Anyone who's voting for Mittens, refute this. Please.

[Narrock]

Your article is bullshit, but go ahead and choose to believe it. You will have a much better quality of life with Romney as pres. Open your eyes dude. All obummer has done in office was raise our national debt by over 5 trillion dollars in 3.5 years, and hasn't done shit to improve the unemployment problem. Oh and let's not forget about the 500 million dollars he gave to Solyndra and other cronies. Talk about a fucking crook...

[Lyion]

I think you are confusing bank lending with private equity, Narrock. Private Equity tends to be more along the lines of leveraged buyouts with a focus on streamlining an under perfoming business to help it stay afloat. This is what Bain did and why it has a target on it's back from a lot of those who confuse what private equity is, missing the point that the alternative is just immediate closure. Likewise, the RS article paints a very broad and caricatured picture of what Bain was, ignoring that the company is similar to others and currently run by a huge Obama supporter.

Private equity to a certain degree is healthy, but the problem is more in 'streamlining' in this age of offshoring, outsourcing, tax havens, and downsizing. The problem is the playing field is not good for the American worker or taxpayer in any regard. We need more laws that help workers, and less laws that ignore the crux of these issues.

[Tossica]

I think you are confusing bank lending with private equity, Narrock. Private Equity tends to be more along the lines of leveraged buyouts with a focus on streamlining an under perfoming business to help it stay afloat. This is what Bain did and why it has a target on it's back from a lot of those who confuse what private equity is, missing the point that the alternative is just immediate closure.

If their intentions were to "help a business stay afloat". They'd be offering interest free loans. Their intentions are to make as much profit as possible with as little investment as possible. If gutting the company is the quickest, most efficient way to get that $, that's what they'll do. If they think they'll make more money in the long run by actually "streamlining" a company, they'll take that route. There's no "help" here, the only concern is self interest.

[Narrock]

Demonizing Romney for being a savvy businessman is completely ignorant. Romney was not the cause of layoffs. Leveraged buyouts are not bad business. And that ad about the guy's wife dying because of Bain Capital was nothing more than a disgusting lie.

[Tossica]

"Savvy businessmen" have completely gutted our middle class and fucked this nation up the ass for the last 30 years. Putting one of them in the white house is the worst possible thing that could happen to this country right now.

[Lyion]

If their intentions were to "help a business stay afloat". They'd be offering interest free loans. Their intentions are to make as much profit as possible with as little investment as possible. If gutting the company is the quickest, most efficient way to get that $, that's what they'll do. If they think they'll make more money in the long run by actually "streamlining" a company, they'll take that route. There's no "help" here, the only concern is self interest.

Bain is a business.Thus, wanting to make as much profit with as little money possible is their goal, like all private business.

You, like Narrock, are missing the point of private equity and buying into a distorted view, Toss. They don't 'gut' companies. They ensure their investment is protected as much as possible. They aren't the government. They can't hand 500 million of tax payer funds over to a few pals and laugh it off when the company goes belly up in a year.

[Tossica]

If their intentions were to "help a business stay afloat". They'd be offering interest free loans. Their intentions are to make as much profit as possible with as little investment as possible. If gutting the company is the quickest, most efficient way to get that $, that's what they'll do. If they think they'll make more money in the long run by actually "streamlining" a company, they'll take that route. There's no "help" here, the only concern is self interest.

Bain is a business.Thus, wanting to make as much profit with as little money possible is their goal, like all private business.

You, like Narrock, are missing the point of private equity and buying into a distorted view, Toss. They don't 'gut' companies. They ensure their investment is protected as much as possible. They aren't the government. They can't hand 500 million of tax payer funds over to a few pals and laugh it off when the company goes belly up in a year.

They are opportunistic vultures. They make their money feeding on the weak or recently deceased. They have no product or service to sell beyond greasing palms and pocketing huge amounts of cash. They try to take the pain of watching a company go belly up away by paying the higher ups in the company handsomely and doing the "dirty work" like laying off staff, closing factories, etc and then pocket huge amounts of cash in the process. That's how it works.

These are the very people that have completely fucked this country. I think on some level you see that whether you want to admit it or not.

[Arlos]

We actually studied this a bit in my recent graduate finance class. Sometimes, yes, companies DO come in and do turnarounds. However, that is by no means the only case. Frequently, as noted in the article, they look for a company with a lower than normal debt to cash flow ratio, no matter how well it's performing, and perform a leveraged, often hostile, takeover buyout. Then, the private capital firm forces the company to take on massive amounts of new debt (which they get, because they DO have good cash flows and not much debt), and use the money not to grow the business, but to pay themselves vast sums of money.

One upshot of this predatory tactic is that companies will frequently carry significantly more debt than they actually need, thus making them less profitable due to the increased debt service payments, simply because they become less attractive targets thereby. If private equity firms really DID just go after poorly managed companies to turn them around, no one would be quibbling. Notice, for example, no one bitching about the management consulting McKinsey & Co. do with troubled firms, even though they charge a fuckton. But that is absolutely, categorically, *NOT* all that Bain, and others like them do.

Like I said, why don't we eliminate the industry specific tax break private equity firms are getting that ALLOWS them to be so predatory, and let the market decide if their business model is still viable? Isn't that an idea a fiscal conservative can get behind? Effectively ending a government subsidy that helps one small interest group and ends up distorting the market thereby?

Oh, and Mindia, I'm sorry, but no, we will *NOT* be better off under Romney than Obama. 1) Look at his foreign policy team, it's made up by something like 80% of the same Cheney following Neocons that gave us trillions of dollars in unfunded wars, with thousands and thousands of dead soldiers, and untold numbers of civilians dead. Hell, he's already threatening Russia. 2) Have you looked at his budget and tax plans? Lower and middle income people will pay MORE in taxes, while the wealthy and ultra-wealthy will pay vastly LESS than they do now. Also, to get his budget numbers, it would require cutting out something like 60% of ALL government spending on non-military things. That's less money for schools, policemen, firemen, roads, NASA, disaster relief, bridges, food stamps, and medicaid, just to name a few. 3) How can you trust a word Romney says? Look at his "firmly held positions" he espoused when he was running for Governor of Massachusetts, and compare them to his "firmly held positions" now. They are COMPLETELY opposite.

In all seriousness, I think Obama has done about as good a job as can be expected, under the circumstances. Did you forget that when he came into office, he was given a country that was fighting in 2 wars he didn't start, an economy that was in complete free-fall, contracting at about a 9% rate and shedding 800k jobs a month, our world position was badly damaged by Bush's unilateralism, AND he was facing (for the first time in history, really), an opposition party that completely gave up any pretense of trying to work on the problems of the nation, focusing solely on attempting to keep him from having ANY legislative successes. Hell, the GOP even would vote against bills THEY THEMSELVES INTRODUCED, simply because he decided to support them.

Remember too, the one other time we had a economic crash this bad, it was the Great Depression, and that started in 1929, and didn't get really FIXED until WW2 and the 1940s. Obama has had 4 years, not 10+. Yet where are we now after 4 years? We have now had 12 straight months of economic growth, albeit, sometimes very small amounts. Still, it's growth, not contraction. We have had 29 straight months of private sector job growth, though again, not enough. Still, it's a vast turnaround from the numbers he was handed when he started. Government has actually SHRUNK during his tenure, if you measure it by number of employees. Actually, if Government employment numbers had just stayed static for the same time period, instead of the government shedding jobs, the unemployment number would be a full percentage point lower than it is now. He got a health care reform passed that CUTS the deficit (just look at the CBO's numbers), and did it in a really centrist way. (Trust me, us liberals were pissed as hell we didn't get single payer or at least a public option, so it was FAR from a left-wing plan. Actually, it was the 1993 GOP plan, to be honest, look it up.) Yes, deficits continued to rise, but that's often NECESSARY in such a huge economic downturn. Look at the Great Depression. Back then, they DID do what the current GOP is demanding (austerity, drastic cuts in spending, whatever you want to call it), and what happened? It made the depression vastly WORSE.

So oh no, Mitt is *NOT* the right choice for America. He would be Bush all over again, just far more plutocratic. Hell no.

-Arlos

[brinstar]

the problem is more in 'streamlining' in this age of offshoring, outsourcing, tax havens, and downsizing. The problem is the playing field is not good for the American worker or taxpayer in any regard.

yet you're going to vote for the guy who basically wrote the book on this process?

goddamnit lyion, every time you start to talk some sense you cram a giant turd in your mouth. arguing with mindia is way easier, because it's pretty clear he's a fucking retard and doesn't understand half of the words he uses

[Tossica]

Still haven't seen anyone actually refute the claims in the original article. Calling it "bullshit" or saying it's wrong doesn't cut it.

[Narrock]

Arlos, tax cuts for business (small, medium, and large) are what we need right now to stimulate growth. The more you tax businesses, the less solvent and profitable they become, and the aftermath of that is less hiring, more firing, more layoffs, less raises, less promotions, etc. America needs jobs. You can't create jobs if you tax business to death. And to your comment about obama having done a fine job so far... WTF? The National Debt increased 5 trillion under obama. Gas prices went from a national average of $1.85/gal when obummer took office, and now the national avg is hovering at $3.86/gal. Unemployment is still sky high, the housing crisis is still there. How the hell are we better now than 3.5 years ago??? We're not, period. And for obummer to ask for another 4 years to finish his "hope and change" bullshit is completely laughable. No fucking way. We'd be insane to keep him around longer. Oh yeah, and obummercare is going to be paid for by the middle class by way of increased taxes. Sorry, I'm not for wealth redistribution. Yes, Romney is exactly what we need right now. With Romney, you're going to see: 1. A decreased unemployment rate. 2. A huge reduction in the national debt. 3. Lower gas prices due to allowing more offshore drilling and a Canada-to-America pipeline thus making us less dependent on foreign sources. 4. A balanced budget. You will get NONE of that with obummer at the helm. The choice is 100% clear to me.

[Narrock]

Still haven't seen anyone actually refute the claims in the original article. Calling it "bullshit" or saying it's wrong doesn't cut it.

Eh? It's been explained to you. You just want to block it out.

[Tossica]

Obama has left the tax breaks in place plus proposed many new ones for companies that create jobs in the US instead of outsourcing. The president does not control the price of gas. Gas spiked to over $4 a gallon under Bush' watch. Where was your outrage then? Taxes will be LOWER for you under Obama. FACT. The fact that ANYONE expected a complete economic turn around in less than 4yrs is fucking RIDICULOUS.

Obama let me down on some policies but taxes and the economy is not one of them. I think he's done as well as ANYONE could have done and another 4 years of the current economic policies will continue to grow the economy.

[Narrock]

the problem is more in 'streamlining' in this age of offshoring, outsourcing, tax havens, and downsizing. The problem is the playing field is not good for the American worker or taxpayer in any regard.

yet you're going to vote for the guy who basically wrote the book on this process?

goddamnit lyion, every time you start to talk some sense you cram a giant turd in your mouth. arguing with mindia is way easier, because it's pretty clear he's a fucking retard and doesn't understand half of the words he uses

pot, kettle, black. What's frustrating is that you don't understand business or economics.

[Narrock]

Obama has left the tax breaks in place plus proposed many new ones for companies that create jobs in the US instead of outsourcing. The president does not control the price of gas. Gas spiked to over $4 a gallon under Bush' watch. Where was your outrage then? Taxes will be LOWER for you under Obama. FACT. The fact that ANYONE expected a complete economic turn around in less than 4yrs is fucking RIDICULOUS.

Obama let me down on some policies but taxes and the economy is not one of them. I think he's done as well as ANYONE could have done and another 4 years of the current economic policies will continue to grow the economy.

He left them in place because he HAD TO. It was the law. Hey, obummer was the one who promised to fix everything in 2008. I love your amnesia.

[Tossica]

If most of what the right wing nutcases spout about the president and his policies were true, I'd be outraged as well. It's just not reality. It's blatant lies. It's fucking bullshit and simple folk who can't think for themselves just accept that what the talking heads say is true. Shame.

[Tossica]

Obama has left the tax breaks in place plus proposed many new ones for companies that create jobs in the US instead of outsourcing. The president does not control the price of gas. Gas spiked to over $4 a gallon under Bush' watch. Where was your outrage then? Taxes will be LOWER for you under Obama. FACT. The fact that ANYONE expected a complete economic turn around in less than 4yrs is fucking RIDICULOUS.

Obama let me down on some policies but taxes and the economy is not one of them. I think he's done as well as ANYONE could have done and another 4 years of the current economic policies will continue to grow the economy.

He left them in place because he HAD TO. It was the law. Hey, obummer was the one who promised to fix everything in 2008. I love your amnesia.

Show me where he or any politician has said that everything that's wrong with the world will be fixed within a 4yr term. You are delusional.

[Tossica]

All I've heard from ANYONE on the right or left regarding the economic recovery is that it will take a long time. The last one took over 10 years and another World War to spark a recovery.

[Tossica]

Still haven't seen anyone actually refute the claims in the original article. Calling it "bullshit" or saying it's wrong doesn't cut it.

Eh? It's been explained to you. You just want to block it out.

I've been told it was "wrong" and "bullshit". Some specifics regarding the content in the article with facts to back it up? I don't think RS is above printing propaganda but I think they probably did a fair amount of research before they printed this piece.

[Narrock]

If most of what the right wing nutcases spout about the president and his policies were true, I'd be outraged as well. It's just not reality. It's blatant lies. It's fucking bullshit and simple folk who can't think for themselves just accept that what the talking heads say is true. Shame.

/facepalm. You can't be serious.

[Narrock]

Obama has left the tax breaks in place plus proposed many new ones for companies that create jobs in the US instead of outsourcing. The president does not control the price of gas. Gas spiked to over $4 a gallon under Bush' watch. Where was your outrage then? Taxes will be LOWER for you under Obama. FACT. The fact that ANYONE expected a complete economic turn around in less than 4yrs is fucking RIDICULOUS.

Obama let me down on some policies but taxes and the economy is not one of them. I think he's done as well as ANYONE could have done and another 4 years of the current economic policies will continue to grow the economy.

He left them in place because he HAD TO. It was the law. Hey, obummer was the one who promised to fix everything in 2008. I love your amnesia.

Show me where he or any politician has said that everything that's wrong with the world will be fixed within a 4yr term. You are delusional.

Ok. Go to youtube and watch the 2008 democratic national convention speech by obummer. And also watch any of his stump speeches. Romney was coreect in saying that obummer's mantra of "hope and change" had a powerful appeal in 2008 (which unfortunately, too many sheep and lemmings bought into). Only problem is... he welched on everything he said he was gonna do, except healthcare reform, which turned out to be the biggest tax on the middle class in U.S. history.

[Tossica]

I have watched them. He says over and over and over again. "The road to recovery will be a long one". NEVER "Vote for me and everything that's wrong will be fixed the moment I take office."

[Narrock]

I have watched them. He says over and over and over again. "The road to recovery will be a long one". NEVER "Vote for me and everything that's wrong will be fixed the moment I take office."

More bullshit. You're cherry-picking and watching select excerpts. Big surprise..

[Tossica]

If he said it, POST IT!

[Tossica]

Obama has left the tax breaks in place plus proposed many new ones for companies that create jobs in the US instead of outsourcing. The president does not control the price of gas. Gas spiked to over $4 a gallon under Bush' watch. Where was your outrage then? Taxes will be LOWER for you under Obama. FACT. The fact that ANYONE expected a complete economic turn around in less than 4yrs is fucking RIDICULOUS.

Obama let me down on some policies but taxes and the economy is not one of them. I think he's done as well as ANYONE could have done and another 4 years of the current economic policies will continue to grow the economy.

He left them in place because he HAD TO. It was the law. Hey, obummer was the one who promised to fix everything in 2008. I love your amnesia.

They were set to expire this year, DUMBASS.