100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Same song second verse | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Bankruptcy is not always a definite failure of the company for one. And there is no way to foresee if this was going to happen so what is the point? There is EVERYWAY to foresee this happening. The way it is supposed to work is to loan money who are in good financial shape to help them expand into a new industry such as solar power. The loans were NOT to help a financially troubled company last a little longer. When very large sums of money are loaned to financially troubled companies, there is usually some graft involved. All assumptions and assumptions suck. There is no for sure way to see this coming. It happens to sound companies all the time. And bankruptcy for a company does not mean that it is going under for sure anyway. My phone company went bankrupt many years ago and it is still going strong now. First of all, sound companies don't go bankrupt... by definition. Second, financial data is required of all companies so there is "for sure" a way to see this coming. Thirdly, to get a loan this large, one either has to submit documentation that the company is sound, falsify the documents that the company is sound, or pay someone to get the loan knowing the company is not sound. Since the company was not sound, only the last two apply. None of which is a sure fire way to predict this not happening. So still a no go. So then the banks making bad loans and causing the housing meltdown couldn't be predicted? We are talking of one loan here. A whole different ball of wax then the banks making a bunch of bad loans and bundling them and selling them to others as tangible loans who then sell them off again, etc... Until the margin call is made and the loans are no good. When banks are not doing the above there are loans made to companies who are believed to be sound by the banks checks and balances and they still go bad. So it is not a black and white process that is sure fire. No matter how much you want it to be so. Defaulting on a loan is defaulting on a loan. No matter how you don't want it to be so. It is obvious in the Solyndra case that they knew there was a problem and because one of the investors was an Obama donor he got bailed out and the taxpayers are responsible for the tab. What is half a billion, right? You are still not making the good point here. No matter how many checks and balances go on with a loaning institution, there will always be a few loans who fail anyway. You cannot deny that because it is factual. So you are going around it but you are not coming out on top in this one. What you don't seem to comprehend is that this isn't some local bank loaning a couple hundred grand that is backed by Fannie Mae with little or any chance of losing their money if there is a default. This is half a billion dollars of taxpayer money down the toilet. You want to sit there and ***** and complain about people not paying their fair share, but here is a case of complete incompetence or worse done by the government you love and all you have is this? Ridiculous. No what is ridiculous is those who want to make it sound like it is an odd occurrence and a failure of the government when in truth it happens to the strictest of loaning institutions all the time. Making it a regular occurrence and a possibility of any loan made. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Tue 11/01/11 05:38 AM
|
|
Our FEDs finest hour!
We borrow money we don't have, loan it to a business that has no knowledge of proceedures, whose CEO's take big bonuses for implementation, then take bankruptcy because they fail. Like fractional reserve banking, it's promises you can't keep if one small part fails! When the gov't or the FED is involved, it's doomed to failure! It's the 1% way! The 99% will pick up the slack and bear the burdon. They're/we're conditioned to accept it as the only means to the end, whether it works or not! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For one company to go bankrupt who received HUGE loans from the US government and had connections to Obama is both highly irregular and a sign of malfeasance. For TWO companies to go bankrupt out of the same fund under the same financial conditions is beyond coincidence.
There are regulations that require financial soundness to get loans of this type under these circumstances. Unfortunately, the normal watchdogs who would review this situation are controlled by Obama's justice department. It would take an act of Congress to to do it independently which is highly unlikely. However, half a billion is a lot of money to waste. |
|
|
|
|
