Newt hits Romney hard on Bain Capital

[midcan5]

"The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy." Alex Carey [see Democracy after Citizens United | MIT World ]

When I started working in corporate America, there was a sense of respect for all, employees were respected for their work and for their contributions. It wasn't heaven but it also wasn't the dog eat dog corporatism of today that sees money and profits above people, and even above the nation. Money is gawd today and getting more in our Madoff et al world is considered normal. It is as if all the things religions and morality taught about temptations came true, with the twist that now they are the good things to do? Free enterprise replaced respect. How'd that happen? The links and books give some reasons. See: Taming the Savage Market


"Corporate propaganda directed outwards, that is, to the public at large, has two main objectives: to identify the free enterprise system in popular consciousness with every cherished value, and to identify interventionist governments and strong unions (the only agencies capable of checking a complete domination of society by corporations) with tyranny, oppression and even subversion. The techniques used to achieve these results are variously called 'public relations', 'corporate communications' and 'economic education'." Alex Carey 'Taking the Risk out of Democracy'


"Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For thirty years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose. We know what things cost but have no idea what they are worth. We no longer ask of a judicial ruling or a legislative act: is it good? Is it fair? Is it just? Is it right? Will it help bring about a better society or a better world? Those used to be the political questions, even if they invited no easy answers. We must learn once again to pose them." Tony Judt 'Ill Fares the Land'

 

[Toro]

romney's problem is this... he can't run on his record as governor because his views as governor almost exactly mirrored the president's. so he has to talk about his experience in the private sector where he claims to have been a "job creator".

once he made his "job creator" status the center of his campaign, it became fair to point out that he's full of it and was really gordon gekko.

i heard someone say it perfectly yesterday and i think it was Andrew Ross Sorkin... he said, it is impossible to ascertain whether mitt was a good job creator or a bad job creator based on the actions of Bain Capital.... and what he was... was a good investor.

yet, being a good investor is not the same thing as being a "job creator" because, as you well know, Toro, what benefits shareholders is not necessarily what benefits the company or its employees.

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

Bain & Co - the consulting company which hired Romney in the first place - is a consulting company. They were a consultant to businesses on both how to grow and how to become more profitable. Their business is business. Businesses pay them a lot of money to tell them how to get better.

Romney took those skills he learned at the consulting business and applied them to the investing business. Romney and Bain Capital - the investment business - made their name originally in what is known as "growth capital" investors. Growth capital investors are investors who give large chunks of money to growing businesses and advise them on how to get better and grow faster.

Bain Capital branched out into what is known as "buyouts." This is where the criticism comes in because in some cases, they do let a lot employees go. Occasionally, it amounts to asset stripping, but most times, target companies are those which lag their competitors. IOW, the company makes a 3% profit margin whereas their competitors make a 6% profit margin so the buyout firm attempts to get the company up to 6%. Since labour is the biggest cost of most companies, this inevitably leads to layoffs. I would agree that there are egregious examples in the buyout world, but most of the activities are an attempt to make the company better.

Why is that bad? Companies don't exist to employ people. Companies exist to make a profit. If we start thinking that companies exist to employ people and profit is a dirty word, then what you have is called "France."

As to my opening question, a guy who spent his formative working years immersed in a culture where the singular goal was trying to improve businesses knows better than anyone what businesses need to create jobs. The economy and jobs are the number one issue in this election. So who knows better, an academic, a guy who spent his entire career in Washington, or a guy who made his fortune trying to make businesses better?

 

[JoeB131]

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

If I needed surgery, I wouldn't go to the guy who thinks he can make a profit if he sells off my kidneys....

Which pretty much describes the Weird Mormon Robot's business practices.

Look, guy, we've been doing the whole "let's make the rich richer" economic policies for 30 years now, Democrats and Republicans alike. Free Trade, low regulation, low taxes on the wealthy.

And the rich got richer.

It just hasn't "trickled down" to the rest of us.

 

[JWBooth]

Fuck Noot, he's a fascist chickenhawk piece of shit.

 

[Toro]

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

If I needed surgery, I wouldn't go to the guy who thinks he can make a profit if he sells off my kidneys....

Which pretty much describes the Weird Mormon Robot's business practices.

Look, guy, we've been doing the whole "let's make the rich richer" economic policies for 30 years now, Democrats and Republicans alike. Free Trade, low regulation, low taxes on the wealthy.

And the rich got richer.

It just hasn't "trickled down" to the rest of us.

So Reagan lied to you? Good to know, uber-RINO!

 

[Synthaholic]

There's no employment in the absence of wealth creation, dumbass.

Wealth creation does not equate job creation, you stupid shit.

 

[Full-Auto]

There's no employment in the absence of wealth creation, dumbass.

Wealth creation does not equate job creation, you stupid shit.

Then explain it dufus

 

[Synthaholic]

romney's problem is this... he can't run on his record as governor because his views as governor almost exactly mirrored the president's. so he has to talk about his experience in the private sector where he claims to have been a "job creator".

once he made his "job creator" status the center of his campaign, it became fair to point out that he's full of it and was really gordon gekko.

i heard someone say it perfectly yesterday and i think it was Andrew Ross Sorkin... he said, it is impossible to ascertain whether mitt was a good job creator or a bad job creator based on the actions of Bain Capital.... and what he was... was a good investor.

yet, being a good investor is not the same thing as being a "job creator" because, as you well know, Toro, what benefits shareholders is not necessarily what benefits the company or its employees.

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

Bain & Co - the consulting company which hired Romney in the first place - is a consulting company. They were a consultant to businesses on both how to grow and how to become more profitable. Their business is business. Businesses pay them a lot of money to tell them how to get better.

Romney took those skills he learned at the consulting business and applied them to the investing business. Romney and Bain Capital - the investment business - made their name originally in what is known as "growth capital" investors. Growth capital investors are investors who give large chunks of money to growing businesses and advise them on how to get better and grow faster.

Bain Capital branched out into what is known as "buyouts." This is where the criticism comes in because in some cases, they do let a lot employees go. Occasionally, it amounts to asset stripping, but most times, target companies are those which lag their competitors. IOW, the company makes a 3% profit margin whereas their competitors make a 6% profit margin so the buyout firm attempts to get the company up to 6%. Since labour is the biggest cost of most companies, this inevitably leads to layoffs. I would agree that there are egregious examples in the buyout world, but most of the activities are an attempt to make the company better.

Why is that bad? Companies don't exist to employ people. Companies exist to make a profit. If we start thinking that companies exist to employ people and profit is a dirty word, then what you have is called "France."

As to my opening question, a guy who spent his formative working years immersed in a culture where the singular goal was trying to improve businesses knows better than anyone what businesses need to create jobs. The economy and jobs are the number one issue in this election. So who knows better, an academic, a guy who spent his entire career in Washington, or a guy who made his fortune trying to make businesses better?

You totally avoided the point that Jillian made.

 

[Synthaholic]

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

If I needed surgery, I wouldn't go to the guy who thinks he can make a profit if he sells off my kidneys....

Which pretty much describes the Weird Mormon Robot's business practices.

Look, guy, we've been doing the whole "let's make the rich richer" economic policies for 30 years now, Democrats and Republicans alike. Free Trade, low regulation, low taxes on the wealthy.

And the rich got richer.

It just hasn't "trickled down" to the rest of us.

So Reagan lied to you? Good to know, uber-RINO!

Reagan did lie to us. David Stockman told the truth.

 

[Synthaholic]

There's no employment in the absence of wealth creation, dumbass.

Wealth creation does not equate job creation, you stupid shit.

Then explain it dufus

What do you need explained?

 

[Synthaholic]

Willard Romney is no different than 'Chainsaw' Al Dunlop.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Except of course that Bain Capital is a private investment firm that invests in businesses and creates jobs. They are clearly bad guys.

Considering that they also destroy jobs, yeah, they kind of are.

They take on firms that are already collapsing. Their success rate was about 70% when the new business failure rate is about 50%

Youre letting your hatred for Romney cloud your judgment.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Except of course that Bain Capital is a private investment firm that invests in businesses and creates jobs. They are clearly bad guys.

Considering that they also destroy jobs, yeah, they kind of are.

They take on firms that are already collapsing. Their success rate was about 70% when the new business failure rate is about 50%

Youre letting your hatred for Romney cloud your judgment.

Where is the link to back up these phony numbers?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Considering that they also destroy jobs, yeah, they kind of are.

They take on firms that are already collapsing. Their success rate was about 70% when the new business failure rate is about 50%

Youre letting your hatred for Romney cloud your judgment.

Where is the link to back up these phony numbers?

The 70% number comes from Romney advisors in response to Newts attack. They have been repeated multiple times in many interviews.

The 50% figure comes from my time in college. It's the number that was taught to us during business mgmt and ethics.

I have no reason to doubt either stat. If you choose to that's your choice.

 

[cheetah440]

No he didn't, it's simply a lie. A small fraction of their business was in liquidating companies that were failing, a very small part. Something we actually need to take place in the Federal government btw. Most of their business was investing in start ups.
Sports authority
Steel Dynamics
Staples
Bright Horizons

The list goes on and on. Just because you don't have a clue about PE and VC companies doesn't give you the right to smear the good work, the necessary and valuable work that Bain capital and the other 2300 PE/VC firms provide to our economic system. You simply don't have a clue. Just attack him for being a Mormon and leave it at that.

Oh, please.

Actually, there was an article today where the Venture Capitalists are crapping themselves because they don't like the scrutiny Romney is bringing down on them.

As far as the 'success' stories. Staples didn't have it's real success until it got Bain out of their lives and developed the "Easy Button" campaign.

Venture Capitalists are parasites that have mistaken themselves for vital organs.

What do you mean "oh please", those are facts. Those are real companies.

Look, Bain is a necessity in the economy. They take risks, make investments and help companies and investors increase revenues.

 

[California Girl]

Except of course that Bain Capital is a private investment firm that invests in businesses and creates jobs. They are clearly bad guys.

Considering that they also destroy jobs, yeah, they kind of are.

They take on firms that are already collapsing. Their success rate was about 70% when the new business failure rate is about 50%

Youre letting your hatred for Romney cloud your judgment.

You're assuming JoeyB has judgement. I doubt he has the sense he was born with.

 

[pixiestick]

Newt is just hurting Romney's chances in the general election and doing this entirely for revenge. It's bad for his party, and according to his belief that Obama is destroying America, bad for our country.

 

[California Girl]

They take on firms that are already collapsing. Their success rate was about 70% when the new business failure rate is about 50%

Youre letting your hatred for Romney cloud your judgment.

Where is the link to back up these phony numbers?

The 70% number comes from Romney advisors in response to Newts attack. They have been repeated multiple times in many interviews.

The 50% figure comes from my time in college. It's the number that was taught to us during business mgmt and ethics.

I have no reason to doubt either stat. If you choose to that's your choice.

The reality is that it is incredibly difficult to provide any solid, accurate information on how many new businesses fail... because new businesses are not required to provide data in order to establish the factual picture. Having said that, the National Federation of Business has, for over a decade, been trying to track it. From their stats, it appears that the failure rate is around 80%.

 

[California Girl]

It seems that many people lack a basic understanding of what Private Equity firms actually do. They do not buy solid, successful companies and destroy them. They inject cash into failing businesses - thereby helping the company in the short term, sell off, restructure and salvage what can be salvaged. This is rational business sense.

These companies are ripe for picking because they are already going to the wall. They don't destroy the company, they don't cost jobs - those companies and therefore those jobs are gonna go anyway. All PE companies do is make money from it. Big deal.

 

[Toro]

romney's problem is this... he can't run on his record as governor because his views as governor almost exactly mirrored the president's. so he has to talk about his experience in the private sector where he claims to have been a "job creator".

once he made his "job creator" status the center of his campaign, it became fair to point out that he's full of it and was really gordon gekko.

i heard someone say it perfectly yesterday and i think it was Andrew Ross Sorkin... he said, it is impossible to ascertain whether mitt was a good job creator or a bad job creator based on the actions of Bain Capital.... and what he was... was a good investor.

yet, being a good investor is not the same thing as being a "job creator" because, as you well know, Toro, what benefits shareholders is not necessarily what benefits the company or its employees.

If I needed surgery, would I want someone who has hands on experience or someone who has no practical experience or any really understanding of what is required in the operation?

Bain & Co - the consulting company which hired Romney in the first place - is a consulting company. They were a consultant to businesses on both how to grow and how to become more profitable. Their business is business. Businesses pay them a lot of money to tell them how to get better.

Romney took those skills he learned at the consulting business and applied them to the investing business. Romney and Bain Capital - the investment business - made their name originally in what is known as "growth capital" investors. Growth capital investors are investors who give large chunks of money to growing businesses and advise them on how to get better and grow faster.

Bain Capital branched out into what is known as "buyouts." This is where the criticism comes in because in some cases, they do let a lot employees go. Occasionally, it amounts to asset stripping, but most times, target companies are those which lag their competitors. IOW, the company makes a 3% profit margin whereas their competitors make a 6% profit margin so the buyout firm attempts to get the company up to 6%. Since labour is the biggest cost of most companies, this inevitably leads to layoffs. I would agree that there are egregious examples in the buyout world, but most of the activities are an attempt to make the company better.

Why is that bad? Companies don't exist to employ people. Companies exist to make a profit. If we start thinking that companies exist to employ people and profit is a dirty word, then what you have is called "France."

As to my opening question, a guy who spent his formative working years immersed in a culture where the singular goal was trying to improve businesses knows better than anyone what businesses need to create jobs. The economy and jobs are the number one issue in this election. So who knows better, an academic, a guy who spent his entire career in Washington, or a guy who made his fortune trying to make businesses better?

You totally avoided the point that Jillian made.

She made two points, first when he was governor then at Bain. If you take her point about governor, then you can extol Rick Perry, jobs machine, because of the strength of the Texas economy. Or you can point to the failure of MA Democrats given that they've controlled the state for a decade. The point about Sorkin is debatable but not relevant. As a successful businessman, Romney knows what is necessary to create conditions for businesses to operate and expand. Business is the backbone of this country. You won't get high job growth until business is confident again. And I believe Romney knows how to do that better than Obama or any other Republican candidate.