This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Judge Griesa Slams Argentina's "Misleading Statements"
Having been abused by almost every member of Argentina's political body, Judge Griesa (presiding over the holdouts vs Argentina case) has come out swinging this morning. "What occurred this week did not extinguish or reuce the obligations of Argentina," he began, exclaiming that "public statements [from Argentina] have been highly misleading - and has to be stopped."
As Reuters reports,
JUDGE GRIESA SAYS IN VIEW OF WEEK'S EVENTS ON ARGENTINE DEFAULT, MEETING TO "CLARIFY WHERE WE GO FROM HERE"
JUDGE GRIESA: "WHAT OCCURRED THIS WEEK DID NOT EXTINGUISH OR REDUCE THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARGENTINA"
JUDGE GRIESA: "THE REPUBLIC HAS ISSUED PUBLIC STATEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HIGHLY MISLEADING, AND THAT HAS TO BE STOPPED"
JUDGE GRIESA: "IN THE FIRST PLACE, HALF-TRUTHS ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE TRUTH"
JUDGE GRIESA: "I AM COUNTING ON THE REPUBLIC TO TAKE STEPS TO STOP THE MISLEADING INFORMATION BEING RELEASED BY THE REPUBLIC"
Objectivity?
»
- 9179 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
...and Argentinians continue to not give a shit. Everyone reaps what they sow eventually.
Default?????
Show me the CDS payouts!
So a Jew banker tried to bring yet another country to its knees and got punched in the face?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Bullshit.
What happened is Argentina defaulted on debt and screwed so many foreign lenders, that in the 90s foreign lenders said enough we are not giving you any money.
But Argentina still needed other people's money, and went around the world trying to find lenders. There were none.
So then Argentina said, "OK we will lend money in NY under NY law and also add these very tight covenants that NY will protect, will you please give us money now". And a few people showed up and said, OK we will give you money under these conditions.
Then Argentina spends that money, but doesn't want to pay. So they re-negotiate and re-negotiate, some lenders say OK to the new terms, but others say no, we are sticking to your promises under NY law.
If Argentina is able to break these covenants it actually screws most emerging market countries, because many lenders will walk away.
Thanks. Now I know what the hell is going on with this case.
Argentina should show that judge who is the boss. Time to defend your sovereignty Argentina
Argentina lost its sovereignty when it could no longer borrow money in Argentina, and CHOOSED to borrow money in NY because that was the only way they could get people to lend them money.
If Argentina says FU to NY, then no one will lend them money anywhere for another generation, well mabye the IMF will, but just wait till you see those terms.
If you need sources, here is a good explaination of the terms and history.
http://www.allenovery.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/The%20pari%20passu%20c...
Unless they go straight to the FED.
Is this asshole Griesa talking about the United States or Argentina? I can't tell from the context of his comments.
The Judge is indeed an asshole. You can hear the panic in his statements. He now has 93% of the restructured bond holders pissed off at him. Not to mention all the bankers. He also has lost control because there is NOTHING more the old, fool of a tool for hedge funds, can do! He shot his load now he needs to go fuck off and stop telling other countries what they can say. He is off his rocker thinking that he can tell a sovereign nation not to talk to its own press. This is insanity.
Argentina should just keep depositing the non holdout debts coupons and let them accumulate into a big pile in their NY custodial accounts. Let the bond holders wage bloody hell to get those payments. He is an idiot.
They lied? You reap what you sow.
ROTFL.
So these are war debts incurred by a dictator right?
". . . CHOOSED to borrow money in NY . . ."
Is "CHOOSED" an English word? Where did you learn it?
What is your native language? What country do you post from? Do many of your fellow sock puppets have H1b visas?
If you ignore the fact that the IMF did already give them (coerce) terms in the 1990s, and pushed privatization to loot their commonwealth, then you could argue its their own fault.
First of all that's the first time I heard this kind of explanation, please supply sources if possible.
But is this now an example how far away entities cannot break NY law -
or more an example about how you can always find a few totally stupid people? (to borrow from)
And the bleeding heart Argentina screws most emerging market countries is totally over the top, if lenders made their decisions based on false premises someone who unmasks the lies is not the single one responsible for loss of faith and money.
"First of all that's the first time I heard this kind of explanation, please supply sources if possible."
This is why the phrase "Let Me Google That For You" was created.
Yeah, and next you recommend Wikipedia as a reliable source of information.
If a poster strongly makes a claim, he/she should be able to supply sources (as original as possible) much quicker than me looking through hundreds of search engine hits.
Here's your first source, that fact that these bonds are in a NY court and not an Argentinian court in the first place. You do understand why the case is in front of a NY judge don't you?
I am astounded by your razor-sharp reasoning!
Now I'm awaiting your thoughts on the other 2 paragraphs I wrote.
Which isn't the whole story.
If your story were 100% factual, I'd completely agree with your sentiment. But it isn't.
Singer bought these bonds AFTER Argentinia went bust at an incredibly low discount rate. Paul Singer has done the EXACT SAME THING in the past with other troubled nations. He's a lawyer and he specialises in this form of blackmail. He holds out and beats these countries into submission via decades of court battles.
So what? Both the original debt-holder and Singer are better off with the assignment of debt. The original debt-holder gets cash now without having to litigate, and is able to reduce its losses (compared to holding defaulted paper that can't be litigated upon). Singer benefits from paying a lower price so long as he's willing to pay for the litigation and spend the long period of time it takes to recover. That's what free market exchange is about - both parties gaining value.
No they're not.
There's only ever a fixed amount of money available to compensate bondholders. Holdouts complicate the settlement and make it more difficult for the country to recover via international markets as it continues to be a drag on the countries capacity to finance itself. It's a lose-lose for all but the holdouts.
Remember the first rule of finance: the interest rate reflects the risk rate (unless you have a central bank neutering the most defining price finding mechanism). I have no sympathy for those losing large chunks on high yield financial products.
Then Argentina should have negotiated bonds that had a clause saying "if x % of holders negotiate new terms, then the new terms apply to all holders"
But Argentina sold bonds WITHOUT those clauses. Most bonds have this, but Argentina's bonds do not, because without them no one would lend to them. Seriously you need to educate yourself on this one.
Fuck all the fraudsters taking out loans in someone else's name!
IE: governents
Also, Fuck the fraudsters making such loans to other fraudsters with made-up funny money.
The people of Argentina should rejoice that their government can not place them on the hook for even more debt... for a couple years.
Tell us about Chrysler's senior bonds and why the (supposedly senior) bondholders were forced by the Obama administration to bail out the unions.
The Chrysler bankruptcy debacle showed the world what the value of seniority clauses really is, i.e. not much.
The story I outlined is 100% accurate.
The fact that the debt was resold is immaterial according to the jurisdiction and terms that Argentina accepted and signed. All debt is sold and resold, it's just an accuse to bail on promises and you fell for it.
Tell me, when the bank resells your mortgage, do you jump up and say "I'm not paying you because you're not the same person"? Why don't you try it, it's the exact same thing.
I hate the NY banking syndicate as much as the next ZHer, but this is a case of a deadbeat borrower, who signed by tight covenants and terms, and then broke them.
"tight covenants and terms"
Please elaborate the tight terms for bankruptcy - any contract worth the paper it's written on has such.
Agreed. Also, I wonder if the previous administration that purchased these loans were by duely ellected officals that represented the people of Argentina making them responcible for the repayment. You may recall that the reason for our nomial democracy was largly created for the banks because former oligarches commonly renege on their loans so it was necessary to create a system where the populus had skin in the game in the form of representational democracy.
"Argentina said, "OK we will lend money in NY . . ."
If Argentina was the lender, what's the problem?
Get your facts straight Nimrod! Or are you just another Zionazi sock puppet that can't read his script?
BS dude. The Argie default you are first talking about happened in 2001. That's when the interim govt saw it was impossible to pay debt that was around 200% of its GDP and said it wouldn't pay. Then in 2005 Argentina made a debt restructuring which by 2008 was accepted by over 90% of creditors.
But NLM and others who had bought defaulted debt in 2001 and didn't enter the debt restructuring were hoping to win a judicial decision forcing the country to pay 100% of the original debt. And Argentina chose NY as jurisdiction for the restructuring, because if not, nobody would have bought it.
Disagree. Superficially yes, there was what Satan calls a "due process". Behind the curtain, however, the whole plot was a dirty invisible hand-orchestated operation (engineered by IMF trolls) to subjugate the destiny of an entire nation to a new york kangaroo court who in turn acts in the interest of the owners of goldmann sachs.
Bullshit.
What happened is Argentina defaulted on debt and screwed so many foreign lenders, that in the 90s foreign lenders said enough we are not giving you any money.
But Argentina still needed other people's money, and went around the world trying to find lenders. There were none.
So then Argentina said, "OK we will lend money in NY under NY law and also add these very tight covenants that NY will protect, will you please give us money now". And a few people showed up and said, OK we will give you money under these conditions.
Then Argentina spends that money, but doesn't want to pay. So they re-negotiate and re-negotiate, some lenders say OK to the new terms, but others say no, we are sticking to your promises under NY law.
If Argentina is able to break these covenants it actually screws most emerging market countries, because many lenders will walk away.
"Argentina said, "OK we will lend money in NY . . ."
If Argentina was the lender, what's the problem?
Get your facts straight Nimrod! Or are you just another Zionazi sock puppet that can't read his script?
the truth is ugly. Nobody wants to hear it, but you speak it.
Lots of folks want to blame somebody else. Shortage of mirrors in Argentina, evidently
Disagree. Superficially yes, there was what Satan calls a "due process". Behind the curtain, however, the whole plot was a dirty invisible hand-orchestated operation (engineered by IMF trolls) to subjugate the destiny of an entire nation to a new york kangaroo court acting in the interest of the owners of goldmann sachs.
True. But you're not addressing the deeper and probably even more important issue...
That the masses and their ploticians* are being Pavlov-conditioned to recognize and accept "US Authority". That's the real subtext here, folks. Griesa is setting himself up as a "Financial Moses" for the world.
* "Politicians gone bad"
Fuck Off Judge Geisha Girl.
pissed off because his judgment is revealed to be worthless paper... seems like a trend, no?
It sucks when your bluff is called and all you can come up with is a hissy fit.
That Griesa judge! I knew there was something slimy and slick about him.
In High School they called him Greasy Griesa - pass the Vigorish already!
Judge Griesa is a crook and a tyrant imo.
I havent seen a good judge, except on Night Court, in decades...
Not like it's even possible, given the mafia will murder their family if they don't comply (think Chicago).
I love the smell of Diversions In The Morning, to take my mind off the war crimes in Gaza.
Argentina, Ebola, Ukraine... Something for everybody, until DWTS and the NFL comes back. The Presstitutes must be all hard or moist.
Just BTFD, BTFATH and pay your taxes!
sounds like socialist Argentina ran out of OPM. Why did they keep spending so recklessly?
anyones guess...
why dont you ask the broke ass US government?
by design, this result is inevitable. that after all, is the whole point of usury.... to enslave.
And why Jews have historically been run out of every country they've ever tried to manipulate. They just can't leave everyone alone!
US Govt overspending doesn't mean Argentina didn't overspend, but nice try
central banking/fractional reserve banking/debt based currency and the control of governments by the MoneyChangers...
thats the answer you should be looking for.
silly me. I thought they just spent too much
You asked in your previous post, "Why did they keep spending so recklessly?"
The answer is, "Because that's what the rules are now." Washington, London and New York make the rules, not Buenos Aries.
"Where is it written that those are the rules?", I hear you cry.
All over the face of Third World Planet Earth is where. Argentina is just another third world country, populated with crooked politicians taking bribes from Zio-bankers, struggling to survive.
If this hasn't worked out to the satisfaction of New York and London, why don't they demand their bribe money back and recall their shills?
The deck is stacked and there is no other game in town.
what did they spend all that money on? I'm sure it was something important. Nothing could be cut from their budget. New York made them keep spending. Interesting how some other countries don't have this problem. Wonder why?
They probably spent some of the money on Zio-bankers and other swindlers.
Yes, New York probably did "encourage" them to keep spending on bribes and other "revenue enhancements".
Other countries also have this problem. "Wonder why?" It's The Rules. If you don't like The Rules, there's always The Cuban Way. The Rothschilds MUST get their pound of flesh.
Because Argentina doesn't really exist anywhere except in your mind. The "they" you're referring to are individual criminals who instead remain nameless.
http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35508/Anthony-Wile-US-Falls-Apart...
Because they are trying to keep their Corporate-Fascist, who rule them, Happy!
I'm not sure who is correct, but the Judge sure is arrogant & is perpetuating the Imperialist American Cowboy image around South America.
"We're deadbeats and we can't pay our bills. It's the gringo's fault."
Best regards,
Argentina.
Convert to Bitcoin and screw all those criminal bankers.
Why is a federal judge making public statements? His job is to issue rulings; enforcement is handed off to someone else.
"Has to be stopped..."
Who the fuck is this cunt, that he believes he can curtail foreign government's right to free speech. Oh, I forgot, he's a top US bureaucrat.
Yeah, let a whole nation suffer, because a crony judge supports a greedy pig who purposefully bought bonds of a defaulted nation to blackmail them at some later point. On Wall Str. that's business as usual. In Sicily he'd have the Mafia giving him a discreet call for stealing business.
BRIICS could be adding an "A" pretty soon
quoting Black
I know what you're thinking-- what gives some judge in the United States authority over a sovereign nation?
Nothing. Except that he threatened them with the kiss of death: if Argentina failed to comply with his instructions, he would banish them from the US banking system.
Now... imagine you're the finance minister of some developing nation out there, watching this all unfold in the newspapers.
Would reading about all of this inspire more confidence in the US government? Would it make you want to continue relying on the US banking system? Use the dollar? Or even hold Treasuries?
You clearly know nothing about this case, do you? It's like you haven't even done a background check on the events leading up to this point.
not true at all, I have been following it on IKN which has VERY detailed info on this case, but you're entitled to your opinion, wrongly.
LOL, ok. From your post above:
Given that Argentina explicitly AGREED to accept the authority of some judge in the United States when they issued the bonds a decade or so ago, I'd say you haven't a clue.
Actually, Argentina has paid the money, but the US judge ordered the bank to withold the payments, .
my last comment here, we're not getting anywhere.
They agreed to make payments as required under NY law. Partial payments (only to holdins, and not to holdouts) are not lawful due to the parri passu clause.
How can you include the juristiction of a bond with the right of a sovereign nation and its politicians to have an opinion and voice it.
Again, Singer isn't some trusting bondholder that bought at the float. He bought the bonds AFTER Arg. defaulted at an incredibly low price, held out and then litigated Arg. once they recovered, therefore blackmailing them into submission as they need foreign capital markets to keep that Keynesian dream alive.
Singer is scum of the worst kind.
Argentina doesn't have the right to tell lies, half-truths, and to make misleading statements and omissions in an attempt to manipulate the prices of your bonds and CDSs.
Are you in favor of the rule of law or not?
Most certainly not the "rule of law" that lets the 1% fuck over the 99ers. The US "rule of law" has become the running joke the world over. US legislation is so mired by special interest and lobbyism, it has lost everything that was once defined by its founding fathers. Legislation goes to the highest bidder. No thanks, you can keep your "rule of law".
Those who rule make the law.
"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread."
Q: What do the people in Iceland think of this? Or, perhaps more importantly...
What do the people in Greece, Spain or Portugal think about this? Ukraine? [Crickets], so far.
But banksters must front-run this situation, lest it turn into a "Financial Ebola". Bankster's Note-To-Self: "Must. Contain. NOW! Per NWO"
What is the difference between Argentina and the U.S.?
If Argentina prints dollars to pay its debts, that is illegal.
I'm wondering if Argentina's financial advisors are telling them what to say and which bankster's that may be.
argentina has some killer bbq. i am talking flintstones style dinosaur portions!
Try the lomo, it is the best.
How does this judge have any jurisdiction over a sovereign foreign state?
Because the bonds in question were issued under New York law.
Argentina wanted to "re-negotiate" the bonds, i.e. can't pay its bills. Most bondholders accepted new terms, a few didn't and took the Arg gov't to court in NY.
The ruling didn't go in favor of the broke-ass Arg socialist gov't and now Griesa is imperialist capitalist pig gringo public enemy #1.
more like a errand boy... sent by grocery clerks (banker whores) to collect a bill.
I don't like the "grocery clerks" either but that doesn't make the Argie gov't the good guys by default.
What would you propose, that the judge should have said "Don't worry about the contract, just amend and modify as you wish, pay whichever bondholders you want as you wish"?
This type of behavior, at its core basically just not honoring one's word, is one of the big reasons why 3rd world banana republic are 3rd world banana republics and why the U.S. is more and more on its way to becoming one...maybe it's just the whole world nowadays...
No actually what happened is they have a RUFO clause in their deal, so if they pay the holdouts MORE then they paid under the restructure three things happen.
1. Argentina's debt goes up 200-500 billion overnight
2. Go to jail
3. Get sued
So Greisa is ordering them to break their deal. Argentina is actually being financially prudent NOT paying them.
Want to know what's worse? Argentina is trying to pay the restructured payment, and Greisa is stealing that to pay the vultures. Imagine trying to pay off a car or house loan only to have a judge intercept that payment and apply it to some other piece of debt you own, that has been sold, and someone else picked it up for pennies on the dollar.
Now you have more defaults, not because you won't pay, but because a judge, in this case Greisa, declared it so.
You hate what Argentina stands for so much, that you're willing to overlook all of this? Oligarchy have trained you well. It doesn't matter what they believe in, the oligarchy shouldn't have control over anyone.
You like judges appropriating your payments how they see fit? You like them deciding where your money goes and what can be taken away from you?
This money is gone. It's from a default over half a generation ago. The people who originally invested, don't own it anymore. These people who own it now, never invested a penny with Argentina. Meanwhile the people that do, are getting shafted because Greisa ordered their money shifted to the vultures.
What you LIKE is this process? You think this process is somehow slowing down America from being a 3rd world banana republic. The sad thing is, what Greisa is doing is EXACTLY what a banana republic would do. Not know the situation, make an asinine judgement, and steal money and give it to someone else.
Glass-Steagall
You're wrong. Argentina has the right to completely default on everyone. They don't want to do that. They want to prefer some creditors over others, in violation of the contract. That's unlawful. As a sovereign, they do not have to keep their promise BUT the US doesn't have to let them use our financial system to facilitate their wrongful preference payments.
That's the only good point you make.
Everything else in your post is just a bunch of rationalization for why it's ok for Arg gov't to break its contract.
The judge's job isn't to make sure Argentina doesn't default, it's to rule on what's in the contract.
That metaphor is only valid if I signed a contract stating that I would pay off my home loan and the other debt equally, without preferential treatment for one or the other. The fact that someone else might have bought some debt I owe for pennies on the dollar is *totally* irrelevant.
The analogy I like, Zero, is that Argentina is like Antonio, the Merchant of Venice, and Singer is like Shylock, the Jewish money lender. Actually Singer only bought the bills of exchange at a discount that Argentina signed at an earlier time, but Greisa chose not to take that into account.
Just as Portia would not let Shylock have a "pound of flesh nearest to Antonio's heart", even though his contract so stipulated, Greisa could have hammered out a more equitable verdict.
HE WAS THE FUCKING JUDGE, AFTER ALL.
Greisa decided not be a Portia, but to be like the American court which ruled the internment of the Japanese Americans in WWII was as kosher as the flowers that bloom in the Spring, Tra La.
Let's call a spade a spade.
The crapola US State Department should have joined the law suit as a "friend of the court" to prevent an adverse judgement from debaring Argentina from excercising the best and most equitable solution for it's sovereign foreign policy and for ALL parties affected by the suit.
Shall a court in Moscow order the ECB and the Bank of Cyprus to refund the deposits of the Russian depositors of Cypriot Banks and redeem the shares that were given them in exchange for their deposits?A Western court in the The Hague had no problem inserting itself in the Russian matter of the Yukos bankruptcy. I
It wasn't New York law there, it was Moscow's law.
The West wants it up, down and inside their ass.
What the fuck does the kangaroo court ruling in The Hague have to do with this? The Russians never accepted the authority of that court to begin with. Moreover that case has nothing to do with contract law and default. Totally different thing.
The Argies accepted the authority of this court when they signed on the line which is dotted for the money they got.
It's not about West, East or South, it's about if you can't pay your bills then don't throw a hissy fit if the creditor doesn't let you off the hook.
Sorry. My comment wasn't clear.
Argentina issued and sold bonds in New York and a district court judge there now feels his court can order the Treasury of Argentina to disperse its funds as his court sees fit.
Why then, if that is the case, should a court in The Hague overrule a Moscow district court which ordered the bankruptcy of Yukos and did not find the Russian Government guilty of any improprieties in that action?
The West wants a sovereign nation's laws to prevail when it awards a judgement to its citizens. But it wants a sovereign nations of the East's laws to be overruled to make an large award to citizens no longer living in that country.
I wonder whether Russia will bring an action in The Hague against the ECB and the Bank of Cyprus for their fraudulent, larcenous behavior in substituting shares of Cypriot Banks for a portion of the deposits of Russian depositors?
When will the US acknowledge the ICC in The Hague and let it try the men Bradley Manning revealed killing civilians in Iraq ? When will the IMF come in to sort out Washington's finances ?
The U.S. opposed the ICC from the beginning, surprising and disappointing many people. Human rights organizations and social justice groups around the world, and from within the US, were very critical of the U.S. stance given its dominance in world affairs.
The U.S. did eventually signed up to the ICC just before the December 2000 deadline to ensure that it would be a State Party that could participate in decision-making about how the Court works. However,
Someone posted this informative link about the situation yesterday.
http://www.gregpalast.com/the-vulture-chewing-argentinas-living-corpse/
@ Pumpkin, 11:43 AM: "How does this judge have any jurisdiction over a sovereign foreign state? "
Sorry, I spotted your question just now, but I believe I answered it above, at 12:06 pm with 5033011:
That the masses and their ploticians* are being Pavlov-conditioned to recognize and accept "US Authority". That's the real subtext here, folks. Griesa is setting himself up as a "Financial Moses" for the world.
* Ploticians = "Politicians gone bad"
Don't 'ya just love when the liberal demo-rat hypocrites get a taste of their own medicine?
You fucked up good and proper didn't you, judge.
'Don't vilify me, Argentina'
If Judge Griesa's opinion in the case were honest, he wouldn't have to defend it in the phony media.
This is not a small thing. This may crash our dear wallstrasse
http://larouchepac.com/node/31150
quoting......IKN
I did not realise that a U.S. Judge had power over another sovereign nation?
the judge should slam obozo and DC. They have been doing this for years!!!!
Griesa's the Greaser for the whores of wall st.!!......a judge being a puppet of the bankster cabal, that's not news!!
Argentina can pay and it's been honouring all its payments until this shameless member of the pathetic and obviously corrupt american legal system decided to trash away the contracts involving third parties and instructed the bank of New York not to pay and keep the money instead of delivering it to its legal owners: the restructured bond holders. Shame on the american legal system and the american financial market, both nests of high corruption.
If Argentina can pay, then why did they want a restructuring?
With the right amount of restructuring and massaging of debt, I'm sure Greece/Portugal/etc. could look pretty damn impressive too!
Because this is payment ON a restructure.
They (Greisa) are stealing that to pay the vultures, because of what Greisa ruled.
You owe X+Y. But we'll only let payment Restructured Debt payment X go through if you pay off Vulture Fund Y FIRST. If you don't pay off Y, the money you sent us will not go towards your payments and you will be in default. The JUDGE is the one creating the default with his ruling. HOW HARD IS THIS TO UNDERSTAND?
Which again, would raise Argentina's national debt 200-500 billion in an instant.
Either Greisa didn't know about that and he's incompetent, or he did know about it...
The bonds were pari passu, so you can't pay X+Y. You have to pay Y+Y, or X+X. Argentina doesn't want to do that, so it's default time. It's unfortunate that both sides are so stubborn, but that's what they agreed to.
If Greisa's ruling were to be enforced, it would have an extremely negative effect on the citizens of Argentina.
The crusty asshole could have taken Argentina's domestic situation into consideration and ruled differently, but he was playing at being patriotic.
Argentina's first duty is to its citizens, not to Shylock vultures scheming the international markets from Tel Aviv West.
Fuck Greisa in his nigga ass.
Since when do governments have to pay their debts back?
Contract law 101 folks: If you don't want to incur the liabiltiy, don't sign the contract. It's just that simple.
OH yea, you also wouldn't get the money.
Therefore, pay the money bitchezzzz. Your better than that.....
On a PS, And remember,.....as the old Cuban saying goes: "Socialism es muerte".
Corrolary: A lender should not lend if it can't collect.
Or the lender should charge more interest (like they did) to compensate for the additional risk of non-payment.
There's a reason they're called "junk bonds".
No rulings? Is the Judge now a hack politician?
Is there o-r-d-e-r in this court? Can a US court truly impose a ruling on a foreign country or is this all make believe.
When Argentina issued the debt it was issued under New York law. So, yes, this judge has authority over these particular bonds.
Moreover, one of the stipulations in the contract was that all bondholders must be treated equally.
Arg gov't can't just make re-structuring deals willy-nilly with whichever bondholders happen to agree to the new terms. Either everyone agrees, or there is no deal.
You are wrong, when a debt is restructured there is a minimum number of parties to agree and make it legal, and that number is well below 100%. In this case 92,4% of bond holders agreed to the argentinian restructuring. That's MORE than enough.
No, you are wrong.
The bonds were issued pari passu. That means all - 100% - of bondholders have to be treated equally.
It's not about what you think is more than enough, it's about what the contract says and that's what Griesa ruled on...what the contract says!
Zerocen,
This place is infested with morons without even the basic knowledge of the law. You've done your best to try to educate them, but it's hopeless.
No, he ordered Argentina to pay MORE then the restructure to the holdouts.
Because of this, it would cause the RUFO clause to be enacted and skyrocket Argentina's national debt by 200-500 billion. Complying with Greisa's order does this.
Again Greisa is appropriating the restructure payment sitting in the bank and instead of giving it to it's rightful owners, it's going to the vultures and then they are saying... they defaulted on the restructured payment because we won't send it on because we want to give it to the vultures.
So judge Greisa is trying to force them to pay more to the holdouts or in reality the vulture funds who bought this worthless debt from the holdouts.
Who in their right mind would want to trigger a RUFO clause? Apparently Judge Greisa. I wonder why. Corrupt or incompetence. One of the two, possibly both.
So who is holding back the payment to restructured bondholders when Argentina sent that money to the appropriate bank? The answer. Judge Greisa who is holding the payment back.
The only real question is, is Greisa TRYING to trigger the RUFO clause for some reason?
New York may believe it has true jurisdiction. Sure there is a piece of paper that confirms this.
But there are 2 countries that will decide whether give this court any authority.
How is this different than US homeowners tossing the keys in the mailbox and walking away?
Bankruptcy court is where restructuring is done.Gonna be some pain for everyone.Haircuts for everyone.
Short-term the Judge is correct.Longterm he is not.The global credit system cannot take many more Fukushimas.
Kicking the can down the road is not a viable policy if the counterparty chain is broken....
Argentina,Portugal,Puerto Rico,Ukraine and Greece.
Let's see how the Argentinians like some more austerity.Like they haven't experienced hardship or inflation for the last fifty years.
Why don't they show the world how it is done and guillotine some banksters in the main square?
They have already frightened the world capital markets.To quote Hillary,"What difference does it make?"
I guess they will PRINT.Like that hasn't been tried before....
Iceland already has shown an alternative way. And yes, they did address some of their bankers.
Don't forget CYPRUS and SPAIN. Or even Estonia where over 10% of the people aged 18-30 have moved out of the country to look for work. Or Poland, where pension funds were seized.
"The pain in Spain falls harder than the rain,
The pain in Spain ensures the bankers' gains." (adapted from the musical "My Fair Lady" with Julie Andrews and Rex Harrison)
Interesting to see if JPM can wiggle out of paying the CDS the Hedgies would've bought on those bonds.
Ah,RISK.Coming to your neighborhood soon...
Silly Argentina, don't they realise the the US is the world ruler and its judges wield the power worldwide. US bankers are part of the empire's enforcement team and must be obayed.
This is akin to someone going to a fire sale of bankrupt but new stock and expecting the original manufacturer of the goods to buy them back at 100cents on the dollar.
Crazy.
Why doesn't Judge Griesh declare Argentina in contempt of court and send the federal marshals to Buenos Aires?
That would teach them a lesson they wouldn't soon forget. And would be entertaining for the rest of us as well.
He can hold them in contempt. The Marshal's won't be able to enforce in Argentina. Enforcement may be possible in other places where Argentina has assets (including the U.S.)
Judge Greasy-Palm:
1. Was nominated to the court by Richard Nixon at age 42 (because Dick was so impressed by his honesty and integrity?)
2. Is now 83 years old.
3. Served as Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York from 1993–2000.
4. Was succeeded in that position by torture advocate Michael Mukasey (clearly the position requires impeccable credentials?)
5. Is now a "Senior" Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
6. Says that he is a Christian Scientist.
7. Is most likely NOT going to get his palm greased by the vulture funds.
Didn't our old Ziobanker friend and Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson also claim he was a Christian Scientist?
83 years old and still compos mentis.......like Hugh Hefner
Judge Griesa is a lowly U.S. District Court judge !!!!!
1.) Argentina is a SOVEREIGN NATION. Since when does Argentina fall within the JURISDICTION of any U.S. court, much less a District Court ????
2.) When you extend credit (loan money) to someone, you charge interest for 2 reasons: 1.) the temporary loss of your use of your money; and 2.) the RISK of the borrower being unable to repay the loan.
It seems that these "lenders" took a risk, but do NOT want to accept the consequences. After all, Uncle Sam has always been there to beat the crap out of any country that defaulted on its debts!
So let the Fed bail those 'lenders' out... they've been doing it for decades, why stop now?
As for Argentina, it seems this judge isn't from Princeton or he would know how to play this game of FU Buddy.... doesn't he know anything about game theory? apparently not, but he does sound rather pathological if he thinks anyone is listening to his nonsense other than himself and some of those 'lenders'.
Argentina chose to borrow under US law then wants to repay under Argentine political decisions.
The judge is simply applying US law to those bonds, the law that Argentina freely entered into when it issued the bonds.
Isn't this WHY there are CDS products with floating prices? Who would lend to Argentina without any CDS protection? The bankers are upset because they normally just pocket the CDS cash as countries pay off the debt by rolling it over. This time the banks aren't so lucky and get to pay up - because of this judge (who may want to avoid high buildings and the use of nail guns).
Who the heck does Argentina think they are? The FED or something?
What fools these American Judges Be?
Being a judge gives people an inflated sense of their importance and power.
Griesa is suffering some serious cognitive dissonance from finding out that he is not as important or powerful as he thought he was.
They should be shot periodically before they develop the papal infallibility syndrome
Shouldn't this judge keep his mouth shut outside court ?
Looks like he said it in Court. The report in Reuters shows the Judge has "lost it".
Every judge that pretends DEFAULT does not exist... is a liar. Every judge that pretends that predators-DBA-government have any legitimate basis to put the humans they pretend to own into debt... is a blatantly disingenuous diabolical predator in league with the predators who created is fictional [and inherently conflict-of-interest] "position".
Just think about how insane the current [belief] system is! Seriously!
A small group of individuals smear ink on paper (to supposedly but only fictionally create some kind of fictitious entity they call "government" or "kingdom" or whatever stupid name). They claim by this action... smearing ink on paper... that they somehow magically gain ownership and/or authority over huge land masses and endless millions [or billions] of human beings who did not sign, and had no voluntary part in their magical fiction.
And if that's not bad enough, they then borrow insane quantities of fiat, fake, fraud, fiction, fantasy, fractional-reserve, completely worthless debt-currency-bits. Then they [and/or other predators] claim everyone [slave == citizen] within their fictional area of space is somehow magically obligated to repay those loans... somehow... anyhow... with no other resource whatsoever.
What an obvious scam! And how obvious that scam has no legitimate basis whatsoever.
DEFAULT.
SHRUG.
Note to everyone who loans to predators-DBA-fictions like "government" or "corporation". The only people you can possibly obligate (or collect from) are those individuals who signed the agreement. Period. If you pretend anyone else has any obligation to repay [or take other actions to compensate] you, then you too are a predator, and deserve whatever losses and harm you get.
Do these comments also apply to USA when its their time to renege on their debts?