Miscellaneous desk
< May 19	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 20[edit]

Greek withdrawal from the Eurozone[edit]

I hear it described as really costly. But why?

Askingaquestion (talk) 04:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What incentive is there for Greece to withdraw? By being part of the Eurozone it benefits from being bailed out of its own financial troubles. If it had never been part of the Eurozone, it would have defaulted on its sovereign debt long ago. From Greece's perspective, its like moving out of mom's basement. If you're broke, at least its a free meal and a roof over your head. Same deal here. --Jayron32 04:40, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is the incentive that if its sovereign debt were denominated in its own currency, it could devalue that currency and thus reduce the effective (world-facing) value of that debt. In 2001 Argentina did this (but hesitated until after it had already had to default on its debt). Greece can't because its debt is denominated in Euros, and it has negligible control over the exchange rate of the Euro. I'm not saying that overall doing so is a good idea - there would be major economic consequences to doing so. In reality, in or out of the Euro, defaulted or bailed out or not, Greece and Portugal (in common with countries like Egypt) have major structural weaknesses. Greece has a very healthy tourist sector (which devaluation would help) but its export agriculture is piecemeal, subsidised, and inefficient. But beyond that Greece and Portugal don't produce high value export goods and services and they can't compete with China on low-wage mass production. Leaving the Euro and devaluing their currency so much that they could would make the current austerity programme in Greece seem like the land of milk and honey. 87.113.171.230 (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also Impossible Trinity —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jabberwalkee (talk • contribs) 03:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The big reason for joining the Eurozone in the first place is that trade within the zone faces very few barriers. Looie496 (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to a Der Spiegel article Greece is considering withdrawal. [1] I suppose why they want to threaten to do so is a separate question. Withdrawal is described as costly to the entire Eurozone. Why is that? Askingaquestion (talk) 05:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of the answers are in the article to which you linked. For Greece it would involve a very large currency devaluation, so imports to Greece wold be very much more costly. For the remaining Eurozone members, it would betoken uncollectable greek debt (Greek debt denominated in Euros would now be, say, 50% more costly for Greece to repay ... it's unlikely enough right now that they have the capacity to repay debts; they'd have much less capacity if the debt now costs half as much again to repay), as well as some loss of confidence in the Euro, leading to a devaluation against the dollar, which again would cost Euro users. Though you didn't ask, I'll add that reverting to a national currency means that Greece would once more be able to set its own monetary policy - and traditionally basket-case economies solve (or ameliorate) some of their problems by devaluing their currency, to diminish imports, encourage exports, and thereby encourage the growth of the national economy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:39, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given your explanation, does this possibly portend the downfall of the EU? A domino effect? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's already a domino effect. The bailout of Greece is basically "breaking the ice" on bailouts, and has led to similar bailouts of Ireland and Portugal. At some point Germany is going to get tired of fronting the cash to buoy all of the weaker economies in Europe just to preserve the Union. I would say the greater threat isn't of Greece leaving, but of Germany leaving... --Jayron32 15:30, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that the Euro will be killed off by the current problems. I think it more likely that some of the PIGS will be asked to leave, before the bulwark countries - France, Germany - decide to call it a day. And the Eurozone != the EU ... the latter is much larger (by number of countries) than the former, existed for many years before the Euro, and has many other functions than the monetary. Even in the case of the complete demise of the Euro, I'm sure the Union will continue. And, of course, the Union will continue to change, as it has done over the last decades. It's by no means a completed project. But this is all speculation, of course, which we try to avoid on this desk. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously we don't know what will happen, but your comments and others' on what could happen are enlightening. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→

See the excellent article on exactly this subject at [2] where the problem is discussed in detail. It's not a simple issue. Introducing a currency simply to de-value it is not a pleasant thought. Could the inevitably high interest rate such a currency would attract (due to its' risk) compensate, though? 114.78.188.155 (talk) 08:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compensate whom for what? High interest rates compensate borrowers (i.e. those financial institutions that lent to Greece) for the risk they may not be repaid in full (i.e. that they have to "take a haircut"); they would not compensate France or Germany directly. And you wouldn't devalue it, you would let it devalue. Euro membership is keeping Greek goods overpriced/underdemanded (probably). The Greeks would not devalue their own currency, only let it devalue under market conditions. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 21:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

stargazing starter[edit]

which will the best book for a starter in stargazing..is it also possible to find in the pdf format online. please advice thanks in advance.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.72.2 (talk) 06:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest H. A. Rey's The Stars: A New Way to See Them (ISBN 0-395-24830-2). BrainyBabe (talk) 17:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Living in Mom's basement[edit]

Do young Americans generally live in their mom's basement? The few basements in US homes that I have seen are cold concrete walled holes with little natural light and are generally filled with the washing machine and various junk. Alternatively, why would an American mom consign her kid to the basement if they previously had a room elsewhere in the house? Astronaut (talk) 10:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do young Americans generally live in their mom's basement? Erm – no. What are you talking about? ╟─Treasury Tag►voice vote─╢ 10:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not generally, no...this is more of a stereotypical insult for adults who are too socially inept to function in the real world and live in their parents' basement playing video games. It does happen though, I know people who temporarily lived in their parents' basement, even if they previously had a regular bedroom elsewhere in the house (I also know at least one person who indeed does live in the basement because he can't function in the real world, so it's not always a stereotype!). This is usually the choice of the child, not the parent, because the basement seems to be more of a private space. The basement article talks about "finished basements", which are designed to look like the rest of the house (although they will also probably still have a laundry room and storage rooms). I don't think it would be possible to live comfortably in an "unfinished" basement. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How "young" is this kid you have in mind? It's not common for babies and toddlers but high school kids who are wanting to put a bit more space between themselves and their parents often like having "a space of their own" away from their parents but still in the same house.

Though my room wasn't down there, my basement growing up was basically what you describe. Storage, a bunch of old and broken toys and junk from my siblings and I, my father's tools and workbench, and the washer/dryer. My basement now in my own house would be a big step up from that. It's "partially finished", meaning that most of the walls have had drywall put up and painted, there's carpet in my wife's office and a rug in mine. The only unfinished rooms are a small storeroom and the laundry room. And even further up the scale would be the basement of my friend's parents house when he was in high school. It was completely finished, had a pool table, carpet throughout, a full bathroom, couches and a big screen TV. My friend's bed room was down there. Dismas|^(talk) 10:29, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The word "basement" is not to be taken literally; its just a statement on adult children living with their parents long past the age when they should have jobs and homes of their own. It is to be understood metaphorically or idiomatically. Some parts of the U.S. feature homes that regularly have finished basements, while other parts (like the Southern U.S. where I live now) have almost no basements at all. But the concept of adult children freeloading off of their parents is a universally understood idea. --Jayron32 14:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In different parts of the country finished basements are more or less common. So, presumably, using them as a guest room is more or less common. But I agree with above, that it's mostly an generic insult that would work nearly as well in parts of the country where no one has basements at all. APL (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Identify bridge in NYC[edit]

Hi, can someone tell me how this bridge is called. Seems it is in New York City, but that`s all information. --Pilettes (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to me like the Wards Island Bridge. ^Avic _ennasis @ 16:45, 16 Iyar 5771 / 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks to me you are right. :) Thank you --Pilettes (talk) 16:50, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added the picture to the article, since we had no pictures with the lift portion lowered. I thought it appropriate to have this one in there for that purpose. --Jayron32 02:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NDA exams[edit]

i wish to prepare for the upcoming NDA exams. I want expert help for the above.Please provide me with instructions and areas where i should concentrate more to pass the exam. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jithinprasad1993 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, experience has shown that most people here do not live in India and do not know much about Indian exams. The original poster is probably asking about the National Defence Academy exam. I googled NDA exam preparation and got lots of links that you should explore. I should point out that since we know nothing about you, we cannot exactly tell you in what areas you should concentrate more. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discover card transaction notices[edit]

I work at a hotel and we accept all major credit cards, including Discover. Every time someone uses their Discover card for payment, a week or so later, I receive a transaction notice in the mail. These notices are not statements listing all the transactions for the week (which would make more sense), but are single notices for every individual transaction. So, if I have three separate people pay with a Discover card on Friday, sometime that next week I will get three separate transaction notices in the mail, usually on the same day. The notices come in letter form, in standard envelopes, by way of the postal service. No other credit card company does this...and I have never found any practical use for these transaction notices. Not only do they seem to be a waste of paper, they also must be a pretty big expense for Discover to send out a notice for every single transaction considering the cost of stationary, printing, and postage. Not to mention the logistical stuff, which I'm sure requires additional man-power to organize and distribute these things. So, why does Discover do this when the other companies do not? Quinn ^{❀ BEAUTIFUL DAY} 18:57, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you called their 800 number to ask about it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:14, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a citation for you, but I agree with Bugs. It's probably some sort of courtesy service that you can turn off or opt out of. Otherwise places like Amazon.com would need a forklift to deal with all the transaction report envelopes. APL (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have brought it up when speaking with them regarding other issues...but the precise answer does not seem to be on their "customer support scripts." A courtesy service was exactly how it was described to me. I do not know if I can opt out...that is an interesting idea I will look into next time I get one. I was hoping someone else might be in retail and have encountered this, and could tell me what they do with them. I suppose I could reconcile them with my transactions and deposits...but that's what credit card processors are for. Ah well, upon reflection, I think I may be expressing frustrations over a pet peeve rather than really asking a question, which I realize is not something for the reference desk. So, unless anyone has a definitive answer, I suppose I can just live with it. Thanks, 74.92.180.145 (talk) 20:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]