The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 32 of 40 FirstFirst ... 223031323334 ... LastLast
Results 621 to 640 of 792
  1. #621
    Join Date
    May. 11, 2004
    Posts
    2,355

    Default

    I think that who ever win the election will "win" a mess.
    A mess that isnt really Bushes fault but rather the"fault" of many previous admm. it just came crashing down during Bushes admn. But because Bush was in office he gets the blame. But 4yrs later? But that is neither here nor there.
    Who ever wins will get as a prize of a large defecit, a slow economy, high unemployment, alot of peoplewho are no longer on the unemployment rolls because they have either stopped looking or their unemplynemt benefits have run out.
    And that would make any sane person run for the hills and never look back... Think about it would you want the job?
    Friend of bar .ka


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #622
    Join Date
    Jun. 11, 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default More on the windfall profit from auto bailouts

    I suppose this website won't be liked by some either- others mileage may vary, more information on Romney's windfall profits:

    http://www.thenation.com/article/170...ilout-bonanza#

    Read the whole article, but this shows there could have been other outcomes- but it would not have squeezed every cent of profit out for the profiteers:
    [I]
    "Another outcome may have been possible. In June 2009, the Treasury and GM announced a bailout deal they’d crafted over months with the cooperation of the United Auto Workers. GM would take back control of Delphi via a joint venture with Platinum Equity, a buyout firm led by billionaire Tom Gores, a self-described “Michigan man” who grew up in the shadow of Delphi’s Flint plant.

    The final Platinum plan, according to Delphi’s official statement posted on Marketwire in June 2009, lists plants in fourteen locations slated for closing, which would have left several of Delphi’s plants still in business, still unionized—and still in the United States. Crucially, the deal would have returned key Delphi operations, including the production of steering columns, directly to GM.

    The hedge funders stunned Delphi by refusing to accept the Platinum plan. Harshly criticizing it as a “sweetheart deal,” they demanded 45 cents on the dollar for the debt bonds they had bought on the cheap—more than double what the Treasury-brokered Platinum deal would pay.

    Then the Singer-led debt holders swooped in. After the Platinum deal was announced, Elliott Management quietly tripled its holdings of Delphi bonds, purchased at just one-fifth of their face value. By joining forces with Silver Point, Paulson and Loeb, Singer now controlled Delphi’s fate.

    Gores, Delphi and UAW officials declined to respond to queries about the deal on the record, but the sworn deposition by Delphi CFO Sheehan (confidential then, but later posted on Scribd.com) lets us in on the tense negotiations culminating in a twenty-hour showdown between Delphi, GM, the UAW, the Auto Task Force and the US pension agency, on the one hand, and Singer’s hedge fund group, on the other. Delphi said it would dump the Platinum deal if the hedge funds would agree to terms that would take care of all stakeholders, including the following stipulation: “Agree on plan structure to maximize job preservation.”

    The hedge funders said no, since they had a billion-dollar ace up their sleeve. According to Sheehan, Singer and company’s controlling interest allowed them to force the bankruptcy judge to hold an auction for all of Delphi’s stock. The debt holders outbid the Michigan Man’s team, offering $3.5 billion. But it wasn’t $3.5 billion in cash: under the rules of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, debtors-in-possession may bid the face value of their bonds rather than their current market value, which at the time was significantly lower. Under the Platinum deal, Delphi would have had much more in real money for operations: $250 million in cash from Gores, another $250 million in credit, and $3.1 billion in “exit financing” from GM, all of it backed up by TARP. Still, under Chapter 11 rules, the Platinum bid was technically lower. And that’s how Singer’s funds—which included the Romneys’ investment—came to buy Delphi for the equivalent of only 67 cents a share.

    Rattner and GM, embarrassingly outmaneuvered, tried to put a good face on it. As Rattner wrote in his memoir, “In truth we didn’t care who got Delphi as long as GM could extricate itself from the continual drain on its finances and assure itself of a reliable supply of parts.”

    * * *

    Even before the hedge funds won their bid for Delphi’s stock, they were already squeezing the parts supplier and its workforce. In February 2009, Delphi, claiming a cash shortage, unilaterally terminated health insurance for its nonunion pensioners. But according to Rattner, the Treasury’s Task Force uncovered foggy accounting hiding the fact that the debt holders had deliberately withheld millions of dollars in cash sitting in Delphi accounts. Even after this discovery, the creditors still refused to release the funds.

    The savings to the hedge fund billionaires of dropping retiree insurance was peanuts—$70 million a year—compared with the profits they later extracted from Delphi. But the harm to Delphi retirees was severe. Bruce Naylor of Kokomo, Indiana, had been forced into retirement at the age of 54 in 2006, when Delphi began to move its plants overseas. Naylor’s promised pension was slashed 40 percent, and his health insurance and life insurance were canceled. Though he had thirty-six years of experience under his belt as an engineer with GM and Delphi, he couldn’t find another job as an engineer—and he doesn’t know a single former co-worker who has found new employment in his or her field, either. Naylor ended up getting work at a local grocery store. That job gone, he now sells cars online for commission, bringing in one-fifth of what he earned before he was laid off from Delphi.

    Even with his wife Judy’s income as a nurse, it hasn’t been enough: the Naylors just declared bankruptcy, and their home is in foreclosure.

    After the hedge fund takeover of Delphi, the squeeze on workers intensified through attacks on their pensions. During its years of economic trouble, Delphi had been chronically shorting payments to its pension funds—and by July 2009, they were underfunded by $7 billion. That month, Singer’s hedge fund group won the bid for control of Delphi’s stock and made clear they would neither make up the shortfall nor pay any more US worker pensions. Checkmated by the hedge funders, the government’s Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation agreed to take over Delphi’s pension payments. The PBGC would eat the shortfall.

    With Delphi’s new owners relieved of its healthcare and pension obligations, its debts to GM and its union contracts—
and now loaded with subsidies from GM funded by TARP—the company’s market value rose from zero to approximately 
$10.5 billion today.

    * * *

    But there was still a bit of unfinished business: President Obama needed to be blamed for the pension disaster. In a television ad airing in swing states since September, one retired Delphi manager says, “The Obama administration decided to terminate my pension, and I took a 40 percent reduction in my pension.”

    Another retiree, Mary Miller, says, “I really struggle to pay for the basics…. I would ask President Obama why I had no rights, and he had all the rights to take my pension away—and never ever look back and say, ‘Not only did I take it from Mary Miller, I took it from 20,000 other people.’”

    These people are real. But it’s clear that these former workers, now struggling to scrape by, were hardly in the position to put together $7 million in ad buys to publicize their plight. The ads were paid for by Let Freedom Ring, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit advocacy organization partially funded by Jack Templeton Jr., a billionaire evangelical whose foundation has sponsored lectures at the Manhattan Institute (the anti-union think tank whose board of directors includes not only Singer but Loeb). The ads also conveniently leave out the fact that the law sets specific ceilings on what the PBGC is allowed to pay retirees—regardless of what they were originally owed.

    In June 2011, Charles and David Koch hosted a group of multimillionaires at a retreat in Vail, Colorado. In secret recordings obtained by investigator Brad Friedman, the host, Charles Koch, thanks Singer and Templeton, among others, for each donating more than $1 million to the Koch brothers’ 2012 anti-Obama election war chest.

    Of course, it wasn’t Obama who refused to pay the Delphi pensions; it was Paul Singer and the other hedge funds controlling Delphi. The salaried workers’ pensions were, after all, an obligation of Delphi’s owners, not the government. Delphi’s stockholders—the Romneys included—had one easy way to rectify the harm to these pensioners, much as GM did for its workers: just pay up.

    Making good on the full pensions for salaried workers would cost Delphi a one-time charge of less than $1 billion. This year, Delphi was flush with $1.4 billion in cash—
meaning its owners could have made the pensioners whole 
and still cleared a profit. Instead, in May, Delphi chose to use most of those funds to take over auto parts plants in Asia at 
a cost of $972 million—purchased from Bain Capital.[/I]"


    5 members found this post helpful.

  3. #623
    Join Date
    Jun. 12, 2009
    Posts
    982

    Default

    Gosh Catsdorule, you're trying to confuse people with the facts. The other side who is so for Romney don't want to know the facts. It doesn't matter if it's this or his position and about face on any number of issues or his record as governor of Ma.
    Facts.. what are they?
    I'm beginning to think that Gloria Steinem was right when she said that this is a power backlash against equality. She was talking about the war on women but I think it's applicable to the President too.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  4. #624
    Join Date
    Oct. 12, 2005
    Location
    Va
    Posts
    2,924

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noms View Post
    I had to pick myself up off the floor from laughing over this post.

    A copy/paste taken from Greg Palast website. Brilliant.

    What do you not understand about the GM bailout.

    PRESIDENT OBAMA took GM through bankruptcy, but not a normal Ch 11 reorg bankrupcy, he used taxpayer money via TARP to the tune of $50 billion which has not been repaid to date.

    Now one would ask why would the prez spent $50 billion in TARP money on a company that is only worth $34 billion on paper???


    Can you say the UAW is in the pocket of this President??

    The UAW in the form or organized labor is mostly to blame for the utter failure of GM to begin with.


    One other little tidbit, that I think is now under investigation. It seems all the union employees got their pensions "topped off", but the salaried, non union people had their pensions chopped by 70%


    5 members found this post helpful.

  5. #625
    Join Date
    Jun. 11, 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default Making a post about unions instead of Romney hypocrisy

    HI quoted:
    "“While Romney was opposing the rescue of one of the nation’s most important manufacturing sectors, he was building his fortunes with his Delphi investor group, making his fortunes off the misfortunes of others,” King added."

    pezk said:

    Gosh Catsdorule, you're trying to confuse people with the facts. The other side who is so for Romney don't want to know the facts. It doesn't matter if it's this or his position and about face on any number of issues or his record as governor of Ma.
    Facts.. what are they?


    pezk, did you also note that the conversation was taken away from the breathtaking hypocrisy of Romney and skewed towards a rant about unions? The post was not about or for unions- it was about Romney making money on a bailout he opposed. If he had any ethics, he wouldn't have been in there getting his share.

    But politics is not about ethics. I did say in that first post that we needed to get rid of all of them and start again.

    But what about unions? Didn't they come about because of the sweatshops earlier in the 20th century? Do we really want to go back there?

    What about the 50's and early 60's, which I seem to remember as pretty good for business and worker alike and there were certainly unions then? How much profit do you really need and how much do you need to break the backs of hard working Americans?

    Are unions perfect? Heck no. They can be corrupt and often co-opted.

    Government is a racket. Try this on for size. It's a pretty long read but well worth the insight of how government works- for the profiteers:


    http://www.dunwalke.com/introduction.htm

    “Dillon, Read & Co. Inc. and the Aristocracy of Stock Profits”

    For the record, this woman worked under the Bush I administration- and the story is not kind to Democrats, either.

    Create a problem, make sure the solution benefits the profiteers, and insure no other solution is allowed. Oh, and since it's government, it's coming out of the people's pocket. But then, that was the whole pupose of the Federal Reserve, which is unconstitutional, by the way. All signed into law by a Democrat.

    And while I'm on a roll, one of the biggest lies is that government should be run like a business- there's a reason they're selling that one to you, it's called "profit." Business is the antithesis of government. Government cannot be run like a business, but business can sure profit from government. Like, privatizing a lot of the function of the miliary, then having a couple wars that sure were good for Halliburton, etc. The example of the prisons in Fitts article should explain part of how that works.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  6. #626
    Join Date
    Nov. 28, 2000
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    10,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catsdorule-sigh View Post
    HI quoted:
    "“While Romney was opposing the rescue of one of the nation’s most important manufacturing sectors, he was building his fortunes with his Delphi investor group, making his fortunes off the misfortunes of others,” King added."

    pezk said:

    [I]

    And while I'm on a roll, one of the biggest lies is that government should be run like a business- there's a reason they're selling that one to you, it's called "profit." Business is the antithesis of government. Government cannot be run like a business, but business can sure profit from government. Like, privatizing a lot of the function of the miliary, then having a couple wars that sure were good for Halliburton, etc.
    Agreed. And yet, one of main thing the Romney supporters trot out is that he is a 'good businessman'.

    He has made money in business through vulture capitalism.
    Why people think this is a good quality in a president is a mystery to me.
    'Business' keeps its eyes on the bottom line - and sells off that which is unprofitable.
    The poor, the sick, the elderly , the disadvantaged for example.
    A FINE ROMANCE - JC Reg Thoroughbred - GOLD Premium CSHA - ISR/OLDNA Approved
    CSHA Brickenden Stallion Award Winner - for Performance offspring.
    Please visit A Fine Romance on FB!


    4 members found this post helpful.

  7. #627
    Join Date
    Nov. 18, 2010
    Location
    california
    Posts
    3,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minnie View Post
    One other little tidbit, that I think is now under investigation. It seems all the union employees got their pensions "topped off", but the salaried, non union people had their pensions chopped by 70%
    What more "news" that only Fox News knows about ? Buy a clue, BS is rampant in the Fox News factcheck. It really doesn't get any funnier when people post such clearly incorrect "facts". "Tidbit" is that what Fox called news ???


    5 members found this post helpful.

  8. #628
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fred View Post
    Agreed. And yet, one of main thing the Romney supporters trot out is that he is a 'good businessman'.

    He has made money in business through vulture capitalism.
    Why people think this is a good quality in a president is a mystery to me.
    'Business' keeps its eyes on the bottom line - and sells off that which is unprofitable.
    The poor, the sick, the elderly , the disadvantaged for example.
    I would rather have Romney lead the country. Why ... His entire career is full of examples of him taking failing companies (Bain capital) public events (Denver Games) and making them a success. You call that vulture capitalism... When I went through a corp downsizing years ago, the whole reason for the downsize was to save the company. Not to downsize in response to business conditions meant the failure of the entire company. Instead of some people losing their jobs.. Everybody would be out of a job and pensions and stockholders would lose their income. Downsizing saved the company.

    That Romney was very good at "Vulture Capitalism". It made him wealthy. Instead of crying over the lost jobs ...Consider all the jobs and pensions he did save! Like star basketball players that lead their teams to championships, Romney was paid well. This country is failing. We need a turn-around expert to lead. Not a community organizer.

    If the country falls economically, we won't have the wealth to help "The poor, the sick, the elderly , the disadvantaged for example." We'll only be able to talk about helping the poor like third world countries do.

    PS .. Vultures have a place in nature. They recycle the dead. Consider that when you speak of "vulture capitalism" Without them, we'd have bodies of dead companies laying about. Oh wait ... We have more dead jobs in the last four years than before ... Calling all vultures ...


    4 members found this post helpful.

  9. #629
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2010
    Posts
    5,642

    Default

    Romney is the worst kind of businessman. He destroyed people's lives and businesses that weren't in terribly shape for the sole purpose of making money, not making it a better place.

    Bain destroyed an Illinois town so he could be rich instead of keeping jobs in this country and staying employed.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grQTu...ature=youtu.be

    He boasted about saving the Olympics with no government help, yet used sneaky tactics to get all kinds of money to make it "on his own." Here he is explaining it in his own words:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuQDLvNGM-Q

    It's not about making companies more efficient and down-sizing, it was about destroying for personal gain. There are so many examples of "good business" that shows a complete lack of morality on honesty that is what vulture capitalists do.

    His lack of honesty goes from lambasting Obama for giving the auto companies bail outs, yet making sure he in the form of Bain capital made about $10 million from it, hiding it all along.http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2012...lost-pensions/

    He won't release his tax returns, he has off shore accounts in the Caribbean and Switzerland and refuses to show anyone anything. This is not the sign of a good person.

    Romney may be good at making money, especially since he started with a lot, but I would in no way call him a good businessman. And his complete lack of morality and arrogance about that is beyond the pale.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  10. #630
    Join Date
    Jul. 20, 2007
    Posts
    286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hosspuller View Post
    I would rather have Romney lead the country. Why ... His entire career is full of examples of him taking failing companies (Bain capital) public events (Denver Games) and making them a success. You call that vulture capitalism... When I went through a corp downsizing years ago, the whole reason for the downsize was to save the company. Not to downsize in response to business conditions meant the failure of the entire company. Instead of some people losing their jobs.. Everybody would be out of a job and pensions and stockholders would lose their income. Downsizing saved the company.

    That Romney was very good at "Vulture Capitalism". It made him wealthy. Instead of crying over the lost jobs ...Consider all the jobs and pensions he did save! Like star basketball players that lead their teams to championships, Romney was paid well. This country is failing. We need a turn-around expert to lead. Not a community organizer.

    If the country falls economically, we won't have the wealth to help "The poor, the sick, the elderly , the disadvantaged for example." We'll only be able to talk about helping the poor like third world countries do.

    PS .. Vultures have a place in nature. They recycle the dead. Consider that when you speak of "vulture capitalism" Without them, we'd have bodies of dead companies laying about. Oh wait ... We have more dead jobs in the last four years than before ... Calling all vultures ...
    Sorry, but running Bain Capital is not the same as running a country. I have been through 3 companies that had massive layoffs. I am not bitter about it, they were needed. I was on both sides of the layoffs in different companies. That IS how companies survive. Sad but true these days. But a company is not a country.

    So you have a "vulture" run this country? How many people will get laid off. Should we dump 20% of the population to save the rest? Or how about 50%. Who cares about them, as long as we save the country. (I did like the "lay off all the Red States, since they are underperforming" though) For those that get offended, it's a joke... But one that makes a good point. We can't lay off half the country... We need to figure out how to save it all. It can be done and the "vulture" policies are not the way.

    About Bain, they are about one thing and one thing only. Making money for Bain. That might mean ripping apart everything you have worked for because it is worth more in pieces, even if that's not the only way out or the best for you, it just happens to be the best for Bain.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  11. #631
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catsdorule-sigh View Post
    HI quoted:

    But what about unions? Didn't they come about because of the sweatshops earlier in the 20th century? Do we really want to go back there?
    I get a regular reminder of this. Some of the earliest organizing by women workers took place next door in Lowell, MA. The working conditions for the "mill girls" were pretty miserable. I've been on a number of field trips with our school system to the mills, they do a good job of demonstrating what life was like for the immigrant and rural girls who flocked to the mills in the city for jobs. They even turn on a room full of power looms (run by water) for us to get an idea of what working there was like during the Industrial Revolution...the heat and noise are incredible, never mind the issues with hours and pay and living space.

    No, we don't want to go back there.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  12. #632
    Join Date
    Jun. 27, 2005
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    4,578

    Default

    I went to Kohl's yesterday. I hate shopping, so in and out I went.

    As I was taking the tags off at home:

    1 pair of slacks, $ 60, made in China
    1 pair of slacks, $ 40, made in the Phillipines
    1 sweater, $ 40, made in China.

    I am 100% certain that Kohl's would be able to sell these items at the same prices if they were made in the U.S.

    However, their profit margins would be smaller.

    But big businesses are not willing to lower their profits (even if it wouldn't hurt them) just to support the American economy. Period.

    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #633
    Join Date
    Sep. 24, 2004
    Location
    Piedmont Triad, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    Sorry, but running Bain Capital is not the same as running a country. ..... But a company is not a country.

    How many people will get laid off. Should we dump 20% of the population to save the rest? Or how about 50%. Who cares about them, as long as we save the country.

    About Bain, they are about one thing and one thing only. Making money for Bain. .
    Running Bain is being an executive. CEO's govenors, mayors have that in common. Senators, legistlators run things by committee and spread blame by committee. The unemployed are sorry that our present leadership isn't executive. We can't afford more on the job training.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canaqua View Post
    They even turn on a room full of power looms (run by water) for us to get an idea of what working there was like during the Industrial Revolution...the heat and noise are incredible, never mind the issues with hours and pay and living space.
    My entire career has been in manufacturing. Your comment makes me think you've never worked in a factory. The accoutrements of modern life come from somewhere. That place is..."the heat and noise are incredible". TODAY.

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmytbs View Post
    I am 100% certain that Kohl's would be able to sell these items at the same prices if they were made in the U.S.

    However, their profit margins would be smaller.

    But big businesses are not willing to lower their profits (even if it wouldn't hurt them) just to support the American economy. .
    Are you a manufacturer or run one? Yet you are 100% certain the same items can be sold for even a small profit.

    Are you willing to send in more taxes than required to support the gov't? Even better... Have you sent in more than required? No... I thought so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beentheredonethat View Post
    Romney is the worst kind of businessman. He destroyed people's lives and businesses that weren't in terribly shape for the sole purpose of making money, not making it a better place.



    His lack of honesty goes from lambasting Obama for giving the auto companies bail outs,


    Romney may be good at making money, especially since he started with a lot, but I would in no way call him a good businessman. And his complete lack of morality and arrogance about that is beyond the pale.
    Honesty is desired from everyone. Obama is less than honest and "Transparent" about guns to mexico, terms of the auto bail-out, how tax money was given to Solyndra being behind his bundler's money, Bengazi, .... What else ... Let's call it equal since I don't know Romney personally unlike yourself.


    To all posters:

    two thoughts to ponder

    Wealth generation is not a zero sum game. Just because one person gets wealthy doesn't mean someone else got poor. In a free transaction both parties get something they want, producing wealth. It's only gov't and thieves that take without mutual benefit that produce zero sum transactions. Put our country back in the groove to wealth generation and it will benefit everyone. Put our country into redistributing wealth and everyone will be poor.

    Emotion seems to be a common component of these three posters. Yet emotion should not be a basis for making choices in running your life, business, or country. Even in marriage, emotion based decisions are bad. It leads to poor choices... in husbands, wives, and presidents.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  14. #634
    Join Date
    Jul. 28, 2006
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunny59 View Post
    Sorry, but running Bain Capital is not the same as running a country. I have been through 3 companies that had massive layoffs. I am not bitter about it, they were needed. I was on both sides of the layoffs in different companies. That IS how companies survive. Sad but true these days. But a company is not a country.

    So you have a "vulture" run this country? How many people will get laid off. Should we dump 20% of the population to save the rest? Or how about 50%. Who cares about them, as long as we save the country. (I did like the "lay off all the Red States, since they are underperforming" though) For those that get offended, it's a joke... But one that makes a good point. We can't lay off half the country... We need to figure out how to save it all. It can be done and the "vulture" policies are not the way.

    About Bain, they are about one thing and one thing only. Making money for Bain. That might mean ripping apart everything you have worked for because it is worth more in pieces, even if that's not the only way out or the best for you, it just happens to be the best for Bain.
    Actually, I believe it's 47% of the population that needs to worry, according to Romney.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  15. #635
    Join Date
    Jun. 12, 2009
    Posts
    982

    Default

    I met a woman a few days ago that had worked for many yrs for a small local corp. I knew the company had closed but I didn't know why. I thought it simply wasn't successful and had closed. Not according to the woman I was talking to.
    Bain Capital under Romney bought the company, broke it up into lots of little companies and when they couldn't survive, sold all the assets and kept the money for Bain.
    Laid off most workers and took a few remaining jobs and shipped them to china.
    As you might expect, this woman wouldn't vote for Romney for anything. While she isn't found of Obama, she's even less fond of Romney. "People need to see him as he is."
    So where does Romney create jobs? only in China.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  16. #636
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hosspuller View Post
    Running Bain is being an executive. CEO's govenors, mayors have that in common. Senators, legistlators run things by committee and spread blame by committee. The unemployed are sorry that our present leadership isn't executive. We can't afford more on the job training.



    My entire career has been in manufacturing. Your comment makes me think you've never worked in a factory. The accoutrements of modern life come from somewhere. That place is..."the heat and noise are incredible". TODAY.



    Are you a manufacturer or run one? Yet you are 100% certain the same items can be sold for even a small profit.

    Are you willing to send in more taxes than required to support the gov't? Even better... Have you sent in more than required? No... I thought so.



    Honesty is desired from everyone. Obama is less than honest and "Transparent" about guns to mexico, terms of the auto bail-out, how tax money was given to Solyndra being behind his bundler's money, Bengazi, .... What else ... Let's call it equal since I don't know Romney personally unlike yourself.


    To all posters:

    two thoughts to ponder

    Wealth generation is not a zero sum game. Just because one person gets wealthy doesn't mean someone else got poor. In a free transaction both parties get something they want, producing wealth. It's only gov't and thieves that take without mutual benefit that produce zero sum transactions. Put our country back in the groove to wealth generation and it will benefit everyone. Put our country into redistributing wealth and everyone will be poor.

    Emotion seems to be a common component of these three posters. Yet emotion should not be a basis for making choices in running your life, business, or country. Even in marriage, emotion based decisions are bad. It leads to poor choices... in husbands, wives, and presidents.
    Right, I always wonder if those that talk like you quote ever realize where their salaries come from?

    I worked my whole life for those with sufficient money to have horses and that gave me a chance to work with horses and much better ones that I could have dreamed being around.
    It would be foolish for me to want to bring those better off people down to my level and try to "redistribute" their wealth thru many like me working for them and have any chance any of us could have those good horses.
    Doesn't work like that.

    For viable societies, some have to be the boss, the many work for the bosses.
    Regulate/supervise that system well and all in society benefit.
    See failed communism for scary not so old examples of trying for utopian equality.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #637
    Join Date
    Nov. 28, 2000
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    10,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beentheredonethat View Post
    Romney is the worst kind of businessman. He destroyed people's lives and businesses that weren't in terribly shape for the sole purpose of making money, not making it a better place.

    Bain destroyed an Illinois town so he could be rich instead of keeping jobs in this country and staying employed.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grQTu...ature=youtu.be

    He boasted about saving the Olympics with no government help, yet used sneaky tactics to get all kinds of money to make it "on his own." Here he is explaining it in his own words:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuQDLvNGM-Q

    It's not about making companies more efficient and down-sizing, it was about destroying for personal gain. There are so many examples of "good business" that shows a complete lack of morality on honesty that is what vulture capitalists do.

    His lack of honesty goes from lambasting Obama for giving the auto companies bail outs, yet making sure he in the form of Bain capital made about $10 million from it, hiding it all along.http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2012...lost-pensions/

    He won't release his tax returns, he has off shore accounts in the Caribbean and Switzerland and refuses to show anyone anything. This is not the sign of a good person.

    Romney may be good at making money, especially since he started with a lot, but I would in no way call him a good businessman. And his complete lack of morality and arrogance about that is beyond the pale.
    Excellent post beenthere, thank you.
    I agree, Romney is neither a 'good' businessman or a 'good' person.
    He is proven to be a pathological liar who will say anything to get elected, and who will do anything even ruin peoples' lives as long as it makes money for him.

    He is a bully and a thug - who has demonstrated cruelty and insensitivity in business and in his personal life, not to mention is a draft dodger who ran away to France to avoid serving in Viet Nam.

    And for those Romneyites who suggest that running an Olympics is a good credential?
    May I remind you that Adolph Hitler put on a pretty impressive Olympics too...

    And before the right wingers get all bent out of shape - no, I am not saying that Romney is just like Hitler.

    I am saying that one is a psychopath who will say and do anything to get elected and further his own 'world view'.
    A FINE ROMANCE - JC Reg Thoroughbred - GOLD Premium CSHA - ISR/OLDNA Approved
    CSHA Brickenden Stallion Award Winner - for Performance offspring.
    Please visit A Fine Romance on FB!


    3 members found this post helpful.

  18. #638
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    40,173

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pezk View Post
    I met a woman a few days ago that had worked for many yrs for a small local corp. I knew the company had closed but I didn't know why. I thought it simply wasn't successful and had closed. Not according to the woman I was talking to.
    Bain Capital under Romney bought the company, broke it up into lots of little companies and when they couldn't survive, sold all the assets and kept the money for Bain.
    Laid off most workers and took a few remaining jobs and shipped them to china.
    As you might expect, this woman wouldn't vote for Romney for anything. While she isn't found of Obama, she's even less fond of Romney. "People need to see him as he is."
    So where does Romney create jobs? only in China.
    Do you mean, that lady wanted to keep her job even if her company was going bankrupt?
    That doesn't make any sense, really.
    I hope I don't have to explain why, but I will if you need me to.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  19. #639
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    16,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hosspuller View Post
    I would rather have Romney lead the country. Why ... His entire career is full of examples of him taking failing companies (Bain capital) public events (Denver Games) and making them a success. You call that vulture capitalism... When I went through a corp downsizing years ago, the whole reason for the downsize was to save the company. Not to downsize in response to business conditions meant the failure of the entire company. Instead of some people losing their jobs.. Everybody would be out of a job and pensions and stockholders would lose their income. Downsizing saved the company.

    That Romney was very good at "Vulture Capitalism". It made him wealthy. Instead of crying over the lost jobs ...Consider all the jobs and pensions he did save! Like star basketball players that lead their teams to championships, Romney was paid well. This country is failing. We need a turn-around expert to lead. Not a community organizer.

    If the country falls economically, we won't have the wealth to help "The poor, the sick, the elderly , the disadvantaged for example." We'll only be able to talk about helping the poor like third world countries do.

    PS .. Vultures have a place in nature. They recycle the dead. Consider that when you speak of "vulture capitalism" Without them, we'd have bodies of dead companies laying about. Oh wait ... We have more dead jobs in the last four years than before ... Calling all vultures ...
    I don't believe you understand the difference between private equity (leveraged buyout) vs. venture capital.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    5 members found this post helpful.

  20. #640
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    16,949

    Default

    We've had two business men as presidents. Hoover and Bush...that didn't turn out so well for us, did it?
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    3 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. CAUTION! POLITICAL THREAD!
    By Frank B in forum The Menagerie
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Oct. 25, 2012, 11:40 AM
  2. For the political threads...
    By CosMonster in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Apr. 2, 2011, 02:39 PM
  3. Replies: 151
    Last Post: Feb. 5, 2011, 07:07 PM
  4. First political thread this off topic day...
    By dressurpferd01 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jan. 14, 2011, 05:56 PM
  5. The political thread
    By dizzywriter in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: May. 18, 2010, 04:52 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •