Modern Greece: Decadence Unbound
Μαρ 9th, 2008 | Ναπολέων Λιναρδάτος| Κατηγορία: English, Ελλάδα |
Email This Post
|
Print This Post
|
by Napoleon Linardatos1
The Egnatia Motorway across the north of Greece is one of the ‘largest road construction projects in Europe’. Six hundred and eighty kilometers long and 24.5 meters wide, it requires the construction of 1,650 bridges, 74 tunnels, 50 interchanges, 43 river and 11 railway crossings. A modern Greek marvel in the making where at least half of the costs are financed by the European Union. In Greece today, a plethora of public works are completed or in progress thanks to the generous aid of the EU. Billions in funds have been transferred southward to the EU’s only Balkan state member since its entry in 1981. By the 1990s, that assistance averaged about 3.5 per cent of GDP yearly. To put it in perspective, it would be as if the U.K. received around $87 billion from the EU in 2007. For almost a quarter of a century, Greece has been the beneficiary of a European willingness to become one cohesive whole, but despite all the bridges, ports, tunnels, roads and agricultural subsidies, Greece remains as far away from the European core as it did when it joined the Union.
There is always some optimism when a grand public project is announced. The Athens underground was supposed to solve the city’s traffic problems, the Olympic Games were supposed to revitalize tourism, and the Egnatia Motorway is supposed to make Greece the economic tiger of the region. There are pronouncements of great hopes when a project is planned, followed by more pronouncements when the project begins, more pronouncements during the construction and a couple more at the opening or numerous openings. Finally pessimism seems to overtake everything. These public projects are like miracles without miraculous ends. The great leap forward is always postponed for a later day.
European assistance has been to Greece what oil has been to the Middle East; the lifeline of poor government, mischievous habits and exasperated hopes. Kathimerini, an authoritative daily newspaper, reported what the cotton subsidies have done in agriculture: there was cotton production of good quality in Greece, cultivated efficiently in the most suitable fields at a good price – now farmers receive subsidies that are up to three times the market price of cotton. Cultivation of cotton has expanded in millions of unsuitable acres. Excess well drilling has drained the valleys of their underground water, and pollution from the senseless use of fertilizers has been linked to serious health problems in the adjacent residential areas. This year the cotton farmers are to receive 690 million euros in subsidies. Since this amount is based on an agreed-upon quantity to be produced, farmers will produce more and attempt to get the national government to make up the difference. The common practice is to block major motorways with tractors; then the negotiations start.
Farming is associated with independence and self-sufficiency but the subsidy farmer is a new breed. He is entirely dependent on the political process, which he thoroughly cultivates, and his connection to the land is shallow. If the farmers are not out fighting for their ‘rights,’ then someone else will be: The teachers who do not want to be evaluated, contract civil servants who want to become permanent, policemen who do not want to police, students who do not want to learn. The list is long, reflecting a Greece cut to pieces with each faction trying to impose its absurd demands on the rest. The pre-eminent action of civic participation is to demand employment in the public sector, or to defend retirement at 50, to illegally build houses in the forest, or to fully exploit one’s state-sanctioned monopoly.
For the local intellectual class, this is the triumph of politics. For decades now, progressive ideas are the only ideas in Greece. They have been so thoroughly instilled in everyone, from the first grader up to the Prime Minister, that they permeate everything. Any movement in a different direction is anti-social, reactionary, liberal, or an Anglo-Saxon barbarity. Under the tutelage of progressive ideas there are privileges without duties, advantages without merit, crime without punishment and hard work with no reward. Can a society flourish under these conditions? What is the character and the purpose of the nation? Important questions, but in Greece they were decided years ago. The only questions remaining are who gets what, when and how. Not long ago I watched a TV report about an explosion in an illegal propane station in a residential area in Athens. The illegal market for fuel is thriving thanks to exorbitant taxes. The journalist reporting the incident mentioned the illegality without a shred of emphasis. It became worse when the owner of the station talked to the camera. I could not discern any expression of shame. She had just broken the law in a dramatic way and in the process put the lives of her neighbours in danger. None of this seemed to matter to her or anyone else. It was the noise and the spectacle of explosion that counted the most; a story reported for its cinematic value, where causes and consequences are unimportant.
This is the relativism of everyday life. The most important thing is what you can get away with. It is the tragedy of the commons writ large; a public sphere where the private and the public meet under the most disadvantageous terms. Someone would expect that decades of policies intended to foster social cohesion would produce a society of benevolent people. Instead we have narrow-minded, cynical, egotists gyrating in alternate states of self-satisfaction and self-hatred.
It is not surprising that between 1991 and 2001 deaths exceeded births by more than 40,000. The rearing of a family involves an unconditional commitment to another person, an undertaking whose emotional and financial costs are obvious and direct while many of the benefits are spread out in society and over time. A family man would say that nothing could compensate for the joys of family, but in a society where the individual perceives himself as the centre of the universe committed to the proposition that all joys and pleasures are equal, the family becomes just another choice among others. When duty and virtue have become antiquated terms that one only finds in books no one reads, we have a declining society entangled in the most petty and ephemeral affairs. Unburdened by the past, unimpeded from posterity, there stands the modern Greek: a person free of any civic and moral duties. The coming of the welfare state brought the monetarization of civic responsibilities and gradually degraded them to special interest sloganeering.
Unlike any other foe the Greeks faced in the past, the one that they face now has no armies laying siege to any walls. There are no occupiers trying to impose their customs and language, no military junta to imprison, torture or banish anyone. It is a foe that does not challenge their strengths but rather assuages their weaknesses. Instead of attacking the culture, it merely trivializes it by draining it of any transcendent qualities. There is no need to assail honesty, merit and hard work; they have simply been rendered irrelevant.
A commentator recently disclosed the slogan that the army is planning to use to attract recruits: ‘A career with the security of the public sector.’ In Pericles’ funeral oration you find no such catch phrase. Pericles talks of ‘the spirit in which we faced our trials and also our constitution and the way of life which has made us great,’ of a city that is ‘open to the world’ and of ‘men with a spirit of adventure, men who knew their duty, men who were ashamed to fall below a certain standard.’ He reminded Athenians that ‘happiness depends on being free, and freedom depends on being courageous.’ In such a city, the soldiers met danger ‘with a natural rather than state-induced courage.’ And they did so not because they knew they would return to some secure government job, but because they wanted to preserve a city they were proud of, a city that ‘future ages will wonder at’.
In the many narrow dirty sidewalks planted against ancient ruins, the many cars that flock the busy, gray streets of Athens, the cold boxy apartment buildings, the dim image of a city emerges, a gap reveals itself. A distance greater than the passage of time, of what we were once and the way we live now.
————————————————————
Notes:
- This article was originally published in The Salisbury Review [↩]
When money pours over a country like manna from the sky, its citizens rationally choose to focus their effort on being the recipients of the manna rather than engaging in the truly productive work that will propel them into firmly rooted prosperity.
This is exactly the reason why the easy money of oil has been so disastrous for the middle east.
In addition, Greece has had another source of relatively easy money (although admittedly not as easy as EU grants): Turism. Tourism to a large extent has also had the same perverse effect on Greece’s economy. It has provided Greece with relatively easy money to support an economic system and mentality that should have long ago had the same fate as the Soviet Union.
I also agree with most of your analysis except for the point that you make,
“…The pre-eminent action of civic participation is to… illegally build houses in the forest…”
about Greeks and their relationship with forests and property rights.
Many people in many countries build into and enjoy the forests, legally. While it is true that many Greeks try to illegally gain ownership to public often forested, property, it is also true that many also hold leggittimate plots of forested private land. What you mention as “action (to petition)… to illegally build houses in the forest” is often just simple demand of certain leggitimate minority of Greek property owners for their property rights to be respected by the Greek public majority. Amongst the illegitimate “katapatites” there are also leggitimate owners who are just defending themselves against a public majority that wants to essentially exproptiate their land for public gain, just because they are the majority and they can thus force laws on a minority.
I will repost something that my wife posted on a different website regarding this same matter (with her permission):
—————————–
“ I am a lawyer of Greek origin living in the state of Illinois.
To those of you reading the facts presented here from an American perspective, I would like to add the following.
Greece is not only one of a few countries that does not have a forest registry, Greece is also one of a few countries where the laws of the state make it illegal for any citizen, Greek or foreign, to live in a wooded area or any land that has any trees on it and often even schrubs. Apparently Greeks feel that this prohibition is so essential to their national identity that they have not only passed this prohibition onto a variety of laws but have also included it as a separate article on their constitution!
Now, to me, being a lawyer in America, who I purchased a 2 acre wooded lot in Illinois, built my house, and now live on it, just like many of my neighbors, this seems absurd.
Also, within the spirit of the Greek so called “forest laws” and the constitution, I mentioned above, Greeks also universally practice what in the US would be reffered to as “regulatory taking”, that is, the confiscation of private land without compensation by explicitly claiming that since an individual’s land has trees on it, the owner is prohibited from using his land in any way. Thus the land, by forest service decree, is rendered completely useless to the owner and just serves the public purpose of providing natural view for neighbors, travellers, hikers and city dwellers who live at a density of 19,000 inhabitants per square kilometer of land (land that once was itself forest, the irony is).
This law not only enjoys considerable public support but it is also currently undergoing considerable expansion to impose regulatory taking not only on land with trees but on any land that the public considers as having natural beauty or any other desirable feature to the public, the public being represented by the zoning bureucrats, an emerging breed of public employees in Greece with their own union.
This is a typical case of what can happen to any land owner in Greece. Somebody inherrits a piece of land from his parents or purchases a piece of land (even as a foreigner) to someday build a house for himself or his kids. At any arbitrary point in time, say close to the time where the owner has finally collected enough money to finally put his building plans into action, the state (that is the public) comes and declares the land “zone of natural beauty” a designation that carries with it the complete prohibition of any building on the land as well as most other uses (sometimes they may allow you to use it as pasture for your goats). The owner is given no compensation and has no recourse since this is now law of the land. Even if the owner is not hit by such zoning condemnation, when the owner wants to eventually build, he has to first have his land examined by the forest service. The forest service comes out to the land and if there are trees on it (sometimes even schrubs are enough) or if trees have ever grown on it (based on aerial photos taken at various times in the past century) then the land is considered forest land and it is not possible to build on it, or use it any other way (in this case you cannot even put your goats to pasture in there – I’m serious! There is a law preventing using land where trees grow from being used as pasture by anybody, including the owner). Of course in this case too the owner is given no compensation either and has no legal recourse aginst the state (that is, against the whim of the public).
I must stress that I am not talking here about a few isolated cases. This is the routine, ongoing practice of the state. The individual has no recourse against the state if he looses his land in this fascion. There are currently over 400.000 appeals against the state for land having being confiscated because trees grow, or grew at some point on it and thus the public demands that these owners surrender their land as being too precious to be left in private hands.
To be fair in this “steal what you can” environment many individuals do the opposite and frivolously stake claim and often eventually acquire title to public land especially land adjacent to large urban areas where land can be quite valuable. However, what would one consider the bigger problem, the few individuals that behave like thieves or a state that officilly behaves like a thief with impunity? How can individuals be expected to follow the law when the state itself (that is the public) acts collectivelly as a thief by taking private land without compensation?
For example, National Parks in Greece are not created by the government buying private land and turning it into a park (as many Americans reading these pages may imagine). National parks in Greece are drawn on a map by a bureaucrat (who represents the public interest, will and whim) somewhere in a government office and then published in the government gazette as a decree. Basically the decree says “We have formed a new national park enclosed by the polygon defined by the following GPS coordinates (table follows) and any owner who had land within this area becomes part of the national park and is prevented from using his land in any way…”. Those that have already developed their land must forfeit any future development (ie. if you want to add as little as a garage to your house on 10 acres you no longer can).
In a democracy (and Greece is a democracy) the laws of the state normally represent the will of the collective, that is, the public, or at least a majority of the public. So when the state operates in this land raiding fascion by confiscating private land it means that at least a majoriry of the public has that same mentality.
There is enough land in Greece for all families to be able to live on one acre or more of land and still keep 95% of the Greek landscape uninhabited (a simple arithmetic calculation shows that). However Greeks insist on living at a density of 19000 inhabitants per square kilometer and are adamant about preventing a farmer with 10000 squre meters of treed land from building a 120 square meter house for his son. No wonder so many people are sitting with match in hand waiting for the right combination of heat draught and wind.
I wrote this comment because those of you hearing these summer’s news about wildfires in Greece and reading these pages from the US, may get the impression that the issue is about some general environmental insensitivity of Greeks. Far from it, it is mostly an issue of property rights (and their violation).”
Το αρχαϊκό πατερναλιστικό μοντέλο που συνδέει την ηθική με την οικονομική ευρωστία και το συμφέρον των ελίτ με το αγαθό, επιτάσσει να σκεφτούμε πως τα λεγόμενα χαμηλά ένστικτα είναι κάτι κοινό σε όλους μας.
Με την καλλιέργεια του χαρακτήρα, υποτίθεται ότι αποκτούμε γνώση του εαυτού και αυτο-έλεγχο. Πρόκειται για αριστοκρατικές αξίες που σχετίζονται με την ανάπτυξη ενός μοντέλου ερμηνείας της διαστρωμάτωσης της κοινωνίας, κατά το οποίο ο καθένας θα δύναται να ξεχωρίζει το “καλό” από το “κακό”, εξασφαλίζοντας τη δυνατότητα της προόδου και της βέλτιστης διακυβέρνησης για όλους.
Σε μεγάλο βαθμό ένα τέτοιο μοντέλο δεν αρκεί για την ερμηνεία της βιοπολιτικής, όπου όσα συμβαίνουν χρήζουν στατιστικών προσεγγίσεων (σα να μελετάς της συμπεριφορά αερίων σε περιορισμένο χώρο), παρά ηθικής αξιολόγησης.
Παρ’ όλ’ αυτά, στην απλή καθημερινή μας ζωή, στο πλαίσιο της κοινωνικής μας “niche”, οι πατερναλιστικές αξίες (και οι εξ’ αυτών απορρέουσες εξιδανικεύσεις της αστικής τάξης, ως το work-ethic των διαμαρτυρομένων και τις ηθικολογίες των αδίστακτων πετρελαιάδων), έχουν ακόμη κάποιο νόημα και γοητεία κατά περίπτωση, δεδομένου ότι μπορούμε και επιθυμούμε συχνά να επικοινωνούμε μεταξύ μας ως πρόσωπα. Το πρόσωπο με αυτή την έννοια δεν είναι φορέας του ονόματος, αλλά πηγή του ονόματος, αυτόφωτο ηθικό υποκείμενο που αποφασίζει ελεύθερα.
Πρόκειται για αξίες που από τον Σωκράτη ως τους Σαμουράϊ και μέχρι το “reserve” που πρέπει να διακρίνει ένα gentleman, αποτελούν σταθερό σημείο αναφοράς των ελίτ για την δημιουργία και σταθεροποίησή τους.
Υπό αυτή την οπτική, υποτίθεται ότι έχουμε όλοι την επιλογή να ασπαστούμε την οδό της αρετής, να γίνουμε έντιμοι και υπεύθυνοι, benevolent/καλόβουλοι πολίτες. Να μην παρεκτρεπόμαστε. Να αυτοπεριορίζουμε τις ορμές και την διάθεσή μας για προσωπική επικράτηση αδιακρίτως κοινωνικού κόστους κ.λπ. Στον δρόμο της αρετής, αυτοσυγκράτηση δεν σημαίνει δειλία, αλλά το ακριβώς αντίθετο. Επομένως, ο ήρεμος, συνεργάσιμος και διαλλακτικός πολίτης θα αποτελούσε πρότυπο, ένα πρότυπο σεμνότητας και ταπεινότητας, μακριά από τις πασαρέλες και την δημοσιότητα, αφοσιωμένος στη δουλειά του.
Όμως, οι σκλάβοι, ήταν εξ’ ορισμού δειλοί και αποτελούσαν βέβαια οργανικό μέρος της πατερναλιστικής οικονομίας. Σήμερα, οι απόγονοί τους, οι πανταχού φτωχοί και περιθωριοποιημένοι, όσο κι αν προσπαθήσουν, δύσκολα μπορούν να μετέχουν ισότιμα της ηθικής των ελίτ -παρά μόνο χρηστικά. Ειδάλλως, αποτελούν συλλήβδην ένα αρνητικό κεφάλαιο που χρήζει διαχείρισης.
Πέραν αυτών των ζητημάτων και συνολικοποιώντας, μπορούμε να πούμε ότι ο πολιτισμός δεν είναι κάτι που κληρονομείται άνευ όρων. Οι πολιτισμοί έρχονται και παρέρχονται, ακμάζουν και παρακμάζουν, μεταλαμπαδεύονται, αλλάζουν, παράγουν υβρίδια… είναι ζωντανοί όπως η γλώσσα.
Είναι λογικό να πούμε πως αν οι Έλληνες (γενικά) θέλουν να είναι υπερήφανοι, ας αναζητήσουν τους λόγους στο σήμερα. Το παρελθόν ανήκει σε όλους στο βαθμό που ενδιαφέρονται να γίνουν κοινωνοί κάποιας παιδείας.
Σαφώς θα ήθελα κι εγώ η κοινωνία μας να ξεφύγει από την ιδεοληψία του παρελθόντος, την παθητικότητα, την υστέρηση. Όμως, για όλα αυτά δεν ευθύνονται οι χιλιάδες μετανάστες, τα παιδιά των ξένων εργατών και δεν ευθύνονται στον ίδιο βαθμό και με τον ίδιο τρόποι όλοι οι Έλληνες. Επίσης, τα ζητούμενα της κοινωνικής και της οικονομικής προόδου δεν είναι ποτέ διαταξικώς θέσφατα και ενιαία. Αποτελούν ζητήματα κοινωνικών διεργασιών.
Απ’ότι γνωρίζω πάντως, κάποιοι Έλληνες “προοδεύουν” μέσα στην παρούσα κατάσταση, χωρίς αυτό πάντοτε να συνδέεται με την πρόοδο ευρύτερων κοινωνικών στρωμάτων.
Φωνάζω κι εγώ συχνά μέσα μου, καθώς αναζητώ “peers”, ομότιμους συν-πολίτες, πως “Ανυστερόβουλο ήθος χρειαζόμαστε. Αξιοκρατία! Και γνώση κριτική.”
Όμως, υπό τις παρούσες συνθήκες, δεν ωφελεί να επικαλούμαστε ένα ανεφάρμοστο πατερναλιστικό μοντέλο. Βλέποντας ρεαλιστικά τα πράγματα, το μόνο συμπέρασμα είναι ότι η κατάσταση στην Ελλάδα θα ακολουθήσει την “καμπύλη” που αναλογεί στο παρόν σύστημα. Ο καθένας βέβαια, όπως είπα, έχει τις ευθύνες του. Αν είναι να κρίνουμε, ας αποδώσουμε τις ευθύνες εκεί όπου αντιστοιχούν. Για παράδειγμα, το μεγαλοϊδεατικό όραμα του 2004 που υποστήριξε το μεγαλύτερο μέρος της οικονομικής και πολιτικής ελίτ, βοήθησε τελικά την Ελλάδα ή την εγκλώβισε στα ίδια και χειρότερα, εξυπηρετώντας το άμεσο συμφέρον κάποιων διαπλεκομένων του πολιτικο-οικονομικού συστήματος; Ο “μέσος” Έλληνας ευθύνεται για τον μικρόπνοο σχεδιασμό;
Ας μην ξεχνάμε πάντως, ότι η κρίση του παγκόσμιου συστήματος -η συσσωρευμένη αδικία αιώνων ιμπεριαλισμού, αποικιοκρατίας, εκμετάλλευσης των φυσικών πόρων…- είναι εξ’ίσου σοβαρή.
Βλέποντας τα πράγματα κατ’αναλογία κλίμακας, θα μπορούσαμε να πούμε ότι και οι ΗΠΑ αποδεικνύονται προβληματική οντότητα που προκάλεσε αμφιβόλου στρατηγικού αποτελέσματος πολέμους, προσβάλει το περιβάλλον, διαθέτει ελάχιστη ασφαλιστική μέριμνα για τους φτωχούς και τους απογόνους των σκλάβων που στοιβάζονται στις φυλακές. Προβληματικές οντότητες είναι επίσης η Κίνα, η Ρωσία, η ανθρωπότητα (;)
Με λίγα λόγια, όσο και αν απελπίζομαι συχνά από την κατάσταση στην Ελλάδα, απέχω από την δημόσια, γενικόλογη μεμψιμοιρία που μόνο καταρρακώνει το ηθικό εκείνων που νοιάζονται. Επιδίδομαι στην καλλιέργεια ενός οράματος κι ενός σχεδίου επιβίωσης, που δύσκολα θα μπορούσε να γενικευθεί. Δουλεύω τόσο ευσυνείδητα όσο αναπνέω και ξέρω πως λίγο με το τσιγάρο, λίγο με την μόλυνση, η αναπνοή μου μερικές φορές είναι ρηχή. Γνωρίζω ότι τα σχέδιά μου ίσως αποτύχουν και ίσως εξαφανιστώ όπως ο Σωκράτης, οι σαμουράϊ, η σοβιετική ένωση, όπως ακόμη, οι δεινόσαυροι…
Οτιδήποτε άλλο όμως, ξεφεύγει από τη δύναμη του ατόμου και υπόκειται σε συλλογικές κινήσεις και στα κύματα της ιστορίας.
in what sense? the greek economy has converged with the rest of the EU quite a bit, Greek GDP per capita is close to 99% of the Union average!
Mr. Georganas do you mean the EU of 27, or the EU we joined in 1981? Because I don’t measure our progress relative to the new poorer members of EU.
Κοίταξα αυτό το πινακάκι που μιλά για 99% της ΕΕ, αλλά αφορά στις 27 χώρες και όχι στις 15. Αν συγκρίνουμε τους εαυτούς μας με τους τελευταίους, πάντα θα τα βλέπουμε όλα ρόδινα και θα λέμε ότι είμαστε πρώτοι από το τέλος. Απορία είναι πάντως αν το ΑΕΠ το μετρά η Eurostat με τις πουτάνες και τα πρεζόνια που μέτραγε ο Αλογοσκούφης ή χωρίς.
Ένα σοβαρό ζήτημα, ακόμα κι αν δεχτούμε ότι είμαστε κοντά στους Ευρωπαίους, είναι το εξής: αν πλησιάσαμε σε ΑΕΠ τους Ευρωπαίους, θα πρέπει να βελτιωθούν και άλλο οι δείκτες και σε άλλους τομείς που δείχνουν την ευρρωστία της οικονομίας. Ο σύμβουλος του Σημίτη Πλασκοβίτης, έγραφε στο βιβλίο του, όταν ήταν πρωθυπουργός ο Σημίτης ότι από τις 4 μονάδες ανάπτυξης κάθε χρόνο, οι 3,5 οφείλονται στις εισροές από την ΕΕ. Αν όντως φτάσαμε τους Ευρωπαίους, το χρέος μας θα έπρεπε να πέφτει, και όχι κάθε Έλληνας που γεννιέται να χρωστά με το που γεννιέται επειδή έτυχε να γεννηθεί σε αυτήν την χώρα. Ποια χώρα μισεί τα παιδιά της τόσο, ώστε να τα δεσμεύει με δυσβάστακτα χρέη με το που γεννιώνται; Δεύτερον, οι δουλειές με τέτοια ανάπτυξη θα πρέπει να αυξάνονται. Αντίθετα η ανεργία παραμένει καρφωμένη στο 10% και το επίσημο νούμερο είναι μειωμένο στο 9%, γιατί στους ανέργους δεν υπολογίζονται οι μερικώς απασχολούμενοι με 400 ευρώ το μήνα, χωρίς ασφάλιση νέοι, στα επιδοτούμενα από το κράτος προγράμματα STAGE.
Θα διαφωνήσω με τον συγγραφέα του άρθρου με αυτά που λέει για τα παιδιά. Εκτός αν πιστεύει ότι σε οποιοδήποτε μέρος της Ευρώπης ο κόσμος κάνει παιδιά για να επιτελέσει το χρέος του για την κοινότητα. Απλά, το ότι δεν κάνουν οι έλληνες παιδιά δείχνει την υποκρισία τους, αφού το παίζουν περισσότερο πατριδολάτρες από άλλους και θεωρούν δυστυχείς όσους δεν είναι, αλλά δεν θέλουν να κουνήσουν ούτε το δαχτυλάκι τους για να κάνουν κάτι για την πατρίδα που υποτίθεται τιμούν τόσο.
Παρόλο που συμφωνώ με αρκετά σημεία του άρθρου δεν καταλαβαίνω ειλικρινά που στοχεύει.
Δημοσιευμένο μάλιστα στην αγγλική (δηλαδή σε ένα ευρύτατο αναγνωστικό κοινό), καταδεικνύει ότι η Ελλάδα έχει τα χάλια της και ότι η ροή Ευρωπαϊκών κονδυλίων δεν έχει αποτέλεσμα.
Εν ολίγοις η Ελλάδα έχει τα χάλια της.
Και λοιπόν; Τι πρέπει να γίνει; Πολύ φοβάμαι ότι είναι εντελώς αφοριστικό να μην πώ ότι κινείται στα όρια του ρατσισμού. (Οι Έλληνες είναι άχρηστοι;)
Κρίμα γιατί το site είναι από τα καλύτερα που επισκέπτομαι.
ΕΛΕΟΣ!
ΟΧΙ ΑΛΛΗ ΜΕΜΨΙΜΟΙΡΙΑ!
ΦΤΑΝΟΥΝ ΤΑ ΠΑΡΑΜΥΘΙΑ ΟΤΙ Η ΕΛΛAΔΑ ΕΙΝΑΙ Η ΧΕΙΡΟΤΕΡΗ ΚΑΙ ΠΙΟ ΦΤΩΧΗ ΧΩΡΑ ΤΟΥ ΚΟΣΜΟΥ.
Η ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ ΕΙΝΑΙ ΑΛΛΗ. YΠAΡXEI ΣTHN WIKIPEDIA KAI http://WWW.IMF.ORG
ΒΡΙΣΚΕΤΑΙ ΣΤΗΝ 17Η ΘΕΣΗ ΠΑΓΚΟΣΜΙΩΣ ΩΣ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΟ ΑΕΠ ΥΨΗΛΟΤΕΡΑ ΑΠΟ ΠΟΡΤΟΓΑΛΙΑ,ΙΣΠΑΝΙΑ, ΙΤΑΛΙΑ,ΓΑΛΛΙΑ,ΓΕΡΜΑΝΙΑ,ΙΑΠΩΝΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΠΟΛΥ ΚΟΝΤΑ ΣΤΑ ΠΕΡΙΣΣΟΤΕΡΑ ΚΡΑΤΗ ΜΕ ΜΕΓΑΛΥΤΕΡΟ ΑΕΠ ΙΣΟΔΥΝΑΜΟ ΑΓΟΡΑΣΤΙΚΗΣ ΔΥΝΑΜΗΣ.
Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΣΗΜΕΡΑ ΣΥΓΚΡΙΝΕΤΑΙ ΜΕ ΤΙΣ ΚΟΡΥΦΑΙΕΣ ΧΩΡΕΣ ΣΤΟΝ ΚΟΣΜΟ.
ΠΑΡΑ ΤΟ ΥΨΗΛΟ ΔΗΜΟΣΙΟ ΧΡΕΟΣ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ 1981 ΚΑΙ ΤΙΣ ΜΕΓΑΛΕΣ ΑΜΥΝΤΙΚΕΣ ΔΑΠΑΝΕΣ ΑΠΟ ΤΟ 1974.
ΑΥΤΟ ΚΑΤΑΦΕΡΑΝ ΟΙ ΓΟΝΕΙΣ ΜΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΕΜΕΙΣ.
ΚΑΙ ΒΕΒΑΙΑ ΘΑ ΓΙΝΟΥΜΕ ΑΚΟΜΗ ΚΑΛΥΤΕΡΟΙ.
ΟΥΤΕ ΒΕΒΑΙΑ ΤΑ ΑΛΛΑ ΚΡΑΤΗ ΔΕΝ ΕΧΟΥΝ ΠΡΟΒΛΗΜΑΤΑ.
ΚΑΘΕ ΑΛΛΟ. ΣΤΟΥΣ ΠΕΡΙΣΣΟΤΕΡΟΥΣ ΤΟΜΕΙΣ ΕΧΟΥΝ ΠΙΟ ΠΟΛΛΑ ΚΑΙ ΠΟΛΥ ΧΕΙΡΟΤΕΡΑ ΑΠΟ ΑΥΤΑ ΤΗΣ ΕΛΛΑΔΟΣ.
ΚΑΙ ΚΑΤΙ ΑΚΟΜΑ. ΟΣΟΙ ΓΡΑΦΟΥΝ ΣΕ ΞΕΝΕΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΜΑΛΙΣΤΑ ΕΛΛΗΝΕΣ, ΠΡΕΠΕΙ ΝΑ ΜΕΝΟΥΝ ΠΙΟ ΠΙΣΤΟΙ ΣΤΑ ΔΕΔΟΜΕΝΑ ΚΑΙ ΤΗΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ.