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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: puborectalis who wrote (648396)	3/20/2012 2:27:41 PM
From: i-node	4 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580266

>> Because both Romneys would have let the U.S. auto industry go down the tubes Liberal lie. Romney clearly stated that he would have allowed the auto mfrs to proceed in a normal Chapter 11 bankruptcy, then, if they needed US loan guarantees to get out, he would have supported that. But he would NOT have corrupted the bankruptcy process as Obama did, which left the UAW in control with the end result being additional bailouts down the road. Romney's approach would have been the correct approach (and the one I stated here at the time). By corrupting the bankruptcy process Obama also corrupted the way capital markets & Chapter 11 processes work. It should never have been done. The i-node/Romney approach would have had a far better result because (a) the motor companies would not have been left under the influence of a corrupt administration, and (b) the auto mfrs would have come out of Chapter 11 in better shape to avoid future issues, and (c) the government would not have been on the hook for future bailouts, which WILL be required.