At a quarter million page views I think I can say this blog has proven some sort of staying power. Ya, I know, considering the wisdom found on this page, you'd think it would be a quarter million page-views per day, not over five years.
I don't get it either.
I'm averse to calling down regular folks on whatever wrong-headed opinions they may express on the world wide web. I'm even reluctant to call out working journalists on the bullshit they too often spew, simply because at the end of the day they are folks who work for their pay.
But I'm not averse to calling shitbags "shitbags."
Paul Singer is a shitbag.
Paul Singer is a billionaire hedgie who gets richer by fucking over the poorest of the poor all around the world. He's also a big deal in American politics, because he's a big donor to political candidates.
Singer recently won his case against Argentina. That's mostly because a new right-wing government came to power in that country.
Here at Falling Downs we've been banging away against the Singer case for years.
We lost.
The people of Argentina lost way more.
Paul Singer won big.
The architect of Singer's win was a judge appointed by Richard Nixon.
No wonder Singer funds the GOP.
Showing posts with label Elliot management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elliot management. Show all posts
Saturday, March 19, 2016
Monday, March 16, 2015
Ukraine's other war about to start
That would be the war with creditors. Creditor number one, the Franklin Templeton fund, has retained Blackstone to represent its interests in debt renegotiations with the bankrupt state.
That in itself tells you something. Blackstone aren't altruistic work-out artists; they're cut-throat hedgies. If they've been "retained" it means FT has already made a deal to sell them their Uke debt at a deep discount.
If Argentina's experience with Elliot Management is any indication, this cloud over Ukraine's future could linger for fifteen years or more.
Interesting to see White and Case mentioned as representing Ukraine. That's a law firm famous for their pro bono work. This could be their biggest pro bona assignment yet! After all, what's Ukraine supposed to pay them with?
Ironically, Ukraine was once known as the bread-basket of Europe, and it's eastern regions were the industrial heartland of the Soviet Union. How did that rich legacy go up in smoke in the quarter century since independence? Simple; Ukraine was well and truly plucked to the last feather by her very own home-grown oligarchs.
The negotiations are doubly tragic for Ukraine in that the value of the hryvnia has been cut in half since the Nuland-Pyatt coup, but those debts must still be repaid in US dollars. That's something the Ukrainian people will have plenty of time to think about as they endure twenty years of Greek style austerity so that the banks who funded the kleptocracy of the oligarchs can be paid in full.
That in itself tells you something. Blackstone aren't altruistic work-out artists; they're cut-throat hedgies. If they've been "retained" it means FT has already made a deal to sell them their Uke debt at a deep discount.
If Argentina's experience with Elliot Management is any indication, this cloud over Ukraine's future could linger for fifteen years or more.
Interesting to see White and Case mentioned as representing Ukraine. That's a law firm famous for their pro bono work. This could be their biggest pro bona assignment yet! After all, what's Ukraine supposed to pay them with?
Ironically, Ukraine was once known as the bread-basket of Europe, and it's eastern regions were the industrial heartland of the Soviet Union. How did that rich legacy go up in smoke in the quarter century since independence? Simple; Ukraine was well and truly plucked to the last feather by her very own home-grown oligarchs.
The negotiations are doubly tragic for Ukraine in that the value of the hryvnia has been cut in half since the Nuland-Pyatt coup, but those debts must still be repaid in US dollars. That's something the Ukrainian people will have plenty of time to think about as they endure twenty years of Greek style austerity so that the banks who funded the kleptocracy of the oligarchs can be paid in full.
Thursday, July 31, 2014
Singer v Argentina: financial crimes against humanity
Paul Singer's immoral campaign to extort unearned wealth from the people of Argentina has hit the wall.
Bankruptcy is a funny thing. I remember a real estate broker in Guelph who had survived three bankruptcies. He kept his fine home and his fancy cars throughout, and if his financial history impacted his standing in the business community, it didn't show.
On the occasion of my own bankruptcy, I recall my elderly mafioso neighbour imparting some words of wisdom; "things happen, son; sometimes you just gotta tip it and move on."
Business folks large and small routinely shift their "non-performing assets," i.e mistakes, into their weakest holding company, pull the plug, and carry on as though nothing had happened.
None of the Reichman brothers had to move house or skimp on meals when their Olympia and York flamed out in what was at the time the biggest bankruptcy in Canadian history.
However, if you hear Paul Singer tell the tale, bankruptcy by a nation state is an affront to God, and he is doing God's work when he uses the courts to put the squeeze on already-crippled national economies.
It's not that Singer lent those countries money and wants it back. The Singer M.O. is to wait till a country defaults, buy up their bonds at pennies on the dollar, and then use his vast resources and political influence to extort face value plus interest on that discounted debt.
The reason this works with a nation state and not with an individual or corporate debtor is because in theory, a nation state could amortize those debts so far into the future that eventually they would be paid. In the meanwhile, the citizens of that country will have to forgo a few frills like education and health care, but at least they're confirming Singer's idea of the rule of law.
Thus, when the people of Peru or Congo or Argentina have to do without so that Paul Singer's vulture funds can make a few un-earned billions, all is well with the world.
That's the American way!
Bankruptcy is a funny thing. I remember a real estate broker in Guelph who had survived three bankruptcies. He kept his fine home and his fancy cars throughout, and if his financial history impacted his standing in the business community, it didn't show.
On the occasion of my own bankruptcy, I recall my elderly mafioso neighbour imparting some words of wisdom; "things happen, son; sometimes you just gotta tip it and move on."
Business folks large and small routinely shift their "non-performing assets," i.e mistakes, into their weakest holding company, pull the plug, and carry on as though nothing had happened.
None of the Reichman brothers had to move house or skimp on meals when their Olympia and York flamed out in what was at the time the biggest bankruptcy in Canadian history.
However, if you hear Paul Singer tell the tale, bankruptcy by a nation state is an affront to God, and he is doing God's work when he uses the courts to put the squeeze on already-crippled national economies.
It's not that Singer lent those countries money and wants it back. The Singer M.O. is to wait till a country defaults, buy up their bonds at pennies on the dollar, and then use his vast resources and political influence to extort face value plus interest on that discounted debt.
The reason this works with a nation state and not with an individual or corporate debtor is because in theory, a nation state could amortize those debts so far into the future that eventually they would be paid. In the meanwhile, the citizens of that country will have to forgo a few frills like education and health care, but at least they're confirming Singer's idea of the rule of law.
Thus, when the people of Peru or Congo or Argentina have to do without so that Paul Singer's vulture funds can make a few un-earned billions, all is well with the world.
That's the American way!
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
How American bullying alienates allies and invites blowback
The Paul Singer v Argentina case is much in the news these days.
Singer runs Elliot Capital, the hedge fund spear-heading the drive to to get Argentina to pay out face value plus interest on the government bonds they bought for pennies on the dollar after the Argentina default of 2001.
Singer's strategy has been to use the US legal system to violate Argentine sovereignty, and thus far the US legal system has been all too happy to play along.
"This is how a hedge funder brings an entire country to its knees" gloats the headline at Business Insider.
What's wrong with that picture?
How is it acceptable for an American vulture fund to bring an entire economy to its knees? Singer brings nothing to the economy aside from opportunistic exploitation of the misfortune of others. His vulture fund doesn't further the common good, doesn't create jobs, does nothing aside from enrich a few already-rich people by punishing an entire society.
Is this what America is about on the world stage today?
Here's another gloating headline about the American judicial system screwing over BNP Paribas to the tune of nine billions. The French bank is guilty of violating US sanctions against Iran, Sudan, and Cuba.
What up here? It's a FRENCH bank. What should be on trial is the legality and morality of US sanctions on Iran, Sudan, and Cuba, not a foreign bank that helps those countries get around the illegal American sanctions.
But, America gets away with this bullying because it can!
These are manifestations of an American superiority/American exceptionalism complex that will eventually come back to bite America hard.
Singer runs Elliot Capital, the hedge fund spear-heading the drive to to get Argentina to pay out face value plus interest on the government bonds they bought for pennies on the dollar after the Argentina default of 2001.
Singer's strategy has been to use the US legal system to violate Argentine sovereignty, and thus far the US legal system has been all too happy to play along.
"This is how a hedge funder brings an entire country to its knees" gloats the headline at Business Insider.
What's wrong with that picture?
How is it acceptable for an American vulture fund to bring an entire economy to its knees? Singer brings nothing to the economy aside from opportunistic exploitation of the misfortune of others. His vulture fund doesn't further the common good, doesn't create jobs, does nothing aside from enrich a few already-rich people by punishing an entire society.
Is this what America is about on the world stage today?
Here's another gloating headline about the American judicial system screwing over BNP Paribas to the tune of nine billions. The French bank is guilty of violating US sanctions against Iran, Sudan, and Cuba.
What up here? It's a FRENCH bank. What should be on trial is the legality and morality of US sanctions on Iran, Sudan, and Cuba, not a foreign bank that helps those countries get around the illegal American sanctions.
But, America gets away with this bullying because it can!
These are manifestations of an American superiority/American exceptionalism complex that will eventually come back to bite America hard.
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Surprise! American courts side with American vulture fund to screw 40 million Argentines
That was yesterday.
The cherry on top was the downgrade Standard and Poor's issued on Argentine debt today.
Obviously, in determining the "greater good", American courts have no problem putting the interests of one opportunistic American hedge-fund operator ahead of the interests of 40 million Argentinians.
This is a case that has gone on for years, and revolves around Paul Singers attempts to use the courts to extort face value plus interest on Argentine sovereign debt he bought for pennies on the dollar.
This is a prime example of the sort of destructive economic activity that should be taxed at a rate of 100%.
The cherry on top was the downgrade Standard and Poor's issued on Argentine debt today.
Obviously, in determining the "greater good", American courts have no problem putting the interests of one opportunistic American hedge-fund operator ahead of the interests of 40 million Argentinians.
This is a case that has gone on for years, and revolves around Paul Singers attempts to use the courts to extort face value plus interest on Argentine sovereign debt he bought for pennies on the dollar.
This is a prime example of the sort of destructive economic activity that should be taxed at a rate of 100%.
Monday, August 26, 2013
Paul Singer's attempted rape of Argentina gets thumbs up from New York appeals court
The government of Argentina has been forced to petition the US Supreme Court in the next instalment of the ongoing battle with US hedgie Paul Singer.
Singer's hedge funds bet big on defaulted Argentine debt, buying up all they could at pennies on the dollar after Argentina defaulted on its foreign debt in 2002.
The Singer strategy is to employ the courts to force the defaulter to make good on 100% of the face value of the debt.
In a nutshell, this case pits the people of Argentina against the opportunistic machinations of a small group of American uber-capitalists looking for free money.
Singer's hedge funds bet big on defaulted Argentine debt, buying up all they could at pennies on the dollar after Argentina defaulted on its foreign debt in 2002.
The Singer strategy is to employ the courts to force the defaulter to make good on 100% of the face value of the debt.
In a nutshell, this case pits the people of Argentina against the opportunistic machinations of a small group of American uber-capitalists looking for free money.
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Paul Singer v. the people of Argentina
In 2008, seven years after the Government of Argentina defaulted on $95 billion in sovereign debt, hedge funds managed by Paul Singer bought up some of those defaulted bonds for pennies on the dollar. Ever since, Singer has been using the American courts in an attempt to force Argentina to pay out those bonds at face value.
This case highlights some of the more egregious abuses that finance capital imposes on its host societies. While Singer's distressed-debt investment strategy has made him a wealthy man, has it contributed anything positive to society?
No. Hedge funds like Singer's represent an opportunistic and non-productive pool of capital that seeks to turn legal technicalities and political influence into windfall gains. Hedge-funds are the Rumpelstiltskins of the modern era.
The legal system is their spinning wheel. When lawyers for Singer, a long-time Republican Party insider and huge financial backer, appear in front of judges appointed by Republican presidents, does anyone imagine that the other side will get an impartial hearing?
This case highlights some of the more egregious abuses that finance capital imposes on its host societies. While Singer's distressed-debt investment strategy has made him a wealthy man, has it contributed anything positive to society?
No. Hedge funds like Singer's represent an opportunistic and non-productive pool of capital that seeks to turn legal technicalities and political influence into windfall gains. Hedge-funds are the Rumpelstiltskins of the modern era.
The legal system is their spinning wheel. When lawyers for Singer, a long-time Republican Party insider and huge financial backer, appear in front of judges appointed by Republican presidents, does anyone imagine that the other side will get an impartial hearing?
Monday, December 31, 2012
Singer v Argentina; does the revolution start here?
Attorneys acting for the state of Argentina have filed papers to overturn a ruling that would oblige the country to reward American speculators who were hoping to make a killing trading in defaulted Argentine bonds.
The gist of the Argentinian argument is that a sovereign state is not obliged to abide by rulings handed down in another state.
Makes sense to me.
The spectacle unfolding before us is a crucial battle between the common good and private interests. What's different here is that we have a sovereign state arguing for the common good, and another sovereign state acting on behalf of the private interests.
Do American courts have the right to impose their remedies beyond the borders of America?
The Singer camp apparently believes so. It's Paul Singer's bond funds that have spear-headed this drive to impose American jurisprudence on the planet.
And why not? If they can pull this off, American lawyers will indeed be the masters of the universe!
The gist of the Argentinian argument is that a sovereign state is not obliged to abide by rulings handed down in another state.
Makes sense to me.
The spectacle unfolding before us is a crucial battle between the common good and private interests. What's different here is that we have a sovereign state arguing for the common good, and another sovereign state acting on behalf of the private interests.
Do American courts have the right to impose their remedies beyond the borders of America?
The Singer camp apparently believes so. It's Paul Singer's bond funds that have spear-headed this drive to impose American jurisprudence on the planet.
And why not? If they can pull this off, American lawyers will indeed be the masters of the universe!
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Meet Judge Thomas P. Griesa, last hope of the bond vultures
Sunday, December 16, 2012
One small victory for humanity over Vulture Fund douchebags
The UN Tribunal for Laws of the Sea has ordered that Ghana release the Argentine ship ARA Libertad.
The ship was seized in October pursuant to court actions brought by American Vulture Fund wheeler-dealer Paul Singer. Singer's funds bought Argentine sovereign debt at huge discounts around the time of Argentina's default ten years ago, and has been using the courts to try to force Argentina to repay their bonds at face value.
It's a great strategy when it works. Several years ago Singer's funds made an estimated 400% windfall profit pursuing the same strategy with discounted Peruvian bonds. That's a windfall Peru's impoverished campesinos continue to pay for.
The irony is that Argentina's legitimate creditors have long ago settled with the government. The Singer funds, which never lent Argentina any money but bought the distressed paper on the open market, now claim that the integrity of the global financial order is at risk if opportunistic paper-shufflers like themselves are not paid off in full.
Sounds to me like a great argument for a 100% tax on non-productive economic activity.
The ship was seized in October pursuant to court actions brought by American Vulture Fund wheeler-dealer Paul Singer. Singer's funds bought Argentine sovereign debt at huge discounts around the time of Argentina's default ten years ago, and has been using the courts to try to force Argentina to repay their bonds at face value.
It's a great strategy when it works. Several years ago Singer's funds made an estimated 400% windfall profit pursuing the same strategy with discounted Peruvian bonds. That's a windfall Peru's impoverished campesinos continue to pay for.
The irony is that Argentina's legitimate creditors have long ago settled with the government. The Singer funds, which never lent Argentina any money but bought the distressed paper on the open market, now claim that the integrity of the global financial order is at risk if opportunistic paper-shufflers like themselves are not paid off in full.
Sounds to me like a great argument for a 100% tax on non-productive economic activity.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Vulture fund tactics spiral into international incident
Paul Singer made it onto Forbes billionaire list on the backs of some of the poorest people in the world.
Singer was one of the pioneers of buying distressed sovereign debt, then holding out for full payment using the American court system to bully impoverished third world nations.
There is a drama unfolding today in the African country of Ghana, where the government has been persuaded to enforce an American court order in favor of Singer's hedge fund.
Back in 2002, as Argentina's economy was collapsing, Singer's hedge funds bought hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Argentine bonds for pennies on the dollar. He has spent the last ten years taking the Argentine government through the US court system to get full payment on those bonds.
His argument is cloaked in the usual brew of self-righteous faux indignation about a promise being a promise, etc, and oh my God, if people can just walk away from their debts, civilization as we know it will collapse.
That's an argument that is favorably received by Republican appointees on the bench when made by major donors to the Republican party. Then a pliable foreign country seeking to curry favor with the US can be persuaded to enforce America's judicial decisions.
That's what Ghana has done by seizing an Argentine naval vessel as surety for Singer's bonds.
The Argentinians are having none of it. This could blow up into a major international incident at any moment.
Singer was one of the pioneers of buying distressed sovereign debt, then holding out for full payment using the American court system to bully impoverished third world nations.
There is a drama unfolding today in the African country of Ghana, where the government has been persuaded to enforce an American court order in favor of Singer's hedge fund.
Back in 2002, as Argentina's economy was collapsing, Singer's hedge funds bought hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Argentine bonds for pennies on the dollar. He has spent the last ten years taking the Argentine government through the US court system to get full payment on those bonds.
His argument is cloaked in the usual brew of self-righteous faux indignation about a promise being a promise, etc, and oh my God, if people can just walk away from their debts, civilization as we know it will collapse.
That's an argument that is favorably received by Republican appointees on the bench when made by major donors to the Republican party. Then a pliable foreign country seeking to curry favor with the US can be persuaded to enforce America's judicial decisions.
That's what Ghana has done by seizing an Argentine naval vessel as surety for Singer's bonds.
The Argentinians are having none of it. This could blow up into a major international incident at any moment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)