SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (577761)5/14/2015 10:52:32 AM
From: D. Long1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Alan Smithee

  Read Replies (2) of 794159
 
The contract clause was put in there for a reason. A State can pass a law prospectively limiting matters of contract, but not retrospectively, for obvious enough reasons. Otherwise you have nothing but a rapacious King, rewriting contracts to suit himself and his favored subjects.

Now, it IS a different matter where the State itself is a party to the contract. In that case, ordinary contract law should control and the State should be in no better position to thwart the parties' bargain than any private citizen or company. Negotiate the change in terms or be stuck with it. Any other option encourages bad behavior and bad faith contracting. The State can just "change its mind" later.

On the other hand, knowing this anybody that contracts with the state for a substantial future performance is nuts.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News