If you owned a business, who would you hire to run it: Obama or Romney?

[sealybobo]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

Romney, obama doesn't think I should make a lot of money because being rich is evil...romney would pay me for being a hard worker.

 

[Katzndogz]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

Romney, obama doesn't think I should make a lot of money because being rich is evil...romney would pay me for being a hard worker.

Isn't that the point? Someone who wants to be paid whether or not they work, or even show up, would obviously rather work for obama. They just wouldn't work for him very long because the practices obama would use would cause a company failure in a remarkably short time. obama would make everything fair, meaning no matter how hard you work, you wll never make a dime more than the laziest most unproductive person on the payrolll.

 

[Jackson]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

If the point is that the answer to this question should guide who we vote for for president, I think it's a very dubious point. Our government is not a business and I don't want it run "for profit".

If you ran the country for "profit", it would bring down the defecit. It simply means not running it into the red like the Obama administration and the Dems are doing.

 

[Oldstyle]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

Call me crazy, Bobo...but I'm taking the guy who actually knows how to run a company and will still be providing me with a job a year from now. You go with the guy who's never been exceptional at any job he's held his entire adult life though and see how that works out for you.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I will take Mary Ann.

Mary Ann was the hot one.

But Ginger puts out

No Ginger was a tease.

 

[Jackson]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

Barack Obama. Without a question. It would be a company I could be proud of. The bottom line isn't the only thing to consider for most Americans. You're right, it was a simple question and it had an obvious answer.

"Corporations are people my friend"--Willard Romney.

This upside down logic got us credit downgrades and the deficits we have today. How much is it to fill up your tank today?

 

[dblack]

If you ran the country for "profit", it would bring down the defecit. It simply means not running it into the red like the Obama administration and the Dems are doing.

I hear you, and agree for the most part. What I'm concerned about is the - fairly broad - assumption that our nation should be run like a business. We hear it in demands that the government should be responsible for the state of the economy; that it should "create jobs", or make gasoline less expensive, etc, etc... The purpose of government, in my view, is to protect our rights, not to "run" the nation as though we were all employees of a national 'corporation'.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

Romney, obama doesn't think I should make a lot of money because being rich is evil...romney would pay me for being a hard worker.

Isn't that the point? Someone who wants to be paid whether or not they work, or even show up, would obviously rather work for obama. They just wouldn't work for him very long because the practices obama would use would cause a company failure in a remarkably short time. obama would make everything fair, meaning no matter how hard you work, you wll never make a dime more than the laziest most unproductive person on the payrolll.

Exactly

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsZpWej8pF4]I Don't Understand with Obama - YouTube[/ame]

 

[gallantwarrior]

Neither one. why do right wingers always seem to limit the options to this or that?
Absolutists....

You wouldn't hire Obama to run your business, but you'd hire him to run the entire country? This says a lot about your lack of judgment.

Didn't vote for Obama.

I think he's not a particularly good president, but he's making the effort. I think that our problems run a lot deeper than any politician can fix. Most of them have to do with the fact our government puts the interests of big corporations over the interests of average Americans.

Because big corporations can and will recycle that government consideration right back into the candidates' campaign warchests.

 

[ThinkCritically]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

I wouldn't want to work for the government if was Mitt or Obama.

 

[The T]

Since most of us are employees not employers, better question to ask would be "who would you rather work for"

And no one honest would say Romney.

Romney, obama doesn't think I should make a lot of money because being rich is evil...romney would pay me for being a hard worker.

Isn't that the point? Someone who wants to be paid whether or not they work, or even show up, would obviously rather work for obama. They just wouldn't work for him very long because the practices obama would use would cause a company failure in a remarkably short time. obama would make everything fair, meaning no matter how hard you work, you wll never make a dime more than the laziest most unproductive person on the payrolll.

Interesting you should say this...

How about this?

Retiring Public Employee to 500 Colleagues: I Haven’t Worked in 14 Years!

 

[Avatar4321]

I dont think I could afford Romney and im not corrupt enough to hire Obama.

 

[churchmouse]

Obama. Romney would fire most the employees and bleed the company dry.

No you would have a chance with Romney…it would no longer be your company if Obama got his hands on it. Ownership papers would be turned over to him…and he would redistribute what you would make to the community.

 

[Inthemiddle]

If a nonprofit cannot pay its bills it goes out of business.

Even a nonprofit has to break even in order to survive. Anything after the break even point applies to your post but up until the break even point a nonprofit is exactly like any other business.

That is true, naturally. But I was referring to his claim that non-profit and for-profit endeavors have the same "operating philosophy." It's not true. A for profit enterprise operates in such a way that it's always pursuing profit, without constraint, with a theoretically limitless potential over an infinite amount of time. This allows them to potentially have a great deal more funds at any given time, with which they can subsidize themselves through periods of loss. By contrast, non-profits do not have the same legal ability to aim for a profit. Instead, they have to repeatedly aim to break even, and as a result cannot afford themselves the kind of cushion that a for-profit enterprise can. It is an entirely different operating approach.

 

[Inthemiddle]

But Ginger puts out

No, chicks like that never do. They tease, but never please. That is how they get what they want.

 

[ThinkCritically]

No, chicks like that never do. They tease, but never please. That is how they get what they want.

Now that is something we can all agree on!

 

[rightwinger]

But Ginger puts out

No, chicks like that never do. They tease, but never please. That is how they get what they want.

No...I saw Gingers acting talent. She did not get where she was without sleeping around.
I'm thinking Thurston Howell III as a definite and maybe the Professor if he could get it up
The Skipper had his "Little Buddy"

 

[candycorn]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

Barack Obama. Without a question. It would be a company I could be proud of. The bottom line isn't the only thing to consider for most Americans. You're right, it was a simple question and it had an obvious answer.

"Corporations are people my friend"--Willard Romney.

This upside down logic got us credit downgrades and the deficits we have today. How much is it to fill up your tank today?

Got that right!

The person named Exxon charged me about $42.00 the other day.

 

[candycorn]

If you owned a business, say about 200 employees, with a lot of capital and stock and all that economic shit..........but you became ill, and needed someone to run the thing to keep it going so your kids and grandkids would benefit in the future from it, who would you hire to run that company: Barack Obama or Mitt Romney???

Simple question. Simple answer. Simple and obvious point.

Barack Obama. Without a question. It would be a company I could be proud of. The bottom line isn't the only thing to consider for most Americans. You're right, it was a simple question and it had an obvious answer.

"Corporations are people my friend"--Willard Romney.

Would you be "proud" of your company after it went belly up, Candy? Come on, you know as well as I do that Barry doesn't have the faintest idea how to run a for profit business! The truth is that the concept of "profits" gives progressives like Obama hives.

So the President had hives? Do you have a link for that?

Hyperbole is such fun. I would imagine that a lot of businesses fail regardless of the person who runs them. Grumps has a failing business and he is not a liberal. Maybe he has hives too.

Romney is CEO of what exactly?