Argentinian government is taking over Vicentin?

[antipodean]

This exactly. I wouldn't trust anything that came from Mossad, ("By means of deception shalt thou make war"), and I certainly wouldn't trust anything that came from Singer.

I do respect both entities, not least of all for their ruthlessness, but I would never, ever trust either.

But what if this, or other, evidence surfaced that could not be disputed. Would opinions of CFK actually change or the whole idea of justice is just about who holds the power to decide?

Unfortunately here in Argentina I feel there are a lot of so called "progressives" who are progressive up to a point, before they turn to brute force to get what they want and throw all their nice ideals of justice and truth, which they us to pursue their own opponents, out the window.
Evidence against Macri = assumed valid. Evidence against CFK = assumed invalid. Or visa versa. Where is the justice here? How can we conclude anyone is a great leader with such serious charges still hanging over them?

 

[Redpossum]

But what if this, or other, evidence surfaced that could not be disputed. Would opinions of CFK actually change or the whole idea of justice is just about who holds the power to decide?

Unfortunately here in Argentina I feel there are a lot of so called "progressives" who are progressive up to a point, before they turn to brute force to get what they want and throw all their nice ideals of justice and truth, which they us to pursue their own opponents, out the window.
Evidence against Macri = assumed valid. Evidence against CFK = assumed invalid. Or visa versa. Where is the justice here? How can we conclude anyone is a great leader with such serious charges still hanging over them?

antipodean, my friend, the question in your opening paragraph begins with the phrase "what if?". In this age of information warfare, is there any such thing as evidence that cannot be disputed?

As far as your second paragraph, I would politely remind you that here in Argentina it is the Right which has a history of using brute force. There was this little episode between 1976 and 1982 when "nice ideals of justice and truth" were nowhere to be seen.

In the end, this issue will never be resolved. Just as the USA has an abundance of unanswered questions about the murder of JFK and RFK, and the events of 9/11, Argentina has 100 years worth of unanswered questions going all the way back to the Semana Tragica. The Ezeiza Massacre, the 1982 bombing of the Israeli Embassy, the 1983 AMIA Bombing, and the death of Nisman, these are just the highlights, but they all leave us with questions that will never be answered. In the AMIA case in particular, the evidence has been so tampered with that there is no hope of ever sorting out what really happened.

So there is no point in us getting angry or upset over any of it. Because Argentina. I love this country with all my heart, but it has some warts.

 

[gracielle]

https://www.clarin.com/opinion/avanzar-vicentin-idea-echegaray-llevo-cristina_0_uv1OvIMB3.html

11/06/2020 - 23:47
Opinion: by Marcello Bonelli...Business Outlook
Moving on Vicentin, the idea that Echegaray brought to Cristina

It was the genesis of a decision that generated an enormous political cost to the President.
Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was the ideological driving force to advance the original idea of expropriating the giant Vicentin. The proposal arose from technical work by a controversial former official commissioned by the vice president. This is the former head of AFIP. Ricardo Echegaray, a figure who granted differential tax treatments and amassed multiple allegations of corruption.

Mauricio Macri tried – incredibly – to leave him in office and tried to take refuge – unsuccessfully – in the General Audit of the Nation. Echegaray was linked to the agricultural market, in its sad management at the ONCCA: plagued by a lack of transparency. Cristina's request happened a month ago. Echegaray put together a team and raised his conclusions a week ago. Echegaray's "paper" included the following solution: intervene and expropriate Vicentin.

The information is confidential and circulated in a small number of officials: those who command public banking and are Vicentin's direct creditors. Among them the Banco de La Nacion. That, and not another, was the genesis of a controversial decision which generated a very high political cost to the President.

Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was the ideological driving force to advance the original idea of expropriating the giant Vicentin. The proposal arose from technical work by a controversial former official commissioned by the vice president. This is the former head of AFIP. Ricardo Echegaray, a figure who granted differential tax treatments and amassed multiple allegations of corruption.

Mauricio Macri tried – incredibly – to leave him in office and tried to take refuge – unsuccessfully – in the General Audit of the Nation. Echegaray was linked to the agricultural market, in its sad management at the ONCCA: plagued by a lack of transparency. Cristina's request happened a month ago. Echegaray put together a team and raised his conclusions a week ago. Echegaray's "paper" included the following solution: intervene and expropriate Vicentin.

Then Senator Anabel Fernández Sagasti appeared and her sincericide at the conference: she thanked Alberto for "adhering to our proposal".
The announcement cut off a long negotiation to save Vicentin and that stick on the wheel obeyed Cristina.

In January, a major emissary was the nexus between Vicentin and Casa Rosada, to explore an agreement without infringing the right and private property.The intention was to empower the investment group while seeking another central issue: holding jobs and avoiding a tensions between agricultural producers.

Sergio Nardelli - through this negotiation - had proposed a concrete agreement: to transfer part of the shareholding package to cancel the million-dollar debt and to jointly make a company with the YPF-AGRO division.

The issue was also explored by the head of Banco Nación, Eduardo Hecker, and the ministers Wado de Pedro and Matías Kulfas. The trio treated him with the President himself. Everyone saw it as adequate. That was the original idea. An agreement and an association. Nothing similar with the sloppy announcement: an agreement with YPF under the coercive format of expropriation.

The President's decision generated a tremor in the government and in the economy. Alberto became aware of the set and tried to remedy the issue with a quick telephone dialogue with the CEO of Vicentin. This Thursday night they came face to face: Alberto and Nardelli try to put cold compresses on the scandal.

In privacy, a proposal is probed that includes concessions from both sides: ratifying the intervention, but refloating the non-compulsive agreement that was probed in January between Vicentin and YPF-AGRO. On Thursday night, however, it was insisted that the bad steps already taken would complicate a way out of the conflict: any search for consensus clashes with the vice president's fanaticism. Cristina sent her infantry of adepts to complicate an agreement while imposing the childish account of "food sovereignty."

In the name of "oil sovereignty" production was lowered and YPF was indebted. Axel Kicillof was generous to Repsol and opened the doors to the trial in Manhattan. Wado de Pedro doesn't share that strategy. The minister wants agreement by consensus. Omar Perotti also: the governor had his phones shut down the day before the announcement. That's the political problem that triggered fury in the business movement and set off alarms in businessmen. The unease is due to a perception: the advancement of statesmen and economic control over the President's moderate logic.

A week earlier, Alberto called the establishment in Olivos and assured them: "It is a nonsense the risk proposal of Vallejos". Five days later I was going in that other direction: expropriate a company that was negotiating an exit under trade laws. That is why it was - this time - the main businessmen who activated the toughest declarations of censorship to measure.

The "popes" link two things that are happening simultaneously: the state's many directions of the last measure and the "super-control" to the dollar that hindered the import of inputs.

Miguel Pesce slept and left 8 billion dollars were gone in a few weeks. The reaction was to apply an exchange rate trap, which has a history: it is even stricter than that in force at the end of Cristina's government. He has already blocked about 1,000 companies from buying dollars.

The issue generated an uncompromising statement from the Business Association. The weather was reflected by a private dialogue that Roberto Murchinson had with Miguel Acevedo. Both were in Olivos a week earlier, and Murchinson conveyed to his colleagues the good news.

On Tuesday, when he spoke to the head of the UIA, he conveyed the opposite: the disappointment at the difference between what was said and what Alberto did. It was a few minutes before a convulsed virtual meeting at the factory plant that Clarín was able to rebuild.

Luis Betnaza went with the tip plugs and demanded a stern statement against the Casa Rosada: "This is a constitutional hit against private property." From there a battalion was armed. Cristiano Ratazzi raised his voice and exclaimed on the computer: "I support Luis. The people know the money is going to come out of town."

Everyone was asking for the word to vent the joke. Daniel Funes del Rioja ironized: "For Copal, the food safety narrative is a nonsense."

It had been more than an hour and it was getting hotter. The textile Luis Tendlarz put on the side: "You have to put a limit, because they attacked the capital". Miguel Callelo exclaimed a war cry: "This line cannot be crossed." Adrián Kaufmann spoke of legal uncertainty and that's when Miguel Acevedo called for a break. "We cannot," he said, "break the dialogue with the President."

Before they had spoken with Ignatius of Mendiguren and José Urtubey and put cold compresses. The BICE holder proposed that Acevedo speak directly with Alberto. The UIA issued a moderate statement. Acevedo considers that there are tough times coming and that now we do not have to burn the ships. At night, Betnaza reproached him in a formal note: "You did not comply with what the bases asked for."

The Vicentin issue shook internationally. It was in the midst of debt negotiations. Martín Guzmán warned about repercussions. On Thursday, the minister gave the last stitches. Clarín confirmed that this Friday Guzman would unveil the new counter-proposal for payment to creditors.

It would be of a present value of 49% and an additional for bonds tied to export: the total would reach 53%. It announced a similar proposal for dollar bonds with local law. This is a major change. Many Wall Street "wolves" would accept the payment plan. However, accession would be below what is necessary and the conflict is not yet guaranteed to close.

Guzman "se curo en salud". On Thursday night he told bankers, "This is the last possible offer."

 

[Dougie]

I'm no fan of CFK, but I would take any info paid for by Paul Singer with a grain of salt. He had a large financial motive to get CFK out of office. However, I do believe the Kirchners have undeclared foreign accounts and assets around the world.

If the information is proven true, of course it wouldn't change the minds of Ks. They'd make excuses, say Macri is worse, claim it was fake, etc. The true believers are just that, believers. It's like bringing evidence to a Christian that the Bible is just a bunch of fairy tales. You're not going to convince them otherwise.

 

[antipodean]

antipodean, my friend, the question in your opening paragraph begins with the phrase "what if?". In this age of information warfare, is there any such thing as evidence that cannot be disputed?

As far as your second paragraph, I would politely remind you that here in Argentina it is the Right which has a history of using brute force. There was this little episode between 1976 and 1982 when "nice ideals of justice and truth" were nowhere to be seen.

In the end, this issue will never be resolved. Just as the USA has an abundance of unanswered questions about the murder of JFK and RFK, and the events of 9/11, Argentina has 100 years worth of unanswered questions going all the way back to the Semana Tragica. The Ezeiza Massacre, the 1982 bombing of the Israeli Embassy, the 1983 AMIA Bombing, and the death of Nisman, these are just the highlights, but they all leave us with questions that will never be answered. In the AMIA case in particular, the evidence has been so tampered with that there is no hope of ever sorting out what really happened.

So there is no point in us getting angry or upset over any of it. Because Argentina. I love this country with all my heart, but it has some warts.

My point here is that we should avoid waiving the flag of any Argentine leader. Especially if we are from "clean(er)" countries we should try to set an example. We should question things and express ourselves about the things in Argentina that are part of the biggest problem it faces, which is being trapped in endless cycles of shittyness thanks to its political reality, impunity and corruption. As you point out correctly that includes casting shame on the past as much as the present.

PS There were also leftist political groups who have carried out acts of violence in this country. Also I will point out that "expropriation" in itself is an act of using brute force to take what you want. Neither the left or the right in this country (who have governed) are great examples of leaders, while they may have all done a few "good things" if those things are viewed in isolation. They have all also done some very "bad" things. The result is a pile of shit higher than the pile of good.

 

[gracielle]

My point here is that we should avoid waiving the flag of any Argentine leader. Especially if we are from "clean(er)" countries we should try to set an example. We should question things and express ourselves about the things in Argentina that are part of the biggest problem it faces, which is being trapped in endless cycles of shittyness thanks to its political reality, impunity and corruption. As you point out correctly that includes casting shame on the past as much as the present.

PS There were also leftist political groups who have carried out acts of violence in this country. Also I will point out that "expropriation" in itself is an act of using brute force to take what you want. Neither the left or the right in this country (who have governed) are great examples of leaders, while they may have all done a few "good things" if those things are viewed in isolation. They have all also done some very "bad" things. The result is a pile of shit higher than the pile of good.

Some analysts are calling this type of "expropriation", in military terms, a "temporary abnormal occupation".
I call it another boondoggle, in the list of many, for the K's.

 

[on the brink]

I

Some analysts are calling this type of "expropriation", in military terms, a "temporary abnormal occupation".

Another example of the Government's Newspeak, like when the Ks called a horrendous rate of inflation a "sideways repositioning"

 

[Redpossum]

I
Another example of the Government's Newspeak, like when the Ks called a horrendous rate of inflation a "sideways repositioning"

Inflation in the last year of Cristina's presidency was 22%, whereas Macri gave us 50% inflation in the last three years of his presidency. Which one is horrendous?
(obviously, the correct answer is "both")

 

[on the brink]

You are right - 22% does not seem so terrible now....! But at least in Macri's time it was called it inflation, not "sideways repositioning".

Amazing, how we got used to double-digit inflation. I did an apartment remodel in 2017, when the dollar was worth only sixteen pesos. That's also amazing.

We have been going through challenging times..... reminds me of the Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times"

 

[jblaze5779]

Anyone else think this was a secret double cross by Kristina to lower the confidence in Alberto? He may have been becoming too popular. If the deal went through then it was her plan, if backfired then it was Alberto's plan and he sucks. Either way she wins.

I've only lived in Argentina for about 2 years now so I don't fully understand as much as others but this seems like something that could be right out of her play book.