Bain Capital…Ain’t That America?

Posted by Tina

It’s been a high spirited week on the old campaign trail. Obama hit the ground running with claims that Mitt Romney “outsourced jobs” to cheap labor countries at Bain Capital.

Romney responded by accusing the President of lying in an ad that included Hillary Clinton:

The President, flanked by the First Lady, sat for an interview with Charlie Rose.

Appearing presidential and back peddling a bit on his remarks, he stuck with the story line nonetheless and intimated that Romney might not be “qualified” to address the economy as a whole:

“When some people question why I would challenge his Bain record, the point I’ve made there in the past is, if you’re a head of a large private equity firm or hedge fund, your job is to make money,” Mr. Obama said. “It’s not to create jobs. It’s not even to create a successful business – it’s to make sure that you’re maximizing returns for your investor. Now that’s appropriate. That’s part of the American way. That’s part of the system. But that doesn’t necessarily make you qualified to think about the economy as a whole, because as president, my job is to think about the workers. My job is to think about communities, where jobs have been outsourced.”

Hmmmm…no comment.


Then there was Stephanie Cutter, Deputy Campaign Manager for the Obama campaign, who suggested Romney might be a felon! After the expected outrage ensued the Obama campaign doubled down on the charge with the following statement:

“Romney and Bain claim that he was not involved with Bain, but Bain and its portfolio companies in their required filings under the Securities Exchange Act continuously certified to the Securities and Exchange Commission say precisely the opposite–asserting without qualification that he was a controlling person, fully in charge of Bain, under the Federal securities law. Under normal circumstances, the question of the truth of this representation would result in an investigation by the SEC into possible criminal, as well as civil, violations of the law.”

Seems like the President is a man desperately seeking a scandal…common guys, anything?…please?

High hopes for scandal might be forever dashed this time around, however. Bain executives came forward to say emphatically that Romney had nothing to do with Bain’s business activities after February 1999:

Then to top it all off Ben Shapiro over at Big Government reports that the 2008 Obama Presidential Campaign accepted big fat donations from Bain Capital executives. YIKES! Here’s the dirt:

Joshua Bekenstein. Bekenstein has been a managing director of Bain Capital since 1986. In 2008, he signed Barack Obama a $4,600 check. In 2004, he gave a $50,000 donation to the Democratic National Committee. That’s outsourcing money, plain and simple. And Obama was happy to take it.
Or how about Stephen Pagliuca? Last year, he cut a $35,800 check to Barack Obama’s Victory Fund. Then he cut another $30,800 check to the DNC. And another $30,800 check to the DCCC. Jonathan Lavine and Mark Nunnelly have both maxed out to Obama already, as well as to the DNC. Lavin was a bundler for Obama, and raised over $100,000 for him. Michael Krupka gave Obama $4,600 in 2008.

A lot of this is old news by now and frankly, most of us are tired of the nonsense of this campaign, so why would I post all of this…stuff?

Because I think this exchange is important. I think this exchange is telling in more ways than one. I’ll leave all the political yammering to the experts, whether or not either team made points with the voters or how many votes each might have won or gained. I’m more interested in the symbolism. What happens if we strip away the political rhetoric and nonsense in this fight? Why is Bain Capital such a big deal in this campaign?

Very simply…Bain Capital represents success!

On the surface Obama is right, Bain Capital is a group of very wealthy men who are interested in making money. But companies Have to DO something to make money. Quaker Oats produces cereal products for the breakfast table or to bake up in a batch of cookies. Apple, the electronics one, makes computers. Restaurants offer specialty dishes, and in many cases atmosphere for a pleasing dining experience. Best Foods makes mayo so your sandwich or potato salad won’t be dry and boring. Crayola creates unique colorful drawing instruments for budding young artists. KB is one of the many home builders in America that build beautiful new homes. All of these companies employ people who produce something…and take home a paycheck! All of them create useful products and services that we can all use or enjoy. Bain Capital invests both money and expertise in companies that are struggling or failing. Their product is a revitalized company that is strong enough to prosper and grow. Now that’s not little pink houses, people, but ain’t that America? Ain’t that what makes America strong and vibrant? Isn’t that what makes it possible for the American people to thrive, to afford a lifestyle that suits them and their families, to climb the ladder to the next rung?

America is failing right now, but just like the companies that Bain execs saw as redeemable, America is also a land of great potential. We are a nation of people eager to roll up our sleeves and make America vibrant again. We want to go back to work…back to making money…back to being a bright and shining success!

Isn’t this man, Mitt Romney, who used to run Bain Capital, EXACTLY the man America needs at her helm right now?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Bain Capital…Ain’t That America?

  1. Rex Crosley says:

    Mitt Romney and Bain Capital are notorious for gutting companies and driving them into the ground while taking millions in fees. That is what you should expect him to do for the USA and the middle class. The lesser of the two evils is obviously Obama, (unless you are racist, homophobic or filthy rich.) Make your vote count this year. Vote 3rd party. Any third party candidate is better than supporting one of the two cows that are eating from the same trough. If you want to vote for a pro-choice Mormon who believes that the filthy rich are the only people that deserve entitlements then go ahead and vote for Romney. He isn’t going to win though, you might as well write in Ron Paul.

  2. Jim says:

    Jack, Please explain how Bain has helped America? Quaker Oats, Crayola and Best Foods were around long before Romney, however they have moved a lot of their production outside the United States. Apple is of course made in China. That is why American is failing now. We have lost way too many manufacturing jobs, and we can thank people like Romney for that loss.

    Yeah, when Romney moved jobs oversees HE was successful, but the working people of the US lost out. He made money by selling out America. The man doesn’t even keep his money in the US. In fact he is the poster boy of why tax cuts dont work. People like Romney havent invested their windfalls back here, they invested it overseas and keep their money is secret off shore bank accounts.

    Why would you possibly support someone who doesn’t believe in the people of America?

  3. Tina says:

    Rex: “Mitt Romney and Bain Capital are notorious for gutting companies and driving them into the ground while taking millions in fees.”

    Do you care about the truth, Rex, or are you just a dupe of the left willing to spout the lies, half truths, innuendo, and fiction that is used to win votes?

    ALL of the companies that Bain invested in were already driving themselves into the ground. They were already headed for the junk heap. Mitt Romney’s record of turn around for these companies is 78%. That is a pretty high rate of success considering the chances were hopeless without his investment capital and expertise. A 78% success rate cannot be described as “driving companies into the ground”.

    “Vote 3rd party.”

    Sure go ahead. Just know that when you do you accomplish absolutely nothing. You might as well stay home and stew in that lousy attitude for all that you will have accomplished.

    “If you want to vote for a pro-choice Mormon who believes that the filthy rich are the only people that deserve entitlements…”

    Nobody deserves entitlements, Rex. People deserve to have a shot at the self-respect that working and being paid for their labors brings. People who work and strive to support themselves, save for the future and provide for themselves and their families ARE rich. In America, when it isn’t being oppressed, offers anyone that is willing to work for it a chance to become as wealthy as they want. It does take more than envy and covetousness toward others to accomplish that goal.

    Ron Paul is an excellent man and very valuable in the seat he currently holds but he doesn’t have a chance at winning the presidency. Lying about that won’t make it so. Wishing it were different won’t change it. Continuing to support the notion is a waste of energies at this point.

    It’s been almost 40 years since the Roe decision. A lot of minds have changed over those years. Anyone interested can find out about Romney’s change of heart on this pro-life:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/12/30/don%E2%80%99t-believe-misleading-attacks-on-romneys-abortion-record/

    Filthy rich, Rex? What exactly does that mean?

    And Rex…what do you have against Mormons? Ivy Baker Priest who served as US Treasury Secretary under Eisenhower was Mormon. Wally Herger is Mormon. In fact go here and you’ll find a lot of Mormons that have served or are currently serving our country:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/12/30/don%E2%80%99t-believe-misleading-attacks-on-romneys-abortion-record/

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/12/30/don%E2%80%99t-believe-misleading-attacks-on-romneys-abortion-record/

  4. Harrriet says:

    Just a bit on Romney, maybe you and others will read it. He is not the shyster you make him out to be.

    Personal Information:
    His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney
    He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old.
    His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan
    He was raised in Bloomfield Hills , Michigan
    He is Married to Ann Romney since 1969; they five children.

    Education:
    B.A. from Brigham Young University,
    J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University

    Religion:
    Mormon – The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints

    Working Background:
    After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.
    After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School
    simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney.
    In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States.
    In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.
    He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
    In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit. At the close of fiscal year 2006, the rainy day fund enjoyed a $2.155 billion balance.

    Some Interesting Facts about Romney:
    Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people.

    Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino’s, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.

    He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad’s gubernatorial campaign 1 year.
    He was an unpaid intern in his dad’s governor’s office for eight years.
    He was an unpaid bishop and stake president in his local church organization for ten years.
    He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.
    He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.
    He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity.

    Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.

    And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income…. Just for comparison purposes, Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%.

    Mitt Romney is Trustworthy:
    He will show us his birth certificate
    He will show us his high school and college transcripts.
    He will show us his social security card.
    He will show us his law degree.
    He will show us his draft notice.
    He will show us his medical records.
    He will show us his income tax records.
    He will show us he has nothing to hide.

    Mitt Romney’s background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States.

    You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least we know what religion he is, and that he won’t desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers, or practice fiscal irresponsibility. We know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into. We won’t like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney’s background can do it. But, on the minus side, He never was a “Community Organizer”, never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called forGod to damn the US.

  5. Tina says:

    If you want companies to return to America you make it an exciting place to do business. We have to make America friendly for business. Business isn’t the enemy…policy is.

    The Bain record is one of success that has served real Americans and added to the wealth and enrichment of American lives. It’s investors, those who profit from Bain’s investments, will surprise you:

    http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2012/06/obamas-false-attacks?cct_info=1|25219|7946991837|138422374|7794059974|b|24458078854|tc||g|||&cct_ver=3&cct_bk=bain%20capital&gclid=COfX64vwmbECFccBRQodQAWwhA

    OBAMA MYTH: Rich businessmen profited most from the firms investments.

    REALITY: The major investment beneficiaries of Mitt Romneys work in private equity and private equity in general are the investors in the fund.

    The investors include pension funds, charities, and universities. In fact, over half the money invested in private equity is from pension funds and charitable foundations alone. The success of private equity investments helps provide secure retirements for seniors, allows charities to serve their communities, and provides universities with the resources they need to educate our youth. (emphasis mine)…

    …OBAMA MYTH: Bankrupting a successful steel mill in Kansas City, MO.

    REALITY: The GS Technologies plant that Barack Obama has used to attack Mitt Romney was scheduled to be closed if Romney and his colleagues hadnt bought the plant and tried to help turn it around.

    In 1993, GS Technologies, a company Bain Capital had invested in, purchased a struggling Kansas City steel plant from Armco. Prior to this investment, Armco announced plans to close the Kansas City plant if a buyer could not be found.

    This investment and $170 million in upgrades kept the Kansas City plant competitive in a tough international market and saved the steel workers jobs for eight years.

    Two years after Mitt Romney left Bain Capital, the GS Technologies plant was closed because of foreign steel dumping into the U.S. market. Thirty-one other steel companies declared bankruptcy during the same period. (emphasis mine) …

    …OBAMA MYTH: A Corporate Raider

    FACT: Even President Obamas supporters acknowledge this isnt true. Steve Rattner, President Obamas former car czar, said that Governor Romney was the furthest thing from a corporate raider. Governor Deval Patrick rejected the characterization of Bain Capital as a raider and said that Bain was a perfectly fine company with a role in the private economy. The truth is that Governor Romney wasnt tearing down companies; he was building up strong companies like Staples, Sports Authority, Steel Dynamics, and Bright Horizons. This accusation is yet another failed attempt to smear Governor Romneys sterling private sector record, and even President Obamas supporters reject it.

    OBAMA MYTH: Shipping Jobs Overseas

    FACT: Under Governor Romneys leadership, Bain Capital invested in over 100 companies. Of those, President Obamas campaign has accused three of shipping jobs overseas. In two of these cases, the accusations are related to events that occurred in 2000 and 2001, well after Governor Romney left Bain Capital in February 1999 to lead the Winter Olympics. In the third case, the share of domestic production actually increased, not decreased, during the time the Obama campaign points to. This attack is merely an attempt to distract voters from President Obamas failed economic record and his refusal to stand up to Chinas unfair trade practices.

    OBAMA MYTH: Closing Stores And Laying Off Employees

    FACT: Under Bain Capitals ownership, Stage Stores doubled the number of employees and doubled the number of stores. During this time, Stage Stores added locations in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa. Bain Capital sold its controlling interest in the company in 1997. Years later, Stage Stores filed for bankruptcy, but today it is a healthy business with 14,000 employees and hundreds of new stores nationwide.

    Mitts very interested in creating good jobs, including good manufacturing jobs for American workers:

    http://www.mittromney.com/jobs

    http://www.mittromney.com/blogs/mitts-view/2011/09/believe-america-my-plan-jobs-and-economic-growth

    My experience could not be more different from his. I spent 25 years in business. I led an international consulting firm through difficult times to growth and success, led a financial services business from start-up to global prominence, and led the turnaround of a Winter Olympics to world acclaim. I know what it means to meet a payroll. I know why businesses hire people, and why they become forced to lay them off. I know what it means to compete in this country and abroad. My entire life experience convinces me that with a leader who fundamentally understands the economy, with a government that encourages investment and hiring, and with the faith and hard work of the American people, we will right the economy, create good jobs, and restore the promise of the future.

    I believe in America. We have always been a land of discovery and pioneers. We flew the first plane across the ocean, we planted the first flag on the moon, we connected the people of the world with the telegraph, the telephone, the television, and the Internet. It is not an accident of history that America is the home of Facebook, eBay, Apple, Microsoft, and Google. These companies reflect our singular capacity for innovation. Nor is it an accident that the productivity of the American worker is unparalleled. The dynamism of our society is renowned around the world. We should build upon our strengths, not burden them with bureaucracy, excessive regulation, and intrusive government.

    Theres much that needs to be done and done quickly to put America back on the right path. I have formulated a comprehensive and integrated plan that focuses on seven areas where reform is urgently needed: taxes, regulation, trade, energy, labor, human capital, and fiscal policy. Change in any one of these seven areas would be important and helpful by itself. Taken together, they hold the potential to revitalize our economy and to reignite the job-creating engine of the United States.

    So much is at stake: nothing less than the future of our great country.

    You are wrong about Romney Rex. Are you willing to look beyond the smears of the current administration’s campaign to discover what is real about this man?

    There isn’t a perfect candidate. No president will ever get everything right. But right now the choice we made last time is doing too many things that are just not working or are downright destructive and we are sinking.

    We need someone with experience who knows what it takes to create jobs and grow our economy. Mitt Romney is a man with capability and experience who also happens to be running for President.

    It’s time for a reality check; the time for wrangling is over. It’s time to be adult and deal in what is actually possible.

    Tell me, Rex, what other candidate, that actually has a chance to win, is there to get behind?

  6. Post Scripts says:

    Jim, I didn’t start this thread, that was Tina, but if you like I will give you my opinion? I think all this BS about Bain is just the best the Obama people can come up with to attack Romney and it’s nothing, often a made up, distorted bunch of half truths. Obama is fighting to retain the presidency and he is desperate. Bain is in the minds of anyone else at any other time a nothing. It’s vilification is a campaign ploy to say, “See here is an evil rich guy and I am your buddy.” It’s that simple. Romney has got a huge edge on Obama in terms of character and business sense, so Obama must take him down by whatever means available.

  7. Chris says:

    I’m not that up on the Bain issue, but what’s up with Romney’s Cayman Islands account? Why does he need to invest his money in a notoriously secretive tax shelter, when he should be investing that money here in America where we need it?

    And what about his refusal to release more than two years of tax returns? Tina, you’re all about transparency when it comes to President Obama, and you’ve asked what he has to hide for not releasing his college transcripts. But the president has released the past twelve years of tax returns, as have most modern presidents. To me that seems much more relevant than college transcripts. Since you are a principled and consistent person who would never hold double standards against people for their party affiliation, shouldn’t you also be asking “What does Mitt Romney have to hide?”

  8. Harrriet says:

    Chris, based on your statements, don’t you think Obama should show his college records, all of them. What does he have to hide? We have not seen them at all. I know I am parroting Tina, but making a point. college transcripts can be more telling.

    Are you equally upset that Pelosi has made up to 5 million dollars on foreign investment, as has Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
    Have you heard about exceedingly wealthy people moving out of the USA to avoid the huge tax burden
    Why pick in Romney? Oh yea, he is republican. silly me.

  9. Tina says:

    Chris: “what’s up with Romney’s Cayman Islands account? Why does he need to invest his money in a notoriously secretive tax shelter, when he should be investing that money here in America where we need it?”

    I don’t know everything there is to know about Romney’s bank accounts. As far as I know there is nothing illegal about any of them. If there were we wouldn’t be having this discussion we’d be having a different one.

    It isn’t unusual for people that do business around the world to have accounts in places like the Caymen Islands where regulation is more business friendly and foreign money is more easily exchanged.

    If America wants big investors to invest in America then we need to make our regulation and tax structures workable for business and competitive in the world.

    I read one disturbing item in the news as I researched this issue. Asian banks are refusing accounts to American businessmen because in 2013 new regulations will kick in that make it too complicated and costly to do business with Americans. What a shame that is for America.

    I am in favor of transparency. Romney has already complied with everything that is asked of candidates when they seek the presidency including releasing his 2010 returns. He has said he will release his 2011 returns. Should he release more? If the American people have good reason to ask to see them, he should. I’m not sure that is the case. I think this is a political game for the Obama team.

    We all know Mitt Romney is a wealthy guy. We know he does business around the world. We know that a lot of his wealth comes from interest and dividends which are taxed at a lower rate (They are for for everybody). I don’t known what people think his tax returns would reveal but I assume the IRS has accepted them as good.

    I did find a few items of interest while searching.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-chair-invested-swiss-banks-foreign-drug-companies-and-state-bank-india_648350.html

    Disclosure forms reveal that Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a member of Congress from Florida, previously held funds with investments in Swiss banks, foreign drug companies, and the state bank of India. This revelation comes mere days after the Democratic chair attacked presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for holding money in Swiss bank accounts in the past.

    I also discovered that a lot of educational institutions and charitable institutions have their pensions invested in Bain and other similar firms and all of them have similar accounts.

    This article shows that 1) This activity is legal and, 2) It is something legislators are looking at changing.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/us/politics/romneys-returns-revive-scrutiny-of-offshore-tax-shelters.html?pagewanted=all

    WASHINGTON Mitt Romneys tax returns have drawn political scrutiny on multiple fronts, like his relatively low tax rates and the money parked in a Swiss bank account. But on Capitol Hill, his returns have caught the eyes of members of both parties for what appears to be his use of a type of complex shelter that has been debated for years in battles over evasion and fairness in the tax code.

    The technique in question allows nonprofit institutions and large retirement funds to exploit the advantages of shell companies set up in tax havens like the Cayman Islands by investing money with private equity firms like Bain Capital, which Mr. Romney ran. Ordinarily, such private equity investments are frequently subject to something called the unrelated business income tax. But by going offshore, pension funds, universities, foundations and even large individual retirement accounts can structure those investments to avoid that heavy tax.

    The technique has drawn bipartisan scrutiny from the Senate Finance Committee, complicating the confirmation of one of President Obamas nominees, drawing negative attention to a Republican Treasury official and eliciting scathing criticism of a well-known charity, the Boys & Girls Clubs of America. The committees chairman, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, and its former ranking Republican, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, have moved to make it illegal.

    Tax experts and former Finance Committee staff members say that Mr. Romneys I.R.A. appears to have used the technique, and that he may have benefited personally.
    The attention suggests that Mr. Romneys personal finances could remain an issue in the presidential campaign. And it highlights how, under the tax code, legality and fairness are not necessarily the same thing.

    The above demonstrates that if there is a problem the problem is with our tax code. Romney has proposed ending tax loopholes and simplifying the tax code.

    The following has to do with the attacks the Obama campaign has been making all week to discredit and smear the Romney business record. I thought a little contrast was in order:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/forget-bain-obamas-public-equity-record-is-the-real-scandal/2012/05/24/gJQAXnXCnU_story.html

    Since taking office, Obama has invested billions of taxpayer dollars in private businesses, including as part of his stimulus spending bill. Many of those investments have turned out to be unmitigated disasters leaving in their wake bankruptcies, layoffs, criminal investigations and taxpayers on the hook for billions. Consider just a few examples of Obamas public equity failures:

    Raser Technologies. In 2010, the Obama administration gave Raser a $33 million taxpayer-funded grant to build a power plant in Beaver Creek, Utah. According to the Wall Street Journal, after burning through our tax dollars, the company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2012. The plant now has fewer than 10 employees, and Raser owes $1.5 million in back taxes.

    ECOtality. The Obama administration gave ECOtality $126.2 million in taxpayer money in 2009 for, among other things, the installation of 14,000 electric car chargers in five states. Obama even hosted the companys president, Don Karner, in the first ladys box during the 2010 State of the Union address as an example of a stimulus success story. According to ECOtalitys own SEC filings, the company has since incurred more than $45 million in losses and has told the federal government, We may not achieve or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis in the future.

    Worse, according to CBS News the company is under investigation for insider trading, and Karner has been subpoenaed for any and all documentation surrounding the public announcement of the first Department of Energy grant to the company.

    Nevada Geothermal Power (NGP). The Obama administration gave NGP a $98.5 million taxpayer loan guarantee in 2010. The New York Times reported last October that the company is in financial turmoil and that [a]fter a series of technical missteps that are draining Nevada Geothermals cash reserves, its own auditor concluded in a filing released last week that there was significant doubt about the companys ability to continue as a going concern.

    First Solar. The Obama administration provided First Solar with more than $3 billion in loan guarantees for power plants in Arizona and California. According to a Bloomberg Businessweek report last week, the company fell to a record low in Nasdaq Stock Market trading May 4 after reporting $401 million in restructuring costs tied to firing 30 percent of its workforce.

    Abound Solar, Inc. The Obama administration gave Abound Solar a $400 million loan guarantee to build photovoltaic panel factories. According to Forbes, in February the company halted production and laid off 180 employees.

    Beacon Power. The Obama administration gave Beacon a green-energy storage company a $43 million loan guarantee. According to CBS News, at the time of the loan, Standard and Poors had confidentially given the project a dismal outlook of CCC-plus. In the fall of 2011, Beacon received a delisting notice from Nasdaq and filed for bankruptcy.

    I think the reason for these wild attacks on Romney is very clearly that Obama’s “business record” is absolutely horrible and the rest of his record isn’t any better.

    I don’t think Mitt Romney has anything to hide. It’s possible but I don’t think so. I also think he’s uncomfortable when attention is drawn to his wealth. He knows that there are a lot of people hurting in America.

    I think the envy, covetousness, and anger that Americans express toward the wealthy in America is despicable and makes us look terrible.

    I know we can count on you, Chris, to let us know if you find Mitt Romney does have something to hide.

  10. Jim says:

    Tina, sorry for confusing you with Jack, my mistake.

    I can understand that both of you don’t like Obama, I’m not pleased with him my self. However I’m not convinced that Romney would be better, if fact I think he would be much worse. As I’ve stated the tax cuts for the wealthy haven’t helped create more jobs, so more cuts that Romney proposes would only make the deficit worse. On top of that, he also wants to increase military spending. I’m sorry but that it just plain nuts.

    As far as his background, well his only major accomplishment as Governor was Romneycare, which he is now against.

    Of course, he changes his viewpoints continuously, so who knows what he might stand for in a few more weeks.

  11. Harold Ey says:

    Thank You Harriet for posting Mitt Romney’s bio, and Chris if you need a answer to why anyone has off shore accounts, Ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNC Chair her reasons first for her Swiss account. The hypocrites at the DNC campaign headquarters and Obama himself have been making Mitt Romneys time at Bain Capital one of their premiere mantras. They constantly attack the fact that Bain outsourced jobs while restructuring the companies they acquired. So why do I call them all lying hypocrites that do little more than spin the truth, and what does Obama have to do with it? During the time period Obama points to, 1999-2002, he neglects transparency (as usual) and fails to mention the executives of Bain donated to HEAVILY to Obama for his campaign. So why is Obama not at all upset about jobs being outsourced while he got some big, fat checks from the Bain executives? Lets just call it what it is Dirty Politics resulting from fear of his own record being less than successful especially when compared to what Mitt Romney has accomplished

  12. Tina says:

    Jim, no problem on the mix up. Jack and I pretty much agree on most things.

    I don’t know what your source is for the statement that “tax cuts for the wealthy haven’t helped create more jobs” so I’m not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. I won’t argue the point but I would suggest you use your own powers of reasoning to reconsider.

    I found a webpage that has a lot of information about taxes cuts, revenue to government, and the overall economy. I think we could both agree that a thriving economy means more jobs, couldn’t we?

    The author, a highly educated individual according to his biography took the time to look at statistics under presidents all the way back to Kennedy (And one more from the 1920’s).

    http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm

    In every case over the last 60 years, major tax cuts have more than paid for themselves. In fact, every major tax cut since JFK has been followed by substantial increases in revenue, not to mention solid economic growth. Moreover, total federal revenue rose at a faster rate after each of those tax cuts than it did before them. Anyone can confirm these basic facts for themselves by checking federal budget data and economic indicators before and after major tax cuts (see, for example, Federal Budget Data, Data 360 Unemployment U.S., and Total Economy Database). Lets take a closer look at the results of the last four major tax cuts (and then for good measure well examine the Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s).

    Bush Tax Cuts: President George W. Bushs 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007:

    2003 — $1.78 trillion
    2004 — $1.88 trillion
    2005 — $2.15 trillion
    2006 — $2.40 trillion
    2007 — $2.56 trillion

    Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year.

    Its important to keep in mind that the recession had nothing to do with the tax cuts. The recession was brought on by destructive federal intervention in the subprime mortgage market, irresponsible funding and securitization of subprime loans by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, unsound Federal Reserve monetary policy, a lack of oversight by the Securities and Exchange Commission, greed and fraud committed by certain large banks and investment firms, and consumers who bought homes they really couldnt afford. Furthermore, even in 2009, when the recession neared depression territory and remained severe throughout the year, total federal revenue was $2.10 trillion, which, even adjusted for inflation, was very close to total federal revenue for the boom years of 2005 and 2006.

    What’s more, after the 2003 tax cuts, the rich paid a higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in the previous 40 years. This shocked the New York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.” This was also true with regard to income taxes. For example, after the Bush tax cuts, the top 1% paid a larger share of all federal income taxes than before. In 2007 the top 1% of taxpayers earned 22.8% of the nation’s income, yet paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes, whereas in 2004 the top 1% paid 36.89% of all federal income taxes. So the percentage of income taxes paid by the top 1% went from 36.89% in 2004 to 40.4% in 2007. (Incidentally, this also means that in 2007 the top 1% paid more in federal income taxes than the bottom 95% paid.)…(continues)

    I hope you will read the entire article regarding all of the tax cutting presidents. You might also enjoy the following, a contrast between the Reagan recovery and the last three years under Obama:

    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/14/the-worst-economic-recovery-si

    In the first 2 years of the Reagan recovery, the American economy created 8 million new jobs, the unemployment rate fell by 3.6 percentage points, real wages and incomes were jumping, and poverty had reversed an upsurge started under Carter, beginning a long-term decline. While Obama crows about 227,000 jobs created last month, in September, 1983 the Reagan recovery less than a year after it began created 1.1 million jobs in that one month alone. In the second year of the Reagan recovery, real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years.

    In contrast, under President Obama, unemployment actually rose after June 2009, when NBER counts the recession as officially ending, and did not fall back down below that level until 18 months later in December 2010. Instead of a recovery, America has suffered the longest period of unemployment this high since the Great Depression. Even today, 51 months after the recession started, the U6 unemployment rate counting the unemployed, underemployed, and discouraged workers is still nearly 15%.

    And that doesn’t include all the workers who have fled the workforce under Obama’s economic oppression. Under Obama’s supposed recovery, the number of working age Americans not in the labor force rose by 7.14 million. As John Lott and Grover Norquist recently observed, “There is no comparable post-World War II ‘recovery’ where this type of exodus has occurred.”

    While in the second year of Reagan’s recovery the economy boomed with real economic growth of 6.8%, the highest in 50 years, last year the American economy limped along with real economic growth a paltry 1.7%. The first quarter of this year will be similar.

    Today, over 4 years since the recession started, there are still almost 24 million Americans unemployed or underemployed.

    Romney will be better at creating policy that encourages and supports growth and opportunity. When American business is growing jobs follow. Of the two major candidates Romney is the only choice unless you prefer government dependency for all but the few at the top.

  13. Jim says:

    Tina, You raise good questions about how we should structure an effective tax policy. My point is that the current tax rates have NOT created more US jobs. There are two things I think we should do:
    1) Currently the capital gains tax rate is 15%. Unfortunately many wealthy investors like Romney take the profits and run off to a place like the Cayman Islands with the money. That doesn’t help us here at all. So instead if the current 15% rate, raise it much higher, say 50%, that is unless you reinvest it here to create jobs! Then you pay a very low rate. In other words, the “Job Creators” only get the tax break when they actually create jobs. This would keep the money in the US and keep Americans working.
    2) Tariffs are how the US government was financed up until 1913. I remember when I was a kid that ‘imported’ items were considered luxuries. Not any more. Tariffs will put US workers on an even playing field and dramatically improve the situation in our country. For example; import a US made car to China, then the Chinese charge a 22% tariff to do that. Import a Chinese car to the US, then you only pay a 2.5% tariff. Can you see why jobs are being outsourced?

    Of course these policies would need to be much more complicated in practice. However I think you can see how these simple changes would improve our economy.

  14. Jim says:

    Peggy, O’Reilly’s comments are spot on. Like he said “I don’t like it (outsourcing), but it’s legal”

    As I explained above, the answer is Tariffs. However neither Republicans or Democrats will go for this because they are all bought and paid for by the big corporations.

    The US workers are screwed.

  15. Post Scripts says:

    Jim, I don’t like outsourcing either, but it’s what happens when businesses are fighting for survival. If there is an upside to it, it’s that some businesses are still around, still paying taxes, still employing folks, that might not have been otherwise. Also, that we have helped create buyers in foreign countries for our goods, without this outsourcing they would not have been able to afford.

  16. Chris says:

    Tina, my questions were not about the legality of Romney’s actions, they were about the contrast between his words and his deeds. Romney constantly talks about job creation being his number 1 priority. He claims that the wealthy and big business are having their hands tied by government regulation and taxation, and claims that is why we are not seeing a lot of job creation today. But that is clearly bogus. Romney has millions of dollars in offshore accounts, he could use that money to invest in America and create jobs. No one is stopping him. He is making a conscious choice to invest that money elsewhere instead of using it to create jobs. And we’re supposed to believe he’d behave differently as president, why?

    You point out that Romney’s actions aren’t uncommon for the super-rich. That is a problem, and it proves my point. Clearly these people could be using their millions and billions to create jobs, and they aren’t doing it. You can’t blame Obama or the government for that.

    If your claims about Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Schultz are true then I think they are in the wrong as well. However, neither of them is running for president on a “jobs, jobs, jobs” platform.

    “If America wants big investors to invest in America then we need to make our regulation and tax structures workable for business and competitive in the world.”

    This is painfully naive. Your entire philosophy amount to, “Well, if we just make things even easier for the most rich and powerful people in the world, and give them every single thing they ask for, then eventually they’ll reward us with their scraps.” I can’t understand why anyone would be so gullible as to believe such a thing. This theory only exists to benefit the existing power structures.

    “The above demonstrates that if there is a problem the problem is with our tax code. Romney has proposed ending tax loopholes and simplifying the tax code.”

    I’m all for simplifying the tax code, but in a way that benefits all of us. I don’t trust Romney or, frankly, any Republican politician to do that. There’s been a lot of talk lately among Republicans about instituting a flat tax, which is horrendously regressive and would force the poor and middle class to pay more while the rich pay less than they do now. I don’t know if Romney favors such a thing, but I do think his tax policy would be regressive.

    “I don’t know what your source is for the statement that “tax cuts for the wealthy haven’t helped create more jobs” so I’m not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. ”

    The source is reality. We’ve had tax cuts for the wealthy for years now, and it hasn’t helped. The rich are not creating jobs as they should be doing. Instead we’ve seen a drastic widening of the income gap. Under trickle-down economics, that should be–literally–impossible. Record corporate profits should coincide with record jobs, not record unemployment. I have never read a plausible explanation from believers in trickle-down that accounts for this. If the rich are getting richer, why are the poor getting poorer? Because trickle-down doesn’t. work.

    There is no guarantee that if we loosen taxes and regulations, businesses will stop outsourcing and start investing more in America. Businesses don’t only go overseas to avoid taxes and regulation, they also do it because they can exploit the cheap labor in foreign countries. Even if somehow your wildest dreams came true and we repealed all minimum wage laws, American workers would still demand more money than our foreign counterparts, and big corporations would still have a huge incentive to outsource.

    Jim is right: the only solution is to de-incentivize outsourcing to the point that American corporations are forced to hire American. We need punitive taxation for corporations that outsource, and we need incentives for corporations that bring jobs back to America. Obama actually proposed a bill that would do this back in 2010, and Republicans blocked it.

    Now there is a new bill designed to bring American jobs back home. Will you support this bill, Tina? If not, I don’t see how you can claim to care about American jobs and the workers who desperately need them.

    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3364

  17. Chris says:

    Harriet:

    “Chris, based on your statements, don’t you think Obama should show his college records, all of them. What does he have to hide? We have not seen them at all. I know I am parroting Tina, but making a point. college transcripts can be more telling.”

    I have said that Obama should release his college records, but I don’t think it is a pressing issue. Recent tax returns are of course more relevant that college transcripts from twenty-five years ago, and Obama has released those. Romney has not.

    “Are you equally upset that Pelosi has made up to 5 million dollars on foreign investment, as has Debbie Wasserman Schultz.”

    If that is true than I am upset, but not equally, because neither of them are running for president, and neither are claiming that we need to make it easier for rich people to make foreign investments.

    “Have you heard about exceedingly wealthy people moving out of the USA to avoid the huge tax burden
    Why pick in Romney? Oh yea, he is republican. silly me.”

    He’s running for president! You really think it’s irrational to subject him to further scrutiny? That’s funny from the party of the birthers.

    For the record, I think any wealthy person moving out of the USA to avoid our historically low tax burden is a whiny, un-American chump. Was there a mass exodus of rich people from the U.S. during WWII, when the top tax rate was over 90%? Not that I’m aware of. Perhaps today’s wealthy is much more selfish and not nearly as patriotic as those of the greatest generation.

    “Jim, I don’t like outsourcing either, but it’s what happens when businesses are fighting for survival.”

    The biggest outsourcers are not “fighting for survival.” Wal-Mart, for instance, is not fighting for survival, and would get along just fine if they did not have exploitative labor in foreign countries.

    “Also, that we have helped create buyers in foreign countries for our goods, without this outsourcing they would not have been able to afford.”

    We don’t have enough buyers here in America right now. The majority of small businesses say that the biggest problem they face right now is not high taxes or regulation, but lack of demand. If we want to fix this problem we need to increase the spending power of the average American now. One way to do that is to increase the minimum wage. Some estimates say that in 1968, the minimum wage was the equivalent of ten dollars an hour. Adjusted for inflation, it’s lower now than it ever has been. And Republicans say we should lower it even more, or get rid of it entirely? That’s completely removed from reality. The average American needs an incentive to work and the ability to spend the money they make. To claim that big business is the group really suffering right now is delusional.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.