El Presidente Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Interesting article: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/26/cuba-6b-debt-to-americans-for-seized-properties-hangs-over-us-talks/ I can see it going four ways: Raised as a sticking point and then forgotten as a "clean sheet" approach. Swept under the carpet and never mentioned Cuba pays the 6 Billion (or agreed figure) kidding...only kidding US pays the 6 Billion (or agreed figure) in exchange for select/strategic business/trade advantages. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Yeah... that is interesting. I imagine the US will foot the bill. I mean, we might as well... we've had the printing presses in the Fed running pretty much non-stop for years and years now. What's another measly $6B? It's not even a trillion! Anything less than a trillion dollars is chump-change today. Cheers, ~ Greg ~ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiminBC Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Not while Obama is in power. The republicans will not let it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainQuintero Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Fox News articles :s I think legally there is no debt owed when something is nationalised? I'd guess it would be brushed under the carpet, maybe Cuba would send a written apology as a sign of good faith to companies that were affected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Fox News articles :s I think legally there is no debt owed when something is nationalised? I'd guess it would be brushed under the carpet, maybe Cuba would send a written apology as a sign of good faith to companies that were affected? Well... That's rather convenient for those committing the nationalization, isn't it? And I suppose the legality of the debt depends entirely upon which side of the nationalization you're on... but either way I think it would be politically impossible for the US to ignore that $6B theft. Even if DC didn't care about the debt one way or another, I'm sure they would opt to pay the debt to allow Cuba to save face while also trying to compensate (as well they can) those whose property was stolen by the communists. Cheers, Greg Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainQuintero Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Well... That's rather convenient for those committing the nationalization, isn't it? And I suppose the legality of the debt depends entirely upon which side of the nationalization you're on... but either way I think it would be politically impossible for the US to ignore that $6B theft. Even if DC didn't care about the debt one way or another, I'm sure they would opt to pay the debt to allow Cuba to save face while also trying to compensate (as well they can) those whose property was stolen by the communists. Cheers, Greg Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk I'm no lawyer buti think nationalisation is a completely legal act and courts will always side with the nation regardless of political system. It's just over of those things. Legally after nationalisations I don't think the company losing it's assets has much of a keg to stand on, for better or worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cigcars Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Plus, how did those companies gain that property in the first place? Was it by popular vote by the people, or lands seized from them in the first place by puppet leaders in the not-so-secret employ of bigger world powers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Sure it's legal. And the nationalists courts will naturally side with the nationalist government if a claim ever managed to make it to court. No disagreement there. But there's still the political/optics factor in the US. Someone has to pay that debt. Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Cuba could do it the Irish way. Promise to pay the $6 Bn. Agree on a payment schedule. Trade begins and US companies invest in Cuba. After 10 years of excuses for not sending the first payment, Cuba reneges on the whole deal. By then US companies have so much money invested in Cuba that sanctions or penalties aren't politically suitable, a little lobbying goes some of the way. After a bit of lip service and some frosty looks the whole thing is forgotten. If Cuba played their cards right they could even get Guantanamo bay back as part of the deal. '6bn is a lot for nothing in return' etc. Ireland did this after independence in 1922, made some payments to our old rulers until 1932 and then stopped. It caused an economic war at the time but times were different then, the trade war was still ended by lobbying from private industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 This is an interesting article as well. http://www.globalresearch.ca/corporate-predators-want-compensation-for-lost-cuban-assets-they-stole/5421479 I recall an article years ago about how America never compensated Britain (effectively Canada today) for assets it seized after the revolutionary war... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 I recall an article years ago about how America never compensated Britain (effectively Canada today) for assets it seized after the revolutionary war... What assets did the then-new US federal gov't seize from Canada? I don't recall the US claiming Montreal as their own, as much as I'm sure many Canadians outside of Quebec wish they had. LOL Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainQuintero Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 This is an interesting article as well. http://www.globalresearch.ca/corporate-predators-want-compensation-for-lost-cuban-assets-they-stole/5421479 I recall an article years ago about how America never compensated Britain (effectively Canada today) for assets it seized after the revolutionary war... There was a story going around a few years ago that said the US wanted to purchase the land that their embassy in London was situated on, the landowner being the duke of Westminster, he refused but was met with insistence. Eventually he agreed but only if the US returned to him the land which was stolen from his family a few years previous...the great state of Virginia Time moves on, invested parties on both sides are in danger on getting lost in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Cite your source. I'm pretty sure there was no King of Virginia prior to the revolution. Well, other than George I suppose. I love all these supposed stories everyone has. Makes for entertaining reading. Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 What assets did the then-new US federal gov't seize from Canada? I don't recall the US claiming Montreal as their own, as much as I'm sure many Canadians outside of Quebec wish they had. LOL Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk LOL:) I can't seem to find the article but I recall it referenced some history prof's analysis on the theoretical amounts owed. I believe lands were seized in America from British sympathizers. The article came out many years ago. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptrthgr8 Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 LOL:) I can't seem to find the article but I recall it referenced some history prof's analysis on the theoretical amounts owed. I believe lands were seized in America from British sympathizers. The article came out many years ago. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Yeah, I can see that. There were a lot of Loyalists who went back to England (voluntarily or otherwise) after the war and I'm sure more than just a few of them were well-off types. Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainQuintero Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Cite your source. I'm pretty sure there was no King of Virginia prior to the revolution. Well, other than George I suppose. I love all these supposed stories everyone has. Makes for entertaining reading. Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3123915/US-embassy-to-move-from-Grosvenor-Square-to-industrial-estate.html That's the point I was making, his lands were confiscated by a nation, isn't he due compensation also? The only way the issue is going to be consigned to history is if people leave history as history. Legally the people and companies have no leg to stand on if they lost assets. I would think given the time frame, most people who want to make this issue are the ones who will benefit most, ie lawyers. They get paid either way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabashcr Posted January 28, 2015 Share Posted January 28, 2015 Cuba could do it the Irish way. Promise to pay the $6 Bn. Agree on a payment schedule. Trade begins and US companies invest in Cuba. After 10 years of excuses for not sending the first payment, Cuba reneges on the whole deal. By then US companies have so much money invested in Cuba that sanctions or penalties aren't politically suitable, a little lobbying goes some of the way. After a bit of lip service and some frosty looks the whole thing is forgotten. If Cuba played their cards right they could even get Guantanamo bay back as part of the deal. '6bn is a lot for nothing in return' etc. Ireland did this after independence in 1922, made some payments to our old rulers until 1932 and then stopped. It caused an economic war at the time but times were different then, the trade war was still ended by lobbying from private industry. I think this makes the most sense. Both countries will agree to a deal to get past this stumbling block, and once the gate is fully opened, future earnings will outweigh any past debts. Some people and companies will get screwed in the deal, but most of those assets were probably written off 50 years ago. I don't see this as a particularly resonating issue with voters (billion dollar corporations are owed some money from the 1960s?), and most corporations won't want to risk the opportunities in an untapped market by making waves about these debts. I just can't imagine this being a true sticking point or showstopper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Presidente Posted January 28, 2015 Author Share Posted January 28, 2015 A follow up article: Five ways Obama could make Castro pay Cuba's $6 billion debt to Americanshttp://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/01/28/five-ways-obama-could-make-castro-pay-cuba-6-billion-debt-to-americans/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.15b5f6bc4159a73805a9f118f79a68ca.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now