How is the U.S. different from Argentina?

Argentina.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/argen...LEFTTopStories
Argentina Teeters on Default as Talks Collapse
Setback Sends Argentine Shares Down in After-Hours Trading

Argentina teetered on the brink of its second default in 13 years after talks with bondholders collapsed late Wednesday.

The setback, after glimmers of hope in recent days that a last-minute agreement could be reached, immediately sent Argentine stocks plunging in after-hours trading.

Still, there remained the possibility that talks could resume and a deal could eventually be reached.

At a press conference after talks with a court-appointed mediator ended Wednesday, Argentine Economy Minister Axel Kicillof, who had led the country's delegation to New York, said "we won't sign an agreement that would compromise Argentina's future." A spokeswoman later said negotiations would continue, without giving a timetable.

"Default is not a mere 'technical' condition, but rather a real and painful event that will hurt real people," said Daniel Pollack, the mediator, in a statement late Wednesday. He added, "The full consequences of default are not predictable, but they certainly are not positive."

The development is the latest turn in a yearslong battle between Argentina and a small group of hedge funds that have demanded full payment for bonds the country defaulted on in 2001. Argentina has refused to pay, despite an order by a U.S. District Court judge requiring it to pay the hedge funds. The issue came to a head Wednesday as Argentina missed a deadline to make a payment it owed to other bondholders, because the court order had prevented such a move.

Mr. Pollack, who had been trying to broker a deal between the two sides, said the country would "imminently" be in default. Standard & Poor's Ratings Services had earlier Wednesday declared Argentina in default on some of its bonds.

A default would pressure an economy already mired in recession, potentially leading to higher inflation and a weaker currency. The breakdown of negotiations also complicates President Cristina Kirchner's efforts to stabilize the economy ahead of elections next year.

Wednesday marked the end of a 30-day grace period for Argentina to make a $539 million interest payment to the holders of $29 billion of the country's restructured bonds that was due on June 30. A ruling by U.S. District Judge Thomas Griesa prevents Argentina from paying its restructured bondholders until the hedge funds, also known as the holdout creditors, are compensated. The holdout creditors are owed about $1.5 billion.

Mr. Kicillof hinted on Wednesday that a private-sector solution was a possibility, apparently referring to a proposal by a group of Argentine banks to offer a $250 million guarantee to the holdouts. The idea would be to give the hedge funds a financial incentive to ask Judge Griesa to suspend his ruling until the end of the year and allow payment of holders of the other bonds.

A default could shave as much as one percentage point off growth this year, said Martin Redrado, former governor of Argentina's central bank. Analysts said it would also fuel inflation, which some economists already estimate to be close to 40%, and deepen the country's recession. It could roil the country's financial markets, ending a period of relative calm in the peso's exchange rate and Argentine bond prices.

The economic damage from a prolonged default could prove politically costly for Mrs. Kirchner, who is trying to stabilize a shaky economy and win influence for her party ahead of presidential and congressional elections in October 2015.

Even if Argentina reaches a deal with holdouts, it likely won't be enough on its own to right the country's finances, said Roberto Sifon-Arevalo, head of the Latin America sovereign group at S&P.

A deal "would definitely be a good thing. I don't think that it would automatically be a solution, or a dramatic game-changer," he said. "The macroeconomic environment in the country has deteriorated significantly. It's weak and getting weaker. This situation certainly does not help."

The immediate impact to debt markets outside Argentina is expected to be limited. Argentina has been relatively isolated from global financial markets since its default in 2001, and the country's legal battles with its creditors are unprecedented and have dragged on in U.S. courts for years. In 2001, the country's bonds made up 20% of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.'s widely followed emerging-market debt index. Now, they are only 1.3% of the index, signaling little chance that another default would rattle the global economy.

"I don't think this is going to have much repercussion outside of Argentina," said Clyde Wardle, a senior currency strategist with HSBC Holdings PLC.

However, the case has raised questions about the power of U.S. courts to adjudicate cases involving sovereign nations and their creditors.

The concerns stem from the controversial 2012 ruling made by Judge Griesa, who has presided over disputes between Argentina and its creditors for more than a decade. He ruled that Argentina isn't allowed to pay the bondholders who accepted the country's restructuring offers since its 2001 default, unless it also pays the holdouts, who have refused those offers.

Lawyers said the ruling marked the first time a U.S. judge had issued such an injunction on the so-called "pari passu" clause, which states that all bondholders must be treated equally.

The U.S. government has called Judge Griesa's ruling "impermissibly broad" and said it could undermine U.S. foreign relations. The International Monetary Fund warned that Judge Griesa's ruling could make it easier for a handful of creditors to disrupt other debt restructurings. "There is a cost to the world," IMF Chief Economist Olivier Blanchard said last week.

Analysts say Wednesday's developments will likely rock Argentine markets on Thursday, as the country's stocks and bonds had rallied this week on hopes that the two sides would reach a deal and avert default. Investors said they had been encouraged by marathon talks on Tuesday and Wednesday between Argentine officials and a court-appointed mediator, as well as a proposal by Argentine banks to pay the holdout creditors.

"The market reaction won't be positive," said Brian Joseph, head trader at local brokerage Puente. "There were big expectations of a deal. This isn't good news."

There are many investors who have actually bet on an Argentine default through so-called credit default swaps, but it could be days before those investors find out whether they can collect on their bets. Decisions about CDS payouts are made by a panel convened by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, a financial trade group. There are $20.7 billion of CDS outstanding on Argentine government debt, according to Depository Trust & Clearing Corp.

The idea of default isn't much of a concern for many Argentines, who have lived through much greater crises over the decades and are adept at adapting to economic setbacks.

"We talk about this as if it's something normal. I'm not losing any sleep over it," said Juan Chamale, 36, who works at a Kodak store in downtown Buenos Aires. "We're very used to this kind of thing and have learned to take it in stride."

Argentina's default in 2001 led to the country's worst economic slump since the Great Depression. At the time, it was the largest sovereign default in history and triggered dozens of lawsuits against Argentina by creditors around the world.

After years of contentious talks, the country persuaded approximately 93% of its bondholders to take heavily discounted restructured bonds in exchanges held in 2005 and 2010. But a small group of investors refused to take the new bonds, with many suing in U.S. courts for full repayment. These included hedge funds led by Elliott Management Corp.'s NML Capital Ltd. and Aurelius Capital Ltd.

U.S. courts had jurisdiction over these lawsuits because Argentina had agreed in some of its bond contracts to resolve any disputes under New York law.

After Argentina denounced several U.S. court rulings awarding judgments to creditors and consistently refused to pay the holdouts, Judge Griesa issued his unprecedented 2012 ruling that barred Argentina from paying its restructured bondholders until it pays the holdouts.

For the next two years, Argentina tried every legal avenue to appeal the decision. But the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Judge Griesa's ruling, and the U.S. Supreme Court in June declined to hear Argentina's appeal.

Meanwhile, the holdout hedge funds chased Argentine assets around the globe in an attempt to get paid. NML seized an Argentine navy training vessel in 2012 and this year tried to block the country from launching a pair of satellites. Other creditors attempted to seize the presidential plane in 2007.

Actually we have to go back to LBJ and his war on poverty and his great society programs.

LBJ’s war on poverty was to use government surplus food to help the poor rather than spend money to store the food.

 

Nixon, better know as a crook and as a traitor, along with then Southern Democrats (now the Republican Party) are the ones who took welfare to the next level.

Obama has cut spending, had to deal with Bush’s mess, does not have the SS surplus that Reagan, Bush and Bush used to hide much of their record deficits and much of Obama’s deficit is the caused by the shortage in the SS fund.   Then Obama has had to deal with Republicans’ promise to screw up everything until we get rid of the Black President.

 

So get this through your heads.  The Republicans are the one who waste money, they increase welfare (much of it is for the rich) and even with their record tax increases they set record deficits.

Good lord, why would you vote for a Republican?

listed the Tea Party platform and asked you questions, you ignored those questions but can you tell me how the above platform stance fits into the hamas terrorist platform and why you're afraid of it? Do you think tea party members are going to raid your home and slit your throat while you sleep ? Do you think that adherence to the Constitution when writing laws will drive you out of your home and your country like isis is doing? What is it about adhering to the Constitution that you fear ? Can you answer those questions or will you do your usual and reply with snark and off topic snipits from the news? I'll give you a few hours to read and comprehend the questions that others could read, comprehend and respond to in minutes in order to make it fair.

So now - who do you think the "collateral damage" of the Tea Party will be...who will ultimately pay?

Gunny nailed it with his statement: "That's an easy one.  The Republican Party!"

The Republican Party has already felt the wrath of our American Voters replacing their mealy mouthed, go along to get along, so called 'moderates' with our Fiscal Conservative Tea Party candidates who are each Individually committed to our ten agenda points above.

BTW, which of our agenda points do you personally object to and why?

I eagerly await your answers to my questions,zolace

My question to you, zolace, is do you have a valid, objective reference to ANY Tea Party Movement Supporter calling for impeachment - or even death - to our President because he is Black. that you can post that validates your opinion stated in your OP?

They encourage "armed insurrection" and "Second Amendment Solutions" but who's going to get hurt?   Not them - just the "little people."

My question to you,  is do you have a valid, objective reference to ANY Tea Party Movement Supporter where a Supporter was actually caught encourage "armed insurrection" and "Second Amendment Solutions"?

I ask these questions, because "IF" you actually produce valid events in answer to my questions, then I plan to raise some hell with our Facilitators. Obviously, "IF" the situations are isolated, local incidents I can and will be less able to bring about any changes since local groups are just that and autonomous from our National Movement.

"Look at the Tea Party/Far Right movement - they basically do the same game - they stir up fear and hate and bigotry and whip the "faithful" into a frenzy."

I realize that with our National Movement we have both a few ill intentioned people. We have also caught and extracted a few others who were Collectivist Liberal 'plants' whose intention was to make our Movement look bad publically. As soon as they started they were caught and physically moved away from our genuine supporters.

My question to you, is do you have a valid, objective reference to ANY Tea Party Movement promoting actual: HATE, FEAR, or BIGOTRY you can post that validates your opinion stated in your OP?

It is true that nearly ALL of our Tea Party Supporters in our National Movement are VERY Passionate about saving our nation from government over reach in excess of the 18 prerogatives allowed the Federal government by our Constitution, and yes these millions of Individuals are VERY faithful to our shared beliefs and Personal Values, so it may very easily appear someone whipped us into a frenzy while in reality each of us did that for ourselves. Just think, over 90% of us vote every election.

They have stupid Americans now spouting Anti-American rhetoric, calling for impeachment - or even death - to our President because he is Black.

Yes, we do call for Impeachment, relative to specific cases where Obama over reached his authority as defined in our Constitution. "IF" we succeed in said Impeachment, we realize the Senate will be VERY unlikely to convict him, however, he will be forced to cease his repeated Over Reach and usurping the power from our House.

I realize and support your right to your personal opinion stated above. Based upon your stated thoughts I am going to first post our entire Tea Party Movement agenda, and then ask you questions about your stated opinions as posted above.


"(1) Protect the Constitution: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does (82.03 percent).

"(2) Reject Cap & Trade: Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumers prices, and weaken the nation's global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures (72.20 percent).

"(3) Demand a Balanced Budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike. (69.69 percent)

"(4) Enact Fundamental Tax Reform: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words -- the length of the original Constitution. (64.90 percent).

"(5) Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities, or ripe for wholesale reform or elimination due to our efforts to restore limited government consistent with the U.S. Constitution's meaning. (63.37 percent)

"(6) End Runaway Government Spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57 percent).

"(7) Defund, Repeal & Replace Government-run Health Care: Defund, repeal and replace the recently passed government-run health care with a system that actually makes health care and insurance more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, and transparent free-market health care and health insurance system that isn't restricted by state boundaries. (56.39 percent).

"( Pass an 'All-of-the-Above' Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation, lowering prices and creating competition and jobs. (55.51 percent).

"(9) Stop the Pork: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47 percent).
"(10) Stop the Tax Hikes: Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011. (53.38 percent)."

Well then, I guess the judge needs to go back a read the law.


But U.S. District Judge Richard Kyle told the jurors to “give it one more shot” and asked them to resume deliberations, noting that his instructions required a unanimous verdict.

Luckily most jurors put aside their personal opinions of the plaintiffs and defendants and decide the case based on facts presented in court. Or maybe those who had a personal opinion about ventura or kyle one way or the other were filtered out to ensure a fair trial based on the evidence.

I'm not sure its legal for a judge to order a jury to come to one conclusion and deny them the option of a hung jury. That said I think a hung jury is the best solution. it lets ventura's ego off the hook  without taking money from the widow. It does however show that the deposition which some accused of being lies because "they didn't remember and if you can't remember you're lying" wasn't as powerful as some had thought it would be for ventura.

ah i remeber ,when i first started years ago, i forgot that mosin nagants won't extract unless the round has been fired

got up to clear weapon so i could go downrange. didn't visually or digitally check. racked bolt back, forward, and pulled the trigger. boom. i always check visually and feel for a round now.

nobody was on the range, but it was a really fucking stupid mistake.

Not me personally: but when I was a kid, I saw my Dad being a dumbass racking rounds from a Colt .45 and the gun discharged, firing through and through his left leg, just above the knee, narrowly missing an artery and lodging the bullet into a piece of wood trim in our house.

I learned a lot about guns that day.

Again, I've never owned a FWD car. I believe RWD is the superior design for fun, light, and nimble and AWD for raw power to the ground in any situation. I'm not arguing with you here.

But push come to shove I wont tell you FWD isn't the superior design for a DD that never sees snow or ice.

Maybe if i re-state it. Situations where you push a RWD car to its grip limit during recreational driving on public roads are much more scarce than a FWD.

You can try, might even manage to put up a half way appreciable fight, but you ain't gonna win:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flqp-Lh-gcw

Casu Marzu, a pecorino cheese and Sardinian specialty, surely wins among most disgusting cheeses of the world. The direct translation is “rotten cheese” and rightly so: blocks of otherwise beautiful Italian pecorino cheeses are purposely prepared to become the natural breeding grounds for nests of maggots—the natural harbingers of rot and putrefaction. As if pecorino wasn’t pungent enough…

I posted earlier guess you missed me

Username: sana8410
Rank:Sr Member
Posts: 1440 (not counting this one)
BTC address: 15Bkkqp6CQzonuDkArzkmuMVd34DWfx8bK

Cool, bro. It's still easier (and safer) to recover from grip loss in a FWD than a RWD and the sort of slide FWD is prone to is safer for public road use. That aside, you still get more interior room per wheelbase. The lack of a transmission hump, drive-shaft tunnel, rear diff & axles makes a huge difference.

umair127 is missing the point. Not everyone drifts on their way to work, but they may still enjoy a vehicle that is fun within the limits defined by their daily driving.