Illegal, Communist, unconstitutional Obama plan put on hold

[redrumloa]

The Supreme Court extends a stay, saying it needs more time to consider the proposed sale to Fiat.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-c ... 6139.story

Some conservatives have complained loudly about the Chrysler bankruptcy, saying the Obama administration was trampling on the long-standing rights of secured creditors to give a better deal to the United Auto Workers. Under deals brokered by the Obama administration, the UAW's healthcare trust would receive 55% of the new Chrysler in exchange for much of the $10.6 billion owed to the fund by the company. Bondholders would get $2 billion in cash in exchange for the $6.8 billion they are owed.

"Upsetting this fixed hierarchy among creditors is just an illegal taking of property from one group of creditors for the benefit of another, which should be struck down on both statutory and constitutional grounds," Richard Epstein, a leading conservative legal scholar, wrote in a Forbes' article entitled "The Deadly Sins Of The Chrysler Bankruptcy."

"In a just world, that ignominious fate would await the flawed Chrysler reorganization, which violates these well-established norms, given the nonstop political interference of the Obama administration, which put its muscle behind the beleaguered United Auto Workers," Epstein said.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) on Monday introduced legislation that would terminate the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, in part because some of the money had been used to bail out Chrysler and General Motors Corp. He cheered the Supreme Court's action to potentially derail the Chrysler sale to Fiat.

"I have been concerned about the fundamental constitutional issues of due process and equal protection that cry out for judicial review and fundamental issues related to a misuse of TARP funds crying out for legislative review," he said. "I am pleased that at this juncture, the court has decided to stay the proceedings and I am hopeful the court will take up the matter."

 

[ilwrath]

Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) on Monday introduced legislation that would terminate the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, in part because some of the money had been used to bail out Chrysler and General Motors Corp.

Of all the TARP fund misallocation and abuse, they choose THIS 1% to review? Great, no politics here.

 

[redrumloa]

Of all the TARP fund misallocation and abuse, they choose THIS 1% to review? Great, no politics here.

Trust me, bond holders care nothing about politics. I also fail to see how TARP should even have any weight in the whole process, though obviously that is the excuse Obama is using. Tarp was converted into an equity share. Equity holders come AFTER debt holders in bankruptcy court, equity holders are typically wiped out. That means TARP money (ie gov stake) wiped out.

This is a very dangerous path we are on, the ramifications are much further reaching than just these specific bond holders. If Obama succeeds in throwing out constitutional law and 150+ years of bankruptcy law, the USA will never, ever be the same. Bonds are how most companies secure financing at attractive rates. If Obama succeeds, the bonds won't be worth the paper they are written on. You will immediately hear a giant sucking sound of money leaving the USA to safer locations. Companies will not get financing, there will be massive contraction and unemployment will reach levels not thought possible in modern times. Haiti is probably a good example of what the USA will look like.

 

[the_leander]

Haiti is probably a good example of what the USA will look like.

What, you mean a more powerful nation will come in and undercut key parts of your economy with subsidised produce, flooding the market and driving indiginous businesses to the wall?

BTW, in case you're at a loss to know what I mean, the US did that to Haiti with the sales of subsidised rice and vegetables, completely obliterating the previously (poor but) stable economy by all but wiping out the agricultural based core of Haiti.

I'm sure if I bothered to look I could find examples of where the EU through its subsidies have done the same, particularly to African countries.

 

[redrumloa]

Obama has succeeded :x

US high court won't block Chrysler sale

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Chrysler LLC's sale to Fiat, turning down a last-ditch appeal by opponents that included consumer groups and three Indiana pension plans.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-high-c ... et=&ccode=

Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock expressed disappointment with the decision and said options seem limited for opponents of the sale. "Obviously the supreme court of the land is the supreme court of the land," Mourdock said. "The United States government has, I continue to believe, acted egregiously by taking away the traditional rights held by secured creditors."

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

 

[the_leander]

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

Actually, the rest of the world was saying much the same about The Chimperer.

And the reason that you are "doomed" is that your previous chap sold the family silver and invaded iraq in a vain effort to stem the haemoraging that was occuring to your economy beforehand.

I remember prior to the invasion no end of posts by many on the left side of the political spectrum that the economy was in serious trouble. I remember too dire warnings that all the borrowing the truly biblical sums of money that Bush was would very quickly drop you right in it.

Tbh given the tatters that the republicans left your economy in, I doubt either side would be able to do much more then is happening. I pitty the poor buggers who go in to clear up the mess New Labour have left the UK economy in (because thanks to Blair, anything you can do, we can do too!).

 

[Wayne]

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

Jim,

Your realize of course after a topic subject as above, followed by the above statement makes it very difficult to take anything you say seriously, right?

Wayne

 

[redrumloa]

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

Jim,

Your realize of course after a topic subject as above, followed by the above statement makes it very difficult to take anything you say seriously, right?

Wayne

Wayne,
It is inflamatory, but is it incorrect? I'm open to counter arguments. Please point out where I am wrong. Even the more far left among us, Fluffy is not arguing the points.

 

[redrumloa]

@Wayne

To add to this, I do not see any parallels to this in American history. It truly sets a scary precedent.

Does none of his actions frighten you? I think you may very well be alone on that one here, I don't see much support for Obama here on Whyzzat anymore.

 

[Wayne]

I'm not talking about your points Jim. I'm talking about the level of "the sky is falling and it's all one person's fault" rhetoric.

Seems to me that the Supreme court, the highest form of absolute law in this nation -- which despite your opinion is not in his pocket -- agrees with Obama's plan, so why are you not screaming for their heads as well?

In any event, yes, we may well be "doomed". If that's the case, and you're certain there's no way out of it, why worry? For all your screaming and pointing fingers at the President, you have YET to point out how to fix the problems facing this nation. The rhetoric surrounding your personal loathing of the President of the United States only takes away from your somewhat potentially legitimate points.

It's easy to bitch. I should know, but until you can offer THE solution that no one else would find just as objectionable, it's just white bitchy noise to most.

I however have bigger problems in my life to worry about right now than whether or not someone somewhere else does something that has zero effect on me personally at this time. Even if it does affect me personally, I cannot do a single thing to change it. As such, I don't need the additional stress, so I revert to "why worry"?

I'm getting to be very Zen about stressful things these days.

Wayne

 

[redrumloa]

@Wayne

Again, you missed my railing against Bush over his last ~2 years. This nonsense did not start with Obama, he just put the gas pedal to the floor as the car headed straight toward the cliff. I have also complained about congress, the supreme court, my local government and Florida's POS (Republican) Governer. There is not much to like out there, Obama is just the guy at the top of the heap. Obama also seems to be the most radical in a horribe way.

My solutions? I've said all along, no TARP, no bailouts, no tax increases etc. Allow companies to fail, period. Too big to fail is bullsh't, all these crooks are protecting their friends and their own interests. Enforce laws on the book, take the FUC*ING crooks out of the Fed and the SEC and put in honest management there. Actually, disolve the Fed and make the SEC chairman an elected position. When I say enforce the laws on the book, this is a really simple concept. If they did over the last ~10 years we would not be in the situation we are. WTF happened to Sarbanes-Oxley?? How the F()CK were the banks allowed to cook their books for so many damn years?

It's not all Obama, it is the whole system. Obama is just at the very top of the system and he is horrendous.

Anyhow, I do hope you are well. Zen is a good place to be if you can get there. I start frothing at the mouth when I turn on the news because I worry about my children's future. If you can find piece throught this nonsense, more power to you.

 

[Glaucus]

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

Ummm... Was that not decided in a court of LAW?

 

[redrumloa]

Laws mean absolutely nothing to this president. The United States is the laughingstock of the world, we are beyond doomed.

Ummm... Was that not decided in a court of LAW?

Not normal due process, a kangaroo court at best. As I said, this sets a terrifying precedent.

 

[redrumloa]

This guy explains my point well.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/142253- ... ve-a-point

The Indiana funds are not likely to prevail. As was the case with the group of dissident lenders, the Indiana funds are in the minority among their own class of creditors (the total group of first lien holders including the likes of Citigroup (C) and JP Morgan (JPM)). They also hold less than 1% of the total debt.

That notwithstanding, they still do have a point, and are raising valid concerns. The issues they raise not only go to the root of creditor rights, but more importantly, raise fundamental questions about the rule of law. And to borrow from William J. Bernstein, “A law that does not apply equally to all citizens, the ruler included, is no law at all.”

So good for the Indiana funds pension and construction funds (and their legal representatives) who, despite the odds, fight not only for their own rights, but also for the rights of all citizens in a vibrant democracy.

Keep in mind it is only 1% because these are then one ones with balls enough to not bend to Obama's threats to break their kneecaps.

 

[the_leander]

no bailouts, no tax increases etc. Allow companies to fail, period. Too big to fail is bullsh't,

Is it? Is it really?

Manufacturing I could accept, but banks?

Seriously Jim if the banks had fallen there would have been no recovery this side of 2050 if ever. Everything else depends on the banks and had they died everything would have collapsed along with them. Attacking him for bailing them out is short sighted in the extreme.

Be thankful that laws put into effect that stopped the bankers at the top who had to resign from collecting their pensions (for the most part). It's something that the UK neglected to do.

I pity the folks who are loosing their jobs as it is, were Obama to take up your plan and run with it. Employment rates would end up not unlike Russia during the 80's and 90's

Want to see what happens when a countries financial core implodes? Look at Iceland. It'll be generations before they recover.

 

[redrumloa]

@the_leander

Manufacturing I could accept, but banks?

The banks were by far the worse of 2 evils. I'd much rather banks fail than manufacturing. Much more employement lost in manufacturing.

Seriously Jim if the banks had fallen there would have been no recovery this side of 2050 if ever. Everything else depends on the banks and had they died everything would have collapsed along with them. Attacking him for bailing them out is short sighted in the extreme.

Hardly, I seriously disagree with you. Do you kow how much money was spent bailing them out? In the US we have the FDIC, it would have been far cheaper to let the banks fail and have the FDIC lift their limits. Not all banks were greedy bastards. Many local banks like my credit union plyed by the rules, the free market should have dictated these banks to survive and thrive and let the giant crooked banks fail. They have created zombie banks, go look what that did to Japan in the for alost 20 years.

I pity the folks who are loosing their jobs as it is, were Obama to take up your plan and run with it. Employment rates would end up not unlike Russia during the 80's and 90's

I'm sorry, but you are believing the hype hook, line and sinker. It is the exact opposite. You cannot create money out of thin air, which is what they are doing. The USA *IS* going to go into decades of horrible times *BECAUSE* of what these nuts are doing. You cannot re-inflate the bubble.

Want to see what happens when a countries financial core implodes? Look at Iceland. It'll be generations before they recover.

Different situation, more accurate would be Japan. Look what happened with Japan for creating zombie banks. Problem is, the situation with US banks are far, far, far worse than what happened in Japan in the early 90's.

We will see DOW 4,000 in Obama's first term, mark this post.

 

[Glaucus]

You're right, they should have let them all fail. In about a years time the five major banks in the US would have been: Toronto Dominion, Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Nova Scotia, Bank of Montreal and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. But Obama screwed it all up for us Canadians. Damn him!

You're probably right about the DOW though, but has nothing to do with Obama.

 

[the_leander]

@the_leander

Manufacturing I could accept, but banks?

The banks were by far the worse of 2 evils. I'd much rather banks fail than manufacturing. Much more employement lost in manufacturing.

[quote:2l1lrkhy]Seriously Jim if the banks had fallen there would have been no recovery this side of 2050 if ever. Everything else depends on the banks and had they died everything would have collapsed along with them. Attacking him for bailing them out is short sighted in the extreme.

Hardly, I seriously disagree with you. Do you kow how much money was spent bailing them out? In the US we have the FDIC, it would have been far cheaper to let the banks fail and have the FDIC lift their limits. Not all banks were greedy bastards. Many local banks like my credit union plyed by the rules, the free market should have dictated these banks to survive and thrive and let the giant crooked banks fail. They have created zombie banks, go look what that did to Japan in the for alost 20 years.[/quote:2l1lrkhy]

You can disagree all you want, doesn't make you right however. If the banks had fallen, any non international company that went through them would have been taken out instantly along with them. This is the point I'm trying (and aparently failing) to get accross. The multinationals would likely have been ok. But anything tied to a bank as it collapsed in the small to medium sized bracket would have been destroyed.

I pity the folks who are loosing their jobs as it is, were Obama to take up your plan and run with it. Employment rates would end up not unlike Russia during the 80's and 90's

I'm sorry, but you are believing the hype hook, line and sinker. It is the exact opposite. You cannot create money out of thin air, which is what they are doing. The USA *IS* going to go into decades of horrible times *BECAUSE* of what these nuts are doing. You cannot re-inflate the bubble.

It's not about trying to "re-inflate a bubble", hell, it's not even about protecting the banks per see. It's about stopping them from taking everything else along with them. Yes, it'll be a damn slow recovery, not helped thanks to Bush's blowing trillions into an illegal war amongst other things.

Fact is, the US has been riding on debt for the past fifty years. Sooner or later it was always going to end in tears.

Want to see what happens when a countries financial core implodes? Look at Iceland. It'll be generations before they recover.

Different situation, more accurate would be Japan. Look what happened with Japan for creating zombie banks. Problem is, the situation with US banks are far, far, far worse than what happened in Japan in the early 90's.

Not really, with the banks (and associated financial services) gone, Iceland lost almost its entire economy overnight. Hell it even took out several UK regional economies since councils over here put a lot of their money into Icelandic banks. A small taste, but proof positive of what happens when a bank dies.

We will see DOW 4,000 in Obama's first term, mark this post.

More then likely, however, that would have been the case regardless of who was in power.