So we need the ECB to start QE in a big way to buy back government bonds. However the Saudis do not own too many.
We also have to go electric on transportation and that much much faster. Only a third of the EUs oil comes from the US and Norway. The rest comes from mainly dictatorships. Going green means supporting democracy. Staying on fossil fuels means supporting dictatorships.
Yep, even if you didn't care about the environmental aspect (which you should), not having to rely on dictatorships all over the place for your energy needs should be enough reason to transition away from fossil fuels.
There are a lot of battery factories being built in the EU right now. Even if they come from China, it is a one time purchase and not a total dependence.
Glad my money isn't wrapped up in EUR. QE = inflation.
I'm all for going green, it's worth mentioning that having trade with dictatorships is a two-way street, we can also use that trade as leverage to hold them slightly accountable.
In this case it gives the Saudis central bank money, which then leads to more money being removed over the coming years. Since the Saudis want to dump it, they have to sell it below market value. Due to that at intresst this means the ECB is moving money out of the monetary system. Hence this is deflationary. We actually saw that in the real world as well. QE meant low intresst rates. The intresst rates shot up as soon as QE was stopped.
Well first this doesn't really have anything to do with the article.
But to answer your question:
Be in a situation where your central bank (they can't get bankrupt as they literally print money) doesn't give interest (negative interest even better)
Be big, financially competent and trustworthy enough that no one doubts that you can pay back any loan.
Now people that have too much money and need a convenient place to store that money without too much costs buy your debt for more than what it's worth.
Sorry I somehow forgot the first part of your question.
If I understand correctly they threaten to sell off the debt they hold which will increase the supply of that debt, while at the same time decrease the amount of potential buyers.
To still be able to sell their debt the EU countries now have to (as any country needs a constant influx of money) make the new debt more attractive by offering better interest etc
At what point will a naked war for resources with Saudi Arabia make sense? Like if a leader went to the EU/America/Japan/Korea and said, "we're gonna take the Saud's oil and sell it for $25/barrel to everyone that helps us for 25 years." And then we went to the public and said, "25 years to get off oil for good" when does that ship?
The issue with the Gulf Wars is that we wanted to control the oil resources via local proxy. Honestly, we (the US, I realize this is on the Europe@) could use our Navy to directly control about half of Saudi Arabia's oil and buy ourselves time to get off oil.
The issue is that currently, the cost of extracting oil exceeds $25/barrel. Personally, I would be glad to see the Saud family ousted from Arabia, as there are countless reasons to consign those disgusting Salafists to the dustbin of history. However, reducing the price of oil at this moment is not feasible.
This analysis is from 2019 and it doesn't break down the cost difference for onshore vs. offshore oil. But it estimates the cost for the Saudi's at $8.98/barrel (approximately $11.01 in todays dollars).
Do you have the analysis where it says $25+/barrel. It is certainly possible that production costs have risen significantly in the last half decade.
Turns out people really don't like being ruled over by nakedly colonialist regimes, and when people really don't like things they tend to blow stuff up, and when people blow stuff up, it hurts the bottom line of oil companies, i.e. the only thing you care about for some reason.
Do you want to create a second Iran? Because that's what happened there.