Comments on: Elliot vs Argentina is a domestic Argentine issue

By: upstater

upstater — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:02:17 +0000

To say that the debt has nothing to do with Argentina’s period of dictatorship is specious. It is similar to say that the EU mess has nothing to do with WWII.

The country was run into the ground by state terrorism against its own population, enthusiastically supported by the US.

Menem introduced neoliberalism, dollarization and facilitated the gutting or sale to rent-seekers of the country’s industrial and resource base.

Banksters are social parasites and should be treated as such.

By: yrsecretfriend

yrsecretfriend — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 20:06:51 +0000

You are welcome Felix.
Glad charting was helpful to your readers.

By: silliness

silliness — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:05:40 +0000

As a completely disinterested party, I think Argentina should be able to pay whoever it wants whenever it wants. They ought to tell the US court to drop dead. Those who hold sovereign debt are hereby warned… the whole edifice is subject to the whims of politicians who can decide they don’t want to pay at any time for any reason. Caveat emptor.

And yes, I am perfectly willing to live with the consequences of such a thing. The vampire squids will just have to adjust. And so will the people of these countries.

By: klhoughton

klhoughton — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:45:02 +0000

“Judge Griesa might have a surprising amount of power. But Cristina Fernández has more.”

Fortunately. If you want to guarantee that there will never be any more bond issuance using US-based intermediaries, just sustain Griesa’s ruling, guys.

When will the people who (STILL) whine about Kennedy’s 10% excise tax c/r/e/a/t/i/n/g/ t/h/e/ E/u/r/o/b/o/n/d/ m/a/r/k/e/t/ moving foreign bond issuances outside the United States are going to realise that was a minor hiccup compared to this?

By: gito

gito — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:14:59 +0000

you are not a journalist….all you right is for one side only…

By: MrRFox

MrRFox — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 05:19:53 +0000

“The WSJ has not been much better … — a sign that if they put their mind to it, US journalists could really add some value here.” (FS)

As long as FT et.al. cover the story well, is it really necessary that every journalist do so? As you say, it’s just a squabble over money among a closed group of people – none of whom ‘wear white hats’. Now the HSBC thing is altogether different – this involves drug-trafficking and homicide by a financial institution that appears to have been a full fledged, legally complicit, willing co-conspirator to all those offenses.

Being a quintessentially US story, kinda sad that no journalist in the great country of ours (if not yours, FS) seems interested in this matter – including you, Scotty. What’s the problem, laddy – cat got your keyboard, son?