Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by LeBuick, Dec 6, 2008.
Something I didn't previously know about this sit in, the company, Republic Windows & Doors, had its line of credit from Bank of America closed which is why they had to close this factory. Since BOA received government bailout money, the workers feel they are entitled to their severance pay.
Is this another case of bankers greed or are the banks correct in not giving the company any further credit?
They were not given those funds to hold on to it. The entire purpose was to give credit. This is a misuse of the intended purpose of those funds that were unconstitutional to start with. The American people are being mistreated.
Has any of the banks given any reason they're not lending? They have been given the help, where is the credit?
Nope. Mums the word. But the rumor is they are using it to expand rather than lend.
These mooches need to get on with their lives.
Bank of America owes them less than nothing.
We gave them an unconstitutional bailout just so this wouldn't happen. It's not really the banks money to withhold.
The problem began when banks gave money to companies who couldn't pay it back. They certainly shouldn't throw good money after bad. If the company can't make a profit, then it can't stay in business. It has no business getting a loan to give to employees or anyone else. Employees are paid to make products to sell. If the company can't sell the products, then it can't pay the employees.
I sure hope Bank of America gives these workers the money they are due. I support the workers!
Do banks owe people money that get laid off because their bosses make bad business decisions?
What a mess, when the Government gets involved in business.
I have a feeling you don't know the whole story.
This company informed BoA in October of this year that their losses the last 2 years were unsustainable and they had no further ways to lower their fixed expenses and were going to shut down in January of 2009.
I can't, for the life of me, understand why the bank kept their credit line open after that , but they finally did the responsible thing and closed it.
That was a good banking decision.
Do you really think the way out of this mess is to make more bad loans with the "bailout" money?
Isn't that what put us here in the first place?
This kind of thinking is foreign to any sane businessman. That's the problem when politicians, most of whom have never run a business at all, start dictating how a bank should conduct their business.
That any bank gets blamed for this business closure is beyond belief and , I believe, has been caused by the union leeches that believe mine and your money should be used to keep a failing business open for just their benefit.
Not on my nickel!!!
Why don't you just write a check and send it to them? Because that's what you are asking. You are saying that BoA should continue to operate in the manner that got us in the mess to begin with. That's silly.
Newflash: BoA owes salary to no one but the people who work for it.
The bailout of any kind was insanity and unconstitutional. The purpose in these unconstutional bailout was to open credit. The reason these people are going under is purely a lack of it. The banks took uncostitutional money and used it for purposes other than what it was given to them for. How is any of that helping?
You sure it's not because the business is failing? I think the reason these people are going under is because they can't sell enough to keep the business open. That's not the banks fault.
So the money was given to the banks to be given to businesses that are closing down because they can't sell their products? Brilliant ...
Well, it's helpful that the bank not lend money to a company that no longer does business. That's not extending credit. That's giving money away for nothing.
Looks like BOA is giving the loan so the union and management is deciding how to give it out. This is not a "normal" situation do "logic" doesn't come in to play. The bailout money BOA received takes all logic out of the equation and inserts "government handout" in its place.
So now, what stops other companies from claiming that they can't pay their employees vacation pay (or Christmas bonuses, or overtime, or whatever else) and demanding that banks who receive the bailout pay those payments for them? Based on the reasoning given by some here, how can it be objected to?
This was a bad idea all the way around.
Your thinking is inconsistent and encourages more government theft of our tax dollars.
This company was not going under because of a lack of money, but because they couldn't make a profit any longer.
Bank of America was forced to take the money and making bad loans to people and businesses without the ability to repay is nothing short of stupidity and a waste of the "bailout" money. It just continues the bad business practices that banks were coerced by government into following in the first place.
You want to throw good money after the bad.
There are plenty of credit worthy businesses and individuals that can use a loan. Use it for that.
Doing more of the wrong thing will not make it better. One of the traits of stupidity is to continue doing the same thing that caused the problem and expecting a different result.
These mooches and their union leeches need to get on with their their lives and stop the whining...
or just move to a right-to-work state. That's what the owner of the business is going to do. :thumbs:
It's a loan they are giving so the company will have to pay the money back. Even though they are going belly up... :laugh: :thumbs:
Now does it make more sense?
The workers of banks and mortgage companies get paid when they make loans. The more loans they make the more they get paid.