Click a Kitty Thank you, JoeProBono
Sweet Young Dragon Adopts Some Orphans
Lend a helping hand
Donate monthly
Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up
Posted on 02/10/2012 7:03:34 AM PST by OKSooner
I am pushing the notion that he can be attacked in a principled manner,
So telling the truth about Romney and Bain isn't "principled? Really? I think those trying to stop the discussion lack principles.
Have a nice day.
When the ONLY company being discussed is Bain? BZZZZ Try again.
Mitt is the problem, not private equity.
Romneys record at Bain is the problem
You have a nice day.
Really? What about using the capitol to improve the company so they will be profitable, rather than extracting as much as possible out of them? and then allowing them to go under?
Romney is running on his private sector record and you think that shouldn’t be vetted? Unbelievable!
For the last time, I merely suggested that if someone wishes to engage in anti-capitalist, populist demagoguery the best places to start are websites such as DailyKos, and Media Matters (I forgot Huffington Post).
If you refuse to acknowledge the basic principle I expressed above, then you must necessarily label me a Romney supporter and accuse me of trying to silence the discussion. You have no other choice, because you are not being intellectually honest.
Those who can, do. Those who can’t, write for Forbes.
The above is a generalization, but fairly accurate.
We already discussed your, ahem, unique interpretation of “vetting.” And if you can’t handle the personal stuff, then don’t get personal. That’s about as simple as I can make it.
It’s pretty short and sweet really.
There’s basically a clear corollary between the amount of influence Bain was allowed to have, and failure rate. The more influence, the more certain the failure. Of the so called successes, 70% of BAIN profits are based on a handful of companies, half of which still ended up in bankruptcy.
“Success” stories like Sports Authority and Staples, Bain held extremely insignificant positions. Staples was very small seed cash. With SA, Bain was just one of many partners yet SA was basically flat line until KMART bought them.
Bottom line is, any success was in SPITE of, not a RESULT of Bain involvement. If you want to seek out reasons for success of any of these companies I’d look at other partners/influences.
I don’t think that...I just don’t think buying out companies in order to extract as much profit as possible and firing all of the workers, rather than helping their sales models and growing them helps the conservative cause.
Bain also helped companies get started — Staples and Sport Authority were two. I’m not a Mitt supporter... but Bain helps alot of companies.
Of course, since you want to "vett", I am sure you will take this into consideration.
“Mitt didn’t just invest in Staples when it was an idea — he hung around as a member of the board of directors for close to 15 years and I’ve been on some very good boards with some great directors. I would still rate him as the single best corporate director I’ve ever worked with,” Tom Stemberg, the co-founder and former CEO of Staples said. “He was the inspirational leader and while Staples may have existed without him, i doubt it would have been nearly as big or successful without him.”I'm not for Mitt, just against duplicitous populists.
But it's fine with you if it's not moral or ethical?
Take your poulist spew to DU!
If all you have are insults then you have NOTHING.
You post ONE "feel good" story about a dishonest lefty politician and you think that's persuasive?
I'm actually a conservative. And I don't support making money off of other peoples misery by stripping a company of it's assets then selling the shell.
What I find interesting is the Mormon influence of Bain Capital. I do not KNOW that all the partners are Mormons but I know that at least one other of Mitt’s original partner is a Mormon high up (Gay) and that Bain sometimes gives money and stock to the LDS church:
http://www.newser.com/story/137777/romneys-bain-gave-19m-in-burger-king-to-mormons.html
To me this may mean that Mitt finds the business of the LDS church of more importance than the business of the American people.
Just my opinion of course.
“February 10, 2012 11:09:13 AM EST · 31 of 55
impimp to aMorePerfectUnion
Private equity firms have an alternative - central planners. You are launching a left wing attack on Romney. The same type of attack a commie would use.”
Private equity - investing in early stage companies- and vulture capitalism are two different things. I favor the first. I oppose the second.
I am opposed to those who use the term “vulture capitalism”. It is commie talk. Again, I oppose anyone who attacks Bain or Mitt from the left.
I have no moral objection to buying a business, selling its parts, and firing its workers. You do, so I oppose your ideology.
Check the thread again or every thread on this subject. At least 40% of the posts aren't on Bain itself and a majority aren't even about Romney but about "LBOs", Equity, or what people think the proper role of businesses like this is and their 'social responsibility'. This has been a common factor when bringing up Romeny and Bain- attacking the Private Equity business model instead of specifically Romney's actions w/ Bain.
“I have no moral objection to buying a business, selling its parts, and firing its workers. You do, so I oppose your ideology.”
Oppose away and I’ll continue to oppose your ignorance so we can both be happy in our opposition
... and I’ll continue to tell the truth about Willard’s activities - from the hard right that actually creates jobs.
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.