Default and Dominoes - Cypress

So Cypress has taken the less damaging option, given in to the realisation that they cant fund their own deposit insurance scheme if their banks go down.
But which other PIIGS country can? America could, they could print more money, so too the Brits but the countries bound by EU legislation cant source the QE to comprehensively guarantee their deposit insurance schemes. We dont even know if America would want to protect and cover deposit holders.
Have the EU financiers understood this? Cypriot haircuts are likely to prove highly contagious. Were it October and impending Winter in the PIIGS countries there would be certain economic terror and mayhem. Maybe the hopefulness of Spring will engender acceptance and thwart any impending run on the banks.
Otherwise the only solution is to have the ultimate guarantor of each countries deposit insurance schemes the EU itself, lest it hold any out of favour country to ransom.
This haircut to save the big financiers could easily be at the expense of the whole global economy.
As the economic policy is run by bankers, it will likely take a Grillo, to roll the austerity Monti's of the EU before any people powered economy can establish a sound and sustainable economy into the future.

The issue GFC is based upon the forward selling of credit and profit on such contracts for up to 30 years at rates that now are not realistic. The profits have been booked over the last twelve+ years, (as we see the rich richer) but those booked profits, taken from once future expectations, are now looking more like losses. This leaves a massive cramping of the economic organisation of the World as the profits have been withdrawn-- blood banked by the rich. The Economic dynamic of the World is as the blood loss patient, at the point of organ breakdown, not enough blood supply to the heart to sustain circulation, not enough oxygen to the organs, at the point of catabolic shutdown.
We do need more credit, the authorities have not realised the extreme of the imbalance. Yes, we will need austerity, but we need survival first. We need to avert the damage of shutdown, once stable and recovering, then moderate the drip of credit. Once recovered, then begin the paying back.

The austerity should also be for the rich, but that is a matter for individual governments, and for another time.

R.Steiner in his threefold economy speaks of gift money as being the solution to economic growth, and imaginably it could also be the solution to the euro problems.

In that last weeks flight of capital from Spain et al to safe havens-UK, US, Aus,.. has destabilised bond markets on both sides of the contagion divide I would like to put a case.

Instead of this becoming subvertly a feeding frenzy, where the capitalised west privately buys further into bleeding Spain et al we need something more.

If we, the 99%, in the west could call upon our governments to act towards stabilisation and rebalancing of the economy, and by this to distinctly limit the carnage and plunder, balance could at least be approached consciously-for the common good (as against freemarket capitalism up to now).

The plan would entail more stable countries, where favourably disposed, with balanced QE or by other means, providing buy-up funds for assets or infrastructure in the critical economies. This would strongly support prices and consequently add stability to the troubled banks while also reducing the plunderous aspect of the rapacious global privateers. Such arrangements might be entered into with an exit strategy over the 7 to 14 years expected recovery timeframe, or delivered as an international gift. The latter good will effect would have unsurmised  benefits of gratitude.

There are articles saying "wealth tax"; the problem arises, how can the 0.1% crystalise even 3% of their wealth to pay a wealth tax without shocking asset prices and markets further? 33% would be mayhem. This broken system will and must be fixed gradually and moderately. A more stable approach would be generate credit now, a year in advance of a wealth tax, maybe 1% for 2013, maybe 2% for 2014, and pay back/unmake the generated credit in future in proportion to continued balancing of growth and inflation targets.

The fundamental though is the motive - the intent; where an action is taken with underlying intent of selfishness/greed/getting the better of another, all will tend towards instability.

Where an action is taken with the underlying intention of brotherliness/common humanity/mutual support we will be bringing the stability and moderating influence of trust back into the economy, and trust is what credit is established upon. Gift money imaginably would be very beneficial.