• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Solyndra shuts its doors

Incompetence, criminal activity, or both. You pick...

Obama admin reworked Solyndra loan to favor donor *| ajc.com

The Obama administration restructured a half-billion dollar federal loan to a troubled solar energy company in such a way that private investors — including a fundraiser for President Barack Obama — moved ahead of taxpayers for repayment in case of a default, government records show.

Since then, the implosion of the company and revelations that the administration hurried Office of Management and Budget officials to finish their review of the loan in time for the September 2009 groundbreaking has become an embarrassment for Obama as he sells his new job-creation program around the country.

An Associated Press review of regulatory filings shows that Solyndra was hemorrhaging hundreds of millions of dollars for years before the Obama administration signed off on the original $535 million loan guarantee in September 2009. The company eventually got $528 million.
 
Last edited:
Should the administration not be aware of all of this and the ramifications before simply throwing away a half billion collars?

Of course. The greater picture dictates the loan was a bad idea. However, Solyndra's specific type of solar system was and is still worth investing in. The capacity to generate electricity from sun light largely independent on the angle is a significant break through.
 
Of course. The greater picture dictates the loan was a bad idea. However, Solyndra's specific type of solar system was and is still worth investing in. The capacity to generate electricity from sun light largely independent on the angle is a significant break through.

It may be worth investment, but that investment should be private funding and not taxpayer funding.
 
Hey what's a half billion among friends - I mean after all they did create jobs for awhile, and just think now the workers can receive unemployment benefits which Nancy Pelosi assures us is an economic stimulus as they will still have money to spend.
 
Can you say cronyism.

It's too bad that Obama will skate on this no matter what is turned up.
 
It may be worth investment, but that investment should be private funding and not taxpayer funding.

It was. The government at the time provided no actual money as I understand the loan guarantee. Essentially it offered much of the same deal as it offers to banks financing nuclear plants.
 
It was. The government at the time provided no actual money as I understand the loan guarantee. Essentially it offered much of the same deal as it offers to banks financing nuclear plants.

It may be only a loan guarantee - but now it has come due with the failure of the company. That is what a guarantee means.
 
It was. The government at the time provided no actual money as I understand the loan guarantee. Essentially it offered much of the same deal as it offers to banks financing nuclear plants.

This is true; however, guaranteeing a bad loan could leave American taxpayers on the hook for much if not all of the $535 million.
 
The Obama administration urged officers of the struggling solar company Solyndra to postpone announcing planned layoffs until after the November 2010 midterm elections, newly released e-mails show.

Solyndra: Energy Dept. pushed firm to keep layoffs quiet until after midterms - The Washington Post
Did you know Solyndra was picked by the Bush administration and worked two years working to get the loans for them. It was Bush and the Republicans who created the loan system for risky energy alternatives. Also the Walton family (of Walmart) was involved with Solyndra.

Ultimately it was the China government who killed Solyndra when they flooded the market with low priced alternatives.
 
Did you know Solyndra was picked by the Bush administration and worked two years working to get the loans for them. It was Bush and the Republicans who created the loan system for risky energy alternatives. Also the Walton family (of Walmart) was involved with Solyndra.

Ultimately it was the China government who killed Solyndra when they flooded the market with low priced alternatives.

Yes, and do you realize that Bush didn't authorize the loan nor did Bush make the loan?
 
Yes, and do you realize that Bush didn't authorize the loan nor did Bush make the loan?
It was the same career DoE officials that made the decision. $535 is big potatoes for you and me, but in terms of Washington, DC it's chump change. KBR- Haliburton has defrauded our government much more and that really IS crony capitalism. They also responsible for the electrocusion (in the showers) of some of our military in Iraq.
 
It was the same career DoE officials that made the decision. $535 is big potatoes for you and me, but in terms of Washington, DC it's chump change. KBR- Haliburton has defrauded our government much more and that really IS crony capitalism. They also responsible for the electrocusion (in the showers) of some of our military in Iraq.

Chump change? Half a billion dollars? Just goes to show that money doesn't matter to you since you don't understand where it comes from. Unbelievable that you cannot take responsibilty for any liberal screw up. Obama loves having people like you support him. The double standard is staggering.
 
Chump change? Half a billion dollars? Just goes to show that money doesn't matter to you since you don't understand where it comes from. Unbelievable that you cannot take responsibilty for any liberal screw up. Obama loves having people like you support him. The double standard is staggering.
You bet, it's small potatoes, here is a comparison:

SolyndraVMilitary.gif
 
It would help if you had any idea what you are talking about.

Solyndra and the other manufacturers are facing a huge influx of Chinese competition. Competition that is not only receiving subsidized loans, but subsidized utilities and subsidized rent. It's no wonder that firms like Solyndra can't compete when its competitors are in no way playing fair. In many ways, the Chinese are basically dumping solar panels.

The great thing about your hypocrisy is that people like you are against the very kind of subsidies that are allowing foreign firms to drive American business into the ground.

Its ok though, the big Chinese companies (suntech, JA, Trina, etc) still can't outcompete American companies like First Solar with cost and efficiency. ;)
 
You bet, it's small potatoes, here is a comparison:

SolyndraVMilitary.gif

Talk about distortion, it isn't the role of the govt. to gamble with taxpayer money but it is the role of the govt. to defend this country. If there was waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars in the military spending, then prosecute but quite trying to equate the two expenditures.
 
Talk about distortion, it isn't the role of the govt. to gamble with taxpayer money but it is the role of the govt. to defend this country. If there was waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars in the military spending, then prosecute but quite trying to equate the two expenditures.

This is true but there is massive fraud and waste in the programs they are designed to do and it must be addressed also. It's not much of a defense though as the fraud and waste is every bit as big under Obama as it's been under anyone.
 
Partisanship aside, it is a good, and complex question. This is just one example of a root issue when you look at competition globally.

For example, say you as a nation are against steroid use. However, you play an international sport and ever other nation uses steroids. You can stick to your guns and be a loser, or you violate your ideals and go out and compete to win. Nations have to make these hard decisions, sometimes it's life and death, or the slow decay of an economy, etc. Fortunately most of us when we make such choices, it's only in our homes, or in maybe a small industry segment where the only losers are in terms of dollars, not lives (usually!).

This can be applied to so many political issues. Too big to fail for example. Sure it's bad, but if globally we get spanked by giant companies that have no such restriction, what's your call? Let a foreign power dominate or play to win?
 
Partisanship aside, it is a good, and complex question. This is just one example of a root issue when you look at competition globally.

For example, say you as a nation are against steroid use. However, you play an international sport and ever other nation uses steroids. You can stick to your guns and be a loser, or you violate your ideals and go out and compete to win. Nations have to make these hard decisions, sometimes it's life and death, or the slow decay of an economy, etc. Fortunately most of us when we make such choices, it's only in our homes, or in maybe a small industry segment where the only losers are in terms of dollars, not lives (usually!).

This can be applied to so many political issues. Too big to fail for example. Sure it's bad, but if globally we get spanked by giant companies that have no such restriction, what's your call? Let a foreign power dominate or play to win?

The problem is in doing nothing while GE ships job after job to China. The problem here is the huge conflict of interest. The problem here is that nearly everyone noted that money alone was never going to make this company solvant.
 
Back
Top Bottom