Talk:PIGS (economics): Difference between revisions
Reply - and please be careful not to delete other people's comments. |
|||
Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
[[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) 16:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
[[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) 16:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:It's not clear where that graph came from. As that, it fails [[WP:RS]]. You should cite where it came from, not where you uploaded it to. [[User:Toddst1|Toddst1]] <small>([[User talk: Toddst1|talk]])</small> 17:50, 22 September 2011 (UTC) |
:It's not clear where that graph came from. As that, it fails [[WP:RS]]. You should cite where it came from, not where you uploaded it to. [[User:Toddst1|Toddst1]] <small>([[User talk: Toddst1|talk]])</small> 17:50, 22 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
::I'd second that. Wikipedia itself can't be used as a source. [[User:Lord Cornwallis|Lord Cornwallis]] ([[User talk:Lord Cornwallis|talk]]) 18:43, 22 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
::So, if I find another source that shows this or similar graph, can I use it? |
:::So, if I find another source that shows this or similar graph, can I use it? |
||
::[[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) |
:::[[Special:Contributions/12.20.4.100|12.20.4.100]] ([[User talk:12.20.4.100|talk]]) |
||
:::: Yes, if you find a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], it would be fine. We shouldn't keep well-sourced, on-topic material out.[[User:VsevolodKrolikov|VsevolodKrolikov]] ([[User talk:VsevolodKrolikov|talk]]) 13:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Nazis called their "inferiors" pigs. == |
== Nazis called their "inferiors" pigs. == |
||
Coincidence? I think not. --[[Special:Contributions/195.74.250.209|195.74.250.209]] ([[User talk:195.74.250.209|talk]]) 01:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
Coincidence? I think not. --[[Special:Contributions/195.74.250.209|195.74.250.209]] ([[User talk:195.74.250.209|talk]]) 01:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
: If you can find a [[WP:RS|reliable source that makes the connection between the epithet PIGS and Nazism, then it may be worth including. The article itself already acknowledges the term is seen as offensive by some.[[User:VsevolodKrolikov|VsevolodKrolikov]] ([[User talk:VsevolodKrolikov|talk]]) 04:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
: If you can find a [[WP:RS|reliable source]] that makes the connection between the epithet PIGS and Nazism, then it may be worth including. The article itself already acknowledges the term is seen as offensive by some.[[User:VsevolodKrolikov|VsevolodKrolikov]] ([[User talk:VsevolodKrolikov|talk]]) 04:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:25, 26 September 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the PIGS (economics) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the PIGS (economics) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | This is a talk page for discussion of the article about PIGS (economics). It is not for discussion about the term itself, unless that discussion involves improving the article. In particular, it is not for discussion about whether or not "PIGS" is a racist term, or what other countries have similar economic problems.
Conversations that are not intended to improve the article will be moved to the archive. Please see "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" and "Wikiquette" for information about the proper use of talk pages. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 February 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 9 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Article Name Change
Forgive me if I'm presenting this wrong as I'm not an experienced user.
Anyways, the name of the article on a whole should be changed to PIIGS. The acronym refers to the countries use of the EURO currency, and the subsequent weakness displayed of that currency relative to the dollar and yen. There were concerns that the currency as a whole might collaspe. Portugal Italy Greece and Spain were included; this was later amended due to deterioration in Ireland's financial condition. This creates the final PIIGS.
For this reason, the addition of countries such as the U.K., Romania, and Iceland are off point and misused by the media. Also, in reading this discussion, I must point out that the acronym is commonly used in American economic publications and journals such as the WSJ, the Economist, etc. It is not a U.K. creation that was to demean the countries. It is an economic acronym.
There is an excellent comment above that this article should mimic the BRIC article about Brazil, Russia, India, and China. Would an editor please attend to this because in light of Ireland's recent bailout, the inaccuracies and lack of information is disheartening for those who would turn to this site for information about the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.160.146.247 (talk) 06:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
== There's no PIIGGS ==
The citations for the extra G are pathetic. I've never seen any reference to PIIGGS (except by bloggers from P, I, G, and S with wishful thinking). PIGS is a real term used in the markets. Don't use this article to assuage national self-esteem. Unless better sources are inserted in a week, I'm going to delete UK from this article. DeCausa (talk) 01:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- This is correct. I've tried to remove references, but cannot change the map/file names for the map and bar chart.94.142.32.114 (talk) 11:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sources Below - No Removal Justified
Rodolfou (talk) 02:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
"I" in PIGS
Shouldn't the "I" in PIGS stand for Ireland? Italy should be the second "I" in PIIGS. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8510603.stm and also http://bx.businessweek.com/irelands-economy/europes-pigs-country-by-country/15556830359292323753-3751dfb9e72be6533f8227d23e647349/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.27.244.146 (talk) 06:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'm beginning to think that's true. The Economist, in two stories that are both critical of Italy [1] [2], says that the I now stands for Ireland. The only dated source in the article from this or last year is a BBC story, which also says it's Ireland. A cursory search of Gnews reveals the same [3]. I think it's fair to change the article to say that it originally stood for Italy, but now stands for Ireland.--Chaser (talk) 21:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
- The picture should be updated too. --93.33.244.38 (talk) 16:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
It is Hard to Find Sources for The Core of The Matter
The main controversy behind the acronym is that it is purposefully discriminatory (e.g., “brown-people discrimination”) as alternatives such as GIPS (but not the possibly derogatory GIPSI or GIPSIs) would still configure a readable acronym without inflaming a North-South divide/conflict (as the original I was for Italy, not Ireland) between Euro-nations and promoting a narrative of “help” from Northern states to Southern states (instead of alternative narratives, e.g. of bank bailouts in disguise).
Other Insulting/Derogatory Acronyms
STUPID - Spain, Turkey, UK, Portugal, Italy and Dubai
FUKD - France, UK and Deutschland
FUKDUS - France, UK, Deutschland and US
Possible Citations
And when you think about that unflattering acronym -- PIGS – you have to ask yourself, who invented it? Where did it come from? My understanding was that it came from an analyst at Goldman Sachs. If so, one is entitled to doubt that was entirely accidental. And I suggest that perhaps it might be useful going forward to change the referent of that acronym to its true meaning: Principal Instigator Goldman Sachs. Comments by James K. Galbraith at a Symposium of the Global Progressive Forum, Res Publica and the Parliamentary European Socialists, Lisbon, July 9, 2010. http://utip.gov.utexas.edu/Flyers/Galbraith%20Lisbon%20I.pdf
But some investors warn that such acronyms, droll as they are, can make the markets less safe. Gerard Fitzpatrick, senior portfolio manager at Russell Investments in London, says: “These acronyms can spread systemic risk. They create herd behaviour, with investors mindlessly running from anything tarred with the PIGS brush.” Jerome Booth agrees: “The problem with all these acronyms is they’re short-cuts. They save you the effort of thinking. Thinking is hard work.” From BRICs to PIGS: what’s in a name? Jules Evans December 6, 2010 http://www.globaldashboard.org/2010/12/06/from-brics-to-pigs-whats-in-a-name/
A particular worry is what could be called the PIGS—Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain, Europe's negative version of the fast-growing BRICs. The fear is that these countries may be in a hole they cannot easily climb out of and that the ECB will be pressed into running a looser monetary policy to save them. The ECB at ten - A decade in the sun. The Economist. Jun 5th 2008 | from the print edition http://www.economist.com/node/11487440?source=hptextfeature&story_id=11487440 Rodolfou (talk) 02:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
The Accronym Does Not Reflect Government Debt Country Rankings
General government net debt (% of GDP) International Monetary Fund, April 2011 World Economic Outlook Net debt is calculated as gross debt minus financial assets corresponding to debt instruments. These financial assets are: monetary gold and SDRs, currency and deposits, debt securities, loans, insurance, pension, and standardized guarantee schemes, and other accounts receivable.
- Greece (152%), Japan (128%), Italy (101%), Ireland (95%), Portugal (86%), Belgium (82%), France (78%), U.K. (75%), U.S.A. (72%), Hungary (71%), Iceland (70%), Israel (70%), Euro zone (67%), Germany (55%), Spain (53%)
- Google Public Data Explorer
General government net lending/borrowing (% of GDP) International Monetary Fund, April 2011 World Economic Outlook Net lending (+)/ borrowing (–) is calculated as revenue minus total expenditure. This is a core GFS balance that measures the extent to which general government is either putting financial resources at the disposal of other sectors in the e...conomy and nonresidents (net lending), or utilizing the financial resources generated by other sectors and nonresidents (net borrowing). This balance may be viewed as an indicator of the financial impact of general government activity on the rest of the economy and nonresidents (GFSM 2001, paragraph 4.17). Note: Net lending (+)/borrowing (–) is also equal to net acquisition of financial assets minus net incurrence of liabilities.
- Ireland (-10,8%), U.S.A.(-10,8%), Japan (-10%), U.K. (-8,6%), Greece (-7,4%), Croacia (-6,3%), Spain (-6,2%), New Zeland (-6%), Poland (-5,7%), Portugal (-5,6%), Euro Zone (-4-4%)
- Google Public Data Explorer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodolfou (talk • contribs) 02:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
And it is not meant to. It was developed generations ago to group the economic related economies of southern Europe, it's a grouping acronym and nothing more. 76.239.18.21 (talk) 13:32, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Iceland
You forgot Iceland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.10.234.164 (talk) 00:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
- What about Iceland? If it has relevance to this article it needs to be backed up by RS. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
WHY ARE YOU DELETING MY INFO?
I had posted info on the articale that Spain has the lowest public debt according to the graph thats INCLUDED in the article. For some unknown, bizarre reason, you deleted it. I even provided the URL of the graph as excellent reference. Why are you doing this? Are you ok? 12.20.4.100 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.20.4.100 (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- It's not clear where that graph came from. As that, it fails WP:RS. You should cite where it came from, not where you uploaded it to. Toddst1 (talk) 17:50, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'd second that. Wikipedia itself can't be used as a source. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- So, if I find another source that shows this or similar graph, can I use it?
- 12.20.4.100 (talk)
- Yes, if you find a reliable source, it would be fine. We shouldn't keep well-sourced, on-topic material out.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'd second that. Wikipedia itself can't be used as a source. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Nazis called their "inferiors" pigs.
Coincidence? I think not. --195.74.250.209 (talk) 01:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- If you can find a reliable source that makes the connection between the epithet PIGS and Nazism, then it may be worth including. The article itself already acknowledges the term is seen as offensive by some.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 04:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- ^ "Are we able to capture the EU debt crisis? Evidence from PIIGGS countries in panel unit root framework".
{{cite web}}
:|archive-date=
requires|archive-url=
(help);|first=
missing|last=
(help); Check date values in:|archivedate=
(help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "The Role of the Euro During and After Economical Crisis" (PDF). Economics and Applied Informatics.
{{cite journal}}
:|archive-date=
requires|archive-url=
(help);|first=
missing|last=
(help); Check date values in:|archivedate=
(help) - ^ "The Impact Of The Financial Crisis On The Currency And The Monetary System" (PDF). Annals of Spiru Haret University.
{{cite journal}}
:|archive-date=
requires|archive-url=
(help);|first=
missing|last=
(help); Check date values in:|archivedate=
(help) - ^ "Public Finances Crises Within the Countries of PIIGS Group". Studia Universitatis Babes Bolyai-Negotia.
{{cite journal}}
:|archive-date=
requires|archive-url=
(help);|first=
missing|last=
(help); Check date values in:|archivedate=
(help)
- Stub-Class Europe articles
- Low-importance Europe articles
- WikiProject Europe articles
- Stub-Class Economics articles
- Low-importance Economics articles
- WikiProject Economics articles
- Unassessed Portugal articles
- Unknown-importance Portugal articles
- WikiProject Portugal articles
- Unassessed Italy articles
- Unknown-importance Italy articles
- All WikiProject Italy pages
- Unassessed Greek articles
- Unknown-importance Greek articles
- WikiProject Greece general articles
- All WikiProject Greece pages
- Unassessed Spain articles
- Unknown-importance Spain articles
- All WikiProject Spain pages
- Stub-Class Ireland articles
- Low-importance Ireland articles
- Stub-Class Ireland articles of Low-importance
- All WikiProject Ireland pages
- Unassessed United Kingdom articles
- Unknown-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles