What started the financial crisis in Greece?

July 23, 2015

WRITER

The Greek financial crisis has been one of the most important stories of the summer, but it’s also one of the most complicated. How did they end up in such crippling debt? Why did the European Union offer a deal to Greece that doesn’t offer a way for them to restructure their debt? And how are the people in Greece handling the ongoing problem...and what happens next?

TheBlaze's Dan Andros and Jason Buttrill explained the crisis on Wednesday's Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rough transcript of this segment:

Dan: Hey, Dan Andros here, head writer for TheBlaze, along with Jason Buttrill, chief researcher here at TheBlaze. Greece is just a big, fat mess, and so we’re just going to go through and try to explain it for you really quick. Basically here’s the situation, Greece defaulted. We all saw that in a news, and they went to go vote on an austerity bailout package, and they voted against it. They wanted to keep their goodies, and they didn’t want anything to do with that, so they voted against it. The Greek PM goes back in and ends up taking a deal, so now everyone’s kind of scratching their heads, they don’t really understand what’s going on. So, we’re going to go through and try to explain it in just a quick couple steps. First step, easy way to understand it, the 2008 subprime crisis.

Jason: 2008 subprime mortgage crisis is basically what kicked off this global financial pandemic. During the subprime mortgage crisis, we had irresponsible lenders and irresponsible borrowers, so basically you had people applying for loans that had no business applying for those loans, but the lenders had no business even issuing those loans in the first place. They were loans that eventually since they had adjustable rates, they were going to continue to go up and up and up, so these people had no chance of ever paying these loans off.

Dan: Right, and they didn’t care. They saw the quick buck, so they didn’t care. They just went for it.

Jason: Exactly, and the lenders saw dollar signs and dollar signs that were going to continue to come and continue to come, and if they didn’t, they would just go bankrupt anyway. Back in 2010, during the first bailout, Greece had a national debt of 130% more than their GDP. Put that into perspective. So, let’s say you are making $2000 a month. Now, what if you had bills that were more than 2000 a month? There’s no way you’d qualify for a loan. No lender in their right mind would grant you a loan, but the EU and the IMF granted those loans to Greece.

Dan: And they had no chance of paying it back.

Jason: They had no chance of paying that back. So, basically Greece was that 2008 loan applicant that wanted something so badly that they didn’t care about what the ramifications were down the line. They figured we’ll get around to it later. The EU were those irresponsible lenders that were willing to make that loan because they knew that there was no chance that person would ever be able to get out of debt.

Dan: So, they signed this debt deal, so what does this thing actually do?

Jason: Basically he went completely reverse on what he asked his people to do. He asked his people to forget the deal, the austerity deals, to begin with and to move forward so he could upend the system so they could eventually leave the euro and leave the European Union altogether. He made this deal that fully gave up controls to their banks, fully gave up control. Now, specifically Germans, but members of the EU, they can make decisions on whether to close banks, whether to grant loans, how to adjust their interest rates, everything. They make all of those calls basically from Berlin.

Dan: So, basically what’s happened here is they’ve lost a choose chunk of sovereignty. Basically Germany is their daddy, and they get to do whatever they want to do to them. So, they know they can’t pay off this debt. They know they can’t pay it off, so all it’s about is control.

Jason: They’ve lost the ability to say how do we run our government? They could actually tell them we don’t like how you use the Parthenon and how you tie that to the government with tourism. We want to own that’s, so actually we’re privatizing that and taking it over. Imagine the Parthenon being owned by a German company from Berlin. That is now completely possible, and the Greeks can’t say a thing about it.

Greece is now on the verge of becoming a straight up occupied country, occupied by the European Union. Talk about never being able to repay this debt, the IMF straight up came out and said that there’s no way the Greeks will ever be able to pay off this debt. They can’t do it. So, if they continue along these current lines, they’ll never be able to pay it off. The only way they said is if they restructure the deal, but they didn’t restructure the deal. That was not a part of this new deal that the Greek Prime Minister agreed to. Restructuring was not in it.

The only way they can do it is if they restructure it, so why would the European Union offer a deal basically that doesn’t give them an out, that doesn’t give them a way to eventually pay off their debt? Just like we said, it’s all about control. It’s all about the EU, German, more specifically, tentacles going further and further into some of these countries, countries that cannot pay off their debts, and now they’re occupied.

Dan: So, how do the people there in Greece feel about it? I think what many here in the states don’t understand is the mentality of the people in Greece. I mean, they just had an election, and the people they voted in, you hear often that it’s austerity and that it’s these right-wingers, but they’re not really right-wingers at all.

Jason: The people of Greece, the way they feel about it is they’re tired of it. Now, again, as we’ve said, they’re just as at fault as the EU is, the people that they’re blaming on this. But they wanted to upend the system, so what did they do? They went and voted in a party, the Syriza Party, that they thought was going to upend that system, that was finally going to say no more, we’re not going to go along with what the EU wants anymore, we’re going to do our own thing. So, they voted in the Syriza Party. Who exactly is the Syriza Party? Who did they give the mandate to do this?

They’re all malice. They’re Marxist-Leninists. They’re communists. They knew they voted in the people that had the ability and had the same mentality that was going to start a revolution, and it’s all about revolution. Since the days of the Soviet Union, that’s always been the goal of this type of government is to start a revolution here, and from there it’s going to spread like wildfire. We’ve actually seen that tinder spreading through the rest of the EU.

Dan: So, now we’ve got a bunch of revolutionaries here in power, and this is like their dream scenario. They’re hoping to get out of there, abandon their debts, and basically hit the restart button.

Jason: And that has huge consequences. If the rest of Europe all of a sudden has a restart button and they can just have all of their debt restructured, what does that say to the lenders? What does that do to basically Germany? What does that say to countries like that? They’re now stuck with all of these unpaid debts.

Now that these countries are considering departing from the EU, will we see a rebirth of nationalism? That’s what the European Union was formed to get away from, but now that that’s all coming down and the dominoes are about to start falling and more and more countries are going to look for that same out that Greece is now about to take, will we see a rebirth of nationalism? Will the old days of Europe, the 1930s era of Europe, will that suddenly become our reality?

Dan: Only time will tell, but as the times get tougher and people’s backs get pushed up against the wall, we’re going to see the answer sooner than later.

Featured Image: The Euro logo is pictured in front of the former headquarter of the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany, on July 20, 2015 as Greece has begun making a 4.2 billion euro ($4.6 billion) payment due to the ECB as well as outstanding sums due to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) according to a ministerial source. The transfer was made possible by a short-term "bridge" loan of 7.16 billion euros granted by the European Union on July 17, 2015. Photo credit should read DANIEL ROLAND/AFP/Getty Images

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep