Energy Dept lends $8B to Ford, Nissan, Tesla to develop fuel-ef...

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>No double standard, contracts or not always fair , You can't compare the UAW to a contract. All judges have always ruled based on contract law even if you sighed something stupid, because to reverse a contract is to say a deal is not a deal. When you can't depend on a contract in American to be the law then lending becomes nothing more then a shot in the dark.That changes the risk and changes the rules. You are already experencing what America is like without credit. No credit the economy stops and all your jobs go with it. So the UAW as I said have made a big mistake and a big backwords step toward their future.Contracts are not about fair there about agreements. If you agree to something and it's thought to not be fair the law is not going to change that agreement unless it was created under duress or it was illegal. This was not the sitution with the UAW.No double standard occured.

FredUAW wrote:

<quoted text>"You can't compare the UAW to a contract. All judges have always ruled based on contract law even if you sighed something stupid, because to reverse a contract is to say a deal is not a deal."
The UAW has what is called a contract with each of the Big-3. So why are Union contracts no good in your opinion? If we are to hold up this rule it can't be the law of the land for everybody except Unions.
Oh, and the judges that your talking about.....where are they at? Because we may need them up here in Michigan.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp...
http://www.eveningsun.com/ci_12362218
http://blog.al.com/businessnews/2009/04/bruno...
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp...

tom wrote:

<quoted text>I didn't say the contracts with the union are no good, I am trying to say the contract of the secured lenders supersede the contract of the union. Another words even when contracts between both parties exist, the contract is considered based on the loan agreement. If this contract agreement is not accepted there is no loan. In the contract from the secured lender it's states who supersedes who. In this case the secured lender comes before the employee or supplier, that's why the lender loaned the money at the rate they agreed upon. If anytime in our history this had happen, where the goverment superseded a contract based on leverage from the UAW, the loan may have not be made, or at least not at the rate agreed upon. You see Fred your right about the judge making this legal, that's why B-R had to happen to make it look legal.But the goverment tweaked the system and has come very close if not guilty of changing a contract with their power. This is why it may effect furture loans to any company leveraged by a union. This will not be good for the consumer.

FredUAW wrote:

<quoted text>I agree, this will change everything.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>WOW! I'm impressed, you have agreed with me. I hope you understand why so many private investors are worried. They feel anyone who invests in a goverment company or UAW leveraged company could hold private investors hostage. This is dangerous because the goverment can't come close to funding everything.Now where should I put my money? Will the goverment doesn't want you to put it in CD's because that isn't risking your money to help the economy. That's why they pay such little interest. Now where do I put it? In the auto industry after what they did to me, not a chance. So guess what pay me more or get your money from the goverment. That's why the future of the auto industry is in the hands of the tax payer, until they remove the risk,good luck.

FredUAW wrote:

<quoted text>Tom, that's the thing now isn't it? Everybody feels as if they have a monopoly on correctness. The points that you've made are valid. The future of investment is going to be different. Stay tooned, it should be entertaining if any thing.

Tom wrote:

<quoted text>I agree,but you can't just stand by and let the river flow Once you get out it's hard to get back in. So far I've been very lucky as a bond daddy. Only had one haircut(GM)in 10 years. The corp. world is still where I think you have the best chance, but even that gets crazy. I't seems now all investments are cross your fingers and pray, and you can't afford to be in cd's and you really can't afford to be in triple A bonds that don't pay sh--t for interest.I guess calculated risk is all we have and then you still need to cross your fingers, because you can't trust what you read or hear. Wow I think were already there. Got any suggestions?

FredUAW wrote:

<quoted text>Get a safe, a killer dog, and some guns. lol