E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSpain threatened economic retaliation against Argentina Tuesday after Buenos Aires took control of an oil company said to be worth $18 billion.
Argentina's President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner replaced the chief executive officer of oil firm YPF -- the country's biggest firm -- and said she would send a bill to congress to take a 51 percent stake in the company, the Bloomberg news agency reported.
Spanish oil firm Repsol is the major shareholder in YPF and it said it would seek compensation on the bases that YPF was worth $18 billion. However, its shares dropped by more than eight percent Tuesday, Reuters said.
"With this attitude, this hostility from the Argentine authorities, there will be consequences that we'll see over the next few days. They will be in the diplomatic field, the industrial field, and on energy," Spanish industry minister Jose Manuel Soria said, according to Reuters.
He added that the government would take "clear and decisive" measures, according to Bloomberg.
Madrid called in the Argentinean ambassador in a rapidly escalating row over the nationalization order, Reuters said.
Fernandez: I'm 'not a thug'
Fernandez's move delighted many of her compatriots but alarmed some foreign governments and investors.
"This president isn't going to respond to any threats ... because I represent the Argentine people. I'm the head of state, not a thug," she said, according to Reuters.
Fernandez said the government would ask Congress, which she controls, to approve a bill to expropriate a controlling 51 percent stake in the company by seizing shares held exclusively by Repsol, saying energy was a "vital resource."
"If this [the YPF's] policy continues -- draining fields dry, no exploration and practically no investment -- the country will end up having no viable future, not because of a lack of resources but because of business policies," she said.
Repsol described Argentina's move as "clearly unlawful and seriously discriminatory." "This battle is not over," Repsol chairman Antonio Brufau said.
Spanish media condemned the Argentinean action, which Reuters said was believed to be the biggest nationalization in the natural resources field since the seizure of Russia's Yukos a decade ago.
Right-wing newspaper La Razon carried a photograph of Fernandez on its front page in a pool of oil with the headline: "Kirchner's Dirty War", referring to her full name. The business newspaper La Gaceta de los Negocios branded the takeover "an act of pillage".
On the left, El Periodico spoke of "The New Evita", pointing out that Fernandez had announced the nationalization in a room decorated with a portrait of Eva Peron, the actress who was married to a president and revered by many Argentineans for her populist politics.
More world news from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Norway mass killer Anders Breivik: I 'would do it all again'
Tunisia still wants sun lovers, new Islamist government says
Sources: Briton killed after threat to expose Chinese leader's wife
US prepares for last major Afghanistan offensive
Follow us on Twitter: @msnbc_world
Leave a Comment:
For many who do not understand, to nationalize the company means that she stole it from the rightful owners. Some people will try to cloud the issue, but that's exactly what happened.
To clarify further, "nationalize" is a desired term and action ONLY to those with socialist and Marxist tendencies. If Obama thought he could get away with it, he'd nationalize, overnight, our entire oil/gas industry as well as the healthcare and power industries. Thank goodness for a handful who have not given in to the progressive/socialist movement and stand in the way of complete executive branch control of major industry segments. Those who think they want this have no idea and the only way they can be convinced of it's disastrous, counter-productive effects is to allow this to happen ... problem is it can't be undone once it happens.
Typical Reich-wing rant from a Texan, seek help dude, you really need it! Oh, and it might help if you actually looked up the definition of Socialism and Marxism instead of blindly repeating comrade Hannity's talking points.
Only an idiot teabagger from Texas would change an Argentina and Spain issue into a rant on our President. This is why the rest of the country think that there are more fools in Texas than oil wells.
Stay strong STexan....GovHater and Steeler Fan obviously don't live in States where Oil Production is critical to the States' economy......they live in lala land, where they think the petroleum products they gorge comes from the gas pump fairy.
Fernandez must be getting guidance from Hugo. It's amusing to read some posts by the regressive left extolling people to look up the definition of socialism before they post. Actually, it is they that should look it up but their ideologically crippled brains prevent them from realizing actual socialism when they see it.
And Gov-Hater and Steeler Fan - only morons would NOT see a neo-socialist footprint on much of what our POTUS has attempted to circumvent constitutionally since he's been on amateur hour the last 3 years. When banana republics steal, they call it nationalization, when OUR government takes over major interests in car manufacturing etc. and steals from major share-holders WE call it "stimulus" or "bailout". BK - you hit it right on the nail. All these slugs know how to do is vomit out the on-going party line BS and vitrolic attacks against anyone that disagrees with them.
The idiots are in Pittsburg Steeler fan. You must be one.
And you ask why the Argentine wants the Falkland Islands with it's proven oil/gas reserves?
Its ALL to do with money. or the lack of it.
The Argentine attitude seems to be we don't have it we want it, so we will take it...Like most thieves
Obama did nationalize GM. The government and union own the lions share of the company to this day. Maxine Waters actually blurted out the "S" word when she was grilling oil corporations.
Make no mistake about it, if Obama and co thought they could get away with it they'd socialize the entire nation. The only thing holding them back was the shellacking they got in 2010 over Obamacare.
It is obvious Obama and all progressives think government can do a better job of running things than individuals or corporations. That being the case, it is also obvious that, to them, a socialist state is the optimal solution.
V Phil. GM was " nationalized"? Please define "nationalized". Also I'd like to know which government agency is responsible for managing GM? I'm curious because GM has judging by it's stock price on the evil capitalist thing known as "the stock market" is doing really well. I'm thinking we should be getting whatever government agency is running GM to step and run the whole government. Or maybe you're just throwing out those cute little phrases you learned while watching FOX News.
Yep, Argentina is going after their natural resources since their DEFAULT ON THEIR 2002 International debt:
So, if Argentina is going after their natural resources, I wonder why they "re-nationalized" an aircraft manufacturer operated by Lockheed Martin ?
Oh, then there is the issue with the Falkland Islands.
Posturing or a Chavez wannabe ?
Ahhh, here are more Argentinian Nationalization efforts to take over other companies (NOT RELATED TO NATURAL RESOURCES);
=Steeler Fan - 2727721
Only an idiot teabagger from Texas would change an Argentina and Spain issue into a rant on our President. This is why the rest of the country think that there are more fools in Texas than oil wells.
Steeler Fan,
How true but it's also why the majority of Americans would mind seeing president Perry make good on his desire to seccede from the U. S. Good bye, good riddence to the ignorant Texans.
i have a good job and i am not stupid or uninformed like a lot of the trolls on this post, but i sure do see the need for the "we the people" govt of the US to nationalize certain things like our oil and the rest of its natural resources after being ripped off for so many years but it will never happen after citizens united decision/now "we the corporations" govt of the us took over. the trolls of the republicans have heroes like nugent who wore the same pants he peed in and crapped in for 30 days to avoid going to viet nam, or gw who just disappeared on a cocain binge and never came back during nam. romney and his ilk are offended by the comment about his wife never working but see no problem with the vile comments by nugent. grow up guys, think for yourselves instead of listening to the hate spewed by limbaugh and consider "what would jesus do" instead of your current motto: "what would hitler do"
What was that Revolting Cocks song about Texas called? Beers, Steers, and Queers? If you haven't heard it, look it up :D
Anyhow, Obama has nothing to do with this. But FYI, in an emergency, any US president can expropriate any business or property in the country - later, once the emergency's passed, the courts can sort out what if any compensation is due.
Bill, funny you seem neither intelligent nor informed.
The savior of the democratic party, Clinton was a draft dodger.
Private property is the essence of all other rights. So if you are so against private property maybe we should also nationalize body parts.
I vote that we use you for spare parts for those who need them and might choose more wisely.
Bill you do not understand nationalization. First gas would go up and there would be shortages. You think GSA is bad. Corruption would be unbelievable and more tax money would have to be raised to pay for the government companies because they will be ran into the ground. Government can not run a lemonade stand.
Look at France when you talk about nationalized companies and they were run into the ground and had to be sold to the private sector to get them up and running again.
Chavez has run his nationalized companies down so much, that even the farms he nationalized does not produce even half of what they use to.
Good post Ido, thanks for the links. I guess she's trying to make friends. not.
"Owners" -- Interesting word.
What myspellchecker is saying is that people who live half way around the world and have completely different priorities and values have a better claim to the land and resources of Argentina than the people who actually live there.
I'm not saying that the rule of law and property rights should be ignored. (And Argentina's President Kirchner is not ignoring them. She will send a bill to their legislature to appropriate funds to pay for the shares.) What I am saying is that ownership of captal is not the highest value in the world. The people who actually live in a place and depend on that place for life do have a stake in these kinds of decisions.
I wonder if there is any case where myspellchecker would not place money above people.,
Porter, I will be happy to explain. The owners used their money that they worked for, much like some of us, then invested it, much like some of us. They sent their equipment, which they paid for, and then after negotiations with the government of Argentina and the rightful owners of the land in Argentina, they leased (paid their money to the Argentinian owners) land and developed it by drilling for oil. Then, and this may help Sighber to understand, they offered money-paying jobs to the Argentinian workers, who of their own free will, accepted, or not. All of the risk was on the part of the Spanish oil company owners. If they had found no oil, too bad for them, everyone else still got paid. Instead, not only did they get oil, they were very profitable. So profitable that Kirchner decided she wanted it all, and then promptly stole the company from them. Quite easy to understand.
Well said!
myspellcheckisbroken
Thank you for posting an explanation that doesn't involve the socialist/Marxist/communist boogeyman.
Every time the rich are getting screwed it's the fault of the boogeyman listed above. When it's the poor getting screwed it's capitalism/class warfare/patriotism.
You are so worried about getting screwed by the rich, you don't even understand the government screws everyone.
Myspellchecker -Porter, I will be happy to explain. The owners used their money that they worked for, much like some of us, then invested it, much like some of us. They sent their equipment, which they paid for, and then after negotiations with the government of Argentina and the rightful owners of the land in Argentina, they leased (paid their money to the Argentinian owners) land and developed it by drilling for oil. Then, and this may help Sighber to understand, they offered money-paying jobs to the Argentinian workers, who of their own free will, accepted, or not. All of the risk was on the part of the Spanish oil company owners. If they had found no oil, too bad for them, everyone else still got paid. Instead, not only did they get oil, they were very profitable. So profitable that Kirchner decided she wanted it all, and then promptly stole the company from them. Quite easy to understand.
That sounds good,and most people here would buy it. But the problem is its a half truth,that distorts the real truth. This company was bought from the Argentine government (that owned YPF) when Argentina,under Carlos Menom was privatizing state owned companies.And many people believe taking huge bribes as well,to do it.So it was a going concern already,not built by the Spanish investors.The new owners as news reports have stated,have not been living up to their agreements made when they were allowed to purchase the company. They have been pocketing the profits from the high prices on gas,but not reinvesting them as required,to drill for more oil,and improve the companies infrastructure. Call it Socialism if you will,but there are resources that are too important to the survival of a nation that shouldn't be left only to the quest for profit.Fat cats will always put their private interests before the common good of the nation,and that is one of the reasons governments exist,to prevent that.
Hey Howard Roark. How many poor US Senators/Representatives do you think there are?
Your point? The were elected by people who were not wealthy. The real question is how many became wealthy after they were elected? That is government, it does not create, it only consumes.
In other news from Spain, with record borrowing and Spain's economy at the level where Greece's was two years ago (before they became insolvent), Spain's king has broken his hip while on a state sponsored elephant hunt in Africa. Doesn't it seem that Spain's king should be thinking about more important stuff than hunting elephants at this particular point in time? Typical monarchy thinking, I suppose.
she has probably done this as part of the dispute she has re ignited for the falkland islands now that oil has been found in the area
Stolen, from its rightful owner? How about the lives of exploited workers stolen from them by corporations that move their operations offshore in order to maximize profits? How about the resources of exploited countries stolen from them by "savvy" businesspeople. Would it be okay if China set up a huge oil and gas operation here in the United States and began siphoning off our resources for their benefit? Would we scream about "theft" if our government responded and "nationalized" their corporation?
Don't look now , but rumor has it that China will be drilling less than 40 miles off our Southern Coast using Exploration Grants provided by the Cuban Gov't........while our Gov't. sits idly by and refuses to allow expansion into that area.
Already the Great Satan is making plans to drill in the China sea. Yassar, the big fish eats the little ones. KA-BOOOOOOOM! Git'em China!
Hey sighber, hate to break the news, but China has already bought into "huge oil and gas operation" in the United States. They already syphon off our resources for their benefit, because oil and gas is a global marketplace. I agree with you on the social/worker issues but the reality is that all the unions in the world dont have the capital resources to build one off-shore platform, or commission 100 miles of pipeline. The socialist can't survive without the capitalist, and visa versa. You can't have a global econmy without capitalist rights to safe investment.
You don't have a clue! "exploited workers"???? What a bunch of friggin crap and stolen right out of the little red book of Mao and the AFL-CIO etc. These WORKERS, didn't have a pot to piss in before foreign investment. That's what INVESTMENT IS except in totalitarian countries where the government owns everything - including your mind. Get real. The lesson to be learned from current events in Argentina AND Venezuela AND much of Africa is to invest NOTHING in these countries and let them wallow in their own quagmire of poverty. Enough said.
JP
Until you labeled me I had no clue, no inkling that I was in league with Mao. Are you related to McCarthy? Label away, it doesn't change the exploitation of people, or resources, or countries, it is all about money, money, money and the heck with everything and everyone who gets in your way. You, sir, are a selfish greedy individual feeding off those around you in a never ending quest to obtain the most "things"! I hope you enjoy all the materialistic garbage you bought over your life. I'm sure all of your assets will mourn your passing and the rest of the people who share your mindset will sing songs that celebrate your grand achievements. Meanwhile people in the countries you "let wallow in their own quagmires of poverty" will struggle and watch each other die for lack of clean water, food, infrastructure...what a grand humanitarian you must be, congratulations!
That's a bunch of 50's socialist crap, how pathetic. It is the investment of companies in third world nations that brings education, opportunity, prosperity. Look at where Japan was after the war, look at where China was under socialism and where it is now under capitalism. Look at Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, S Korea, all lifted from poverty to prosperity through capitalism. Look at the entire Soviet Union before and after the break up. Meanwhile N Korea, can't even feed itself.
You are Maoist and you McCarthy rant is stupid. We are talking about property rights, the key to ANY prosperity, not some witch hunt.
Phil. China is a capitalist country?!?! Holy @!$%#! Alert the news media!! The last bastion of communism has died and everyone in the world missed it except for that Valhalla Phil guy who posts on MSNBC!
China is allowing more privatization of businesses; however, they are far from capitalist.
They're quite capitalist, actually, and becoming more so every year. It's just that their government model doesn't match any other capitalist nation. There is quite literally nothing Communist about the nation run by the Communist party.
The last vestiges of Statist economic policy are their state-backed corporations, which aren't that different from American corporations with very good lobbyists in concept (though state-backed corps in China are much better off for it than contributing businesses in the US).
bk- the republican gov of fla doesnt want drilling off his coasts.
Ta Da! Next comes the return of the Falkland islands to Argentina from the bankrupt English oil (Libya) thieves. Yassar, in time justice arrives to make things right.
Right, there's beef on the British side over that, Spain is now squeezed as well. It wouldn't surprise me to see the two of them agreeing to do something about it. I'm pretty certain England doesn't want any more pressure on Europe right now, it's bad for business.
Maybe we should return Arizona to the Apache, and you and "save the environment" can see how well you fare living there. Better yet, move to the Falklands, start a pseudo-Arab Spring, Save the Whales resistance movement against the British and see how long it takes them to use you for fertilizer. THAT is the REAL world! Natural resources either perpetuate or destroy a culture or civilization, and when push comes to shove, guess who wins? NOT the person that can sing kumbaya the loudest. Enough said.
JP is there a point to this post other than to prove you're rude and not very bright? PLease take your attitude and shove it or post intelligently.
yes JP, what on earth are you blathering about?
How do you move an "OIL" operation off shore? This the problem with dealing in South America. Buy property there to retire because it is less expensive, lose it tomorrow because of a 3rd world government that doesn't like the original deal. Chavez and Venezuela is a better example, company invests money there and he is elected.
The thief/thug/dictator claims the government now owns it. I would consider blowing it to pieces before giving it up to this sort of 3rd world malcontent-ed government. I would expect odumba to think seriously about doing that here................"fairly redistributing the property and wealth."
I see little difference between so called "nationalizing" a company and the principal of "eminent domain" except that it is the big boys who are taking it in the shorts this time. Look at what we did to the Native Americans when we discovered gold and oil on their lands. Besides, I have little sympathy for an industry that takes so much in resources and returns so little to the people of that country. Maybe if they had bribed more politicians with campaign funds and expensive trips to exotic locations like they have in our country, this would not have happened.
and what do you drive? how do you cool and heat your home? sounds like the industry is just feeding your greed and needs. In other words providing a service they have invested in and should be paid for.
Rob. Even in eminent domain proceedings the property loser is to be compensated monitarily. Chavez cooked new deals with the oil companies in Venezuela, and "nationalized" some gold interests, but that is all still playing out in international law, and there will be funds changing hands. Either that, or he can find a new market for his oil that doesnt involve international banking, fat chance on that. If Argentina wants to do it without compensating for the assests, that's just theft, and they will watch their import/export ratios change dramatically, as well as their GDP. Hello 1970's Argentinian inflation. If the Argentinians didn't cook the right deal with the Spanish, who is to blame for that? The Argentinians and the folks that they elected, not the invited investors in Argentina.
There is a huge difference between the two unless you are a socialist. Eminent domain is the government requiring land for a specific use, not a fascist power grab of another business. If the idiot needs the land to put a highway through a refinery, fine, take the land, give compensation, then tear down the refinery and put in the road.
That is NOT what is going on. As said above, the company took all the risk, made all the investment, then when successful, the socialists want to take it over. Either way Argentina will lose big over this unless they back off immediately. What business in their right mind will want to invest there if this goes through?
Sorry Daryl, but no matter how you try to spin it eminent domain is a government tool, not a corporate one, and those forces work in opposition to each other more often than not. I don't really know what you're referring to as far as "human hunting", but judging from the rest of your post I have every reason to believe it is similarly a bad twisting of the truth.
I oppose both eminent domain and nationalization. Private property is the most fundamental economic right there is, and no government should have the right to violate it without indicting you for something first.
SF accountant, you can't oppose eminent domain, because its in the constitution.
Plus it is a government tool, but Kelo has used it to seize property and hand it over to a private entity. It can be used for massive amounts of corruption.
LOL... What's good for the Goose...
Maybe Spain should call on the Odyssey Exploration group to see if they can find the company for them!
Funny people should mention Obama nationalizing Natural Gas.
He just did. This last week.
Look it up.
Hey moped. "Funny People" don't provide links to their assertions. Normal people do.
I'm sorry that you are too lazy and stupid to look for anything yourself, Arsenic. :(
It doesn't matter. Its your country that's going to be burning in rubble in a few years.
Hey Moped. Why look up what I know you didn't get right? And you have no idea what country is on my passport, or where I am invested. Clueless in fact. Just like your affirmations regarding the Executive Order. You did bother to read it first; didn't you, dittohead?
I know that you live on Planet earth, and I know that you're apparently too stupid and "righteous" to read the writing on the wall.
Enjoy your "Brave New World," zombie. :)
After all, you probably helped make it.
Oh, and you didn't eh? Bwahahahahah! Go back to your studies boy-clown.
Oh, and you didn't eh? Bwahahahahah! Go back to your studies boy-clown.
Oh, and you didn't eh? Bwahahahahah! Go back to your studies boy-clown.
Oh, and you didn't eh? Bwahahahahah! Go back to your studies boy-clown.
Oh, and you didn't eh? Bwahahahahah! Go back to your studies boy-clown.
Moped, Obama didn't "nationalize" the natural gas industry. Tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists think the executive order is the first step, but there is no proof of that at this point. However, there is some growing evidence that fracking can cause some serious problems and needs national attention.
oh contraire.....there is no evidence that Fracking causes serious problems. Please provide links to evidence. YOU CAN"T tree hugger.
I agree....where is your link...otherwise you just spewing BS.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/04/17/environment-fracking-earthquake-studies.html&sa=U&ei=e9SNT7HpCqnZ0QH657muDw&ved=0CCgQFjAD&usg=AFQjCNF-XQFsLLc37vpRDUS0mbyaDLWl0g
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9207396/Fracking-caused-Blackpool-earthquakes-QandA.html&sa=U&ei=e9SNT7HpCqnZ0QH657muDw&ved=0CCoQFjAE&usg=AFQjCNG87nKWHNl1P7NL87XnZ72cEtqXDw
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/17/fracking-earthquake_n_1430466.html&sa=U&ei=e9SNT7HpCqnZ0QH657muDw&ved=0CDsQFjAK&usg=AFQjCNELoW1qFsWtuQ3UW1vYx-NDIMIm-w
http://247wallst.com/2011/12/12/us-epa-links-fracking-to-groundwater-contamination-eca-chk-xom-eog/
But of course, you won't believe them anyway. But any RESONABLE person would know that you can't pump 10's of thousands of gallons of chemicals into the ground without it going somewhere and ending up in our drinking water.
In the next few months, you are going to see a lot of really weird things happening here in the United States.
lol
Executive Order -- Supporting Safe & Responsible Development of Unconventional Domestic Natural Gas
signed by president Obama.
AKA - Regulating Natural Gas,
AKA - Nationalizing Natural Gas
Kinda neat how MSNBC didn't mention a peep about this, eh?
Hey Moped. Where does this "Nationalize" anything? Looks to me like it spends taxpayer money to help out private industry.
"Consistent with the authorities and responsibilities of participating agencies and offices, the Working Group shall support the safe and responsible production of domestic unconventional natural gas by performing the following functions:
(i) coordinate agency policy activities, ensuring their efficient and effective operation and facilitating cooperation among agencies, as appropriate;
(ii) coordinate among agencies the sharing of scientific, environmental, and related technical and economic information;
(iii) engage in long-term planning and ensure coordination among the appropriate Federal entities with respect to such issues as research, natural resource assessment, and the development of infrastructure;
(iv) promote interagency communication with stakeholders; and
(v) consult with other agencies and offices as appropriate.
Kinda stupid to call that "Nationalization" ya think?
You obviously haven't learned anything about how Politicians interpret their own language, have you?
Decades of officials "interpreting" their own self-written laws in draconian fashion - and you still naively believe that simply writing stuff in a "nice way" means anything to them?
Again - it's your ass. Not mine. :)
You have no idea if it's "my ass" Moped. Hey, why write laws at all if your going to do whatever you wanted to do. You'r anit-obama, I'm not from here, projection is really funny. Why would anybody that wasn't an American be invesing time in an American Executive Order? You give yourself away clever-boy.
What would be niaive is believing anything that you write OR that you read the executive order befor you posted your Rushism. TaTa.
Moped are you another idiot teabagger from Texas as is STexan above? Geese, listening to faux news has turned your small brains to shi^^t.
Hehehe.
We'll see how things turn out in a year or so.
:)
You'll eat your words.
Obama can, already, do whatever he wants to do.
He can assassinate you,
He can detain you,
He can take all your stuff for Federal purposes even during peace time operations.
And he can do it all under executive decree.
This is all according to a series of "new" laws he signed or modified recently.
But that's okay.
I bet you knew about those, too.
Mmmmmmmm,
Care for s'more Obama Kool Aid?
Moped,
you realize that the government has been able to do all those things you just listed above over the past 100 years right?
Gee Moped, shouldn't you be worried about the P^3? You know, the President, Premier, or Prime Minister where you live? Why the Obama fixation, self-proclaimed non-American?
NDAA, was just passed, not 100 years ago, but less than 100 days ago. That is a whole new ballgame. The interesting thing is both parties went along with it. What do they know that we don't?
And Daryl, YOU realize that the Tea Party (I assume that was what TP meant?) didn't exist before Obama took office, right?
Personally both parties have little problem with gross expansions of federal power. It makes me sick that there seems to be no choice in our political system but "dumb or dumber?"
Phil,
NDAA just makes it more right and out in the open. It doesn't mean that before it the government had no way to do it, as long as the government sees you as a threat to the US they will find a way to deal with you. That's not conspiracy, it's just fact.
"I represent the Argentine people. I'm the head of state, not a thug" she said. Well, can't you be both? We've had ours.
the article doesn't give us much as far as background on Repsol and YPF and how they are treating Argentina. what am I supposed to be investigating the whole thing? Geez MSNBC, your folks should be doing that.
Certainly Repsol must have some kind of agreement with the Argentine government for operating. Spain is hurting and aching as it is economically so cutting off their oil supply will certainly anger them a lot. Is Kirchner trying to start world war 3 ?
That's not "their" oil supply. Repsol is a private company, I believe. They sell to whoever buys, not necessarily Spain itself. While it's possible that mucking up the laws involving energy investment in resource-rich South American countries may cause the world oil price to rise somewhat, it's unlikely to have a distinct effect in Spain alone.
This be part of the "Occupy" movement. Occupy Repsol. Workers of the World Unite.
Spoken like a true socialist.
A true (I.E. educated) socialist should know that socialism requires capitalism to fund it, and thus cannot sustain itself without such basic rights as respecting private property. So no, Katlan is not a true socialist.
Not to mention there's a rather unsupported assumption with that comment. "Workers of the World Unite"? Are Repsol's worker's underpaid or mistreated at all?
If the Spanish oil company is anything like BP then they are probably polluting the areas where they drill and pump without cleaning it up . So she has the right to take controlling shares as long as she makes sure that all pollution is cleaned up
And who do you think cleaned the BP or Exxon events - the EPA??? She has a RIGHT to steal a company? Typical left wing ideology whose matra is "we have a right to steal everything you earn" if we have a crusade. Give me a friggin break. What you fail to understand is that most wars start because one faction feels they have a RIGHT to respond to the actions of another, and when you try to steal something from somebody that eventually decides not to let you do it, you often get your head blown off or your country destoyed. Argentina is rolling down the same slippery slope as it did with Britain in the Falklands - and we all know what happened there. New Evita my hind-end, more like the next Allende.
So you're supporting a seizure of private property based on your completely unsupported assumption that the company is spewing pollution and doing nothing about it?
Would you be so sanguine about some Feds raiding your home and arresting you because they assumed you were doing drugs? You know, because leftists do that, right?
That's called prejudice, and it's wrong. Whether you're applying it to a person or a corporation.
Is this our so called leaders sister??????????????????????????
Kirchner is getting out of control, here. If the state wants a greater share in the company, I don't see what's keeping it from negotiating a share settlement rather than just seizing it and paying whatever they feel the company's worth. She says she wants more investment and exploration, and she's going to encourage that... by taking over foreigner's assets?
Usually these sorts of moves are followed by mismanagement by the leaders involved, invariably by stocking the company with friends and patrons rather than people who know what they're doing. This (also invariably) leads to a decline in production, efficiency, and usually safety too. See Venezuela's oil firm (I believe it's called Petrobras, if I remember correctly) and Russia's Gazprom.
It's not hard to understand, people. Resource extraction is a business. Governments don't belong in business. The incentives are too twisted. Tax it, regulate it, whatever, but otherwise, stay out of it.
Energy and Water... you'll see more of this happening in the future with many governments..!!
Sadly I think you are right. And sadly I think it will only make things worse.
The Oligarchs start to squirm when a leftie country claims soverignty over their own resources. 51% is a controlling interest but 49% isn't enough for those who are used to dictating to the masses.
Obama and the neolibs will never take this path since they worship private property so the only solution is World Revolution!
Why your types are called progressive is beyond me. You want to regress back to 50's style socialism. We should start calling you regressives.
There is no such thing as oligarchs when it comes to oil companies, they are owned by millions of stock holders. I own a ton of Exxon stock, does that make me an oligarch? Stupid.
Instead of just parroting leftist talking points, grow a brain and think through what you are posting.
A controlling interest is important when it comes to private vs. government ownership. Once a government has authority to change the way your company is run, from that point the business is run for politics, not profit.
For all leftists whine about greed, it's much cleaner, transparent, and beneficial to society than political meddling.
World revolution. Right. As if private corporations could ever begin to approach the level of tyranny and suffering caused by governments.
I'd be upset if I made a great buy with a car dealer, but he showed up at my house the next day and decided he didn't like the deal he made and took the car back.
Where are those darn "Conquistadors" when you need them? Someone call the Vatican, We'll get this lined out in no time, Maybe a few beheadings are in order?
No Spain, You no longer OWN Argentina or it's people or it's real estate
No England, You no longer own the USA or it's people or it's real estate
No Russia, You no longer own U-beki-beki-stan-can or it's people
I know sometimes cutting apron strings hurts, But,,,,,,,,,,Gotta be done
No Argentina you do not have the right to nationalize a globally recognized private company and call it yours. Just because obama did it with GM doesn't mean it is right.
They DO own, or at least have a legal right that they paid for, the oil company, its infrastructure, and the land they were exploring. They didn't just put down a fence and post some guards like in the old days. Who has the greater right to property? The people that paid for it, or the people that willfully sold it?
this is exactly the same stuff the Obama regime wants to do with American oil companies...Obama is in lock step with the foriegn socialists in Argentina, Russia and Venezuela...
What is going in in Argentina that they recently picked a fight with the U.K. over the Falklands, now they are picking a fight with Spain? What do the people of Argentina think of their government?
Hard to say. Nationalism sells sometimes. Check out Venezuela. Hugo Chavez has devastated the economy and made hating America public policy, and many of the people eat it up.
Kirchner is making all these moves under the explanation that Argentina is being unfairly treated by foreigners. It all depends if you can make that story sound plausible to the voting guy on the street.
Not particularly. Both parties serve up nationalism when it happens to mesh with their platforms. I hear plenty of whining from Obama about "jobs being shipped overseas" and globalization/trade "taking jobs away from Americans". The argument being that it's more important to make sure Americans have those jobs than keeping a product line efficient and the end product low-cost (as a side note, this argument also favors producers over consumers, since the only way to prevent outsourcing is to protect domestic businesses from foreign competition so that they can safely charge their customers more. Corporate welfare, anyone?)
The GOP favors nationalism when it comes to security and immigration. But nationalism isn't a primary driver of politics in the US because voters are more motivated by what politicians want to actually do and by their political leanings than by their nationalist credentials.
All these folks keep talking about Obama being socialist, but what is your military and your federal highways? Those are socialist, and I would bet my bottom dollar you support them. A lot of folks keep calling this stuff socialism, but the government enters these markets to balance them at times when the better good is being taken advantage of. I find having the government to check the market system with it's programs helps me and puts more money into my pocket than the approach of a rich person letting his money trickle down to me.
This is true. The line between a "socialist" and "capitalist" government is fuzzy, and intellectually disingenuous (mostly because socialism cannot support itself properly without capitalism to fund it). I think that most people tend to think of a sliding scale, with the US near the middle while many European countries like Greece and France lie further down the scale, with economic wrecks like Cuba and North Korea on the far end.
That said, forced nationalizations are not really a tool of socialist policy. They're a populist policy, a way to appeal directly to people's sense of nationalism and "fairness" while deliberately ignoring the obvious legal and economic repurcussions. Tell people they're exploited and then punish your scapegoat. Same thing Chavez did in Venezuela and Mugabe did in Zimbabwe. Didn't really work out in those countries.
Better to burn it than let them take it by force.
To nationalize: Make contracts with companies/contries to produce natural resources that you dont have the technology, money or ability to produce yourself then simply tear up those contracts and take them over after they're setup and producing.