Posted on 12/08/2008 9:01:38 AM PST by Zeddicus
Just heard on FNC an update on the Chicago plant closing where union workers are protesting.
The main complaint is that the plant's bank, Bank of America, received federal bailout money but did not extend the company's credit line, resulting in the plant closing.
Now we have the Governor of Illinois saying that the State is going to suspend all business with BoA, essentially blackmailing the bank into lending to the company with the expectation that the plant will reopen and reemploy the protestors.
My question is this: do we know that BoA did not have a legitimate financial reason for closing the company's credit line? I have to assume the bank made the decision because the company was a bad credit risk. It's entirely possible that BoA is simply being responsible with taxpayers funds.
Think about this. Didn't we get into this whole mess in the first place because banks were taking bad credit risks? Are we now going to force banks to continue bad lending practices with taxpayer money?
What if the company simply has no business to sustain operation? They are a construction-related business - it's not suprising they are broke, and I would not be suprised if BoA had good reason to shut them off.
This is not going anywhere good. The government is now in a position to force banks to lend taxpayer money to insolvent companies, and to force said insolvent companies to remain open solely to keep people employed, gainfully or not.
Free enterprise in this country is dead. I think it's pretty safe to say we're now living in a communist country, no?
Wasn’t it about a year or two ago that BOA was lending money to illegals? I remember Dennis Miller saying he was taking his money out because of it.
Are we now going to force banks to continue bad lending practices with taxpayer money?
Been going on for far too long.
ON CNBC this morning I heard someone mention that a congressman proposed emminent domain to rework MSB’s.
We are close to being fully socialist.
Not likely.
Why not? Because the federal government wants to own the auto industry directly. They are content to own smaller industries through the banks they've bailed out.
BofA wasnt near failure...what on earth are you talking about?
Trust me. Without that bailout, the counterparty obligations of ensuing bank failures would have left a smoking hole where they once stood. Whether or not they were “healthier” than other banks, it doesn’t matter when an atomic bomb goes off a hundred feet from where you’re standing. They were all on the verge of failure. And that said, the industry is merely on life support at this point. Only the expectation that the gov’t will save the industry at any cost is keeping the system afloat.
And don’t forget about that massive, gaping, toxic albatross called Countrywide, whose liabilites they assumed, plus the continuing aversion of banks to reveal their level 3 assets.
If the vanity is written soundly and pertains to a hot issue, then I don’t see a problem with them. Some vanities are better than most news articles, IMO.
They also made arrangements to purchase Merrill Lynch even before the concept of bailouts was introduced.
I don't think they were close to failure.
more appalled by the state thinking it can strong-arm its way into the B of A’s boardroom and dictate what business decisions they make.
I'm wondering if the whole purpose of forcing banks to take bailout money was specifically so that the govmt could claim some ownership of bank business decisions.
Government is clearly exceeding its authority.
Seems to me this whole cataclysmic disaster was provoked by people in the Gubmint (like Barney Frank) telling lenders who to lend to, regardless of whether it made business sense or nonsense. COMMAND ECONONOMIES DIRECTED BY “SMART” PEOPLE KILL “REAL” PEOPLE.
By the millions.
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.