Posted on 01/11/2012 4:51:32 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Many have suggested that attacks on Mitt Romney's service at Bain Capital are attacks on capitalism itself. That is hyperbole at its finest from those who do not understand the business Bain Capital was involved in.
Mitt Romney was NOT primarily a venture capitalist. A venture capitalist invests in early-stage businesses with the hope that they grow and prosper. These early-stage businesses are often risky investments. Though most ultimately fail, some succeed spectacularly making the risks worthwhile. Apple Computer and Google are two such examples. This is what Mitt Romney means when he says some investments succeed and some fail.
By contrast, Mitt Romney was primarily what is affectionately known as a vulture investor........
The two core arguments for Mitt Romney's candidacy are (1) that he knows how to create jobs and (2) that he stands a better chance of defeating Barack Obama than his competitors. Is it true that a slash and burn vulture investor is the best advocate for job creation? If you were a factory worker in Ohio or Pennsylvania or the upper Midwest and Mitt Romney killed your job because there was a more efficient use of the capital employed in your factory, are you really going to listen to what Mitt Romney has to say even if you believe in hard work and free market capitalism?
No one is suggesting that Mitt Romney was evil or immoral or corrupt or criminal. If Mitt Romney had founded a business that did not rely on firing thousands of people as part of its business model, this issue would never have come up. Given that the focus of this election needs to be squarely on Barack Obama and his Marxist rhetoric and policies, it is paramount that Republicans not nominate a candidate that detracts from that.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Alight, show your cards. Tell me about this $30 million investment. What was the name of the company? Let’s get some facts. Or, are you going to deal purely in recycled Obama talking points?
Bain took bailout money before it was called "bailouts"
Not quite. If you have a problem with the private parties voluntarily entering transactions (as is the case with Bain) then what is the alternative? It is only government intervention. Or do you claim something else?
libertyjihad accuses US PERRY PEOPLE of being for the Federal Government bailout approach.
“It” is simply posting off the wall.
Whether knowingly or unknowingly, who knows?
:o)
Were there poor decisions made and improper personnel in place? Definitely.
However, that's a bit different from an overt strategy to take over, cannibalize, and sell off.
Seems like you wouldn't bother with the 8 years of investment and mergers if that was your goal. You'd also take the offer that was proposed by another enitity before everything went south, if making a quick buck is the endgame.
“Bain took federal money”.
When? What was the name of the company? Will anyone attacking Bain on this board PLEASE provide some facts instead of reading Axelrod talking points. FACTS PLEASE!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204879004577108500491449164.html
Go watch the unaired ad and then tell me how Romney is going to do up against Obama. Yep, just keep on demanding those details and telling people who are out of work that there's a difference. Tell those teapartiers who are pissed about that bailouts that the $10 million Bain/Romney stuck taxpayers with is somehow different. Go ahead try it. Stealing from taxpayers to enrich your "investors" is as much a redistribution of wealth as stealing from taxpayers to give to the poor. Redistribution of wealth is still redistribution of wealth
Please don't be confused. Mitt Romney was not a venture capitalist. He was an animal of a different breed entirely.
Bain Capital bought existing companies that were in some stage of distress.
What they did with them was their business.
Bain Capital had a group that did invest venture capital but I don't care what they did with their money and businesses.
BTW, venture capital investment companies look for rates of return in the 1000 times and so much control of your company that would gag a maggot, but it's their money and if you need it, you make the deal.
I am not confused and I don't give a rat's ass about the union slugs that got thrown on the street {I also hope that their kids had to drink dirty water and had to breath dirty air}.
What in the hell is going on at FR, I think I'm at demonRAT Underground with all this left wing socialist bullshit that I'm having to fight.
Well, if we just nominate a lifelong politician with no private business experience, we should please the electorate. Good work Einstein.
I’m with ya’ brother. This board sounds like so much OWS nonsense I’m shocked to hear posters claim conservative cred. They are literally reading Obama/Axelrod talking points (which are simply attacks on free markets). If FR has gone populist/progressive, we have lost the argument for freedom. Bain fired people, Bain made profit, Bain took every legal action available to ensure they protected and grew the money entrusted them by investors. Bain settled debts for the companies they purchased. They settled debts with banks. They tried not to pay 100% of all debts if the other side was willing to negotiate. All good business, but apparently against the new anti-business principles set forth by FR readers.
Worst form of capitalism. Nice little moral judgment.
It's either capitalism or it's communism, you pick it, Clyde.
Which other parts of capitalism don't you like, how about where the evil owner gets the Mercedes and the hard working, good Christian drives an 8 year old, beater?
How about the owner going to Aruba for winter vacation while the hard working Christian stays at home and eats pop corn {no butter, can only afford a little salt}.
You people should go over to demonRAT Underground.
Anyone who imagines that it’s the right thing to do to make your first dollar of income subject to health care (yours and others) rather than FOOD, SHELTER and CLOTHING is a mental case who should be locked up so he can’t hurt anyone.
Notice how nice and neat a vulture’s head is ~ nothing to stick to it ~ every pin feather in place at the margins.
Instead of shutting down failing companies, Romney should have gone to the Whitehouse and asked for a 500 million dollar Solyndra style loan, THEN take the taxpayer money and shut it all down.
Go big or go home!!!
What Romney and Bain Capital did was not capitalism. It was corporate raiding. It was exactly the kind of behavior that gives capitalism a bad name and it is absolutely legitimate to bring this stuff up. In this regard, Romney isn’t much different than George Soros who operates much the same way.
Exactly. Politics is all about messaging and optics. Barry and his team of spinmeisters will paint a picture to make Romney look like the devil incarnate. It doesn’t matter what the facts are. As we saw in 2008, they are masterful at it.
Not shilling for Romney, but frankly we need a “Vulture President” to pick off all the job-killing, freedom-killing, liberty-stifling Federal agencies in Washington DC and throughout the country.
See: http://www.opm.gov/feddata/HistoricalTables/ExecutiveBranchSince1940.asp
That way you get the numbers right.
Kinda interesting ~ peak federal employment was 1945. It's been lower than that ever since. 1985 was peak employment under Ronald Reagan. It's not that high yet.
Lots of folks imagine all sorts of things about federal hiring and employment practices ~ much of it simply isn't supportable with the evidence at hand.
Now, on the other hand, if you wanted to take the federal government's experience with Mechanization, Automation, Computerization, Improved Methods and Robotics as a guide to the future, it's looking pretty grim out there. There will be no new jobs anywhere for anyone!
They quite regularly fire people, prosecute them and stick them into federal prison.
Your typical private company doesn't often get that opportunity.
I was there when the United States Post Office Department was DISMANTLED and the new United States Postal Service built on the wreckage of the old organization.
The entire Headquarters operation was DISMISSED, FIRED, SENT PACKING, DISPOSED OF LIKE YESTERDAY'S KLEENEX......
Before going into total reorganization and restructuring we'd had about 535,000 employees, and afterwards several thousand less. That was back in the early 1970s. There's some more recent information at
It says, in pertinent part, "The number of career employees has declined 23.2%, and the number of non-career employees has increased 6.3%."
The USPS increased the amount of mail handled by about 7X while maintaining a relatively fixed workforce. That was done through massive application of Mechanization, Automation, Computerization, improved methods AND Robotics.
That's what is in everyone's future.
BTW, USPS didn't ship jobs overseas ~ it simply became more productive with 100% of its employment based in the United States.
I don't get it either. It's kind of creepy. Makes you think how quickly a populist could turn dictator if conservatives are ready to form picket lines just because the other guy happens to be someone they don't like.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.