members savers?
This is why the EU should leave EEA.
>i personaly will vote NO
That’s fine Axel. As Fisy always implies, it’s pretty insane not to have a Plan B. So what’s your Plan B if (not when) Iceland loses the court case? Because there is no requirement for the UK/NL to lend to Iceland at the rate Buchheit negotiated.
I believe we will reject the Icesave law, i personaly will vote NO,
i will not pay the debts Bjorgolfur and his gang have racked up,
if i were to accept this it would save the Bjorgolfs necks, and thats not what i want to be a part of.
This is one reason, another reason is how this matter has been handled.
The terrorist laws, the threats and attacks, secrecy and lies.
The people of any state should never be forced to take over the debts of a private bank, even if Brown forced British taxpayers to pay for this it does not make Icelandic people responsible.
Two wrongs dont make a right.
It will be very difficult for Johanna and co to fix this referendum as i believe they did with the constitution commitee “card board box” elections, if they were to try and it would backfire it could destroy the SD party, send some people to prison and cause some civil unrest that might escalate very quickly into something that could destroy the old power elite, the 4-party.
If the icesave deal is rejected, Johanna will be forced to call for elections, i suppose she could decide to sit anyway no matter what, like Gaddaffi is doing, but i find that very unlikely,
she will try to shove a new constitution, written by her EU buddys down our throats at the same time as the elections are held, i belive Icelanders will defend the current constitution.
The comittee, or the remains of it dont have a leg to stand on, after the elections were found to be illegal by the High Court,
So everything they dish out will go the same way as the elections did, down the tubes.
There is absolutely no way Iceland will join the EU.
It remains to be seen if the assets of Landsbanki will cover the depositors guarantee, some how i doubt that.
Peter London write :
” Which exchange rate are they talking about? the real rate or the artificial rate set by the Icelandic politburo? ”
Now that is at last an accurate descriptiom from you Peter, of the govening style of Jóhanna ” there is no Plan B ” Sigurðardóttir. Centralizing power is her government forte — they want to centralize it so much they want it centralized out of country and across the sea to the EU commission.
Unfortunately they have this problem, Jóhanna and the EFTA-phobes they do — that problem is the Icelandic tax payer and voters who do NOT want any thing closer to do with EU.
They are happy to be in EFTA dealing with EFTA Suiveliance Authority and EFTA court.
> ” Until the capital controls are removed Ice lands currency is effectively worthless. ”
Almost right ! This is best post you have made for some years here at IceNews I congratulate you Peter.
In fact what think you were trying to say is that ” Until the capital controls are removed Ice lands currency is effectively not able to be valued by the market and with capital controls in place investors cant put their money into investments that Icelandic poeple want them to come into . ”
Now on that you and me we agree !
*In new opinion poll published March 17, 2011 in business newspaper Viðskiptablaðið. 55.7 percent oppose EU membership while 30 percent favour the step. 14.2 percent are uncertain. ( Usually the business people are FOR EU member ship. )
>Is not the first time I have the feeling icenews is doing propaganda, always with this kind of “news”, trying to make the EURO look like the holy savior.
What the hell are you talking about? That article made no case (either directly or obliquely) for Iceland joining the euro. It merely refers to a “recent” report stating blah blah.
I say “recent” because the report was actually written back in 2004! Surely then it is only coincidence that Wiki gives exactly this quote in a context where it might reasonably be assumed to be a recent report? :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_kr%C3%B3na#Iceland_and_the_euro
The link to that 2004 report:
http://www.sedlabanki.is/uploads/files/WP-26.pdf
That’s not the only factual inaccuracy. C-.
I was nodding head on most things but then this two howler did come before my eyes:
” the possibility of joining the European Union and securing the broad security that the euro offers has gained wider support. ”
No it hasnt. Support against joining EU and EURO is a high as ever been, not that I am against the EURO or any other currency for Iceland in principles but its not coming to Iceland if the price is to join EU.
In new opinion poll published March 17, 2001 in business newspaper Viðskiptablaðið. 55.7 percent oppose EU membership while 30 percent favour the step. 14.2 percent are uncertain. ( Usually the business people are FOR EU member ship. )
Capacent published their general people of Iceland poll result on March 10 where opposition to EU membership at 50.5 percent, support to join at 31.4 percent and the uncertain at 18 percent. ”
( Capacent July 2010 before that did put opposition at 60 percent, support to join at 26 percent and those uncertain at 14 percent. )
Since August 2009 all of the polls show majoity against and only one third in favour which is basically just Social Democrat supporters who are rapid EU at any cost, and usually 20 – max imum 30 % in elections and few others.
” A recent economic study on the issue reported that, “The Icelandic krona acts as a barrier to international trade, and that by joining the EU and adopting the euro, Icelandic trade could increase by 60 percent. ”
That unamed study wasnt just happen to be the one quote by that expert in national and international finances who is such genius in every thing he does+ — Árni Páll Árnason ?
i.e that soggy column he did write in Fréttablaðið Dec 27th 2010 where he foolishly claimed that keeping the krona would mean a return to simpler trade and sustained exchange restrictions but with out actually explaining why that is.
https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/12/27/trade-minister-iceland-must-choose-between-euro-and-currency-controls/
Probably because he has been told to say it by EU commission friends of his the rings he likes to kiss over there in Bruseels or the Barleymonster, who are keeping that nice seat as EU commissioner for him warm for when ” Iceland joins the EU “.
That will happen in a cold day in hell so sorry Árni Páll you soon will have to work for a living to get nice salary like that an expenses when you are boot out of parliament here with no EU member ship.
Stop lying to the people in EU commission that your party can bring Icelanders into EU.
+https://www.icenews.is/index.php/2011/02/09/ive-had-enough-thanks-very-much/ he is so popular that some one did try and help him to leave after his appalling performance recently over care home issue and well nearly every thing in his official positions he does.
At this rate of recovery,
Germany, China and the USA watch out, you have comptetition coming up.
Correction people, what the original anonymous would say is,
Please do not allow Iceland into the EURO zone.
Please put the issue to the vote in the EURO zone just as they vote for everything in Iceland? for example so as not pay or delay the payment process to the Bond Holders?
If Iceland is allowed into th EURO zone then I will return my EURO zone citizenship and passport.
These people have surprised everyone with the collapse of the Banking sector in Iceland. Over two years and five months and no-one seems to know where the many double digit Billions of Euros and Dollars dissapeared to? no audit trail or risk analysis?
This is very serious money.
Many thousands of families lost their life savings in guaranteed, yes guaranteed Bank Bonds in Iceland.
From,
The one and only Anonymous!
Is not the first time I have the feeling icenews is doing propaganda, always with this kind of “news”, trying to make the EURO look like the holy savior.
Well is not, beside the fact, if they get in to the EURO zone is one more country to be Angela Merkel bitch.
Which exchange rate are they talking about? the real rate or the artificial rate set by the Icelandic politburo?
Until the capital controls are removed Ice lands currency is effectively worthless.
Weight the krona against gold, not fiat currencies, to determine the recovery. The USD and EUR are dipping in their value, so don’t use them.
This is a message to all the people of Iceland.
If you want your country to remain a sovereign independent nation, then there are two things you must stick to.
#1: Do NOT, i repeat, do NOT disband your national currency.
#2: Do NOT join the European Union, or else your country will suffer the same fate as Greece, Ireland and probably Portugal, by being reduced to a protectorate.