Georges Ugeux's double standards with respect to the Euro crisis

In a previous post, we discussed Georges Ugeux's contradictions regarding EU bank recapitalization. This is a follow up in which we briefly discuss his HuffPo article, The European Agreement Offers Other People's Money, which is nearly identical to a post in his french blog. In short, while he probably correctly points at some questionable aspects of the new EU plan addressing the sovereign debt crisis, it is wrapped in moral rhetoric that is flawed, but not new coming from him.

Georges Ugeux's views on EU bank recapitalisation

Georges Ugeux is a contributor to the Huffington Post but also actively writes in a finance blog which is influencial in the french speaking world. In a discussion pertaining to the resolution of the EU banking/sovereign debt crisis,  which he has some involvement with (1), he says that recapitalising banks would dilute shareholder value. We will look into this and conflicted positions he has taken on this topic.

An economist featured in Inside job (still) lectures us : "The main culprits are Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid"

In article featured in Business Week, this economist downplays the financial crisis as a cause of the economy's ailments, notably public sector debt, blaming them, instead on the usual suspects shown in the title. He was instrumental in the design of the 2003 Bush Tax cuts, which, it is no secret (but some think tanks dispute it), favored the richest households and a shot a big hole in subsequent budgets.

Revisiting the case of Mario Draghi (ECB) and the fraudulent Greek swaps

According to Wikipedia:

Mario Draghi [became] vice chairman and managing director of Goldman Sachs International and a member of the firm-wide management committee (2002–2005). [...] Pascal Canfin (MEP) asserted Draghi was involved in swaps for European governments, namely Greece, trying to disguise their countries' economic status. Draghi responded that the deals were "undertaken before my joining Goldman Sachs [and] I had nothing to do with" them, in the 2011 European Parliament nomination hearings.

While it is not disputed that the deal was initiated before he joined the company, should he have had any supervisory role over the team that arranged it, it would have been expected that he rectify the wrongdoing, starting by disclosing it to the public. Not only that, but the maturity of the deal was extended in 2005, before he took up a new appointment at Bank of Italy, which was not given due attention. During the hearing, this career public servant provided an interesting explanation supporting his claim that he had no connection to the deal and its follow up : out of personal preference, he did not interact with the public sector. This is contradicted by an official statement from his employer. Oddly, a request by a renowned news agency to have access to some relevant documents were blocked by the ECB shorty before the scheduled hearing.