Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-04-2009, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,932,670 times
Reputation: 7118

Advertisements

giving the UAW the sweetheart deal of the century. Totally unconstitutional what his administration is trying to do.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Senior creditors: Chrysler deal violates 5th Amendment
http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/2009-05/Lauria-5thamendment.pdf (broken link)

Quote:
If the Obama administration expected the senior creditors of Chrysler to fold their tents under political pressure, they may have gotten a rude shock today. Thomas Lauria, who accused the White House of threatening the creditors withn humiliation at the hands of the White House press corps, has filed a motion to halt the administration’s machinations on behalf of the UAW in the Chrysler bankruptcy. Lauria and his allies claim that the Obama administration has violated the Constitution in their bid to devalue the senior creditors’ holdings on behalf of junior creditors, and have some precedent to support the allegation.
Quote:
One might think that a Constitutional scholar like Barack Obama would have already known that, but either this precedent escaped him or he doesn’t care about it at all. Brandeis acted to uphold contract law, especially in the face of a government interest in paying off politically-connected unsecured creditors ahead of the senior creditors. There is no other reason for Brandeis to make that decision, as only government could insert itself into the contractual relationship during a bankruptcy proceeding — just as Obama has done with Chrysler.
The arrogance is breathtaking.

Look in your portfolios - maybe YOU are one of the investors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2009, 03:41 PM
 
1,655 posts, read 3,246,250 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
giving the UAW the sweetheart deal of the century. Totally unconstitutional what his administration is trying to do.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Senior creditors: Chrysler deal violates 5th Amendment
http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/2009-05/Lauria-5thamendment.pdf (broken link)





The arrogance is breathtaking.

Look in your portfolios - maybe YOU are one of the investors.
LOL... yeah, maybe you guys are wealthy enough to have invested in a hedge fund... LOL... you guys are too ridiculous for words. I think real Chrysler shareholders would much rather have the company survive... do you know what these hedge funds want? They want the company sold off piece by piece because they will get a higher return than through the current plan. And all they have to do is yell "Unconstitutional" and you knee-jerk conservatives come running like lap dogs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,958 times
Reputation: 1401
Bankruptcy law is quite clear on this. If the president has a problem with it, he can take it up with the SCOTUS. It matters not what the investors want to do with this company, as long as preferred bondholers are paid. Additionally, when Chrysler's assets eventually get sold off, hopefully the purchasers will utilize the infrastructure to build a real car company.

This is why I don't invest a dime in US companies. Until government allows shareholders a say in the company and dividends become more flexible, it's 100% international for me. Returns have been WAY above the Dow this year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Texas...and proud of it.
749 posts, read 946,756 times
Reputation: 164
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
giving the UAW the sweetheart deal of the century. Totally unconstitutional what his administration is trying to do.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Senior creditors: Chrysler deal violates 5th Amendment
http://hotair.cachefly.net/images/2009-05/Lauria-5thamendment.pdf (broken link)





The arrogance is breathtaking.

Look in your portfolios - maybe YOU are one of the investors.
Just about everything this admin does is in violation of the constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 04:54 PM
 
Location: The Great State of Texas, Finally!
5,475 posts, read 12,241,893 times
Reputation: 2820
Quote:
Originally Posted by bgibbs42 View Post
Just about everything this admin does is in violation of the constitution.
And that's next on the list
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Idaho Falls
5,041 posts, read 6,215,113 times
Reputation: 1483
I see. Michelle Malkin - the woman who claims that imprisoning Japanese-Americans in WWII was a good idea - that's who you go to for commentary on what's legal today?

That explains a lot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,958 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by idahogie View Post
I see. Michelle Malkin - the woman who claims that imprisoning Japanese-Americans in WWII was a good idea - that's who you go to for commentary on what's legal today?

That explains a lot.
So bankruptcy law should be turned on its head for politics' sake?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 05:03 PM
 
3 posts, read 23,180 times
Reputation: 10
Default Speculators and Fiduciary Responsibility

Quote:
Originally Posted by vsmoove View Post
LOL... yeah, maybe you guys are wealthy enough to have invested in a hedge fund... LOL... you guys are too ridiculous for words. I think real Chrysler shareholders would much rather have the company survive... do you know what these hedge funds want? They want the company sold off piece by piece because they will get a higher return than through the current plan. And all they have to do is yell "Unconstitutional" and you knee-jerk conservatives come running like lap dogs.

When underwriting risk a shareholder/speculator/bondholder (s) will often times insure the risk of their capitol by insuring the secured creditor position and possibly have the funds privately insured. Either way, as an investor I would never sacrifice my risk, my investment, my money and my senior creditor position .... for a junior position behind the UAW. I am entitled to be satisfied and not OBAMA AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT AND ESPECIALLY NOT THE UAW. This is what is so horrific in having Government intrusion and Cram downs. My money... my risk... my payback.... my decision.... NOT Obama's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Idaho Falls
5,041 posts, read 6,215,113 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
So bankruptcy law should be turned on its head for politics' sake?
Why jump to unsupportable conclusions?

My point was that you shouldn't listen to a total screaming moron like Michelle Malkin for advice on what's legal or not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2009, 05:23 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,087,528 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsmoove View Post
LOL... yeah, maybe you guys are wealthy enough to have invested in a hedge fund... LOL... you guys are too ridiculous for words. I think real Chrysler shareholders would much rather have the company survive... do you know what these hedge funds want? They want the company sold off piece by piece because they will get a higher return than through the current plan. And all they have to do is yell "Unconstitutional" and you knee-jerk conservatives come running like lap dogs.
Pity for you, the US Supreme Court has already ruled the actions are unconstitutional. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer

Hows it feel to be wrong again?

Last edited by pghquest; 05-04-2009 at 05:38 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top