Published: Wednesday, June 13 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
Does anybody else think it is absurd how people worship business people? Running
a business is entirely different than running a country. A business owner
doesn't have to build consensus with over 500 elected officials.
Oh, Frank, you distort and misrepresent. If you want to be honest, say Romney
was successful leveraging the fortune he inherited. He made money, but he
can't call himself a job creator. And if Obama has personal responsibility
for everything that happens in his Administration, he deserves credit for the
good. And to be fair, Romney then also deserves the blame for the economy of
Massachusetts going from one of the best to near the bottom when he was
Governor. You can't have it both ways. Come to think of it, I guess Mitt
could blame it on Bush because the economy tanked under him. So why use the same
people to advise? No thanks!
Agreed Shaun. If you think about it the only skill Romney and his cohorts
needed was the skill to find companies that were in such condition (not too good
and not too bad) that they could convince a bank to lend them tens of millions
of dollars to "turn around". It didn't make any difference to Bain
if the turnaround occurred because they would put in 10 million of their own,
then take out 30 million from the borrowed money..20 million profit...Done. Now
how does that relate to running a whole economy?
Romney may have made bundles of money for Bain, but he hurt a lot of people in
the process. That is not what this country needs.
It's already been said.
@ pragmatistferlife, your point is well taken. Maybe Mitt could liquidate the
U.S., use the money to pay off the debt, pocket the rest, and we can all learn
to speak Chinese! Now that's what Mitt is really good at.
28% of companies Bain invested in went bankrupt. Obama's team bailed out or
provided funds to a bunch of companies and you name one failure. How is that a
worse track record than Romney? (Nevermind that in a late 2008 op-ed Romney
strongly suggested we needed stimulus including investment in green energy so he
likely would've wanted to do the same thing).
Solyndra was a mistake. It wasn't a very expensive mistake, as these
things go, but it was a mistake. It was also not a mistake the President had
anything to do with. Bain made many mistakes too. So let's call that one a
wash.But let's look at the auto industry. President Obama led on
that one, and the record is spectacular. Saved literally hundreds of thousands
of jobs, turned around a crucial industry. Bain doesn't have a success to
I'm with Mitt 100% - just as soon as there's an election for Venture
Capitalist in Chief.
Irony--we have experienced a V-shaped recession. Its low point was the day Bush
left office. Future economic historians will speak of the historic "Obama
Recovery." Now, shall we put back in office the same kind of greedy
dunderheads who brought us the Bush catastrophe? Seriously?
Wow, let me summarize the liberals comments here:Obama losing
taxpayer money is ok, Romney making money for private investors is bad.Romney having a 70% success rate in taking failing companies and making them
successful, thus having a net positive job creation rate is bad, and
Obama's net job loss rate is good.Obama = good, despite the
results (GM went bankrupt AFTER receiving bailout funds)Romney =
evil, because he isn't a Democrat.To "Irony Guy" future
historians will look back and shake their heads at Obama and reflect at how he
was FDR and Jimmy Carter rolled into one. FDR because he prolonged a recession
for ideological gain, and Jimmy Carter becaue he is so clueless.
@RedshirtObama has overseen the gain of 4 million private sector jobs the
past 2 years. In fact he has an overall net private sector job gain during his
term (public sector jobs fell about a million, that's why overall it's
still negative). He inherited a trainwreck that guaranteed the loss of millions
of jobs his first year. Why do you ignore context?Romney oversaw the
47th best job creation while Governor of Massachusetts. Of course his first year
was when he was 50th so he improved somewhat since then (and I agree with his
team that the first year is influenced by policies from the previous
administration and that new policies take a while to have effect), and of course
Massachusetts has a low birth rate so it doesn't need as much job creation
in order to maintain consistent levels of employment. So I'd argue that
Romney's job performance is not nearly as bad as some Democrats portray it.
I'm willing to consider the context for Romney's job numbers, why
aren't you willing to do the same for Obama?
I'm with RedShirt. Lets cut ALL taxes on the rich so they can continue to
create jobs in China & India.Then we raise taxes on the firefighters
and teachers, because some of them side with unions.Then we increase the
defense budget and while we're at it, invade a few more countries. That
will solve our problems and make the teaparty happy.
I certainly don't want my country to be run like a business. Folks who are
poor, will be left doing all the work and serving in the military. Folks old or
sick will be exempt from health care because they aren't worth the cost. A
few people will win big financially while most won't (and they'll be
doing all the work). Has anyone actually worked in an office before?
All the gossip, treachery, greed, etc. I don't want that part of my
country. People kissing Romney's rear or laughing at his jokes
just to promote their careers or bring more fed money to their states? No
It's astonishing the number of people who are willing to accept someone who
runs our country's economy like a personal money tree for his family and
friends, and who throws billions of dollars we don't have into unproven and
unprofitable pet projects, and who reduces the domestic auto industry workforce
to send those jobs overseas, and who maintains a lethargic recovery, and who
skyrockets our country to an unsustainable and ruinous amount of debt.Sure -it's much better in these economically perilous times to have
someone who's clueless about financial and economic forces. Who needs a
businessman now when President Obama is doing such a great job driving our
country into bankruptcy?
To "atl134" unfortunately your numbers are not even based in reality.
According to the BLS over the past 2 years there have been 3.4 million jobs
gained, but that that was after Obama LOSING 4 million jobs in his first 15
months as President. Last I checked, Obama has not created any new jobs, but is
still trying to regain what has been lost since becoming President. In January
2009 there were 133,561,000 (according to the BLS) jobs, in March 2012 (April
and May are still preliminary) there were 132,863,000 jobs. That make a net
loss of 698,000 jobs.The interesting thing about Obama's
unemployment number is the timing of the job increase. When you look at the
numbers when Democrats were running everything (2009 and 2010) there were few
jobs created. Once republicans slowed the flow of laws and regulations job
creation started to grow. Think about it.If you want to complain
about Romney having a difficult time making jobs, let look at his record. In
January 2003 MA had an unemployment rate of 5.6%, by December 2007 it was at
4.5%. Economists consider that Full Employment.
Romney didn't use his own money either to advance his vulture capitalism.
Right now, not so pleased with either the Rep or Dem choices for pres.
Romney is a VULTURE capitalist. He feeds upon the unfortunate, turning a profit
for himself and investors, but caring little about the lives or the jobs he
destroyed. Is this who you want to lead our nation? He cares about the 1%. No
more no less.He left the government to clean up his messes while he walked away
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments