Latin Scholarship, FT Alphaville and Promissory Notes

Here is the FT Alphaville take on the promissory notes saga, along with a nice selection of Latin expressions.

13 replies on “Latin Scholarship, FT Alphaville and Promissory Notes”

Jack Charlton’s great motto deserves to be rendered in Latin: Put ’em under pressure!


And have decisions been made on this or not? Did something happen while we were all downloading the 1b pages of Mahon?

Ollie Rehn’s faustian pacta sunt servanda should not be enforced on those who are ‘Non compos mentis’ (and we have ample evidence of madness).


Ireland chasing 107 vs Die Nederlands in Dubai

William Porterfield ‘catch of the tournament’ – a two and a half reverse sommersault …. (thought I spotted Richard Tol toggin out at 9 but early in the morning …

@all at all

‘The ECB wants to reduce IBRC’s reliance on highly risky emergency loans to fund its operations. While the restructuring scheme would achieve that, Bundesbank chief Jens Weidman and German ECB executive member Jörg Asmussen are sceptical.’

Jens must still sore at his little GUBU on the ELA wha! He shudda gone to speksavers or .. er .. read Whelan on the blog. Tuff Sinn! I’m confident that Jörg the pragmatist will come round eventually …

‘THE EUROPEAN Central Bank has asked the Government to refine its plan to avert a €3.06 billion cash payment next week to the former Anglo Irish Bank.

The bank’s request comes amid indications that its chief Mario Draghi is warming to the notion of an initiative to restructure Anglo’s wider debt, now managed by Irish Bank Resolution Corporation.’

Refine! Send for John Teeling – he wants to refine at least 80 billion.

Back to Beesley ….

…. wonder does Richard Tol bowl?

..though on reflection and with some guidance from a learned colleague..

ei ponendi sunt

is more elegant.

I know it is bad taste to make a serious comment on this thread, but that won’t stop me.

I agree totally with the explanation given in the FT opener but I demur at the fulsome endorsement of Karl’s paper.

Let me say that everything I know about this subject is derived from Karl’s various presentations, and I think I do have a c.95% understanding by now.

However, others, much cleverer than I, have misinterpreted Karl’s explanation, and understandably so. In particular, Karl more or less states that central banks going bust doesn’t really matter, this naturally leads some people to argue that if we tear up the PNs, all that happens is that the CBI goes bust, and sure that doesn’t matter.

Let us also consider the statement that ELA is a CBI risk not an ECB risk. Yes, formally so. But if ELA is worthless the CBI goes bust. Yes the first losers are the equity holders, in effect the Irish taxpayer. But at these levels of ELA the really exposed constituency are the creditors. And who are they? Substantially the ECB through the Target2 system.

Comments are closed.