Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (11981)	6/25/2001 12:48:34 AM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 196857

for crying out loud people, the law is the law. my position would not have changed one iota. if you sell somebody an asset and they can't pay but file bankruptcy, you can't just unilaterally take back the property and resell it at a higher price. The bankruptcy court has to lift the stay that Congress said is in place. All you get is the contract price plus interest. So what the heck is new? Not a blasted thing. If you guys had your way, your local governments could assess your ad valorem taxes on January 1 and then in November decided they could make more money by demanding that your taxes be doubled and you owe it immediately. In our country, The Government is in no better position than you would be. That is the essence of our system of government: The King has no special rights and can't do whatever he wants; he has to follow the law. Would you really want the rule to be otherwise. To listen to you guys, the rule ought to be: Gosh, if the government thinks it can make more money by violating the law, then it can do anything it wants and that's okay? The issue extends far beyond the FCC and licencing or auctioning spectrum.