The confusing part is that there is a very recent, very relevant precedent that was set by Iceland and for some reason that course of action is completely off the table.
I don't know why. It appears to have worked very well for Iceland.
Greece is in a completely different pot of hot water. Their incomes (taxes) keep being lower than expenditures, aka salaries, pensions etc. Not getting any more EU help means they will start paying their doctors and firefighters with monopoly money.
because that was actually Iceland's obligation so it wasn't at all unreasonable for the UK and the Netherlands to expect that.
http://ec.europa.eu/finance/bank/index_en.htm (Single Passport and cross-border banking)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Iceland_to_the_Eu...
Later, after the shit hit the fan, Iceland did apply for EU membership and negotiations begun. Iceland later withdrew their application.
Iceland had a bank crisis triggered by a speculative bubble produced by poorly managed deregulation. It imposed capital controls, was bailed out by the IMF, and took on a crapload of debt in the process, which it is paying off. All this was managed by Iceland's central bank, which controls Iceland's own currency.
Greece has multiple structural flaws and an economy that does not appear compatible with the Eurozone, while being locked into the monetary policy of Germany and France, who effectively control the ECB.
The only thing these events seem to have in common is that they were economic crises. Iceland's problems were acute; Greece's chronic. Iceland's had a single cause, Greece many. Iceland controls its monetary policy, Greece signed that over to the Eurozone. Iceland got assistance from the IMF, Greece requires ongoing assistance from the ECB. Iceland is paying off its debts, Greece is (it seems apparent) never going to do that.