>>>What is under discussion is Germany's reluctance to launch a growth stimulating package that would relieve some of the pressure.
>>
>>Reluctance? Or the guy from Goldman Sachs didn't bring them the latest version of their opinion for this month?
>
>About this case I will invoke my right to remain silent in the absence of evidence. :). That being said, for "the guy at Goldman Sachs", it would be much better that Germany leaves the EU and takes away her guaranties. All those countries facing bankruptcy offer much better perspectives for speculation and quick profits (and losses).

I'm not sure - for Goldman Sachs it's much better to have someone from whom they can squeeze more money than someone who's already been squeezed. But it's confirmed that they had one of the top brass at GS (Christof Brand, whatever the spelling) has been officially talking to some high secretary in Merkel's cabinet 48 times since 2009, plus some 25 meetings at other levels. That's at least once a month, and each time it was a couple of days ahead of the cabinet's decision on some financial or fiscal matter.

>And can you blame the Germans not to stimulate their economy if they do not think they need it at this point in time? I don't think that blaming them for problems that need to be addressed anyway serves any purpose other than buying more time or other electoral purposes.

I don't blame Germans at all. They're screwed by banksters just as thoroughly as anyone else, if not more.