The Indiana funds claim the sale of Chrysler is unconstitutional, saying the plan upends the rights of senior lenders(bond holders) to be paid off before junior creditors (UAW) and the Treasury Department doesn't have the authority to lend bankruptcy financing under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 7:04 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by LoriKeet at 8:17 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
It is your own opinion. Why you worry worry what others think or who they voted?
I personally think we should do everything to save the Chrysler. We have high courts for desiding the matters.
Answer by Anonymous at 9:20 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by lovinangels at 9:35 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Uh, anon, Lori said "I believe this to be the case". So, you pointing out that it's her opinion is a little redundant. Besides, a very high percentage of what is posted here is opinion.
As for the rest of your post, what does saving Chrysler have to do with paying bond holders?
As for the OQ, I do think that bond holders should be paid before the UAW, but this is the payback they have been waiting for.
Lori, you sure have the ability to bring out the anons. :oP
Answer by QuinnMae at 9:37 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by mustbeGRACE at 9:39 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by yourspecialkid at 9:59 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by Anonymous at 10:24 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by DawnPratt23 at 10:40 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Answer by lovinangels at 11:07 AM on Jun. 9, 2009
Next question overall
Why are so many women on here clueless about when to take a pregnancy test?