It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits

page: 5
28
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   
1985?

Some 27 years ago?

Oh, wait, because once a politician says somethings it must always be true forever and ever and ever without any change.

Gorram that's going way back.

The lieberals must be getting desperate.
'




posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam


It drives me nuts that people find this offensive. Success has become so villified, I'm convinced we have become a nation of lazy-ass, envious, whiners.

'Harvest' means they bought companies, made them more valuable through investment, and later sold them for a profit.

The fact that people are offended by the term is simply stupid.


What should they have done? Bought businesses....invested heavily in them...and then lost money????



edit on 28-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)


No, harvest in this type of investing means highly-leveraged buyouts, followed by draining of the company's treasury, then selling the skeletal remains. That said, I don't fault Romney for doing so, I fault the policies which work against or nation's and our citizens' best interests which reward such behavior.

We need to re-write the rules, the tax code, etc., so that companies are rewarded for job creation and for re-investment in U.S. Operations, while punishing outsourcing and off-shoring wealth.

Simply lowering corporate tax rates does nothing to improve U.S. Jobs situation, as it merely adds to the reward of increased profits through Chinese/Indian labor over U.S. Labor, for example. Tarrifs, quotas, tax benefits for US job creation, Instant nationalization of corporations who employ illegal aliens here, followed by selling of said company back to the private sector, etc. A whole new code is needed. Any corporate CEO who isn't trying to maximize prodits within the law, however unpatriotic and un-American it may be, is not doing his job.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam


It drives me nuts that people find this offensive. Success has become so villified, I'm convinced we have become a nation of lazy-ass, envious, whiners.

'Harvest' means they bought companies, made them more valuable through investment, and later sold them for a profit.

The fact that people are offended by the term is simply stupid.


What should they have done? Bought businesses....invested heavily in them...and then lost money????



edit on 28-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)


They did that too, but screwed over so many other people, they made up for it. Seriously, unless you make a paycheck of over a mil a year, people are idiots to vote for this guy. Romney is a tax cheat, he has cheated the IRS out of millions of dollars, and he now wants to be the leader. If Romney is guilty of nothing else, he is ignorant. You want to lead me, while cheating your country, what an idiot.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam


It drives me nuts that people find this offensive. Success has become so villified, I'm convinced we have become a nation of lazy-ass, envious, whiners.

'Harvest' means they bought companies, made them more valuable through investment, and later sold them for a profit.

The fact that people are offended by the term is simply stupid.


What should they have done? Bought businesses....invested heavily in them...and then lost money????



edit on 28-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)


No, harvest in this type of investing means highly-leveraged buyouts, followed by draining of the company's treasury, then selling the skeletal remains. That said, I don't fault Romney for doing so, I fault the policies which work against or nation's and our citizens' best interests which reward such behavior.

We need to re-write the rules, the tax code, etc., so that companies are rewarded for job creation and for re-investment in U.S. Operations, while punishing outsourcing and off-shoring wealth.

Simply lowering corporate tax rates does nothing to improve U.S. Jobs situation, as it merely adds to the reward of increased profits through Chinese/Indian labor over U.S. Labor, for example. Tarrifs, quotas, tax benefits for US job creation, Instant nationalization of corporations who employ illegal aliens here, followed by selling of said company back to the private sector, etc. A whole new code is needed. Any corporate CEO who isn't trying to maximize prodits within the law, however unpatriotic and un-American it may be, is not doing his job.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
oh please

in 1985 I had parachute pants and did coke

I'd hate for someone to judge me today for it



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


I haven't said anything about Romney.

I'm addressing all of the business success haters in this thread.

edit on 28-9-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)


You know I don't think there is anyone in here that hates LEGITIMATE business people, Romney's tactics are questionable at best, and criminal at worst. You seem to be unable to distinguish between the legitimate business people of the world and the predators.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by axslinger
Who cares. When Obama bailed out GM, he dumped Buick, Pontiac, Saturn and Hummer. Tens of thousands lost their jobs to make GM "profitable" AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE and he's a hero but if Romney trims the fat off a company to make it profitable, and utilizes PRIVATE FUNDS, he's somehow evil. Save it. Take your envy and stick it up your ballot box.

Like it or not, big business provides millions of jobs in the US and the government does nothing but cost US WORKING FOLKS our hard earned cash. I worked for a company that dumped 300 employees after they were acquired by a private equity firm and I was one of them. I am now making $15k more per year than I was at that job. It was an opportunity for them as well as for me.

If Romney provides one job from the private sector, FOR the private sector, that is more of a success than Obama spending a trillion dollars of taxpayer money to "create" a thousand jobs. Obama's job history basically works out to costing ME about $200,000 for every $30,000 job he "created". That's liberal math for ya. They see that as a success.


You lost me at they dumped Buick, your are an uninformed, illiterate, right winger repeating talking points. Buick is one of the largest selling brands in the world. Keep watching faux news and listening to Rush, they will splain it to ya. You guys are going to lose, for the simple reason that the repubs put forth a really sorry slate of candidates, Maybe in 4 years they will wise up.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Who cares??? He's a business man, this is what companies do... It's a dog eat dog world out there, and being a proponent of capitalism it's his job to turn a profit, not to look out for every company out there...


So, you want a guy that does that for president? That only cares about profit and doesnt care about the people?

Damn, you should really vote for Romney, you will be well served. At least, you will have a fancy car and all the things you've ever wanted, but sorry, no time to use it because you need to work like a slave.

Enjoy your future country until you are all exported to China!
edit on 28-9-2012 by bigwig22 because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-9-2012 by bigwig22 because: typo



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Who cares??? He's a business man, this is what companies do... It's a dog eat dog world out there, and being a proponent of capitalism it's his job to turn a profit, not to look out for every company out there...


Yeah, and this why we have labor unions, they were screwing their emlployees, this is why we have the EPA, they were screwing up our environment, this is why we have OSHA, because they cared nothing about the safety of their employees. Gee, we need more "BUSINESS" men out there so we can have more regulation. How about, we have some guys that want to make a profit, take care of their employees, and still take home a bigger share for themselves. This is what capitalism is supposed to be, not the outdated version of it that you have.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrNotforhire
and obama said in 2008

he wanted to redistribute the wealth I have more of a problem with that then capitalism


Seriously, please find me a source for this quote.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
When I was much younger I had an incident with a vending machine. I put in a quarter (Much younger), and something jammed. The dispenser kept recycling until every candy bar in that slot had fallen to the floor. There was no sense in yelling at it or kicking it, it just kept going and going.

Pretty much exactly like this thread. Romney's a pig, he's a criminal. he's probably a serial killer, the most evil man on Earth, he steals from the poor, on and on without stop. I sincerely hope that, when you sign off for the night, you tell yourself something like "Wow, that was a good fight, my blood was really boiling. I didn't know what I was saying half the time, but I was on fire. I'd better calm down."

I'm a little different from some of you. I like to have conversations. But if you prefer the mindless scream-fests, go right ahead, do what you have to. It seems a little too much "two-minute hate", with Romney as the target for me.

But may I suggest, if you're serious about learning things concerning Bain's track record, read this article.
online.wsj.com...

The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain's involvement and shortly afterward.

The Journal's findings could provide fodder for both critics and supporters of Mr. Romney's presidential ambitions and of his role at Bain.
I found it extremely informative and balanced. Give it a try, then you can get back to your screaming.



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


You could've pulled the plug


Joking aside, the link you provided was pretty interesting. Thanks!
edit on 28-9-2012 by bigwig22 because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-9-2012 by bigwig22 because: typo, typo, typo :S



posted on Sep, 28 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


1999? He was in charge there until 2002, at least according to Bain SEC filings. Mitt Romney can't even be honest about that.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 

What does that have to do with the topic? Perhaps you'd be kind enough to explain.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer


1999? He was in charge there until 2002, at least according to Bain SEC filings. Mitt Romney can't even be honest about that.


Not to call you out Black, but seriously.

I find many of these type of threads amusing. See, I have NO problem blasting Romney. I also have NO problem blasting Obama. The real problem is this. What has Obama done with his time as President? Is the United States in better shape, then what it was, say 4 years ago? I am talking ALL aspects, from Wars, Economy, Civil Liberties, etc....... Personally, I don't buy anything either of these two, represent.

Romney is NOT the President. Obama is. That's the ONE fact, everyone fails to understand, when it comes down to scrutinizing both of them. I don't know if this is done on Purpose, to deflect this current Administrations failures, or to paint a picture that if Romney would become the President, he would make it worse. Our Economy, and the Worlds Economy are in a bubble ready to burst. That wasn't under Romney's watch, regardless of Romney's business practices way back in 1985. I wont vote for any of them, but if pointing the finger, that Romney is a bad man, then may I suggest those Obama supporters cover up the three fingers pointing back at them, and this current Administration........


Peace.
edit on 29-9-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


It was in reply to your post - you do see the "reply to Charles1952" highlighted above my comment? You made a post regarding a WSJ article that claimed Romney was at Bain until 1999 - I was correcting that, as his SEC filings show he was the CEO until 2002. (Just one of Mitt's smaller fibs).

If that seemed off topic, well you can thank yourself for that.



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Start another thread on that subject if you want - this one's about Romney in a 1985 video exclaiming how he harvest's companies for profit.

Your post is bordering on being an ad-hominem attack on me, as the OP, while ignoring the topic at hand, "NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits".



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
This thread is nothing but a ad-hominem attack on Romney considering the vast majority do not have any business degrees whatsoever.

What is the difference between rob from the rich and give to the poor and Romney's so called harvesting?
edit on 29-9-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Come now,ad hominem? I think there is enough negativity in this thread already, on Mitt Romney. I was very clear on how I view Romney. Im Just questioning WHY all the hate for Romney, his business practices, and no point/counter point discussion, on it when being applied to the other side of the coin, IE; This current Administration? I will leave, if its just going to be a "bash" fest............if you want.



So............

WHY is 1985 RELEVANT, now?

Does Mitt Romney need to be scrutinized, more then the current President?

What does Bain's Profits, have to do with the Average American?

Some questions, that deserve legitimate discussion.


And one more thing.......About the very forum we are in.

discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to be highly critical of the current administration.

edit on 29-9-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well considering that I AM THE POOR you speak of, I gotta say I have no problem with the man making some money!!! I DO have a problem with MY president loosing so much of MY MONEY!!!

Respectfully! Whodat-Nation!!



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join