b-b-but where are the created jobs?

[Star]

Robert Reich, Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration, explains the magic of Private Equity (vulture capitalism in Mitt’s case) in 8 easy steps.

1. Risk other people’s money
2. Buy a company to squeeze higher profits
3. Cut workers, pay and benefits to squeeze higher profits out of the company
4. Use company as collateral to borrow lots of money to inflate profits
5. Company pays back investors immediately
6. Sell company for more than they bought it for
7. Equity Managers Pocket 20% of the sale even though they never risked their own money
8. Equity Managers don’t risk a dime and only pay 15% capital gains tax

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rodifJlis2c"]How Did Mitt Romney Get So Obscenely Rich? Robert Reich Explains - YouTube[/ame]




Who pays for private equity profits --- WE DO!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Robert Reich, Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration, explains the magic of Private Equity (vulture capitalism in Mitt’s case) in 8 easy steps.

1. Risk other people’s money
2. Buy a company to squeeze higher profits
3. Cut workers, pay and benefits to squeeze higher profits out of the company
4. Use company as collateral to borrow lots of money to inflate profits
5. Company pays back investors immediately
6. Sell company for more than they bought it for
7. Equity Managers Pocket 20% of the sale even though they never risked their own money
8. Equity Managers don’t risk a dime and only pay 15% capital gains tax

How Did Mitt Romney Get So Obscenely Rich? Robert Reich Explains - YouTube




Who pays for private equity profits --- WE DO!

does the goof liberal want to make private equity illegal so no one can buy failing companies or buy stock in any companies for that matter?

Of course the liberal really has no idea what he wants because as a liberal he will lack the IQ to know.

 

[Warrior102]

grab a shovel.
There are plenty of shovel-ready jobs available, so we're told

 

[Stephanie]

Robert Reich...IS he still around?

 

[Star]

Robert Reich...IS he still around?

Romney’s Bain and JPMorgan



I wish President Obama would draw the obvious connection between Bain Capital and JPMorgan Chase.
That way his so-called “attack” on private equity is neither a personal attack on Mitt Romney nor a generalized attack on American business.

It’s an attack on a particular kind of capitalism that Romney and JPMorgan both practice: Using other peoples’ money to make big bets which, if they go wrong, can wreak havoc on the economy.

It’s the substitution of casino capitalism for real capitalism, the dominance of the betting parlor over the real business of America, financial innovation rather than product innovation.

It’s been terrible for the American economy and for our democracy.


It’s also why Obama has to come out swinging about JPMorgan. The JPMorgan Chase debacle would have been prevented if the Volcker Rule were sufficiently strict, prohibiting banks from using commercial deposits to make bets except very specific offsetting bets (hedges) on narrow classes of trades.

But Jamie Dimon and JPMorgan have been lobbying like mad to loosen the Volcker Rule and widen that exception to include the very kind of reckless bets JPMorgan made. And they’re still at it, as evidenced by Dimon’s current claim that the rule that eventually emerges would allow those bets.


As a practical matter, the Volcker Rule is hopeless. It was intended to be Glass-Steagall lite — a more nuanced version of the original Depression-era law that separated commercial from investment banking. But JPMorgan has proven that any nuance — any exception — will be stretched beyond recognition by the big banks.

So much money can be made when these bets turn out well that the big banks will stop at nothing to keep the spigot open.

There’s no alternative but to resurrect Glass-Steagall as a whole. Even then, the biggest banks are still too big to fail or to regulate. We also need to heed the recent advice of the Dallas branch of the Federal Reserve, and break them up.

At the same time, there’s no point to the “carried interest” loophole that allows private-equity managers like Mitt Romney to treat their incomes as capital gains, taxed at only 15 percent, when they’ve risked no money of their own.

If private equity were good for America it wouldn’t need this or the other tax preference it depends on, elevating debt over equity. But the private equity industry has huge political clout, which is why these tax preferences remain.

Get it? Bain Capital and JPMorgan are parts of the same problem. The President should be leading the charge against both.

 

[rdean]

I seem to remember Republicans running on "Jobs Jobs Jobs" in 2010. What happened?

 

[uscitizen]

Robert Reich, Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration, explains the magic of Private Equity (vulture capitalism in Mitt’s case) in 8 easy steps.

1. Risk other people’s money
2. Buy a company to squeeze higher profits
3. Cut workers, pay and benefits to squeeze higher profits out of the company
4. Use company as collateral to borrow lots of money to inflate profits
5. Company pays back investors immediately
6. Sell company for more than they bought it for
7. Equity Managers Pocket 20% of the sale even though they never risked their own money
8. Equity Managers don’t risk a dime and only pay 15% capital gains tax

How Did Mitt Romney Get So Obscenely Rich? Robert Reich Explains - YouTube




Who pays for private equity profits --- WE DO!

It is also a handy profit making way to eliminate competition.

 

[Vidi]

I seem to remember Republicans running on "Jobs Jobs Jobs" in 2010. What happened?

They had no plan plan plan.

 

[uscitizen]

Anyone else remember the right wing rhetoric about "the mobile workforce for the new millineum"?

Yah we see how that turned out well for the temp agencies anyway.

 

[Caroljo]

grab a shovel.
There are plenty of shovel-ready jobs available, so we're told

Obama already admitted he lied......

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I seem to remember Republicans running on "Jobs Jobs Jobs" in 2010. What happened?

They had no plan plan plan.

actually they had a plan to create about 50 million, it was called capitalism!!

1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If its that easy why dosent everyone do it

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there’s no point to the “carried interest” loophole that allows private-equity managers like Mitt Romney to treat their incomes as capital gains, taxed at only 15 percent, when they’ve risked no money of their own.

actually the more they make the more people will want to buy and turn around dying companies. Is that simple enough for a liberal? Are you opposed to saving jobs and creating new ones??

 

[rdean]

I seem to remember Republicans running on "Jobs Jobs Jobs" in 2010. What happened?

They had no plan plan plan.

actually they had a plan to create about 50 million, it was called capitalism!!

1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

Prosperity through LOWER wages. I love it!

 

[rdean]

I seem to remember Republicans running on "Jobs Jobs Jobs" in 2010. What happened?

They had no plan plan plan.

They still have no plan plan plan.

So what they do is lie lie lie.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

They had no plan plan plan.

actually they had a plan to create about 50 million, it was called capitalism!!

1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

Prosperity through LOWER wages. I love it!

too stupid!! with all those new jobs there would be tremendous upward pressure on wages.

 

[rdean]

They had no plan plan plan.

actually they had a plan to create about 50 million, it was called capitalism!!

1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

Prosperity through LOWER wages. I love it!

The only job creator is "demand". That's it. Without demand, no company will hire. Not in a capitalistic society. And it wasn't mentioned once. Hilarious!

Then all that nonsense was called "wisdom". It's like it came from the "Bizarro World":

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The only job creator is "demand".

of course thats stupid and liberal. IF so we could just drop money from airplanes. We don't because it would not create anything but inflationary demand.

Real jobs and real growth come from the supply of new innovative goods and services. Thats what got us from the stone age to here, not demand.

 

[Stephanie]

The only job creator is "demand".

of course thats stupid and liberal. IF so we could just drop money from airplanes. We don't because it would not create anything but inflationary demand.

Real jobs and real growth come from the supply of new innovative goods and services. Thats what got us from the stone age to here, not demand.

Excellent dear..
but I doubt that will be get into the simple minds.

 

[American Horse]

Bain Capital, and other private equity and venture capitalists don't buy healthy companies. They find failing companies, companies that are not operating up to potential, take them over, inject capital (that's money for your information), including updating plant and equipment, and do what is necessary to make them efficient in their operations, and therefore profitable going forward.

When they are up and operating at optimum efficiency, proving their profitibility, then and only then can they sell them at a profit. It they didn't improve them there would be no profit, and their capital investment would go down the drain. Sometimes, perhaps even often, they have to get rid of the deadwood, namely those employees who don't contribute to the success of the operation, just the same as the do obsolete equipment that doesn't operat efficiently or competively.

If they are wrong in their initial judgement about the potential of a company, then they may have to sell it at a loss. There is no profit in selling at a loss. There is no tax writeoff worth the cost of a loss. These companies like Bain Capital are doing a publc service, just like the Obama Administration did with GM, but in the case of GM the Bond holders, those who were first lien holders and considered thier position to be legally inviolable, had their bonds written down and the company was given to the Union. General Motors, unlike the companies refurbished by B.C., does not pay corporate income taxes, because it has had it's corporate tax liabiliy forgiven, therefore it competes unfairly with other auto manufacturers. And it still owes the US Treasury more than $30,000,000,000. And many thousands of GM workers lost their jobs. There are as many GM workers working in foreign countries as there are working in the US now.

Any failed venture by B.C. does not end up getting a free ride on the backs of the American People. There is no profit to Bain Capital or any other venture capitalists to make bad decisions in the quality of their investments. If they make a bad decision, they may have to bankrupt that company if permitted, or have to sell it off at a loss or for salvage, with all the obligations in the contracts to employees that they accepted at the time of the purchase.

Instead they are bankrupted, and if possible reorganized. Even when they aren't reorganized the plant and equipment will very likely go into other production facilities, and jobs will result, except these jobs won't be a burden on the treasury. In other words Bain Capital's failures are, unlike GM and Chrysler, not too big to fail.

But When a company is bought up by Bain (etal), because it is already in a state of stress or decline, it will have operated longer under the Bain ownership than if they hadn't made the investment in the first place.