Romney is wealthy; hell, he is loaded. And I think it’s gonna present him some problems:
It seems that this lack of any real financial struggle has made Romney tone-deaf in what he says about people and money. This fault is Romney’s veritable Achilles heel.
Romney has to acknowledge and accept that this charge will be leveled against him. He has to be prepared for it, plan for it and practice for it. I think he will. And there is plenty of good reason for him to defend himself and his occupation:
…the direct employment losses that result from private-equity deals are not as large as critics claim: on average employment declines by only 1% two years after a buy-out, once the jobs created at new facilities are counted. Such shifts in employment are part of the creative destruction that invigorates the economy, and if private equity hurries the process along, that is all to the good. The evidence suggests that it does. Private-equity buy-outs tend to increase productivity—by around 2%, on average, according to one academic study. If firms become more efficient, the economy works better. Resources will be reallocated where they can better be used.
Romney needs to embrace the free market capitalism that Obama attacks. Romney need to accept the label of capitalist and instead, turn it around and label Obama as the statist that he he is.
There is no shame in taking a corporation that’s struggling and turning it around by, in part, trimming the work force only to hire more productive and able staff in the near future.
Romney needs to celebrate this, not hide from this.
Yup. Romney isn’t a corporate raider, but “fair share” liberals refuse to make that distinction because they hate math and it reminds them of their secret love of capitalism (haha!) Besides, there’s a big difference between investing in a company for financial reasons and “investing” (subsidizing) a company for political reasons where you make sure your voter buddies get a better deal than the shareholders or taxpayers.
Romney has started to take a stronger stance on the matter of him being wealthy, and how he got there. I hope it continues. He’s created a significant net REAL job increase (i.e. one that increases production) which is more than a “statist” approach has ever achieved.
Romney isn’t a corporate raider, but “fair share” liberals refuse to make that distinction because they hate math and it reminds them of their secret love of capitalism (haha!)
Agreed. However, to be sure, this is just a politically motivated attack. There is no real reason to object to his role.
the free market capitalism that Obama attacks.
This has never happened in real life.
If you disagree, please explain why Richard Nixon and Dwight Eisenhower hated capitalism. What about their backgrounds led them to embrace socialism?
This has never happened in real life.
Sure it has.
He disregarded bankruptcy law in GM.
Further, his administration has blocked corporate deals in Boeing, AT&T and then again with the pipeline. He supports union and big labor over free markets.
Under Obama more and more people are relying on state support. He is, in all honesty, the food stamp President.
George Bush Jr. greatly expanded the power of government along with the welfare state, doubled the deficit, in Medicare Part D signed the largest entitlement bill since the 1960s, regulated carbon dioxide as a “pollutant,” signed Sarbanes-Oxley and the steel tariffs, heavily promoted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, shoveled hundreds of billions to well-connected firms in no-bid contracts, proposed hundreds of billions in federal aid to various private and public entities including the auto industry, and handed out billions in economic stimulus checks. The recession that began on his watch saw a massive escalation in the number of people relying on state support.
Bush is the food stamp president, who waged a vicious, merciless assault on free market capitalism. No one who supports capitalism should vote Republican for decades.
Or he had some policies that worked out poorly and that you disagree with. Your call.
it strikes me as a GOP problem, not just a romney problem. The GOP needs to explain why they fought tooth and nail not to raise taxes on the wealthy but very nearly let a payroll tax cut that primarily benefited the poor/middle class expire. They need to explain why they prefer a system where on the wealthy can afford health care to one where everyone, no matter what their finances, has access to such care. Romney is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
The GOP needs to explain why they fought tooth and nail not to raise taxes on the wealthy
This is the class warfare. When Dubya cut taxes, he cut them more for the less wealthy than for there wealthy. And now Obama is saying that he wants to undo the Bush tax cuts but ONLY for the wealthy. The capitalist doesn’t have to defend this, the liberal does.
very nearly let a payroll tax cut that primarily benefited the poor/middle class expire.
Yeah, that was butt ugly. They’ll claim they did it to extend confidence, that a 2 month agreement is meaningless. But I think it was rooted in pure politics; they want to stop all democrat initiatives.
They need to explain why they prefer a system where on the wealthy can afford health care to one where everyone, no matter what their finances, has access to such care.
Well, without changing a thing, people can buy an insurance policy that covers catastrophes. In fact, it costs about the same amount people use to play the lottery:
http://tarheelred.com/2011/07/05/how-to-afford-health-care/
However, the really hard part to accept is that health care is getting better and more affordable to each class of people every year. It might be that the very rich have access to procedures and medicines today and the very poor don’t. However, in a properly functioning system, that access and those prices will move in favor of all people. If we break that system, those procedures and those medicines may NEVER be created to begin with.
And THAT would be a tragedy.
I think Romney has a real argument to make about economic competence. Barak Obama has failed to meet his own 3 year goal of turning around the economy . I have not yet found a good example of companies that Mitt Romney turned around, but his turn around of the 2002 Winter Olympics is a pretty good statement of his management skills .
Mitt should just continue to hammer Obama on the slow growth economy . Let Republicans in Congress hammer Barak on Solyndra and Fast and Furious . Everyone can rip him on the keystone pipeline .
reflectionephemeral
” Bush is the food stamp president, who waged a vicious, merciless assault on free market capitalism. ”
” No one who supports capitalism should vote Republican for decades. ”
America took your advice in 2008 and look how it turned out . Whenever Americans get really angry at Republicans they vote stupid just to teach the GOP a lesson . We’ll show you, we’ll screw ourselves. Voila, Carter and Obama .