Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Solyndra files bankruptcy, employees sue
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 9/6/11 | David R. Baker, Chronicle Staff Writer

Posted on 09/06/2011 4:14:52 PM PDT by SmithL

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: businessprofessor

The government has no business entering into any covenant that does not place the taxpayers’ interest first. Someone failed to do their duty in agreeing to such a covenant (and it would not terribly surprise me to find that that person has a connection to the beneficiaries of it).

This is rank and open corruption and screwing of the taxpayer!


21 posted on 09/06/2011 4:46:22 PM PDT by icanhasbailout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

A guy came into my shop back in the early 90’s. He was driving VW Rabbit and had a couple of solar panels tucked under his arm. He wanted us to fabricate some brackets to mount the panels on the roof of his car.

He said he was going to put an electric motor in the car and a bunch of batteries and it would run for free.

I did some figuring and told him what it would cost. So then he says, “Oh, I thought I could just cut you in on the profits”.

I laughed in his face.

I guess people like him are getting government money now.


22 posted on 09/06/2011 4:49:12 PM PDT by keat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: icanhasbailout
The government has no business entering into any covenant that does not place the taxpayers’ interest first.

how about this instead: "The government has no business entering into business with the taxpayers' money."

23 posted on 09/06/2011 4:49:36 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: businessprofessor
"...The lenders may have insisted on priority, secured status..."

Not that it makes any difference after the way the government treated Chrysler investors. Apparently, legal binding terms mean nothing when the government steps in.

24 posted on 09/06/2011 4:51:00 PM PDT by rlmorel ("When marching down the same road, one doesn't need 'marching orders' to reach the same destination")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: icanhasbailout

“the company’s private investors”

Soros and Buffet?


25 posted on 09/06/2011 4:54:13 PM PDT by dynachrome ("Our forefathers didn't bury their guns. They buried those that tried to take them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: keat

Even if he did this, he’d be paying you to help him power his radio. :)


26 posted on 09/06/2011 4:57:07 PM PDT by Jonty30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Photobucket
27 posted on 09/06/2011 4:57:24 PM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: businessprofessor

What? So your opinion is that the voluntary $69 private investment (primarily from George Kaiser) should be first in line to be repaid over the $535 million that the taxpayers involuntarily invested in this failure?

If that’s really your argument, may I suggest that you’re on the wrong website?


28 posted on 09/06/2011 4:58:49 PM PDT by Carling (DeMint to Obama: I want to read the bill, not listen to talking points off a TelePrompter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Why don’t they sue Obama and Algore? They’re the ones that lied to them.


29 posted on 09/06/2011 5:02:42 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: icanhasbailout
The government has no business entering into any covenant that does not place the taxpayers’ interest first. Someone failed to do their duty in agreeing to such a covenant (and it would not terribly surprise me to find that that person has a connection to the beneficiaries of it).

Government should never have loaned the money in the first place. The corruption was the government loan not treatment of the lenders unless the lenders made political payoffs.

Democrats know that it is not practical to put taxpayers ahead of other bondholders. Companies will not be able to raise capital outside of government with such bond covenants. I see nothing but corruption from government loans. Democrats have turned the DOE into a venture capital firm to fund their delusional view of energy development.
30 posted on 09/06/2011 5:03:27 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Carling

I think bizprofessor is sort of overlooking the idea that the biggest investor was the taxpayer, and as such, WE should have been senior to any private investors. Their covenants should not trump ours.

In the case of the Gov’t and the unions ripping off Chrysler bond holders, biz professor is right. Solyndra is different.

That’s the problem of crony capitalism. It screws up normal business equations and rules.


31 posted on 09/06/2011 5:05:27 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


32 posted on 09/06/2011 5:07:54 PM PDT by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: businessprofessor

Our responses crossed in the blogosphere....looks like me more or less agree on what the problem is.


33 posted on 09/06/2011 5:08:17 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Carling
What? So your opinion is that the voluntary $69 private investment (primarily from George Kaiser) should be first in line to be repaid over the $535 million that the taxpayers involuntarily invested in this failure?

I do not know the terms of the investment agreement. We both agree that crony capitalism is ripe with corruption. I have not heard of equity investments with secured status. If it was a loan, he may have insisted on secured status.

Solyndra is just one in a long list of crony capitalism deals made by Democrats. All of these deals stink, giving taxpayers and rate payers the shaft while enriching politically connected individuals, labor cartels, and Democrats.
34 posted on 09/06/2011 5:09:11 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: icanhasbailout

This is the new economy, same as the old economy.
it’s part of any ‘Private/Public’ partnership or commonly known as Corporatism.


35 posted on 09/06/2011 5:13:02 PM PDT by griswold3 (Character is Destiny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Carling
The Obama Casino is only open for his special friends and supporters. Bet all you want and enjoy your winnings. If you lose? Not a problem because you receive a 100% refund on all losing bets. Sweet!
36 posted on 09/06/2011 5:15:31 PM PDT by JPG (Palin '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

yep, or crony capitalism or corporate socialism or fascism. They all apply. They all stink. They are all the opposite of free market capitalism.


37 posted on 09/06/2011 5:17:12 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

This is nothing compared to how I’ve seen 8(a) government contractors rip off the government. The big ones aren’t much better but the 8(a)’s are less subtle, usually because the owners aren’t as smart. That was Solyndra’s mistake. They could have had an RFP custom-made for them, get the award, and stay in “business” forever producing nothing.


38 posted on 09/06/2011 5:22:34 PM PDT by mikey_hates_everything
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

39 posted on 09/06/2011 5:35:37 PM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

DU is treating this like it’s no big deal.

“no notice to the employees sucks but I guess the $$$ is gone...”

I said:
It sounds like a piss-poor investment, a waste of tax payer money, and someone needs to have hearings on it. That’s a hell of a lot of money for nothing.
If this happened at a private company, that person would have been fired within an hour, and would probably be looking at criminal charges.

Can’t wait to see what the reply to that would be.
Who now has more than half a billion dollars of taxpayer money?


40 posted on 09/06/2011 5:49:33 PM PDT by christx30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson