Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy ,Another Obama Success

[bonnie]

Solyndra to Declare Bankruptcy

President Obama touted the facility only a year ago.By Scott McGrew | Wednesday, Aug 31, 2011

Solyndra -- recently touted as an innovator by President Obama -- is reportedly shutting its doors. Employees are being turned away this morning.

----------------------

Solyndra, a major manufacturer of solar technology in Fremont, has shut its doors, according to employees at the campus.

"I was told by a security guard to get my [stuff] and leave," one employee said. The company employs a little more than 1,000 employees worldwide, according to its website.

[Analysis: Solyndra Bankruptcy a Disaster for President Obama]

President Takes... More Multimedia Shortly after it opened a massive $700 million facility, it canceled plans for a public stock offering earlier this year and warned it would be in significant trouble if federal loan guarantees did not go through.

The company has said it will make a statement at 9am California time, though it's not clear what that statement will be. An NBC Bay Area photographer on the scene reports security guards are not letting visitors on campus. He says "people are standing around in disbelief." The employees have been given yellow envelopes with instructions on how to get their last checks.

Solyndra was touted by the Obama administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs. The President visited the facility in May of last year and said "it is just a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world. And you guys all represent that. "

The federal government offered $535 million in low cost loan guarantees from the Department of Energy. NBC Bay Area has contacted the White House asking for a statement.

Some Republicans have been very critical of the loans. "I am concerned that the DOE is providing loans and loan guarantees to firms that aren't capable of competing in the global market, even with government subsidies" Florida Congressman Cliff Stearns told the New York Times.

[Guest]

Rush was talking about this today.

[Guest]

I think I'll post what he said, on another thread.

[bonnie]

Rush was talking about this today.

Now you have done it!! Make it seem like I was listening to Rush and that is where I got it.LOL

I did catch it on Rush but heard it earlier on local radio programming. I think this is one of three that have closed or are filing bankruptcy after millions and millions in stimulous money.Got to love those shovel ready jobs.Especially the green ones

[Guest]

Exactly. Yep.

[Dr. Shane]

Rush really makes himself look like an ignorant buffoon when he rants and rants about things like this. I sure if he knew what kind of toilet paper Obama uses he would tell us how bad that is too.

Solyndra needs more government subsidy. These alternative energy technologies need the government to invest in them until they advance far enough to become profitable. Solar has a long way to go. If Obama hadn't flushed so much stimulus money down the toilet already, he could probably have been able to give Solyndra the money they needed to stay in business.

[John317]

Rush really makes himself look like an ignorant buffoon when he rants and rants about things like this. I sure if he knew what kind of toilet paper Obama uses he would tell us how bad that is too.

Wow, Shane. You really don't like Rush, do ya?

I don't listen to him all that much-- in fact, only once since 2008-- but I enjoy him when I'm on the road. I would probably listen to him more if I wasn't always so busy on the Adventist Forum. I think he's the best entertainer on talk radio.

[Dr. Shane]

I think he is all about business. He feeds red-meat to the Obama haters. His ratings skyrocket when he is criticizing Obama. Sometimes he gets so caught up in tossing out the red meat that he gets off track and really shows that he is either not informed or ill-prepared to discuss the subject at hand.

Alternative energies need government subsidy to be developed. Private industries are not going to mess with them until they are profitable. Much like space exploration. The government has to fund space exploration until it becomes profitable for private industry - which has been slowly taking place.

[bonnie]

Rush really makes himself look like an ignorant buffoon when he rants and rants about things like this. I sure if he knew what kind of toilet paper Obama uses he would tell us how bad that is too.

Solyndra needs more government subsidy. These alternative energy technologies need the government to invest in them until they advance far enough to become profitable. Solar has a long way to go. If Obama hadn't flushed so much stimulus money down the toilet already, he could probably have been able to give Solyndra the money they needed to stay in business.

If a company is not viable without government subsidies it should not be operating.

Be patient,more monopoly money is on the way from the sounds of it

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: Shane

Rush really makes himself look like an ignorant buffoon when he rants and rants about things like this. I sure if he knew what kind of toilet paper Obama uses he would tell us how bad that is too.

Wow, Shane. You really don't like Rush, do ya?

I don't listen to him all that much-- in fact, only once since 2008-- but I enjoy him when I'm on the road. I would probably listen to him more if I wasn't always so busy on the Adventist Forum. I think he's the best entertainer on talk radio.

It is kind of funny. Rush Limbaugh is a entertainer/radio talk show host, which is what most critics forget.

Critics are pretty swift with the name calling but really fail to show where he is wrong with facts.

[bonnie]

I think he is all about business. He feeds red-meat to the Obama haters. His ratings skyrocket when he is criticizing Obama. Sometimes he gets so caught up in tossing out the red meat that he gets off track and really shows that he is either not informed or ill-prepared to discuss the subject at hand.

Now this is a shock.

Do you think most that listen to Rush believe that his show is a charitable contribution?

Can you show where his ratings went up yesterday or where he was wrong concerning this article? It would be nice if his ratings went up when he addresses another failure of Obama.

If a business cannot operate without government subsidies it should be allowed to fail.

Let the marketplace work.If it is viable it will succeed without government welfare

Alternative energies need government subsidy to be developed. Private industries are not going to mess with them until they are profitable. Much like space exploration. The government has to fund space exploration until it becomes profitable for private industry - which has been slowly taking place.

[bonnie]

September 1, 2011 Bankrupt solar company with fed backing has cozy ties to Obama admin

A solar energy company that intends to file for bankruptcy received $535 million in backing from the federal government and has a cozy history with Democrats and the Obama administration, campaign finance records show.

Shareholders and executives of Solyndra, a green energy company producing solar panels, fundraised for and donated to the Obama administration to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Tulsa billionaire George Kaiser, a key Obama backer who raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for the president’s election campaign, is one of Solyndra’s primary investors. Kaiser himself donated $53,500 to Obama’s 2008 election campaign, split between the DSCC and Obama For America. Kaiser also made several visits to the White House and appeared at some White House events next to Obama officials.

Campaign finance records show Kaiser and Solyndra executives and board members donated $87,050 total to Obama’s election campaign.

And now, just two years after securing a half-billion-dollar federal loan, Solyndra has said that it will declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In a statement, Solyndra wrote “global economic and solar industry market conditions” forced it to close its Fremont, Calif., factory and lay off 1,100 employees.

“Regulatory and policy uncertainties in recent months created significant near-term excess supply and price erosion,” Solyndra president and CEO Brian Harrison said. “Raising incremental capital in this environment was not possible. This was an unexpected outcome and is most unfortunate.”

Obama cited the company as a model of success for his highly touted green-energy industry initiative. In fact, the Obama administration fast-tracked the solar startup’s $535 million loan application to the Department of Energy — a move later criticized by the Government Accountability Office.

Solyndra and the administration originally projected the loan would help Solyndra create 4,000 jobs.

During a visit to the Solyndra facility in 2010, Obama said the factory is “a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world.”

Ads by Google“Less than a year ago, we were standing on what was an empty lot. But through the Recovery Act, this company received a loan to expand its operations,” Obama proclaimed then. “This new factory is the result of those loans.”

According to a Washington Post report, Solyndra communications director David Miller called the White House to ask that a factory tour be added to Obama’s itinerary during a trip to California.

Campaign finance records show Solyndra shareholders and executives did their fair share of greasing palms.

Ben Bierman, executive vice president of operations and engineering for Solyndra, donated $5,500 to Obama’s election campaign. Karen Alter, senior vice president of marketing, donated $23,000 in 2008.

According to information collected by the Center for Responsive Politics, Solyndra board members have donated at least $27,400 to Democratic campaigns and affiliates.

Since 1998, Solyndra board member James F. Gibbons has contributed $13,500 on his own. Board member Winston Fu has contributed $4,550 since 2008. Since 1991, board member Thomas Baruch has contributed $7,150. And board member Steven R. Mitchell donated $2,300 to Obama in 2007.

Solyndra also spent $550,000 lobbying Congress in 2010. Between 2008 and 2011, the company spent more than $1 million lobbying for bills including the “American Clean Energy Leadership Act of 2009″ and the “Solar Manufacturing Jobs Creation Act.”

Despite Solyndra’s recent bankruptcy announcement, the Department of Energy and the White House insist the investment was not in vain.

“The project that we supported succeeded,” a spokesman for the Department of Energy told The New York Times. “The facility was producing the product it said it would produce, and consumers were buying the product,” he said. “The company struggled because the market has changed dramatically.”

“While we are disappointed by this particular outcome, we continue to believe the clean-energy jobs race is one that America can, must and will win,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said today in an emailed statement.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Shane

I think he is all about business. He feeds red-meat to the Obama haters. His ratings skyrocket when he is criticizing Obama. Sometimes he gets so caught up in tossing out the red meat that he gets off track and really shows that he is either not informed or ill-prepared to discuss the subject at hand.

Now this is a shock.

Do you think most that listen to Rush believe that his show is a charitable contribution?

Can you show where his ratings went up yesterday or where he was wrong concerning this article? It would be nice if his ratings went up when he addresses another failure of Obama.

If a business cannot operate without government subsidies it should be allowed to fail.

Let the marketplace work.If it is viable it will succeed without government welfare.

[Dr. Shane]

If a business cannot operate without government subsidies it should be allowed to fail.

Wow! That is some scary extremism.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Alternative energies need government subsidy to be developed. Private industries are not going to mess with them until they are profitable.

You're exactly right.

Thank you.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

If a business cannot operate without government subsidies it should be allowed to fail.

Wow! That is some scary extremism.

If it is a viable product and there is demand someone will provide it.

If it cannot exist without a government handout there is not enough of a demand for it.

The solar panels that there is a market for is made much cheaper in China.Us cannot compete with the price of production.

[Dr. Shane]

If it is a viable product and there is demand someone will provide it.

If it cannot exist without a government handout there is not enough of a demand for it.

Quite a simplistic and naive view of the world. Thank God our political leaders - both Republican and Democrats - know better.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

If it is a viable product and there is demand someone will provide it.

If it cannot exist without a government handout there is not enough of a demand for it.

Quite a simplistic and naive view of the world. Thank God our political leaders - both Republican and Democrats - know better.

Yes,don't they have a marvelous track record?Especially the reputation for operating economically and efficiently.

Got to love that government subsidized fuel. One of it's problems seems to be how tough it is on car engines.

Our mechanic always said "please don't use that garbage"

When we would take the vehicle into be serviced first question asked,you haven't used ethanol have you"?

Nuclear power still can't ween itself from subsidies.

Now we throw big money after bad money because of the stimulous for products people don't want.

[bonnie]

Whether it is the radio,electronic communications of any kind,

flying,bicycles,light bulbs,automobiles,sewing machines,oil exploration and drilling did not have government hands on it,any inventions that have gone into making life easier and more pleasant is because of inovative private citizens. No subsidies.

[Dr. Shane]

One of the reasons the US is a leader in technology and innovation is because of government subsidiaries. Our entire public education system is subsidized. Our airports and highways are subsidized. Many of the public water and sewer systems in are publicly subsidized. The entire space program is publicly subsidized. Many pharmaceutical companies are subsidized to research cures for diseases that are not wide-spread enough to offer financial incentive to find a cure.

I hear the talking heads on talk radio babble about their pure capitalist utopia but they simply reveal their ignorance regarding how the real world works. If government subsidizing was a bad thing the US would be in terrible shape compared to countries like Kenya and Bolivia. The issue with subsidizing is that too often it is used as a political payback and not as a true incentive to innovation or the public good.

[phkrause]

One of the reasons the US is a leader in technology and innovation is because of government subsidiaries. Our entire public education system is subsidized. Our airports and highways are subsidized. Many of the public water and sewer systems in are publicly subsidized. The entire space program is publicly subsidized. Many pharmaceutical companies are subsidized to research cures for diseases that are not wide-spread enough to offer financial incentive to find a cure.

I hear the talking heads on talk radio babble about their pure capitalist utopia but they simply reveal their ignorance regarding how the real world works. If government subsidizing was a bad thing the US would be in terrible shape compared to countries like Kenya and Bolivia. The issue with subsidizing is that too often it is used as a political payback and not as a true incentive to innovation or the public good.

I agree Shane, the problem is some people don't like certain subsidizing, unless its what they like or who it is that's doing that subsidizing.

[bonnie]

Quote:

One of the reasons the US is a leader in technology and innovation is because of government subsidiaries. Our entire public education system is subsidized. Our airports and highways are subsidized. Many of the public water and sewer systems in are publicly subsidized. The entire space program is publicly subsidized. Many pharmaceutical companies are subsidized to research cures for diseases that are not wide-spread enough to offer financial incentive to find a cure.

I am sorry,I just assumed that most adults understood what a subsidy was.

When the government trys to initiate a demand for something

and then pays to keep that product afloat and viable it does not work.

A subsidy is something that is placed beneath as a support.

The government did not create a demand for public schools.Nor are public schools privately funded with government subsidies to keep them operating. Or possibly you do know of private businesses or persons that are the main financial support with the government giving a subsidy as a support to the system

The last I heard our public schools were fully funded by a variety of taxes/government,not merely subsidized to keep it afloat.

I think the same holds true with our infrastructure.We have a lot of road construction going on in our area.I do know those living along those routes are not privately paying with the government subsidizing to pay for the work. Cty,State,and Federal pay.They pay with our money but it is fully funded

Quote:

I hear the talking heads on talk radio babble about their pure capitalist utopia but they simply reveal their ignorance regarding how the real world works. If government subsidizing was a bad thing the US would be in terrible shape compared to countries like Kenya and Bolivia. The issue with subsidizing is that too often it is used as a political payback and not as a true incentive to innovation or the public good.

I knew you couldn't get thru a post without your "talking heads and talking babble".Unlike you that cannot seem to form an opinion because of talk radio I look to history and the results of doing something a certain way.

The government cannot create a demand and sustain that by subsidies.When the subsidies dry up so does the imaginary demand.Inovation is not inspired by the government.

The demand comes as a result of a need or a desire for a certain product.When the demand is there government does not need to subsidize to keep demand

[Guest]

Thank you.

You're thanking me for a missprint. A fopaw, a screw up. If a business has to have government money to survive, then it's not a business at all. It's only a welfare recipient. On the dole like all the other welfare recipients. That is NOT business.

The only people who think it is, are those who believe there is a socialist utopia somewhere, and we're just about to find it if we can just borrow enough, and tax enough, and spend enough, of other people's money. LOL

Look up the word "business" in the dictionary and see what it says Shane. You're so out of touch with reality from drinking the kool-aid, that you don't even know what a legitimate business is. And have the nerve to call Rush a buffoon for telling the truth about it. Rush is not the buffoon here, I assure you. If he goes on a rant, it's because he cares about what is happening to this country. You seem to be blissfully ignorant about where all this is heading. Just like you were when you thought it would be a good idea to vote for obama!

[bonnie]

Quote:

I agree Shane, the problem is some people don't like certain subsidizing, unless its what they like or who it is that's doing that subsidizing.

That is probably true.There are also those that just can't get enough government subsidies.

Then there are those of us that don't believe any business should be subsidized.

If it is a viable product and there is a demand Big Brother doesn't have to meddle.

There is a role for the federal government but should be limited.

The federal government cannot operate efficiently or economically.It is cumbersome and many times redundant.

Look at Fema,they are robbing Peter to pay Paul.There is no reason for the expanded role of Fema.

The states and the citizens themselves can do far more with far less.

I would be happy to see all the deductions eliminated,except for true business expense and lower taxes to a straight 10-15%.

WITH EVERYONE PAYING.

If I need a mortgage interest deductions to afford my own home,I best not be buying a house and expect other taxpayers to subsidize me.

If I cannot afford to have children without the deductions I have no business having a child

[Guest]

The government propping up a failed business is something that should NEVER happen. And earlier in our lifetimes it was unheard of.

It screws up the natural process that happens in the marketplace, and defeats capitalism. If left alone the markets will always correct themselves. It is the marketplace that should decide which businesses succeed or fail, NOT the government.

But we've got a bunch of dopes running the country into the ground now, and evidently a bunch of other dopes who believe they're doing the right thing. I know the end must be near. Everything is upside down, and 180 degrees out of phase. Good is called evil, and evil is called good. People who seemingly have average intelligence or better, have allowed themselves to be turned into morons.

God bless the morons. At least the well meaning ones.