If you owned a business, who would you hire to run it: Obama or Romney?

[CrusaderFrank]

"Fired" is what you call employees in a venture that sets record losses, won't pass a budget and then decide to go to Vegas on company money

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Obama would hire union workers and destroy the plant and my relationships with my customers by berating them for not being green enough and then try to charge them for recycling their shipping containers.

*

"You don't need a weatherman (or, desperate-Republican) to KNOW which way....

.....the wind blows."!!!!!!

 

[Skull Pilot]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

If the point is that the answer to this question should guide who we vote for for president, I think it's a very dubious point. Our government is not a business and I don't want it run "for profit".

Even not for profit enterprises need to be well run or we end up with 15 trillion dollar debts and budgets with trillion dollar deficits.

If we got someone who just understood that spending cannot be greater than revenue it would be a huge improvement.

 

[dblack]

I completely disagree about the government not being a business, perhaps that's why the debt is so high. If a private business operated the same way, it'd have been shut down a long time ago.

I've worked with a lot of non-profit businesses, guess what, they have to operate within their budget, heck they must have a budget. Anything that's left over at the end of the year goes to the start up for the next year. Only when there is a surplus can they expand. Maybe we need to rethink that "not a business" thing.

You make some good points here. And I agree that being able to balance the books is important. But what I'm addressing is the temptation, that a lot of us seem more than willing to indulge, to make government responsible for our economic affairs in general. Calling on government to provide us with jobs, to pump up the stock market, to prop up failing businesses or otherwise "drive" the economy is bad mojo. Going in that direction is merging economic and state power in a way that will be virtually impossible to untangle. And it will be devastating to the cause of freedom.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

"Fired" is what you call employees in a venture that sets record losses, won't pass a budget and then decide to go to Vegas on company money.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm......

That's gotta be the first-time I've ever heard the GOP described as.....

......a venture.

Are you sure you don't mean an adventure???

.

 

[WillowTree]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

Priceless! Just priceless.

 

[naturegirl]

I completely disagree about the government not being a business, perhaps that's why the debt is so high. If a private business operated the same way, it'd have been shut down a long time ago.

I've worked with a lot of non-profit businesses, guess what, they have to operate within their budget, heck they must have a budget. Anything that's left over at the end of the year goes to the start up for the next year. Only when there is a surplus can they expand. Maybe we need to rethink that "not a business" thing.

You make some good points here. And I agree that being able to balance the books is important. But what I'm addressing is the temptation, that a lot of us seem more than willing to indulge, to make government responsible for our economic affairs in general. Calling on government to provide us with jobs, to pump up the stock market, to prop up failing businesses or otherwise "drive" the economy is bad mojo. Going in that direction is merging economic and state power in a way that will be virtually impossible to untangle. And it will be devastating to the cause of freedom.

You also make some good points. Balancing the books is paramount.

If the government would just stay with what it was designed to do instead of making promises about jobs, pumping up the stock market and propping up failing businesses then this wouldn't be an issue would it?? How many politicians run on that premise??

The government has overreached for too long, it needs to get out of the way and move to the back of the bus. Let the people drive the economy, let businesses that can't make it on their own fail. From the auto industry to the banking industry to the green industry.

The government should not be propping up anything except the constitution. Untangling it now is going to be devastating, but the longer we wait the worse it's going to get.

To the Obama administration, I'd like to say--------Back off!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

If the point is that the answer to this question should guide who we vote for for president, I think it's a very dubious point. Our government is not a business and I don't want it run "for profit".

Even not for profit enterprises need to be well run or we end up with 15 trillion dollar debts and budgets with trillion dollar deficits.

If we got someone who just understood that spending cannot be greater than revenue it would be a huge improvement.

"conservatives" finally.....

...."GET THAT"....

.......huh????

 

[NYcarbineer]

Romney is claiming he can balance the budget by cutting taxes, increasing defense spending,

and then making enough non-defense domestic spending cuts (aka mystery cuts) to accomplish it.

I would not hire a man who is either that delusional, or that flagrantly dishonest, or that ignorant in simple mathematics,

to run my business.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Romney in a walk.

Obama would hire union workers and destroy the plant and my relationships with my customers by berating them for not being green enough and then try to charge them for recycling their shipping containers. And that's just the first week. Can't let a crisis go to waste!

You're hiring someone. He would be working FOR you.

 

[Harry Dresden]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

i would hire Romney for the business side of things.....Obama can run the recreational side of things....like Employee parties.....

 

[Seawytch]

The government isn't a business and shouldn't be run like one. I'd hire Jim Sinegal.

 

[naturegirl]

Romney is claiming he can balance the budget by cutting taxes, increasing defense spending,

and then making enough non-defense domestic spending cuts (aka mystery cuts) to accomplish it.

I would not hire a man who is either that delusional, or that flagrantly dishonest, or that ignorant in simple mathematics,

to run my business.

Oh I see, you don't want anyone that is capable of identifying where the problems are then doing what is necessary, albiet unpopular, to fix them.

I realize the concept of a balanced budget scares the bejesus out of Dems.

 

[Sallow]

Romney is claiming he can balance the budget by cutting taxes, increasing defense spending,

and then making enough non-defense domestic spending cuts (aka mystery cuts) to accomplish it.

I would not hire a man who is either that delusional, or that flagrantly dishonest, or that ignorant in simple mathematics,

to run my business.

Low taxes and low regulations societies are found all over the third world. Another feature of those third world countries is a big shiny military.

Progressive taxes and well regulated economies make up what is known as G8. Countries with strong economies and advanced societies.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Obama has 3 years experience running things and has run up massive debt.

he wouldn't even be a choice.

Now as a spokesman, he's my pick. He's still got liberals thinking he's done great things.

 

[Douger]

I'd hire Romneys Salvadorian yard man.

 

[Rocko]

I want the guy with no background in economics and has no experience running a business.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Romney is claiming he can balance the budget by cutting taxes, increasing defense spending,

and then making enough non-defense domestic spending cuts (aka mystery cuts) to accomplish it.

I would not hire a man who is either that delusional, or that flagrantly dishonest, or that ignorant in simple mathematics,

to run my business.

Oh I see, you don't want anyone that is capable of identifying where the problems are then doing what is necessary, albiet unpopular, to fix them.

I realize the concept of a balanced budget scares the bejesus out of Dems.

*

......Due-to-the-fact Dems always manage to get stuck....

.....cleaning-UP the mess!!!!

​

 

[dblack]

If the government would just stay with what it was designed to do instead of making promises about jobs, pumping up the stock market and propping up failing businesses then this wouldn't be an issue would it?? How many politicians run on that premise??

Precious few. Certainly not Romney or Obama.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Obama has 3 years experience running things and has run up massive debt.

......'Cause taking-over babysitting-dutie$ (for George Sr. & Babs) isn't exactly the economically-fea$ible thing for a Country to do....

Now as a spokesman, he's my pick. He's still got liberals thinking he's done great things.

Pisses-you-off.....doesn't it??!!

OBAMACCOMPLISHMENTS!!!!

. . . . . ​