Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I love this part of the article because it speaks to truth. Most Americans would themselves like to be rich.
While the Obama campaign seeks to portray Romney as a tool of the rich, “most Americans claim Romney's wealth will not affect their vote, perhaps reflecting Gallup research showing that the majority of Americans believe the U.S. benefits from having a rich class and would themselves like to be rich,” writes Gallup’s Frank Newport.
Read more on Newsmax.com: Gallup: Majority Say Romney’s Wealth Won’t Affect Their Vote
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
It was never an issue of his "Wealth".
It's an issue of how he got his wealth and how he used it to screw working people.
And when people hear about the sleazy actions of Bane, they generally are less inclined to like Romney.
He looks like the guy who laid off your dad.
I'd rather vote for someone who has been proven a success from turning companies around in difficult circumstances. That proves he knows businees, the economy and what works. I worry if he wasn't a success.
It was never an issue of his "Wealth".
It's an issue of how he got his wealth and how he used it to screw working people.
And when people hear about the sleazy actions of Bane, they generally are less inclined to like Romney.
He looks like the guy who laid off your dad.
Looks are deceiving.
How did Mitt get his wealth?
He earned it.
How did Obama get his?????
I'd rather vote for someone who has been proven a success from turning companies around in difficult circumstances. That proves he knows businees, the economy and what works. I worry if he wasn't a success.
you think running the govt and running a business are one in the same?
I'd rather vote for someone who has been proven a success from turning companies around in difficult circumstances. That proves he knows businees, the economy and what works. I worry if he wasn't a success.
you think running the govt and running a business are one in the same?
"Mitt Romney's political foes are stepping up attacks based on his time running investment firm Bain Capital, tagging him with making a fortune from the rougher side of American capitalismeven as Mr. Romney says his Bain tenure shows he knows how to build businesses.
"Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. 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.
"Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
"Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investorsyet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.
"Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court."
Romney at Bain Capital: Big Gains, Some Busts - WSJ.com
Maybe the number we should be looking for is how many new US jobs Romney produced while he was at Bain. We know he's good for investors; maybe not so good for workers.
I'd rather vote for someone who has been proven a success from turning companies around in difficult circumstances. That proves he knows businees, the economy and what works. I worry if he wasn't a success.
you think running the govt and running a business are one in the same?
I love this part of the article because it speaks to truth. Most Americans would themselves like to be rich.
While the Obama campaign seeks to portray Romney as a tool of the rich, most Americans claim Romney's wealth will not affect their vote, perhaps reflecting Gallup research showing that the majority of Americans believe the U.S. benefits from having a rich class and would themselves like to be rich, writes Gallups Frank Newport.
Read more on Newsmax.com: Gallup: Majority Say Romneys Wealth Wont Affect Their Vote
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
There was a poll taken 7-8 years ago about Americans and their perceptions of the rich. When asked, 20% of Americans thought they were in the top 2% of income-earners and another 20% said they wanted to be. So if you start your campaign bashing the rich, 40% of the electorate is in your opponent's pocket before you even begin.
It was never an issue of his "Wealth".
It's an issue of how he got his wealth and how he used it to screw working people.
And when people hear about the sleazy actions of Bane, they generally are less inclined to like Romney.
He looks like the guy who laid off your dad.
Looks are deceiving.
How did Mitt get his wealth?
He earned it.
How did Obama get his?????
I'd rather vote for someone who has been proven a success from turning companies around in difficult circumstances. That proves he knows businees, the economy and what works. I worry if he wasn't a success.
you think running the govt and running a business are one in the same?
If government was run like a business it wouldn't be such a cesspool.
Mitt's good for investors because, unlike his father who got rich from producing things people wanted, Mitt got even richer by financial engineering which cost thousands of US workers their jobs."Mitt Romney's political foes are stepping up attacks based on his time running investment firm Bain Capital, tagging him with making a fortune from the rougher side of American capitalismeven as Mr. Romney says his Bain tenure shows he knows how to build businesses.
"Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. 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.
"Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
"Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investorsyet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.
"Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court."
Romney at Bain Capital: Big Gains, Some Busts - WSJ.com
Maybe the number we should be looking for is how many new US jobs Romney produced while he was at Bain. We know he's good for investors; maybe not so good for workers.
Because Bain Capital only has investors, no employees? Or . . . no, wait, I've got it! The companies that Bain Capital invested in and saved from bankruptcy had no employees! THAT'S how he's only good for investors, not workers, right?
Mitt's good for investors because, unlike his father who got rich from producing things people wanted, Mitt got even richer by financial engineering which cost thousands of US workers their jobs."Mitt Romney's political foes are stepping up attacks based on his time running investment firm Bain Capital, tagging him with making a fortune from the rougher side of American capitalismeven as Mr. Romney says his Bain tenure shows he knows how to build businesses.
"Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. 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.
"Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
"Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investorsyet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.
"Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court."
Romney at Bain Capital: Big Gains, Some Busts - WSJ.com
Maybe the number we should be looking for is how many new US jobs Romney produced while he was at Bain. We know he's good for investors; maybe not so good for workers.
Because Bain Capital only has investors, no employees? Or . . . no, wait, I've got it! The companies that Bain Capital invested in and saved from bankruptcy had no employees! THAT'S how he's only good for investors, not workers, right?
I don't know if Bain Capital's financial engineering produced a net gain in US jobs or not.
Do you?
I do know there's at least one other big difference between Mitt and his father and that's their willingness to release relevant tax returns.
George Romney released twelve years of returns.
Mitt seems to think he's too special.
Would you care more if Mitt was running as a Democrat?
It was never an issue of his "Wealth".
It's an issue of how he got his wealth and how he used it to screw working people.
And when people hear about the sleazy actions of Bane, they generally are less inclined to like Romney.
He looks like the guy who laid off your dad.
Looks are deceiving.
How did Mitt get his wealth?
He earned it.
How did Obama get his?????
This is one of those stupid things that really annoys me.
Romney didn't "earn it". He found the way to control the division of spoils to his own benefit.
He wasn't producing value to the products he sold. He just gamed the system. He no more earned it than a crooked accountant earned it when he skimmed off the till.
Is Bain an example of venture capital or private equity, aka, leveraged buy-out capitalism? The former tend to nurture promising new companies while the latter tend to purchase existing companies with the goal of increasing profitability by stripping assets, including jobs, while adding a substantial leverage component to the capital structure.
For leverage...read debt as in using other people's instead of your own.
Say what you will about the rampant greed on display in the NFL, the players and coaches compete on a level playing field where it doesn't matter the size of your contract when it comes to regulators' decisions. That's the exact opposite of crony capitalists like Romney or their hack political enablers like Obama.
