jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (14 posts)

Did Mitt Romney and Bain Capital Pioneer Outsourcing?

  1. 0
    screamingposted 4 years ago

    Those considering voting for this "Job Creator (lol)" might need to rethink their decision! Under Bush 50,000 factories closed and we lost 1/3 of our manufacturing jobs. Bain outsourced American computor type jobs and call centers to countries like India and China under Romney's leadership. Bain is buying out a Japanese shopping channel which will create a lot of jobs. Jobs to help the American public? NO And just how much indirect monies supporting the Romney campaign are coming from China? You may be surprised. Happy voting!

  2. Cagsil profile image60
    Cagsilposted 4 years ago

    Outsourcing isn't a new concept. It been around for decades.

    1. 0
      screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      So Romney created jobs? Or did outsource most?

      1. Cagsil profile image60
        Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Created jobs? I remember hearing something about him creating jobs in Mass, but also cutting jobs at some company. Did both offset? I don't know.

        As for outsourcing jobs overseas? I could careless. I don't find that anything one singular company does to have an adverse effect or affect on the Economy.

        The Economy consists of all businesses which do business within America's borders, as well as, what other Countries do business in America.

        From what I am to understand is that the deficit in which the government apparently has no control over at this time, is based on government spending, government revenue based on taxes domestically and taxation on imports.

        Regardless of the taxation applied, it all goes to the consumer, which creates the pricing structure of the Economy.

        The taxation on domestic companies? Is it where it should be? Or should it come down? Or go higher?

        The taxation on foreign imports has a great affect and effect on how much imports will be coming into the country, because of pricing is so much based on supply and demand. Unfortunately, right now as it stand, the pricing structure in America is damaged because it's being manipulated to be a demand and supply network Economy. Why? Because profits must be maintained.

        Companies will only put out so much product, so the pricing can go up. They supply just enough for the demand of their brand of name product. Some companies have ventured into the land of letting other retailers re-brand their product.

        The other day I went to the store to buy a bag of potato chips and noticed that Lays has introduced a new size for a mid-range price, so as to offset lower sales. There's less in the bag and is $2.00, where as this particular bag didn't exist. The bigger bag has almost doubled in price, but not physically changed in weight. And the smaller bag which was $.50 is now $1.09.

        There's a serious problem with the Economy. What the public doesn't see is how Wall Street changes the playing field from equality and equal rights, to unlevel and skewed toward the wealthy.

        1. 0
          screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You're correct, on company might not have a big inpact on a countries economy. But we're looking at a potential President who impacted many Americans by outsourcing jobs to China and India. And now a company he still gets "Passive" income from, is at it again in Japan. And he's the guy to create jobs? In my opinion, I seriously doubt it.

          1. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            You're not looking at from a business perspective. You're looking at it from an individual perspective.

            If the government attempts to restrict(regulate) heavily on what companies can or cannot do, and impose unnecessary licensing fees and other BS, such as taxation, then the business is going to do what it needs to do to make a profit, while still giving society a product/goods or services.

            Yes, I understand that it not helpful that he really isn't interested in creating jobs here and as President of the United States, it could look bad, like he doesn't give a damn about people. He doesn't. He isn't for equality and/or equal rights. He wants to force society to conform, just like Obama is doing now.
            No he isn't. It's why he won't get elected.

            We already have a tyrant on our hands, we're not about to allow a religious tyrant at the helm.

  3. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    The Obama claim about Romney's outsourcing has received 4 pinocchios from WaPo's Fact Checker:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac … _blog.html

    Outsourcing under Obama:


    1. 0
      screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Spin it anyway you want, but Romney doesn't have a history of creating jobs. So I see no qualifications for him doing so as President if elected.

      1. PrettyPanther profile image85
        PrettyPantherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Stating facts is not spinning.

        I don't believe Romney's record supports his claim that he will create jobs as President, though.

        1. 0
          screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          What facts have been presented? Other then Faux news facts, which by the way Bain has interest in. Anytime a question is asked about Romney, many don't answer, they just go on attack at President Obama. All I ask isanswer the question. That is with an answer, not another question.

      2. habee profile image91
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Citing WaPo's facts is not spin. Do you not know the difference? The "spin," in this case, was from the Obama campaign, according to WaPo Fact Checker and Politifact.

        1. 0
          screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You answer a question with a question, avoiding Romney creating jobs or not? I say the way he flip flops on any policy he would bankrupt any business with his indecisiveness.Now I must ask you? Do you know the difference between answering the question before you without changing the subject? The forum refers to Romney not Obama. I can't make it any clearer!

          1. habee profile image91
            habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Are you having trouble with comprehension? The response I posted was in direct reply to the title of your forum thread: Romney's outsourcing. It's the TITLE of your thread. I didn't answer your question with a question. I answered with a link to the Washington Post.

            1. 0
              screamingposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Are you having trouble with comprehension? The title is part of the thread. Did you bother to read the rest of the thread? So you conveniently respond to a TITLE only? But conviently inject a comment of Obama? I didn't see anything in the thread about Obama.http://www.mediaite.com/online/washington-post-fact-checker-upgrades-mitt-romney-jobs-claim-to-3-pinocchios/