Sorry, I don't know exactly which rant this one is. I don't recall hearing about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. Care to explain it so a normal person can understand?
-- Rick C. -+--- Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging -+--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
itical advantages. Politics is politics. I would like to at least not hav e the constitution working against the will of the people.
ng about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. Care to explain it so a normal person can understand?
Robert Baer is channeling James Arthur. When GM folded after the global fin ancial crisis, the government intervention that kept the company running di dn't give the share-holders as much compensation as James Arthur thought th at they should have got.
Quite why the share-holders (who elected the board of directors who'd run G M so badly that they'd folded) deserved any compensation is a question that you'd have to raise with James Arthur, who is a higher class of right-wing nitwit than Robert Baer, though still not worth paying attention to.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
olitical advantages. Politics is politics. I would like to at least not h ave the constitution working against the will of the people.
e
ring about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. Care to explain it so a normal person can understand?
inancial crisis, the government intervention that kept the company running didn't give the share-holders as much compensation as James Arthur thought that they should have got.
GM so badly that they'd folded) deserved any compensation is a question th at you'd have to raise with James Arthur, who is a higher class of right-wi ng nitwit than Robert Baer, though still not worth paying attention to.
Technically, GM went through bankruptcy, no? When that happens, the shareh olders get diddly. Car owners also lost their warranties I believe althoug h they may have done something for partial compensation. So Baer is compla ining that he lost money on bonds? Yeah, that happens. That's why the val ue of bonds goes up and down, at least in part. It is a factor of current interest rates and the perceived risk the bonds will be paid. The rest of his post seems to be a bit of a rant about the Constitution and unions.
-- Rick C. -+--+ Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging -+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Rick C wrote:
Was not called that, to protect him. Illegal subversion of commercial contract law. You do not remember the result: Government Motors? Give me a break.
Sanitized headlines: November 18-19, 2008 - GM CEO Rick Wagoner and the CEOs of Ford and Chrysler appear before Congress to request $25 billion in government assistance for the automobile industry. December 2008 - GM receives a bailout of $13.4 billion from the US Treasury, through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). March 30, 2009 - CEO Rick Wagoner announces that he is resigning at the request of the Obama administration. April-May 2009 - General Motors receives another $6 billion in bailouts from TARP. May 29, 2009 - GM stock closes at less than $1 a share for first time since the Great Depression. June 1, 2009 - GM files for bankruptcy. It receives another $30 billion in government funding to assist with restructuring. After bankruptcy, the company will be 60.8% owned by the US government, 11.7% by the Canadian government, 17.5% by the UAW union and unsecured bondholders will have a 10% share.
Did Obama save General Motors or did Obama steal General Motors from the bond holders? It is plain that bondholders were not treated fairly by the government?s interference in the normal Chapter 11 process. People and institutions held GM?s corporate bonds. They bought these at a time when they were considered a fairly safe investment, though no investment is perfectly safe. A lot of ordinary people had retirement funds invested in GM bonds that had a guaranteed rate of return. NOTE the word "guaranteed". Normally in the Chapter 11 process, these people owning bonds would basically be at the front of the line as GM?s assets were evaluated and payments made to creditors. They essentially did own part of the company. That is what a bond is, a contract where the bondholder invests in the company, buying into its assets. As the company was reorganized (with "help" from Obama), the US govt. was awarded 50% of the company and an obligation for GM to repay $20 billion in loans. The UAW was given a 39% share of the company in return for forgiving $10 billion that GM owed to the healthcare fund. The bondholder got only 10% of the company, a fraction of the money originally invested by them. People who had invested a good portion of their savings in GM received only pennies on the dollar in the settlement. In a NORMAL Chapter 11 settlement without government involvement, they would have done far better, but the Obama administration prioritized the UAW, which had NO ownership stake in GM, over the people who invested their money in GM.
Outright theft.
Put that in your smoke and pipe it.
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
SHAREHOLDERS get little or nothing. BONDHOLDERS are first in line, as they OWNED a part of GM; the bonds being the LEGAL CONTRACT.
Oh, why did the unions get into the act? Because Obama owed them for political support (look it up).
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
olitical advantages. Politics is politics. I would like to at least not h ave the constitution working against the will of the people.
he
ue
earing about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. Car e to explain it so a normal person can understand?
l financial crisis, the government intervention that kept the company runni ng didn't give the share-holders as much compensation as James Arthur thoug ht that they should have got.
run GM so badly that they'd folded) deserved any compensation is a question that you'd have to raise with James Arthur, who is a higher class of right
-wing nitwit than Robert Baer, though still not worth paying attention to.
areholders get diddly. Car owners also lost their warranties I believe alt hough they may have done something for partial compensation. So Baer is co mplaining that he lost money on bonds? Yeah, that happens. That's why the value of bonds goes up and down, at least in part. It is a factor of curr ent interest rates and the perceived risk the bonds will be paid. The rest of his post seems to be a bit of a rant about the Constitution and unions.
Uh, did you read your own post? What did it say on the topic?
-- Rick C. -+-+- Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging -+-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
political advantages. Politics is politics. I would like to at least not have the constitution working against the will of the people.
he
lue
earing about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. Car e to explain it so a normal person can understand?
financial crisis, the government intervention that kept the company runnin g didn't give the share-holders as much compensation as James Arthur though t that they should have got.
un GM so badly that they'd folded) deserved any compensation is a question that you'd have to raise with James Arthur, who is a higher class of right- wing nitwit than Robert Baer, though still not worth paying attention to.
eholders get diddly. Car owners also lost their warranties I believe altho ugh they may have done something for partial compensation. So Baer is comp laining that he lost money on bonds? Yeah, that happens. That's why the v alue of bonds goes up and down, at least in part. It is a factor of curren t interest rates and the perceived risk the bonds will be paid. The rest o f his post seems to be a bit of a rant about the Constitution and unions.
The Federal Government did not follow the procedures of bankruptcy.
Dan
ce political advantages. Politics is politics. I would like to at least n ot have the constitution working against the will of the people.
the
svalue
hearing about this particular destruction of the Constitution by Obama. C are to explain it so a normal person can understand?
al financial crisis, the government intervention that kept the company runn ing didn't give the share-holders as much compensation as James Arthur thou ght that they should have got.
run GM so badly that they'd folded) deserved any compensation is a questio n that you'd have to raise with James Arthur, who is a higher class of righ t-wing nitwit than Robert Baer, though still not worth paying attention to.
areholders get diddly. Car owners also lost their warranties I believe alt hough they may have done something for partial compensation. So Baer is co mplaining that he lost money on bonds? Yeah, that happens. That's why the value of bonds goes up and down, at least in part. It is a factor of curr ent interest rates and the perceived risk the bonds will be paid. The rest of his post seems to be a bit of a rant about the Constitution and unions.
I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say if they did anything improper or not. But the obvious question is if they did break the law, why did no one challeng e it? If the courts sided with it being all legit, then how can anyone say it was not? In particular you need to be a loon to say it was unconstitut ional.
The complaint seems to be that the unions were compensated for the healthca re fund. As I said, I don't know the law on this, but doesn't it make sens e if the healthcare fund has priority over the bond holders, etc.?
-- Rick C. -+-++ Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging -+-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Well, not the usual leave-it-up-to-the-court procedure. What they did instead, was use eminent domain to force a sale, and became investors in the 'new' company.
Using public money to keep the factories open is NOT 'the procedures of bankruptcy', but the bank crisis at the same time, made a lot of options unavailable to bankruptcy court.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.