Effects Of A Default On Expats

[Don Alberto]

If we are to believe the Argentine government's propaganda, 122 percent of the countries in the world are supporting Argentina.

Why don't these many, many, many allegedly supporting countries each pay a few dollars and make the problem go away?

 

[Don Alberto]

Whether or not there will be a default doesn't really change how I am preparing for the future.

1. Earn in Dollars if at all possible.
2. If earning in Pesos exchange those Pesos ASAP for Dollars.
...

GS

For 'Dollars' read 'just about any foreign currency' (except Zimbabwe dollars and Venezuelan Bolivar Fuerte).

Pesos Uruguayanos and Chilenos, Euros, British pounds, Reais, etc., etc. are in great demand.

 

[ArielFabian]

Economically I don't think it is going to be a problem for the expats that have an income in dollars. But if Argentina defaults will be more unsafe. Many companies depend on the IMF financing and will bankrupt, the unemployment rate will increase, retirees income will decrease, social plans will be removed etc.; these facts will definitely increase the crime rate.

I believe the default is a fact; otherwise Xi Jinping, Putin, etc. would not be visiting Argentina, and there would not be meetings with the BRICS. It seems to me that the government is preparing for the worst scenario and the default is around the corner. Many people believe that nothing will happen, but I am not very convinced.
Brazil, India and South Africa might not agree to lend $ to Argentina, but China will not let Argentina go down hill because of its soybean need, and other businesses that did not exist in 2001. Putin described Argentina as the most important partner in the region, this is another hope to obtain credits during the default.

 

[scotttswan]

Putin described Argentina as the most important partner in the region, this is another hope to obtain credits during the default.

In the whole of south america or just south of Brazil?

 

[gpop]

... but China will not let Argentina go down hill because of its soybean need, and other businesses that did not exist in 2001. Putin described Argentina as the most important partner in the region, this is another hope to obtain credits during the default.

So then that's how to break the love affair CKF has with Monsanto. Russia outlawed GMO. Now how will Argentina ever meet it's demand for soy?
At least this would be step into improving the lives of those in the northern provinces exposed to glyphosate.

 

[Gringoboy]

I don't have my own page as such, just links to the products on sale.
Been a 'member' since 2006 and I have some good PC kit up there, some new but mainly used.
Trading in used kit today, especially here, is a very solid market.....or at least it used to be lol.

 

[Rich One]

Economically I don't think it is going to be a problem for the expats that have an income in dollars. But if Argentina defaults will be more unsafe. Many companies depend on the IMF financing and will bankrupt, the unemployment rate will increase, retirees income will decrease, social plans will be removed etc.; these facts will definitely increase the crime rate.

I believe the default is a fact; otherwise Xi Jinping, Putin, etc. would not be visiting Argentina, and there would not be meetings with the BRICS. It seems to me that government is preparing for the worse scenario and the default is around the corner. Many people believe that nothing will happen, but I am not very convinced.
Brazil, India and South Africa might not agree to lend $ to Argentina, but China will not let Argentina go down hill because of its soybean need, and other businesses that did not exist in 2001. Putin described Argentina as the most important partner in the region, this is another hope to obtain credits during the default.

Cristina today spoke for a LONG time during the BRICS meeting, although she was only a GUEST, her time run up. The Speech was exclusively on the Vultures/Default issue, she said Argentina has already paid to the BONY if Griesa blocks it, bad luck,

She is the best public speaker ever, no machete nothing,,,,

 

[French jurist]

Thanks for taking the time to summarize all the things that you've said previously. Seriously. It takes time to sit down and organize all your thoughts like that in one post.

That being said, I think that most (not all) of what you said is an odd mix of

· conspiracy theory,​

· insults and seeming suggestions of corruption (perhaps unintentional) toward the judge and the US judicial system,​

· misunderstanding of the US judicial system,​

· outdated information (e.g., future of debt restructuring being at risk),​

· ideas not based in reality​

Some points:

· The judgement has been rendered and it is in force now.​

· The effect of this case on other world debt restructurings has been discussed in dozens of recent news articles. Argentina's claim on this is pure smoke.​

· The judge has already blocked the payments to the other bondholders, and unless he sees progress in the negotiations between the parties, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that he will suddenly change a position that he has held for years, which has been upheld by the full appeals court of the state of New York and given tacit approval by the US Supreme Court.​

· The notion of somehow looking to the international courts to resolve this is absurd. Putting aside the fact that Argentina would likely lose such a case, there are fifteen days to resolve this matter before Argentina falls into default.​

· I don't even know how to address your odd parenthetical comments in the first paragraph about the role of psychology (which itself is an odd notion).​

· Griesa's ruling has been proven, by being accepted by the appeals court, to be above the sovereignty of Argentina, and is being enforced.​

· The notion that Argentina committing financial suicide by defaulting puts them in a stronger position is also absurd. The holdouts want to collect, but they're not going to have the terms dictated by Kiciloff. They've been patient for years, and I'm sure that rather than accept a ridiculous offer from Argentina, they'll wait a few more.​

The bottom line on all this is that maybe some of your ideas would have played out or helped Argentina if they had been presented earlier or if there were more time now. But there's a hard deadline in fifteen days, and I don't think you've offered any ideas that could lend themselves to a political solution to this problem in the next fifteen days.

Maybe I'm wrong. It certainly wouldn't be the first time. But I don't see anything in what you've said, or from anywhere else, that suggests some last minute political solution.

I thank you too & appreciate your posts as well, excellent statements followed by a proper demonstration.
In short for the first paragraph:

- Conspiracy theory/insults/suggestion of corruption: the US rank in the second half of the high income countries for anticorruption (ranks close from France) - http://data.worldjus...ject.org/#table​

In Griesa’s case, it’s a problem linked to a minority of ultra-rich people, big companies who manage to use the public system for their private gain. It’s not innocent that Singer managed to have his own Act passed for instance - http://www.gpo.gov/f...12hhrg76980.pdf. It’s not innocent that GWB erased the Congo debt so that Singer could make profits (to the expense of US taxpayers of course) - http://dollarsandsen...507palast2.html . It’s not innocent that GWB won the dubious election. It’s not innocent that GWB attacked Iraq on false grounds for private interests. It’s quite astonishing that Kenneth Dart escaped the IRS (to the expense of US taxpayers of course), while the AFTA (the Vulture funds site against Argentine) has such a page - http://www.atfa.org/...efault-matters/ . It’s not innocent that banksters, who jeopardized millions of Americans, got saved by the US taxpayers and that no real regulation was put in place later on.​

I could keep going on, each country has its own problems, the US problem appears to me as originating from: what’s becoming a plutocracy + ultra wealthy individuals or entities which have way too much power.​

- Misunderstanding of the US judicial system: while I studied Law, I admit I only have a vague idea about it (learning though)​

Now for your points:

- Indeed, the judgement is in force now (never said otherwise?)​

- Argentina's claim on debt restructurings : not sure which one you refer too, if that’s the idea there’s a form of Economic imperialism, I think it’s true to some extent, and likely untrue in other aspects. Anyway, what’s for sure is that this jurisprudence worries many countries & international organizations (not really debated anyway).​

- Judge blocking the payment to other bondholders: precisely the issue (already debated in extenso in other posts).​

- and unless he sees progress in the negotiations between the parties, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that he will suddenly change a position that he has held for years: the fact he decided to block payments to others (or to take hostage the ones who were goodwilling and accepted a cut, depending on how ou consider that) is quite recent but follows a 10 years fight between two hard headed sides. Nothing really new, what will the negotiations give? I keep on thinking Argentina has the upper hand (already explained).​

- I don't even know how to address your odd parenthetical comments in the first paragraph about the role of psychology (which itself is an odd notion): in fact, quite a few commentators mentioned the psychological aspect, for instance Griesa’s ruling was the act of an exasperated judge at the end of his tether. (in this interesting article http://www.foreignaf...nd-vs-sovereign )​

- Griesa's ruling has been proven, by being accepted by the appeals court, to be above the sovereignty of Argentina, and is being enforced: in fact there are two things, Griesa’s ruling & Griesa’s decision to block the payment to foreign bond holders. Concerning Griesa’s ruling, in Legal terms (I’ll do my best in English), it’s not that Griesa’s decision was proved to be above the sovereignty (would be a nonsense), the debate at the SC (at least in the june 2014 SC ruling, didn’t read them all) was about the Foreign Immunity Act and whether or not the discovery of extraterritorial sovereign assets would be covered by it (SC answered no). Now for the decision to block the payments to foreign bond holders, that’s precisely here that Griesa’s is violating Argentina’s sovereignty since Argentina (or eventually the sovereignty of other countries).​

Interesting case indeed

 

[Don Alberto]

Cristina today spoke for a LONG time during the BRICS meeting, although she was only a GUEST, her time run up. ...

Cristina is unable to speak for less than forty minutes at a time.

 

[Matiasba]

In the whole of south america or just south of Brazil?

In Latin America.