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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (112107)	5/28/2009 10:35:56 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541741

The high-yield bond funds I watch have gone up steadily the last several days despite the Chrysler news. The idea that this will chill corporate bond issuance is a blogger-spin myth.

To: KyrosL who wrote (112107)	5/28/2009 10:44:34 AM
From: slacker711	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541741

Are Chrysler bondholders getting more or less than if Chrysler was left to the market without any government intervention? His answer is that the bondholders are probably getting more. Do you disagree? That has nothing to do with anything. If a normal bankruptcy takes into account the timeline and circumstances to the lending then the government should get preferred treatment. However, this article expressly skips that argument (and I havent read anybody else make it either). Instead we get talk of the loans as charity and that should take precedence over the law. That simply shouldnt fly in a court of law. Would anybody be making these nonsense arguments if private equity had stepped up in December? Would we be saying that Blackstone should get preferential treatment because they lent money when nobody else would? My second point is that it is ridiculous to now call these loans charity. They were meant to be paid back with interest. Slacker