Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Obama 0, Private Equity Investments 1

May 29, 2012 by  

Obama 0, Private Equity Investments 1
UPI
President Barack Obama is confused about private equity investments.

The President, realizing that his opponent in the upcoming election became a very wealthy man because of private equity investments, is making claims that don’t add up.

“If your main argument for how to grow the economy is, ‘I knew how to make a lot of money for investors,’ then you’re missing what this job is about,” President Barack Obama said at a news conference last Monday. “This issue is not a distraction. This is what this campaign is going to be about.”

Though it is not surprising for Obama to use class warfare and make villains of wealthy Americans for political reasons, Mayor Corey Booker of Newark, N.J., recently pointed out the absurdity of a President running against a type of business.

But if Obama really wants Americans to believe that his attack on private equity is not a red herring, he is also asking them to believe that he is extremely misinformed. Private equity investments such as those that Mitt Romney was involved in during his tenure at Bain Capital are good for the economy on the whole.

Reason recently pointed to a 2010 National Bureau of Economic Research 2010 study, Private Equity and Economic Performance, by researchers from Columbia and Harvard Universities and the Swedish Institute for Financial Research. It says (the emphasis is the author’s own):

Industries where PE [private equity) funds have been active in the past five years grow more rapidly than other sectors, whether measured using total production, value added, or employment…

PE industries appear to grow significantly faster in terms of labor costs and the number of employees. The annual growth rate of total labor cost is 0.5 to 1.4 percentage points greater for PE industries, and the number of employees grows at an annual rate that is 0.4 to 1.0 percentage points greater. These findings are particularly surprising, since a common concern is that PE investors act aggressively to reduce costs with little concern for employees. This concern is not necessarily inconsistent with our results. Despite initial employment reductions at private equity-backed firms, the greater subsequent growth in total production … may lead to subsequent employment growth in the industry overall.

Considering the specifications with PE activity quartiles, industries with more PE activity appear to have more rapid growth of total labor costs, but the growth rate of the number of employees is fastest in industries with more moderate levels of PE activity. Regardless of the level of PE activity, however, the PE industries’ growth rates of labor costs and employment always exceed the rates for non-PE industries.

Perhaps someone should send the Obama Administration a memo stating that private equity works better than government bailouts.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Obama 0, Private Equity Investments 1”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Warrior

    It’s actually really simple,

    Grow the gubmint = Bad.

    Grow the Private Sector = Good.

    • Sirian

      Warrior,
      You’re making it to simple now, the useful idiots can’t understand simple things such as that. . . :)

    • eddie47d

      The thing is that private equity and vulture capitalists are mostly making money for themselves and the economy is only an afterthought. They create these deals first and foremost to feed their bank accounts not for some patriotic endeavor which is how those on Romney’s team present it. The devil is in the details.

      • vicki

        Eddie47d writes
        ————————-
        The thing is that private equity and vulture capitalists are mostly making money for themselves and the economy is only an afterthought.
        ————————
        Spelling checkers don’t catch some misspellings. Venture. Not vulture.

        Government grows for the sole purpose of force and control. Private equity are creating wealth for themselves by creating things that others voluntarily want and buy.. They then share that wealth by buying from other private enterprises. This happens to BE what economy is so neither thought nor afterthought are required.

      • eddie47d

        Vulture was correct but thanks for noticing.

      • truesoy

        eddie47d,
        Good luck with that. I doubt they’ll understand, though.
        I’ll just give you a hint: conservatives believe in things they don’t understand.

        Sincerely,
        Truesoy

      • Tigerous

        You really don’t understand private enterprise, do you.

        • truesoy

          Tigerous;
          A ‘boiler room’ type operation is also ‘private enterprise’, but is the wrong kind and therefore boiler rooms are illegal.
          The point I’m trying to get at is that we can’t defend every institution in the private sector because not all are ‘righteous’.
          When defending capitalism/free market we must to differentiate that which is genuine from what is not.
          There can’t be a blanket defense of capitalism.

          Sincerely,
          Truesoy

      • vicki

        truesoy says:
        ———————————————
        A ‘boiler room’ type operation is also ‘private enterprise’, but is the wrong kind and therefore boiler rooms are illegal.
        ———————————————

        What makes them illegal? Some liberal get a law passed?

        ——————————————–
        The point I’m trying to get at is that we can’t defend every institution in the private sector because not all are ‘righteous’.
        ——————————————–

        Not hard to figure out which ones are not righteous. Any enterprise (note “any” would also include government enterprise) that lies, cheats, steals (really steals like at gunpoint) would not be righteous.

        ————————————–
        When defending capitalism/free market we must to differentiate that which is genuine from what is not.
        There can’t be a blanket defense of capitalism.
        ————————————-
        If it is not then it is not capitalism. Thus we can indeed defend capitalism cause that which is not capitalism is not.

      • vicki

        eddie47d says:
        —————————–
        - Vulture was correct but thanks for noticing.
        —————————–

        Thanks for what? noticing that you made up a non existent thing for your non existent argument? You’re welcome.

  • Dave Kirby

    i think many of the complaints are from the companies Bain bought and liquidated.

    • DaveH

      What does that mean to you, Dave?
      Do you think that the former companies assets are just thrown in the dump, or what?
      In fact, when those companies aren’t using their assets efficiently, they are better off in the hands of others who will use them efficiently.
      Only their competitors win when inept managers drive their companies into the ground. Their workers lose (out of a job). And their consumers lose (less competition in the marketplace, thus higher prices for their goods and services).

      • Dave Kirby

        I was commenting that the people without jobs are doing the complaining, not the survivors.
        Communism is a system where the government controls the means of production. In capitalism, the production is in private hands. In this country we have a situation where private capital has an immense influence in all levels of government and nearly complete control of television media. Most laws that concerns corporate America are written by corporate lobbyists. They have the resources to convince the general public and then the politicians to see it their way. The system is not fair.

        The laws are skewed toward large corporations. Small businesses are becoming a rarity. A company is now called a small business when they have less than a thousand employees; yeah that’s a small business. Look at any legislation coming out. Despite popular backing from citizens, small companies can’t get a foothold, because large corporations stand in their way.

        Free enterprise is a wonderful thing but there must be limits and restrictions by a strong fair government to keep the playing field level. Bring back the days when a small business can compete with larger business through hard work and lower overhead.

        Government owning the means of production and corporations owning the government are pretty similarly undesirable situations, don’t you think?

    • Mike in MI

      Dave -
      Don’t make the mistake o falling orthe Oblama-lama-ding-dong mode of thinking just because you hear the ding-dong. Just because the “0″ clangs the clanger’s clapper doesn’t make it worth clinging to. So, don’t make yourself a clunk by clinging to the clanger’s clapper. You might catch a case of politial “clap” – a form of VD communicated promiscuously by the “0″.
      He beneits by your knee-jerk to his misinforming ideas (propagnda) which would have you believe the PE companies are just like the old leveraged buy-out raiders who came into a firm and trashed everyone and everything, liquidated what they could, then declared bankruptcy. (Like what you are aiding and abetting “Zeerro” to do to the U.S.A.if you fall for his “misinformation”.) Then took their cash to the next corporate victim.
      PE companies are ASKED in to try to ASSIST troubled companies which are in danger of going belly up. The goal is to SAVE the company, SAVE people’s jobs and wellbeing and (IF possible) return the firm to profitability.
      Ex-Gov. Romney was petty good at it.
      Obama/Soros is more in line with the corporate raider modus operandi.

      Be careful how you hear what they want you to believe.

    • paxcat

      A private equity company or any private company does not do things in its “worst” interests! DUH! A private company is always looking for ways to increase the bottom line meaning profit, so an equity company wouldn’t dump loads of money into a loser with the goal of it failing – If your 401k or other retirement investments were put into a company which tried to lose your money rather than return a “growth” on your initial investment, would you like that?

    • http://www.mototcarsfinancial.com Brad

      Kirby

      In most of those cases it was later after Romney had been gone for some time. All they can do is make the best out of a failing company. there is no guaranty just as if you or I opened a business, there is no guaranty we will make throughh our first quarter. America, like no other country in the world. Got to love it, or please leave it when Obama checks out. Or sooner the better!!!

  • sesame

    “MAY lead to subsequent employment growth…” It also MAY NOT

    • UnrepentantCurmudgeon

      Wow. Fab insight: the economy is uncertain. Success is not guaranteed. I must have slept thru that day of class. Thanks for bringing us all up to date.

      Just so you don’t miss anything: “investment” is defined as “capital at risk in expectation of return.” The term “risk” by definition means that the outcome is uncertain. You are gambling on the totality of circumstances working out in your favor. If you are successful on the whole, that means that most of the time the risks have paid off in your favor, which in the PE game means in favor of the businesses you are restructuring.

      Yes, sometimes things do not pay off. But business people … investors … are not in the business of losing money. So, on the whole, they tend to make decisions that lead to profits. Government, on the other hand, does not care whether it loses money or not, because every government spend is a money loser.

      Get it? Got it? Good.

      • http://yahoo catsueme

        the govn. does’nt generate taxes from it’s spending ethier(?).

  • kategray

    When you have a PRETENDER that had no experience in any field out side of a community organizer, what can you expect that he would complain about anyone who has more experience than him. The PRETENDER was groomed for this job and has failed miserably and could not find his own way out of a paper bag without his tele-prompter.

    • Bev

      He couldn’t find his way out of a paper bag with directions written on the inside and a little voice telling him to “go towards the light”.

  • Chester

    More often that not, when someone such as Bain Capital moves in, well over half the total number of employees of a company get to move out, preferably out of town, as their jobs are gone forever. When you go in, fire half the workers, shut down any plant that is making less than a thousand percent ROI, and sell off or scrap all the equipment in the closed facilities, you are going to grow income, for a year or two, enormously. What the long term prospects are for this company are none of your concern, as you will either load it up with phony debt and bankrupt it, or you will sell the suddenly highly profitable parts for a huge profit for your investors,. That doesn’t help the economy much, but sure makes the investors happy.

    • Ted Crawford

      Didn’t read the article too closely Chester? Let me help ” The PE industries’ growth rates of LABOR COSTS and EMPLOYMENT always EXCEED the rates of non-PE industries “! What part of increased employment do you not understand?

    • vieteravet

      Mitt had a net plus of over 7000 jobs while at Bane, Obama has lost millions of jobs.

    • DaveH

      Chester says — “More often that not, when someone such as Bain Capital moves in, well over half the total number of employees of a company get to move out, preferably out of town, as their jobs are gone forever”.
      Their jobs are gone forever? So then, Chester, you think it would have been better for our economy to keep the buggy-whip manufacturers alive? Or tube televisions? Or many of the other obsolete industries of the past? The best thing that can happen to companies that aren’t making a profit (in other words, the consumers aren’t interested in their goods or services) is for their assets to be better employed by those managers who will produce products that are in demand by consumers and thus make a profit.
      Neither the consumers nor the workers benefit by inefficient use of capital assets.
      Read this book, Chester, and get a clue:
      http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

      • Mike in MI

        Naw, Dave – Chesty is one of those Obamaphiles who self-inflate their chesties because it’s fashionable to be with the lefties – regardless of realities. So don’t challenge him with facts.
        Remember, liberalism presents itself as a political facade. In reality it is a religious system – that’s why God rips its essesnce to shreds in the Bible (not in one place but all over in many ways). There are lots of Democrats who purport to be “Christians”. But in practice they are an idolatrous lot who, if they were honest, would learn what they actually are (since it is very hard to divorce theory from practice) versus what the Bible consistently presents. (Lots of very virtuous people don’t like God because of what they see in those who go to a church, but couldn’t tell you didly about whether a set of ideas is Godly or evil. That includes the spirit fronts standing behind the pulpit.)
        Back in the 1930′s through the 1950′s the Leftists worked very hard (and successfully) to get their guys into teaching positions in the demoninational seminaries. Voila!!! Today, we have forsaken our heritage. Any wonder?
        So don’t attempt to argue with Chesty. Whenever you attack a person’s spiritual depth his body goes on alert.
        Then, the adrenals start pumping out cortisol in preparation for a fight (even if he looks calm). The cortisol clamps down on the blood supply to the pre-frontal and frontal lobes bringing ablation of logic and acquisition of new information. That’s why most people only adapt to error through hard experiences or catasrophic collapse in the case of cultures.
        Have a blessed day, sir. I greatly respect your personal virtue.

      • Chas

        You make very good points Dave. Perhaps Chester could learn something from Dr. Thomas Sowell as well.

        http://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Common-Sense-Economy/dp/0465022529/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1338312162&sr=1-1

      • DaveH

        I love that guy.

      • Tigerous

        That’s as good and succinct a description of private enterprise as you’ll find. If you can find a copy of “Surfing the Edge of Chaos”, it clearly links survival – of organisms or organizations – to adaptability. The central thesis is that resistance to change is one of the strongest forces in nature, and in human nature. Failure to change and adapt as needed is the main reason for extinction – of species and industries. The role of the venture capitalist / private equity is to make the changes required for success. Unfortunately, some situations are beyond salvage, regardless of the investment. In those cases, the survival of the private equity firm requires shedding the un-salvageable. The tragedy is when public funds are over-committed by the allegedly well-meaning, thus diverting our resources from profitable enterprise to prop up the un-salvageable. A greater tragedy is when it’s done by the politically-motivated to make themselves look good or to benefit their campaign contributors. Reference the Solyndra debacle, over which someone should be indicted. If Enron was worth jail time, so is Solyndra.

        • truesoy

          Tigerous;
          What some people don’t understand is that ‘shedding the unsalvagable was not what Bains Capital was about. What they did in many occasions was to ‘shed’ employes from a solvent enterprise in order to lower overhead thereby increasing the profit margin, at least short term, to push up the price of the company stocks long enough to sell at a higher profit.
          This is what they did at KB Toys, and then they declared bunkrupcy, took the money and ran. The losers were the creditors that didn’t get pay and the people that bought shares,
          That is the wrong type of free market capitalism.
          That is more of a con job than anything else.

          Sincerely,
          Truesoy

    • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

      Dear Chester,

      Please tell me what you believe is the purpose of a business.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • bigchas40

        Well Bob, I would assume since Chester sees scrapping equipment from a closed facility to be a way of enormously growing income for a year or two, he probably thinks the purpose for a business is to provide Americans jobs only. Just sayin’

      • boyscout

        I am very pleased that some of us “get” the nature of business. Unfortunately, masses of unemployed Americans are too distracted to appreciate these niceties and will probably be very tempted to again vote emotionally. This is not to say that they will give up the cell phone manufactured by political prisoners in China, slave labor in Indonesia, or children in Central America, but they will remain illogically angry. I credit the Obama staff for deploying (the root “ploy” being operative) such fine underhanded politics. Deceit seems to have the upper hand these days.
        Still, I do not see myself coming around to Romney. I believe that his election would mark the end of the historical GOP and that his office would further the cause of NWO. Should Repubs loose this one with Romney, they have a chance at saving the integrity of the party. I am left with a Libertarian stance and must guess that that party will survive integrity intact. Harumph damnit.

    • paxcat

      DUH? Like Harry Speakup said, labor is the largest expense for any business, and if a business has made poor business decisions by promoting people to higher salaries before the business could produce the money to pay for those, then that is what the investor does. A business is not in business to “take care of employees,” it is in business to do and/or produce whatever the product or service is. In my small business with margins of about 6%, I didn’t have any employees (except for one month a year) for the first 4 years I was in business, I ran the whole thing myself because the business couldn’t sustain an employee yet. When I did hire an employee, it was PT, and eventually I’d grown the business to a 3/4 million dollar a year business still working FT myself with 3 PT employees – that’s it! You need to learn what being in business is all about!

  • USA4ever

    Perhaps someone should send the Odimwit administration a memo to vacate the United States and never come back

    • Tim L.

      Maybe you should really look at how despicable private equity companies are, rather than spewing your hatred at a man who tried to tell you the truth.

      • momo

        Maybe you should look at the no economic experience dumb ass residing at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue, moron.

      • Steve E

        May we should look a the equity that the government has given to companies like Solyndra and others. They went bankrupt and lost employees too.

      • DaveH

        Tim calls private equity companies “despicable”, then has the temerity to indict others for their “hatred”. Typical hypocritical Liberal.

      • paxcat

        If that is true, Tim L, why does Obama have two private equity people on his “jobs” committee and why is one of his campaign managers, Frederico Peno, a founder of Vector, a private equity firm? Or, why didn’t Obama’s 2008 campaign send back the over $55,000 it received from, guess who, BAIN!!!!!!

    • eddie47d

      How about loading up some of those sneaky venture capitalists and equity fund managers and drop them off in the middle of nowhere. Some of them are nothing more than devious and very sinister thieves. There is always two sides to every story and too many like this economical free for all where companies are cannibalized and huge profits made at the expense of many. We have a State Senator who is a Democrat who made 11 million dollars over such a deal. This was before he was elected and involved Regal Cinemas. He only put in 6 months work for that much money so where is the justice within our capitalistic system ? His partner made $203 million off of the same deal. If a company is ruined and has few if any assets how do these raiders come up with so much money to pay themselves. It’s one hell of a con game and Bain has done the same thing many times over. All these shysters are rotten to the core pulling money out of thin air and paying themselves handsomely.

      • DaveH

        Businessmen may or may not cheat to get ahead. If they are cheaters, ostensibly they can be prosecuted in court. But very few people would condone cheating behavior on the part of a businessman. Yet, many people can condone Union Immorality, such as forcing their way on their employers, potential replacement employees, and their employer’s customers. Some of those even have the nerve to call others “shysters” when they are merely profiting from voluntary transactions with other people.

      • eddie47d

        That doesn’t change one iota of what I said. Union members volunteer by vote to belong and they do it to save their jobs and make a decent wage. VULTURE capitalists do it out of immoral greed. That is something you just can’t grasp.

  • Bob

    oreo is an idiot,i wouldnt let him supervise my churches bake sale………….

    • Tim L.

      I don’t think you have to worry about your church bake sale. I’m sure the only one’s there will be hardcore, card carrying bigots. Have another cup of tea.

      • momo

        Keep drinking the Koolaid, fool.

  • Jim

    Once again Obama fails to make a point economically, or socially in a free society, but true to his nature he believes that he, and he alone, knows what is best for everyone. Obama, the history that we now know, has a terrible habit of putting his foot in his mouth, and sometimes both of them. This is one of those times.

    • Tim L.

      Bravo Jim! Mitt and the Koch Bros. love you.

      • Ted Crawford

        Even as Alinsky, Soros and Buffet love you!

    • http://Yahoo Maynard

      Jim, what’s so free about a society that, by the will of both parties, is shredding the Constitution taking away our right to due process? What’s so free about a society that has horrendous lies told to us, like the lone-nut assassination myth, the Gulf of Tonkin, The WTC sting operation in ’93 that killed six people and caused huge financial losses in which the FBI gave real explosives to “terrorists”, the “incubator babies” propaganda to get us into the first Gulf War, The Oklahoma City Murragh Building slaughter which involved far more explosives than a truck bomb, 9/11 with its deliberate demolitions which could not have happened by airplane impacts and/or fires, the lie that Saddam had WMD’s or a delivery system to use them, the anthrax letters inside job to intimidate the political opposition and the press, and whatever else they are now plotting to put people in FEMA camps or in front of firing squads. Wake up. Free enterprise is a myth. Look at a simple pie chart of our government’s expenditures.

      • http://Yahoo Maynard

        Jim, I forgot that in looking at that simple pie chart, all the money we are giving the “spooks” in the NSA, CIA, Homeland Security, etc., etc., etc., is not revealed.

      • Jim

        I’m trying not to give up on our free society, trying not to lose our last liberties, trying to keep the thought alive, and the Constitution relevant within our government structure. The alternative is not an option and will yield a terrible cost to all of us.

  • http://httpaol.com sean murry

    The reason he is rich he is a crook.

    • http://Yahoo Maynard

      True. Look into how he got into Columbia from a mediocre academic background. Where’s his academic record at Columbia? What about REZKO and the accusations of cocaine use and homosexual acts in ’99? But, the same and worse could be said about the Bush’s. Look up the book called “The Franklin Affair,” by a former Nebraska Republican state senator. My point, our government has been turned into a money maker for the well connected. Defending one party or the other is a mistake. It’s a diversion and a myth that either group is really interested in the common man’s needs or wishes.The worst part is the way they are so casually slaughtering innocent people.

  • GALT

    So Sam, in ” seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.” which of these did you accomplish today? Which one of these were you trying to accomplish?

    Seems what you have is “faulty math” and the promise that ” the greater subsequent growth in total production … may lead to subsequent employment growth in the industry overall.” ( feel free to find any industry engaged in actual production of something useful
    where employment has grown and benefited from wage appreciation.” )

    This hasn’t happened in the coal or steel industries, for overall production has increased and employment has tanked……which does explain the “unsavory image that journalism” enjoys?

    Why not take the following admission as the actual “truth”, private equity is not about
    creating jobs, it’s about realizing profits, and it is doing just fine at that.

    The truth here is that the only solution being offered is the “infinite growth myth” and it will not and can not work…….which leaves “another” possible solution…….eliminate the “parasites”……..those unfit or unwilling to be enslaved in a culture where the definition of
    success is the accumulation of “money” and where the concept of “hard work” is devising
    schemes to defraud consumers and suck them into inescapable debt?

    You are seeing the consequences of this now, and people are slowly waking up to the trap, and the reality that even if they wanted to, they can not afford to, which explains the current economic malaise………

    While economics has no scientific basis as a discipline, certain relationships do possess
    some validity, and the one we are facing now is fairly stark…….the infinite growth myth
    has reached the point of diminishing returns………….and this will require a choice to be made……….the decision between “how much is enough?” or the composition of a list
    of ‘disposable people’ who will not or can not contribute to the preservation of the myth?
    I wonder where journalists would fit in?

    • Jim

      Galt, when companies sell out to Private Equity (PE) groups they do so while the ship is sinking badly, or worse. The fact of the matter is that the original company owners who needed/wanted to sell did so so that someone else can do the dirty work i.e. clean up the mess, leaving their names untarnished in the debacle they probably caused in the first place. When management does nothing to adjust to Macro and Micro (MM) environmental factors then they, not the PE firm, is accountable for the outcome. The PE knows what needs to be done because they understand the current MM environment. PE have a track record of overall saving more jobs than what they have had to eliminate, and yes make some profit in doing so. That is capitalism at work… destruction and creation, a cycle of ever improving, and yes profitable!. What Obama suggest is that the horse and buggy industry should have never been replaced, can you imagine if the government stepped in and saved the horse and buggy industry, do you want the government to decide which company is to survive, or do you want free markets to decide, your call.

      • GALT

        Sorry Jim, there are too many assumptions and too little information in your presentation
        nor do I agree with your conclusions or the choices offered……..

        As noted below, both the steel industry and the coal industry have maintained or increased productivity, and simultaneously shed 80+ of the work force. This was not
        due to outsourcing……..

        One can also look at Apple, which retains 70% of the costs of its products as profit,
        yet most of the jobs are out sourced to other countries where labor is cheap……
        and they are also structured to avoid taxes……..so you have the privilege of consuming
        their products, providing profit to them and paying the taxes they have avoided……

        Examination of other industries, present other problems……with the final problem
        being their ability to ‘corrupt’ the government and the fact that it has been so easily done.

        So my choice is that I would like government to do its job……..

        As for private equity, I didn’t notice them lining up to save the auto industry, or the banks
        in any hurry to lend money to businesses that needed it…….

        I know you would like this to be simple……it is not and I am certainly not willing to turn
        business over to corporations who have no loyalty to any country and have demonstrated
        this time and time again……

    • Ted Crawford

      Companies, with Bain Capital influence, that have failed 22%, Companies, with Bain Capital influence, that have succeedee 78%. Makes your point mote, no one is right 100% of the time.

      • Jim

        Sorry Ted, like your sentencing, your breaking up. If you have a point about PE’s that makes any sense, please provide

      • Ted Crawford

        Perhaps there is a misunderstanding here Jim. The companies who invite Bain Capital in , aren’t healthy, thriving, prosperous companies. They are usually on the verge of bankruptcy, without the help and funds provided by companies such as Bain Capital the vast majority would fail. It seems to me that a 78% save ratio is laudable in those circumstances!

      • vieteravet

        That was their job, fix it or shut it down. Makes sense to me!

    • DaveH

      More conjecture and double-speak from Galt.
      Galt says — “The truth here is that the only solution being offered is the “infinite growth myth” and it will not and can not work”.
      It won’t, Galt? And exactly what evidence have you provided for that conjecture?
      Profit can only be gained by companies who please their consumers, or companies who have been given unfair advantage over their competitors by Big Government Crony Politicians. I have not seen you support the former, Galt, but you do seem to support the Big Government that creates the latter. Am I wrong? Am I just reading your double-speak incorrectly?
      Galt says — “to be enslaved in a culture where the definition of
      success is the accumulation of “money” and where the concept of “hard work” is devising
      schemes to defraud consumers and suck them into inescapable debt?”.
      And how do those companies accomplish that, Galt, without the support of the same Big Government that you Progressives advocate? Only Government has the assumed Power of Force. Only Government can make people buy things they don’t want.
      What we are “seeing the consequences of … now”, Galt, are Greedy, Self-interested Progressives, like yourself, who have turned our onetime nearly Free Enterprise system into one that much more closely resembles Socialism than Capitalism.
      Galt says — “the infinite growth myth has reached the point of diminishing returns”.
      No, Galt, what has reached the point of diminishing returns is the Propaganda spewed by Ignorant Progressives, like yourself, who repeat their lies over and over in the hopes that other ignorant people will come to believe that they are true.
      Capitalism (Free Markets, Voluntary Trade, Voluntary Contracts, Private Ownership of Property) has always trumped Socialism, and always will.
      Anybody can see that by examining this list of countries ranked by the size of their Government intrusions into their Marketplaces:
      http://heritage.org/index/ranking

      • GALT

        Have you completed your reading homework? Have you started? because the list is growing…….

        Now take your list of countries, and add to it, the top 1000 corporations…….and see what results you get……….by rank. The point of comparison can be anything you like, GDP,
        actual government budgets, actual government budgets directed at regulating corporations…….as compared to the assets controlled by those corporations.
        Blackstone has 3 trillion in assets under management……which is 1/5 of US GDP,
        roughly equal to the Federal Yearly Budget, and considerably more than all monies
        on every level directed at keeping them in check.

        Someone has to be corrupting this government, have you been doing things while we haven’t been looking? Who do you think is doing the corrupting and for whose benefit?

        Infinite growth requires infinite resources. Please identify the source of these infinite resources?

        Are you questioning or disputing the claim that “job creation” is NOT the point or function
        of private equity?

        If the solution is that we have got to get the economy growing again, if this solution does not include “employing” people……what exactly will this growth consist of?

        Productivity levels in the steel and coal industries over the past decade+ have increased
        slightly by 10 to 20%, while employment levels have decreased by 80+%……

        This is not an isolated problem, but a systemic one……given the numbers involved, the primary one being 7 billion people and 8 billion by 2024……..and the currently living standards of the majority of them, plus the decreasing standards of most of the rest,
        how does a world dominated by corporations, whose interests are profits not people
        and whom have corrupted the largest economy in the world, and are accountable to no one………result in a solution to this problem……..?

        Bob, recommended the Book: Tales of an Economic Hit Man……did you read that one?

        You seem very concerned about what I have to say, particularly the questions that seem to threaten your simple minded mantra’s which no doubt reflect your present situation
        and the fact you do not want it to be disturbed……..and that you view government as
        the primary threat. Unfortunately, this is only part of the problem……and attempting to attach labels to maintain your “willfull ignorance” will not change this, or make the problem go away……….

        Two new books for your list: Economics Unmasked and The Great Divergence.

        Educate yourself, or start composing a list of “disposable people” and the argument
        as to why, you should not be included in it…………surely you must represent some
        indispensable function that your “new masters” can not replace?

      • DaveH

        Galt asks — “Have you completed your reading homework?”.
        I no doubt have read far more extensively than you have, Galt. Otherwise, the only conclusion I can come to is that you don’t understand or retain what you read because your arguments rarely make any sense at all, Galt.
        You don’t address the facts, rather you obfuscate the issues with your pretentious and convoluted statements.
        Instead of presenting your verbose double-speak, Galt, you can spend more time developing coherent arguments with references to back up that which you claim. I do. You can also (maybe).

      • DaveH

        The reason my “mantras” can be simple-minded, Galt, is that I know what I’m talking about. That’s why I don’t need to wrap my ideas in pretentious circuitous double-speak as you do.
        Galt says — “how does a world dominated by corporations, whose interests are profits not people and whom have corrupted the largest economy in the world, and are accountable to no one………result in a solution to this problem……..?”.
        Actually, small businesses account for more than 50% of the United State’s nonfarm private GDP according to the SBA. But, most businesses are concerned with profit, and they should be. Profit results when a businessman improves the raw materials with which he works and sells the resulting product to a willing consumer. If that businessman cannot make a profit, it can only be because the consumers are not interested in the improvement that he made to the input raw materials.
        Sure, the businessman is interested in profits. Why shouldn’t he be? We all want what’s best for ourselves. You, Galt, can certainly not lay claim to caring about other people, when you advocate a system (Socialism) that has been a proven failure throughout history and throughout the modern world.
        The result of the profit motive is Economies that are far more productive than those with heavy Socialist constraints on their people. And the result of that increased productivity is more goods at cheaper prices, so even the poor people have access to quality goods that our ancestors could only dream about.
        The real problem we have is the unfair advantage that certain Big Businesses command over their competitors by pandering to their Crony Politicians who provide them with cover from competition with regulations, bailouts, quotas, price supports, and other protective measures. But the irony of that situation is that it couldn’t exist in True Capitalism, because businesses wouldn’t have Big Government to block for them. And what do Ignorant Progressives like you, Galt, advocate for? Big Government of course — the very thing that allows some Big Businesses to defraud the consumers.

      • GALT

        So you failed to comprehend the questions? Or the facts?

        Too bad you didn’t read Power, Inc. Would have explained how to deal with the problem of copper as money? Or that it financed an empire and changed the course of history and preceded both banks and capitalism……….and is still in existence. ( circa 1150 A.D.)

        No clue as to what I’m talking about, do you?

        So where in your list does Blackstone fit?

        You should also know that, you have no clue WHAT I am advocating…….and that is because you do not understand what has been written……….or refuse to understand, which makes your attempts to argue against it rather foolish and a waste of time…….

        It is clear that YOU believe you have all the answers…….

        I on the other hand have only posed questions which challenge those answers, although
        mostly these are directed at the “authors” ……….as responding to you is a waste of time.

        Strange that you are concerned with these questions or that others might consider them,
        that you feel the necessity to respond……..to that which you can not comprehend, and questions you can not or refuse to answer……….

        Clearly if all this is true, why bother to respond to me at all?

      • GALT

        The final irony, of course is:

        “Who do you think is doing the corrupting and for whose benefit?”

        Apparently you only have the ability to comprehend things that you say…….since you just wasted all that time ‘explaining” how corruption works and why……..when that fact has been acknowledged by me in what you claim not to comprehend……and in the questions you were asked…….

        And I will also repeat this……government is NOT the problem, corrupt government is the problem. If there is an actual argument here, it is that my solution is ending the corruption,
        yours seems to be ending the government…..and replacing it with some magical system….
        which you state has never existed……..voluntary contracts are great until someone chooses not to abide by them……..which would seem to suggest a mechanism for resolution………like maybe a legal system, which would mean………?

        This government, was founded on the principle that ” governments derive their just
        powers from the consent of the governed”, which makes it different from every other
        government that came before…….it begins…..”We the people……” and it no longer serves in that capacity………..and it began to stray from it, very early on……so much so, that you have no clue how it is operating now, or under what authority, yet you are an unwitting volunteer, and determined NOT to know, thereby avoiding having to do anything……

        You have no actual argument with me………regarding the effects of what you are experiencing………or some of the symptoms……..but you have absolutely no understanding of how it fits together, what the implications are, or how to go about fixing it.

        This is why the questions asked are such a threat……they expose the fact there you are here to complain, be a ditto head, have no real solutions and are not interested in any
        alternative explanations or proposals, because you are ignorant of the actual causes, and determined not to DO anything other than what you are doing now. Which is NOTHING!

        Feel free to complain about me……I am one of THEM!

        ( someday you may figure out which ONE of THEM, I am. )

      • DaveH

        The problem is, Galt, that your comments are mostly incomprehensible, because they’re nonsense, not fact. So, you must resort to disparaging me personally, having no real factual information to present.
        It’s like your comment about copper out of the blue, which had absolutely nothing to do with my comment. Personally, I think you have a loose screw.

      • DaveH

        Your last two, very verbose, comments, as usual, said basically nothing, Galt. And it’s not because I can’t comprehend your comments. Rather it’s that your comments say basically NOTHING.
        And of course, corrupt Government is the problem, but it’s just a matter of fact that the larger Government grows, the more corrupt they become. You worry about Big Businessmen, who by themselves have no power over us, but then advocate Big Government which does claim the Power of Force as if Government is going to be magically populated by upstanding, moral citizens.
        You’re an Ignoramus, Galt, masquerading as an intellectual. You might fool some ignorant people, but you don’t fool most of us.

      • GALT

        Damn, funny but it really looks like you were responding to me……..I was responding to Sam…….and just because you write words and include my name, doesn’t mean you are actually responding……because there is “no evidence” of any response…….

        I am also sorry you can’t remember what you write about, although it is not surprising…
        your complaints about copper, were awhile back……last week maybe…..

        I have no reason to disparage you……….your own words are sufficient.

        Since you have no response, or answers to the questions…….

        Until the next time you get scared……and are compelled to babble…

        Que sera, sera!

      • DaveH

        The only comment I have made about copper was some time ago, and it was simply stating that copper, being a sought after commodity, would retain its value as the dollar devalued, but that it wasn’t very portable.
        Nevertheless, it had nothing to do with today’s topic, other than the fact that you desperately try to obfuscate your comments to give the appearance of intellect when in fact anybody with knowledge knows that you are just a run-of-the-mill Progressive, Galt.
        I could beat you on any mental test except those that tested our level of BS, Galt, and you would win those hands down.

      • Mike in MI

        Galt -
        I, for one, stand with Dave H. after reading through your diatribes.
        You are a pretentious, self impressed, self-important, advanced without competition from peers (all the while being unduly praised by your instructors, so as not to bruise your volatile self-esteem) DOLT.
        I believe if Jesus Christ were to be confronted personally by someone of your opinion, demeanor, aptitude and attitude he would just cast you out and keep moving.
        ‘Nuff sed.

      • GALT

        Well, Mike you can stand with whomever you like, especially if you believe that one wins an argument by attaching a label, lays claim to great knowledge but can’t answer questions, constantly posts that he finds the material incomprehensible, yet never asks any questions unless he provides the answer and doesn’t seem to have read anything published in the last half century……. I am a bit curious about one thing though, if I am a progressive, what would someone opposed to that be? A regressive? Apropos? Possibly, but it doesn’t seem very promising.

    • DaveH

      For those ignorant people who might think that Galt is speaking truth, please read this Free book and learn about Real Capitalism, not the distorted version of Capitalism that Galt and his fellow Progressives would like you to believe:
      http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

      • Tigerous

        I actually read all of Galt’s comments carefully, thinking I wasn’t taking him seriously enough. But it’s all just prog crap. Sometimes he’s almost comprehensible, which makes you think there might be something there, but mostly it’s gibberish. Reminds me of the junior in the bar scene in “Good Will Hunting” trying to impress the freshman girls with his semi-literate BS.

  • http://Yahoo Maynard

    It is simplistic to say investment in peaceful energy is bad and funding huge defense contracts is good. In both cases, the taxpayers are handed the bill. I prefer peaceful, clean energy independence to trumped up false flag wars for war-profiteering and control of other countries’ filthy fossil fuels.

    • GRusling

      It looks like you missed the memo – your “Green” agenda has failed, and no-one is buying your “AGW” theory anymore! Your “Clean Energy” bogeyman has proved to be nothing but a red-herring to promote your industry hating viewpoint while “Global Warming” (which we haven’t had in more than a decade now) turns out to be part of the natural cycle of the planet (some of us said that decades ago) so the argument now is, what is the primary “natural” driver of that cycle, because it certainly IS NOT CO2!

      You need to do some reading and catch up with the times … even the UN has started to realize that THAT particular scam has lost it’s appeal to the majority of the worlds population, so it’s quietly bailing out.

      KYOTO, by the way, is dead and about to be buried… It will not be renewed…

      • http://Yahoo Maynard

        The Green Agenda has not failed. It hasn’t even got off the ground. The filthy fossil fuel agenda is failing us daily. CO2, it’s true, is a bugaboo. Polluted land, air and water is not. Ask a sea otter if oil is a problem. Oh yeah, they can’t talk. Ask a Louisiana shrimp boater if oil is a problem. Ask a fisherman in the Midwest if mercury from coal is a problem. Ask your lungs, or the next generation’s cancer doctors about pollution. Besides, fighting over scarce resources like filthy fossil fuels is also a problem. And humans are smart enough to devise alternatives. In fact, we already have, but those who control the capital want to continue their monopoly over energy. They don’t want to give up their obscene profits. And people who don’t see the big picture are going to let them until the last filthy drop of oil and the last gasp of breathable air. What a waste!

      • DaveH

        Maynard says — “The Green Agenda has not failed. It hasn’t even got off the ground”.
        Not for lack of spending other peoples’ money, Maynard.
        If you like the Green Energy, then why don’t you and your fellow Liberals buy it, and build the companies to provide it, With Your Own Money? Keep your thieving hands out of our pockets.
        Maynard says — “Ask a sea otter if oil is a problem. Oh yeah, they can’t talk”.
        Ask a Cuban or a North Korean if Poverty is not a problem. They Can Talk — If their Government will let them.
        Nobody I know likes pollution, Maynard, but they also don’t like starving. And it’s a known fact that the poorer countries have the dirtiest environments. So how do you think that impoverishing our country, with pie-in-the-sky Liberal projects, will result in us having a cleaner environment?
        And please provide us with examples of those “obscene profits” that you claim are being made by those who provide us with conventional energy.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Maynard, the green agenda is nothing more than a farce. It’s an excuse to transfer money from our pockets to theirs, nothing more! If the government really cared about our planet they would stop spraying our skies with aluminum and barium. They would stop polluting our water with fluoride, a known neurotoxin. They would stop paying for the development of genetically modified crops which are killing the bees and polluting our planet. The government doesnt care about the planet. It’s just an excuse to steal from us and control us!

      • Mike in MI

        Nancy in Nebraska –
        John 10:10 – The devil’s job description: “The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill and to destroy.” Thus far Satan’s most recently effective operative (B. O. Plenty) has only had opportunity, as far as we know, to “steal”. But if he gets as much latitude as some of his Leftist predecessors the other two will fall in quick succession. He’s cold, imperious and abundant in moral torpitude.
        I don’t see any of Jesus Christ’s leadership traits in Obama’s demeanor…ANY!

    • DaveH

      I prefer neither, Maynard. If you want “peaceful” energy, then waste your own money on that pursuit. Keep your hands out of other peoples’ pockets.
      I prefer engaging in voluntary trade and voluntary contracts with my fellow humans. People work their hardest when they can accumulate wealth by pleasing their consumers with goods and services that those consumers desire.
      In the year 1900 Government (at all levels) spent 3% of our GDP. Now they spend over 40% of our GDP. That’s a 1300% increase in size. Are the people thirteen times more unruly now than they were in 1900? I think not.
      The truth is that the Leaders are taking advantage of our ignorance (mostly instilled by the Propagandists) to feather their own nests at the rest of our expense. Government can offer very few services that we couldn’t have purchased more cheaply from private companies. They are simply building their Power and Wealth on the peoples’ ignorant backs.

      • Dave Kirby

        DaveH, I’m just guessing, but in 1900, the USofA ranked about tenth in wealth, power and respect. The US Government began increasing in size along with the wealth of the nation.
        In the 20′s we had a situation similar to the one we had in the past decade. Corporations preyed on human greed and ignorance and people bought more than they could afford. Yes, Dave, they had free will and should have known better and I’m sure the law was on the side of the corporations. (Even if it wasn’t, have you ever tried to put a corporation in jail?) In the 20′s the result was a run on the banks; in the 00′s it was a run on real estate with every american affected. It’s too bad the government wasn’t strong enough to stop the disaster. Thankfully it was strong enough to control the free fall.

  • GRusling

    Private Equity firms (like Bain Capital) don’t take over well organized, profitable companies because they’re not for sale. What IS for sale is companies which are in financial trouble because they’re NOT well organized and profitable, so these are the companies Bain takes over, and always has been. They then “reorganize” to make them profitable (like they did with Staples, Burger King and Dominoes – just to name a few), and such reorganizing usually requires the closing of some units or branches which can’t be revived, so those people certainly lose their jobs, but about 3/4 of the companies Bain has taken over since its beginning have come back strong, become or returned to profitability and ADDED jobs in the process! That number is somewhere in the neighborhood of “800,000″ additional jobs, just for Staples alone!

    Bain Capital has been successful because it strengthens most of the companies it takes over, puts them on a profitable footing (adding jobs in the process) then sells them to someone else who has an organization prepared to operate long term in that specific industry. That’s what “P.E.” companies are all about.

    By the way – if you have a retirement plan and/or Mutual Fund investment, you almost certainly own “stock” in one P.E. firm or another, and it’s very likely to be Bain Capital itself…

  • Jacquebus

    It’s really too bad to see the negative comments. We all want a strong America and we see different ways to make it so. Elect the best and go with what you got till things change.

    • Jim

      Jac.. it’s much more urgent than that and here is why:
      1. 1.8 Trillion deficit spending for the past 3 and a half years,
      2. A 16.2 Trillion dollar debt,
      3. Our debt ceiling is reached by Oct/Nov this year…. again,
      4. 1.5 Trillion in Student Loan debt (government induced)
      5. Tax-Armageddon at the end of this year (this alone will cause a depression)
      6. Entitlement increases i.e. 10,000 baby boomers retiring each and every day for the next 15 years.
      7. 50 percent of college students are not working, of the 50 percent working only 25 percent have found work in their field of study.

      There is more, but these are the ones that stick out the most in my mind, with 4 children, 2 just out of college, 1 in college and one yet to be. Their future is as dim as it could possibly be. In less than 4 years the SSI run completely dry…. that’s the urgency, that’s what is driving all this passionate discussion. We have on one side the government who want to destroy the rest of the economy with take overs, QE spending, and bailouts by printing money out of thin air. The other side wants government to get out of the way and let the free market, which is America, fix things on its own. Best wishes!

  • http://google john p.

    Obama has done more harm to our country then our enemies
    have done . he has us in so much debt it would take your
    great,great ,grand children to pay for our debt . and he wants
    more money to waste on more stupid policies that don’t work .
    GOD BLESS AMERICA .

    • Nancy in Nebraska

      More harm than our enemies? Make no mistake! He IS the enemy! A wolf in sheep’s clothing!

  • Kenny

    Yes, I guess we’re “missing what this job is about.” For Obama it’s about destroying the economy and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars in the process. We miss the Marxist big picture from which Obama derives his policies. It’s a sad commentary that the American people were so misguided as to have voted for this incompetent nitwit in 2008.

  • Mr. Smith

    Whether we want to admit that it is happening or not, the fact is that Atlas IS shrugging. One of the founders of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, who recently gave up his citizenship, should be a wake-up call for everyone. When the government demonizes the wealthy (and we allow it) we have no right to then wonder where all the entrepreneurs have gone, and wonder why nobody is striving for excellence.

    Smith

    • Nancy in Nebraska

      Mark Zuckerberg did not give up his citizenship! Go back and read it again!

    • paxcat

      Mark Zuckerberg did not give up his citizenship, in fact, he just got married in CA. His partner who has lived abroad for many years in Singapore has been speculated to trying to give up his, but nobody knows the truth about that.

  • http://personallibertydigest gottaplenty

    If you want high quality advice you only have to look at the remarks of Tim and his highly informed libs for expert advice.. The country is in the condition it is in because of the minds that put that idiot in office to begin with. Some thing like that idiot handling the purse strings trying to make sense to a concervative common sense population is beyond belief. To begin with he never so much as ran a hot dog stand in his life trying to put someon down that began life working . Of course if Mitt had spent his college year(s) fogged out of it on dope as Obummer boasted he did ,, in his book,,,,Then we might have an equal playing field to speak,,, Mitt would have not had the unequal nerve to make the kind of money he did.The billions that Obummer threw around on impossible (investments) was not his money so you can see if you ever had a dollar you earned of your own to invest most folks with any good sense would be more cautious than throw it away on greenery. Something without a secure future. . And when in the cornbread hell did Obummer have earned money? Typical of that kind , scam and steal. D C is full of them..

  • In God we Trust

    Bain was smart enough not to get involved with Solontra.

    as for SS don’t understand it, if we all are paying into it it every pay check,
    then we all should receave it when we retire. so who give’s the goverment the right to spend it.As well as our Medicare.
    Have you looked at your pay stubs lately.Add all three up FED, SS, Med.
    It’s over 33% of your pay.

    • http://PersonalLibertyDigest BARBARA NECKER

      Yup, it should be there but the repugnicans are trying to make it go away — and if folks don’t wake up, they juswt might get away with it.

      • Randy

        Yes, and the Demopubs want to SPEND IT ALL, and declare the recipients ‘entitled’. Need to get rid of ALL ‘PARTIES’ as they now exist!

      • Ted Crawford

        ” YUP it should be there ” That’s true Barbara, however $2 Trillion+ of it ISN”T there any longer. Social Security ceased to be a viable retirement plan in 1968, when Johnson removed it from it’s ‘ Trust Fund ” position and placed it directly into the General Fund! If adjustments aren’t made it will be completely broke within the next couple of decades!
        With the country soon to be $16.4 Trillion in deficit, and Obama trying to get Congress to increase even that, the IOUs from the Fed. will never be paid. Those who claim they woun’t touch it are the ones insuring it’s demise!

    • GALT

      The people that got involved with Solyndra did not suffer, they secured government funding….and then they cashed out.

      The reason for the failure was market driven, and the government now owns it. The market conditions will change, and government has the ability to affect markets……
      but governments for some strange reason do not seem to be capable of any really
      intelligent solutions………in fact it is clear that government has no clear understanding
      of what it should be doing, let alone how to actually do it…….

      What I find curious, is that the original investors were allowed to extricate themselves….
      that the conditions of the investment permitted this……and that even after the fact,
      no one seems to be concerned…….which means that it will happen again…….

      Government money ( tax payer money ) is used to fund all manner of projects and research…….yet the “taxpayer” having made the investment, seems to benefit by having the privilege to “purchase” whatever the result is from a private company…..while they get the profits.

      From the point of view of “return on investment” this does not seem to be a prudent
      or equitable policy……..

  • Steve E

    When this country gets into a debate on whether capitalism is good or bad like it is now. There is no hope for America.

    • Randy

      I fear you may be right. But WE MUST at least TRY to recover it. Of course, Capialism is not good, if all of the Capitalists send the companies overseas, and import product to sell here at prices that do not reflect the ‘savings’ in labor costs. I well remember when Ford Motors sent the entire Maverick car line to Mexico. The quality droped, the COSTS dropped, but the PRICE was as if the car was still being built in Dearborn.

      As things are ‘progressing’ now, I see only a complete revolution as the way to bring out this Country, The enemy has thouroughly infiltrated, and is now insisting on “their” way.

      • DaveH

        Randy,
        We haven’t had Capitalism for a very long time. What we have is much closer to Socialism. Companies are moving overseas because Government is taxing and regulating them to death, so they have to leave the United States to have some Freedom. Imagine that, having to leave the Country that, 200 years ago, did more to establish Individual Liberty than any other country in History, in order for those companies to get some Freedom again.

  • http://personallibertydigest gottaplenty

    Steve,, There has never been a question of wheather capitalism is good or bad for this country,, The question is how did this creeping marxism get into our capitalistic system . Capitalism is and has been what built the country If any one thinks we have been short changed because of it take a look at Cuba N. Korea , Venizuala and any other of the commie countries and choose which one you like best and get the hell gone to them.

  • Harry Speakup

    Labor is the single highest cost of doing business. Upwards of 70%. When you have to cut costs, LABOR always gets the nod……..

  • rhl

    My friend Eddie was a big Obama supporter in 2008 and 2009, but over the months and years, he has come to realize that Obama is only committed to moving our great country to communism and sees just how terrible he is. Obama spends almost all of his time dividing our country, trying to raise taxes, increasing our debt, increasing the size of government, increasing regulations, cutting america’s use of our own energy resources.

    I am happy about Eddie as he is 1 of thousands who see what Obama is all about, but the war has just begun as too many people want to sponge off of others and want big government even though we have fought wars over communism. It is sad but true.

  • Marvin Fouty

    Adam Smith called it “the invisible hand” whereby working for ones own self interest, makes the economy as a whole better.

  • Raggs

    Funny that there are no critics for the king [offensive term removed] while he blows holes through the Us economy with his ever loving pride and his compasion for islam…

  • metroman

    Bain Capital, (private equity fund) picks winners and losers. United State Government (public equity Fund) picks winners and losers. GM, Chrysler, and some Green Mfg. with the operative words of Private or Public equity fund. You tell me what the differences is? I will tell you, Obama’s (our public equity fund) cost job and turned true capitalism into government controlling production. The public equity fund picked winners and losers in the banking and insurance company business. What does this all sound like to you? Capitalism? Just asking?
    p.s. I don’t care if Republican’s agree or not with the bailouts, what we have is Republicrates and Ron Paul is the only answer. This ship must be put back on course or surely we will sink like the Titanic.

  • Michael O’Hara

    Mr. Rolley doesn’t have good reading comprehension. Obama did not say anything negative about equity funds, so his complaint about Obama is vacuous, to say the least.
    The question is one of Romney’s resume – what has he done that prepares him for the job of president of the US? He’s been asked that question several times on TV, and he doesn’t answer. He keeps touting his “business experience” but when a reporter asks him what he learned in “business” that he could apply to the work and policy of the president, he avoids answering.

    • metroman

      No, because he takes their money also. He uses the t.v. talking heads do that. Obama also runs the largest equity fund in the world. See my reply above. It’s us against them! I know it’s hard to admit you made a mistake but it is what it is. Carter, Reagan (he was shot shortly after he took office and promised real change), Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama; the names change but the game is the same. Ron Paul is the only one who offers and opportunity to change it!

  • cawmun cents

    One small sentence……”Big ideas with little pockets.make liberals brave enough to take your money and make a stand.”-CC.

  • Frank Zappa

    Obama could not even run a taco stand much less a nation. Completely LOST is the best description. Oh Before I forget….Yes that’s it…If Obama’s Father used a Condom we would not have the mess that we are in today…Hummmmmm just thinking? What it would be like for Obama to be a poster child for a condom commercial??? What an idea.

  • roger

    From http://www.economicvoice.com – “while at the same time lowering real wages “, “PE are likely to favour the rich “, and “more likely to represent the relatively well off rather than the ordinary workers “. Just what we need – the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.