• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US could topple my government, kill me: Argentina's Kirchner

That is what hedge funds do so there is nothing predatory about it and it is legal.

No one said it was not legal. Much of the predatory lending during the US subprime crap was legals as well.

What caused this mess is the Argentine government with their military dictatorships that ran up huge amounts of debt.

No that debt defaulted long ago.

It is not about greed, it is about survival, a hedge that loses 70% of their holdings will not be in business for long.

Bull****. It wont impact them at all and has nothing to do with survival. If it did, then it would take the deal because at least it would get something. What these funds are doing now, is pushing the country into default, meaning everyone will lose except those that bought insurance against default...

Argentina has never fully recovered. They have been locked out of financial markets because they chose to default like a bunch of deadbeats. If you break the rules then expect markets to push back.

Sigh you have no idea what you are talking about.

Their motivation is that Argentina will hopefully live up to their commitments and pay their debts in full just like everybody else.

Bull****. Their motivation is greed and always has been. They stand to make more in letting Argentina default on a minor part of their debt than taking a haircut.. that is all this is about.
 
No, it's absurd.

The Cold War is over, been over.

And tell that to the American right.

Are Argentinians buying it though?

Good question and I suspect they are, just as the American right believe that the Cold war never ended and all that crap.
 
Why is it that seeing a business try to hold on to its assets must be termed greed. It is just business. You borrow, you have to repay.

It is greed because this effects millions of people, and there is an alternative. And it is greed because by pushing for a default then they will get most if not all of their 7% back via their insurance. That is greed.

A default doesn't benefit a creditor. They are most likely pushing for some payment.

LOL since when? You have heard of CDS right? If the hedge funds have taken out such, which is very likely, then they stand to lose pretty much nothing. Sure it screws over millions of people and only benefits the few rich who invest in the hedge fund, but hey it is "business" no?
 
I'm just waiting for PeteEU to show up and explain why it all makes total sense because of the innate evil at the core of America.

Edit: Haha, I missed it.
 
No one said it was not legal. Much of the predatory lending during the US subprime crap was legals as well.
Your definition of hedge funds as predators falls right in line with the Argentine president's. Youre pretty much agreeing with her that it was illegal for them to do it. Typical socialist nonsense.

No that debt defaulted long ago.
And they have been locked out of the markets ever since and have never recovered. So please, spare me the socialist BS. The Argentines have been intervening in every single aspect of their economy and have not curtailed their spending habits thereby continually destroying their economy- its pretty much what happened to Greece and a lot of the other EU countries.

Bull****. It wont impact them at all and has nothing to do with survival. If it did, then it would take the deal because at least it would get something. What these funds are doing now, is pushing the country into default, meaning everyone will lose except those that bought insurance against default...
If there was any insurance they would have used it. There is no such insurance against government default.

Bull****. Their motivation is greed and always has been. They stand to make more in letting Argentina default on a minor part of their debt than taking a haircut.. that is all this is about.
Wrong. If Argentina wants to return access to the world financial markets then they have to pay their debts just like all the other nations of the world. Who gives Argentina the right to default and not have to pay off debts? Nobody.
 
It is greed because this effects millions of people, and there is an alternative.

So greed is defined by how many people are affected? It isn't possible to take from a single person motivated by greed?

And it is greed because by pushing for a default then they will get most if not all of their 7% back via their insurance. That is greed.

That is business.
 
Her real best option would be to privatize lots of government owned businesses, adopt the US Dollar as Argentina's currency, cut down spending, and stop government intervention in the country's economy. In short, stop her Keynesian socialist policies and adopt a free market approach. Its the only way Argentina can move forward.

Economic policy is a far broader matter than the current legal dispute between Argentina and the limited number of hedge funds. We don't disagree that structural economic reforms would benefit Argentina in the medium- and longer-term, especially as Argentina has had a long record of underperforming economic growth. In part, some of those reforms e.g., financial sector reforms, depend on Argentina's capacity to regain access to international financial markets. One big step in that direction would be for Argentina to resume its Article IV consultations with the IMF.

Argentina has fully repaid its IMF obligations. Such consultations would provide the kind of transparency that could increasing the confidence of potential lenders to resume lending to Argentina. The second step would entail working out private arrangements with sympathetic countries, starting with Latin American allies, and then in Europe and Asia. The third step would entail asking the UN General Assembly to vote for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the legal dispute between the hedge funds and its government. Argentina would very likely obtain a favorable vote and the General Assembly has the authority to direct the ICJ to examine the matter and issue an advisory opinion. Those measures would give it leverage.

Even as the advisory opinion would be non-binding, Argentina would gain leverage. First, if the advisory opinion is largely in its favor, its negotiating position vis-a-vis the hedge funds would be increased and the U.S. Judge's rulings would see less international cooperation and the probability of an appeal within the U.S. legal system would also be increased. The U.S. Supreme Court, which has jurisdiction in such matters might even reconsider its initial choice not to take up the case. Second, if the advisory opinion is largely in favor of the hedge funds, then Argentina would gain the cover to make larger concessions to those funds. Given the complex and technical nature of the dispute, either outcome is a possibility. Either way, a resolution of the dispute would be facilitated.
 
Your definition of hedge funds as predators falls right in line with the Argentine president's. Youre pretty much agreeing with her that it was illegal for them to do it. Typical socialist nonsense.

No that is not my definition of hedge funds.. it is my definition of these specific hedge funds involved.

And they have been locked out of the markets ever since and have never recovered. So please, spare me the socialist BS. The Argentines have been intervening in every single aspect of their economy and have not curtailed their spending habits thereby continually destroying their economy- its pretty much what happened to Greece and a lot of the other EU countries.

So much miss-information here that it is laughable.

If there was any insurance they would have used it. There is no such insurance against government default.

HAHAHA you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Of course there is.

Wrong. If Argentina wants to return access to the world financial markets then they have to pay their debts just like all the other nations of the world. Who gives Argentina the right to default and not have to pay off debts? Nobody.

Again, Argentina has made agreements with 93% of all debt holders on reducing the debt load of old debt and hence improving the situation. It is 7% of the debt holders that are holding out and refusing to do it.
 
So greed is defined by how many people are affected? It isn't possible to take from a single person motivated by greed?

No greed is not defined like that. My point is, that a bunch of rich fat cats are willing to destroy a country to get their money back, money that they actually dont need to live off. That is greedy, destructive and frankly disgusting. They knew what they were getting into when they bought the debt from the lender back in the day. This debt is from the last century for the most part, so it is not a shock that they would not get all the money back.

That is business.

It is exploitation and should be illegal. Morgan Stanley tried to do it with Greece but were ultimately burned when Greece did not default.. Morgan Stanley help Greece get illegal loans and hide, while taking out insurance on default and then starting a whisper campaign against Greece that ultimately almost pushed Greece into default.
 
No greed is not defined like that. My point is, that a bunch of rich fat cats are willing to destroy a country to get their money back, money that they actually dont need to live off. That is greedy, destructive and frankly disgusting. They knew what they were getting into when they bought the debt from the lender back in the day. This debt is from the last century for the most part, so it is not a shock that they would not get all the money back.



It is exploitation and should be illegal. Morgan Stanley tried to do it with Greece but were ultimately burned when Greece did not default.. Morgan Stanley help Greece get illegal loans and hide, while taking out insurance on default and then starting a whisper campaign against Greece that ultimately almost pushed Greece into default.

Hopefully you will get past your anger some day.
 
No that is not my definition of hedge funds.. it is my definition of these specific hedge funds involved.

Again, Argentina has made agreements with 93% of all debt holders on reducing the debt load of old debt and hence improving the situation. It is 7% of the debt holders that are holding out and refusing to do it.

Right, because in your warped mind just because they are American hedge funds they are to blame for the mess, right? WRONG.

Even if these firms would swallow a big loss and accept Argentina's proposal it will not fix the problem. The only reason why the country got a little bump when Kirchner became president is because she went on a massive spending spree that created a temporary bubble, but that didnt last when the debts came rolling in and needed to be paid. So even if they do accept it the country is still back to square one. If Argentina is to recover long term they have to give up the Chavez style socialism and go back to free market reforms.

After default, Argentina economy falling into deeper hole | Reuters

In the six weeks since Argentina failed to complete a debt coupon payment and defaulted for the second time in 12 years, the government has restricted the amount of dollars available to importers, boosted subsidies and drawn up proposals to interfere in private companies' output plans.

"They're clamping down on foreign goods," said 42-year-old camping store salesman Javier Aguirre, gesturing at a single sleeping bag hung on a rack meant to display a dozen. "We are having to place things carefully at the front of the shelves to make it seem we're well stocked."

Along the Santa Fe shopping boulevard in Buenos Aires, the choke on imports and a sharp decline in consumer spending have driven up shop closures and forced retailers to bring forward sales.

The leftist government's measures are meant to shore up foreign reserves that stand at less than five months worth of imports and boost consumer confidence to prevent the $490 billion (301.84 billion pounds) economy already contracting.

But with no signs of a deal to emerge from default and thus no prospect of a return to global debt markets, capital flight has intensified, pushing the peso currency to record lows and fuelling inflation.
 
Right, because in your warped mind just because they are American hedge funds they are to blame for the mess, right? WRONG.

I dont care if they are American, British, French or Spanish... it is irrelevant. It is their actions that is the problem.

Even if these firms would swallow a big loss and accept Argentina's proposal it will not fix the problem. The only reason why the country got a little bump when Kirchner became president is because she went on a massive spending spree that created a temporary bubble, but that didnt last when the debts came rolling in and needed to be paid. So even if they do accept it the country is still back to square one. If Argentina is to recover long term they have to give up the Chavez style socialism and go back to free market reforms.

Again irrelevant. First off she aint a socialist per say, and certainly not Chavez like. Secondly by pushing for a default then what will happen? Total economic crash and social upheaval. Is that what you want, to throw millions of people on the fire just so a few greedy bankers can get their money via their insurance? I have no doubt that things have to change in Argentina, but those changes aint gonna happen if the country is being held at ransom by a few bankers while the rest of the planet want to help them.. and that is exactly what we are talking about. They cant make any reforms or get outside investment or anything like that BECAUSE of these greedy bankers. This is a clear cut hostage situation and the world governments should do something about it. No private company should be able to hold a whole country as hostage for profit.. period.
 
Hopefully you will get past your anger some day.

LOL it is hardly only me.. it is most people in the civilized world. Bankers are not exactly popular and especially certain American banks. And it amazes me that you and other right wingers continue to defend these institutions despite their role (big role) in the financial crisis.
 
LOL it is hardly only me.. it is most people in the civilized world. Bankers are not exactly popular and especially certain American banks. And it amazes me that you and other right wingers continue to defend these institutions despite their role (big role) in the financial crisis.

As you know, we Americans are not civilized. We are working on it, though.
 
As you know, we Americans are not civilized. We are working on it, though.

Has nothing to do with all Americans but a select privileged few... Most Americans would probably agree with me and the rest of the world on the banking industry...
 
Your definition of hedge funds as predators falls right in line with the Argentine president's. Youre pretty much agreeing with her that it was illegal for them to do it. Typical socialist nonsense.
Kirschner is unquestionably wrong in accusing the US government of trying to take down Argentina. She's obviously trying to distract the public from Argentina's problems, many of which they made for themselves.

That doesn't change the fact that Aurelius is unquestionably acting in a hostile and predatory manner.

This is not the first time in history that a sovereign nation has defaulted on its debts. As far as I know, it is the first time that an entire nation was bent over a barrel by a private entity who bought up the nation's debts.


The Argentines have been intervening in every single aspect of their economy and have not curtailed their spending habits thereby continually destroying their economy- its pretty much what happened to Greece and a lot of the other EU countries.
Not so much. No one seems to be screwing over Greece in order to trigger credit default swap payouts.

In addition, while government spending has been slowly growing, the debt-to-GDP ratio has dropped significantly since 2003.

argentina-government-debt-to-gdp.png



If there was any insurance they would have used it. There is no such insurance against government default.
Yes, there is. It's called a "credit default swap."

CDS's are part insurance, part bet, part hedge. They are triggered when a particular debt instrument or arrangement defaults. Neither the issuer nor purchaser of a CDS needs any financial involvement whatsoever to buy one.

It's been around for over 10 years, and it's what got AIG into such big trouble. AIG issued CDSs on CDOs and MBSs for years, and as long as they were solvent, AIG was collecting huge fees. When people started defaulting on loans, AIG was forced to pay out more and more, until it drove them bankrupt. The US government stepped in and made the purchasers of the CDSs whole, which helped prevent the global financial system from melting down. It turns out that Goldman Sachs was a big holder of CDSs at AIG, so they were basically betting against derivatives that they were selling to their customers.

And yes, it is fairly likely that Aurelius et al have purchased CDSs on Argentine debt. Even if they don't have a plan to intentionally push Argentina to a second default, that would be a prudent move.


Wrong. If Argentina wants to return access to the world financial markets then they have to pay their debts just like all the other nations of the world. Who gives Argentina the right to default and not have to pay off debts? Nobody.
Erm... Actually, that's what a default actually is. You owe money, you can't pay, you offer to pay back a portion of your debts.

In turn, once a nation defaults, no one is obligated (legally or morally) to make any loans. Any such lenders do so at their own risk.

That's how it works. Are you genuinely not aware of this process?
 
I dont care if they are American, British, French or Spanish... it is irrelevant. It is their actions that is the problem.
Its pretty relevant when you reserve your venom only for Americans and their businesses, youve been at this for years. And no, their actions are not the problem, these firms are out to make a profit and they will do whatever they can to make it so, that is what capitalism is about. If you dont like it then go to Venezuela, North Korea or Cuba.

First off she aint a socialist per say, and certainly not Chavez like.
Really? Her government basically enforces import curbs, price controls, multiple currency exchanges just like Venezuela does.

Secondly by pushing for a default then what will happen? Total economic crash and social upheaval. Is that what you want, to throw millions of people on the fire just so a few greedy bankers can get their money via their insurance?
They already defaulted. Again. Havent you heard the news?

I have no doubt that things have to change in Argentina, but those changes aint gonna happen if the country is being held at ransom by a few bankers while the rest of the planet want to help them.. and that is exactly what we are talking about. They cant make any reforms or get outside investment or anything like that BECAUSE of these greedy bankers.
Youre wrong. They can make these reforms and if they do them then IMF can finally step in with a bailout package but Kirchner is too stubborn to curtail government spending and cutting subsidies so that means capital flight will continue and the economy will keep contracting because there is no revenue.

Let's face it, these hedge funds only own about $1.7 Billion in credit that they want paid off, Argentina's reserves are around $25-28 Billion so they can pay them off if they want to, the problem is that they just dont want to.
 
And no, their actions are not the problem, these firms are out to make a profit and they will do whatever they can to make it so, that is what capitalism is about....
Capitalism shouldn't be about making a profit with no regard for the welfare of an entire nation.


Youre wrong. They can make these reforms and if they do them then IMF can finally step in....
Oh? And in how many cases has the IMF or World Bank actually helped out, when a nation has its back to the wall?

Unfortunately, in most cases it fails, in part because these agencies push for a kind of austerity and right-leaning solutions that make things worse. Argentina took IMF aid and advice in 1999, including cutting spending, increasing government revenues, encouraging foreign investment, and liberalizing labor laws. By 2001 the economy was a disaster, and the IMF was pushing Argentina to pay off foreign debts instead of take care of domestic problems. The resulting peso devaluations caused more problems, including capital flight and widespread unrest.

In other words, the IMF ****ed up Argentina so badly that by 2004, Argentina realized that default was a better alternative than taking IMF funds and following their policies.


Let's face it, these hedge funds only own about $1.7 Billion in credit that they want paid off
Try $15 billion. And no, it really is not a good thing to lose half their reserves.
 
Capitalism shouldn't be about making a profit with no regard for the welfare of an entire nation.
.

If you dont like capitalism you can always emigrate to Cuba, North Korea or Venezuela.

Oh? And in how many cases has the IMF or World Bank actually helped out, when a nation has its back to the wall?

Argentina has no choice because nobody else wants to help them them (and for good reason).

Argentina took IMF aid and advice in 1999, including cutting spending, increasing government revenues, encouraging foreign investment, and liberalizing labor laws. By 2001 the economy was a disaster, and the IMF was pushing Argentina to pay off foreign debts instead of take care of domestic problems. The resulting peso devaluations caused more problems, including capital flight and widespread unrest.
Wrong. They barely enacted those reforms you mentioned and pretty much stopped them altogether and then went back to meddling with the economy, just like all Keynesians and socialists do, so when the IMF saw that they stopped supporting the country.

How Argentina Got Into This Mess | Cato Institute

In other words, the IMF ****ed up Argentina so badly that by 2004, Argentina realized that default was a better alternative than taking IMF funds and following their policies.
A very clueless statement. Argentina never made any lasting reforms and continued their corruption and manipulation of the economy until it blew up on them, then they all of a sudden decided to thumb their nose at the world and defaulted because they didnt want to pay what they owed and then expected everybody else to accept their terms- sorry, but only the sycophants ever agreed to it and Im glad that the two hedge funds fought them back.

Try $15 billion. And no, it really is not a good thing to lose half their reserves.
Wrong again.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/in-hedge-fund-argentina-finds-relentless-foe/

Elliott and other investors are now seeking more than $1.5 billion, which includes years of unpaid interest.
 
If you dont like capitalism you can always emigrate to Cuba, North Korea or Venezuela.
Thanks for the fallacious thinking (specifically, false dilemma)

I did not say "capitalism is evil." I said "capitalism should not be about bankrupting sovereign nations." There are plenty of other ways for a hedge fund to profit without deliberately forcing a nation to default.


Argentina has no choice because nobody else wants to help them them (and for good reason).
You didn't read my question. Here it is again.

How many times has IMF intervention actually made a situation better? What's their track record?


Wrong. They barely enacted those reforms you mentioned and pretty much stopped them altogether and then went back to meddling with the economy, just like all Keynesians and socialists do, so when the IMF saw that they stopped supporting the country.
Uh, no. Argentina deliberately refused further IMF assistance. IMF and bond holders were pushing it towards austerity, which would have crippled growth (as we've seen with many European nations recently). As it was, IMF requirements pushed them towards devaluing the peso, which caused an economic disaster.

There's no question that many of Argentina's problems were created by various Argentine governments, with varying degrees of legitimacy. But it doesn't look like the IMF did much to help, because they're focused on repaying foreign creditors rather than fixing economies.


Argentina never made any lasting reforms and continued their corruption and manipulation of the economy until it blew up on them, then they all of a sudden decided to thumb their nose at the world and defaulted because they didnt want to pay what they owed and then expected everybody else to accept their terms- sorry, but only the sycophants ever agreed to it and Im glad that the two hedge funds fought them back.
Why? What have those hedge funds done to improve the economy of Argentina?

They aren't helping any of the other creditors, because their intransigency holds up payments to all the creditors. They aren't helping the economy of Argentina, which will tank if it undergoes the "reforms" you want. They certainly aren't helping the citizens of Argentina, by stripping the nation of its reserves and keeping it in economic turmoil.


Wrong again.
I must admit, I was wrong. Argentina doesn't owe $15 billion. They're on the hook for about $100 billion if they do what the hedge funds demand.

Long story short: Their current agreements require them to treat all bondholders equally. While RUFO is active, if they pay the NLM group in full (as NLM demands), they will be required to make all of the bondholders whole, to the tune of $100 million (or 3 times their reserves). They were trying to pay some of the bonds, but the US court blocked them because, again, the agreement requires them to treat all creditors equally.

So even if they want to pay off the $1.5 billion to the holdouts, doing so would trigger a debt obligation they can't possibly afford. Hence they've been trying to wait out RUFO, which expires at the end of 2014.

Obviously it's much more complex than this capsule explanation. And I'm not saying that Argentina are the "good guys" or can do no wrong. I've already explicitly stated that Kirschner's attempts to blame the US government and scare her constituents is wrong, and not helping. They also apparently made some very poor and/or short-sighted arrangements with the original default.

By the same token, the hedge funds are certainly not the White Knights of Capitalism. They're screwing over an entire nation and all the other creditors, because they won't take a haircut like all the other bondholders, on loans they purchased long after the initial default, for around 10¢ on the dollar. They could take the same deal as everyone else, and still profit, especially if they bought a bunch of CDSs on their investment (which is almost certainly the case).

So in this particular case: Screw the hedge funds. They can still make a profit without keeping Argentina in turmoil. And it's not their job to teach Argentina a lesson, or to force Argentina to change its fiscal policies.
 
Back
Top Bottom