Joe revealed that Romney is supporting a $500 trillion tax cut - 500 trillion bucks. No way THAT math will work! I can't vote for Romney now. Thanks for opening my eyes, Joe!
Good ole' Joe. I think they call that a Freudian slip.
That's probably a mistake in terms of the figure (is there that much money in the world?), but I'm on Joe's side anyway; the fact that Romney as head and major shareholder of Bain Capital managed to put millions of dollars of people's pension funds in his own pocket and still managed to sleep at night is enough for me.
Bain was a "turn-around" company, called in when companies were failing. That usually calls for lay-offs to save the company, for example, better to lose 200 jobs than lose 500. I don't recall any evidence that pensions were denied the workers. Perhaps you could enlighten me. Thanks.
I heard a credible source today or yesterday say that 20+% of the companies under Romney's leadership were liquidated as he would have done to GM, Chrysler and possibly Ford as well.
Now Now !!!! Reality is - Ford never ask the government for help.
Ford could easily have gone under along with GM and Chrysler because of common, inter-related suppler relationships that would have been disrupted. Also, Ford benefited from the wage and benefit give backs from the UAW and others after they were negotiated by GM and Chrysler, thanks to the Obama bailout.
I think you have your timing wrong there Ralph. Ford was ahead of the game The CEO had negotiated the companies Debt long term and renegotiated the UAW contracts before the recession hit. The UAW givebacks in GM and Chrysler were modeled on what Ford had already done. Romney wanted GM and Chrysler to go through the same managed process that Alan Mullaly had managed to do (without going to Bankruptcy) via the Bankruptcy courts with certain Gov guarantees (warranties etc) which is essentially what they did after the first bailouts failed. Seems we could have skipped a Couple Billion dollar step there and done it right the first time.
I don't have my timing wrong. GM settled first on September 17, 2011, Ford second on October 4 and Chrysler on October 12 .
You are correct that Ford had wisely obtained a large ($24 billion) credit line before the financial meltdown. However, it also requested but did not receive additional funds from the government.
"Ford's Bailout Proposal
Ford requested a $9 billion line-of-credit from the government, and a $5 billion loan from the Energy Department. Ford pledged to accelerate development of both hybrid and battery-powered vehicles, retool plants to increase production of smaller cars, close dealerships, and sell Volvo. Ford is in better shape than GM or Chrysler because it had already mortgaged its assets in 2006 to raise $24.5 billion. Although Ford didn't need, and didn't receive any funds, it also didn't want its competition to get the upper hand thanks to the government bailout."
http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticals … ailout.htm
However, as I pointed out above, Ford would have been severely damaged if GM and Chrysler went into liquidation because of common supplier relationships.
Negotiations with Ford, GM and Chrysler were conducted pretty much simultaneously by the UAW. Here are reports of the settlements with each of the companies (GM settled first on September 17, 2011, Ford on October 4-2011, and Chrysler, October 12, 2011, Ford would have been unlikely to obtain all of the concessions in the absence of the pressure on GM and Chrysler from the Obama administration.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/04/news/co … /index.htm
You keep saying liquidation but that is not what Romney recommended, there is a significant difference between a managed bankruptcy and a liquidation. I also remember clearly that Alan Mullaly in testimony before Congress said Ford did not need a bailout.
Hey Habee been here, there, and everywhere. The Hatch act has me cooling my heels more or less. Couldn't help pushing a Ralph Deeds button. Sometimes just gotta do it! LOL and Hey
Ralph great to see you're still in good form. God Bless ya.
It turns out that Ford didn't need a bailout. However, as the article linked above indicates, Ford applied for federal money. Secondly, it's true that Romney didn't recommend liquidating GM and Chrysler, but that's what would have resulted without federal bailout money. Private financing simply wasn't available. I read somewhere that they were even rejected by Bain. Here's a link to an article in today's Detroit Free Press by the paper's leading financial/auto writer which summarizes the issue quite accurately and fairly. Please read it before you contradict what I've said! (I live in Detroit and I worked for GM for 34 years. I owned a small amount of GM stock and I followed the bailout quite carefully. Without having the government squeeze the UAW, bond holders, salaried employees and wiping out GM common stock holders Ford would never have gotten much in the way of concessions from the UAW, and would have been severely affected by disruptions in the parts supply chain as a result of a GM failure. Bottom line--Bush's and Obama's auto bailout saved an estimated million jobs.
http://www.freep.com/article/20121027/C … state-Ohio
"....As has been widely reported and repeated over the past several years, Romney contended that Chrysler and General Motors should have gone through managed bankruptcies -- which is exactly what ultimately happened in 2009 -- but that they should not have been financed with taxpayer dollars. Private money could have been used, he said.
"Most economic experts agree that no private capital on that scale was available during the credit-frozen days of the 2008 economic crisis. Romney said it could have been, if the federal government had guaranteed the loans...."
Ralph Not going to contradict what you said as it confirms very clearly what I have been saying, the first Bailout was a waste of time and money and Gm and Chrysler could have gone in to the managed Bankruptcy five months earlier and saved the taxpayers hundreds of million of dollars.
Have a great day.
I also should have added the gov could have done it with loan guarantees instead of the bailout and ultimately owning GM Stock. It's not the place of Gov to buy companies. Its the fine lines here Ralph that define the argument its not Liquidation its managed Bankruptcy. a Bailout is much different than loan guarantees. The very things Romney advocated are the things that ended up working. I really can't say much more with out stepping over some very defined lines for me but I can say that its the fine semantics like these that keep me from supporting either party. But the Dems in particular have turned in into a fine art along the lines of Mao and Lenin tell the big lie until folks believe it. Demonize your opponent make it personal if you can, especially if his ideas are better than your record, and as pointed out in the original content of this thread Vice President Biden is a prime Character in all of it. Have a great day Ralph love ya man.
An attempt at managed bankruptcy without government money would have resulted in liquidation and chaos throughout the industry. Government guarantees meant nothing because private money wasn't available. Remember? The government was bailing out the banks as a result of the housing fiaxco. Romney is dead wrong. I guarantee you that the people in Ohio and Michigan aren't drinking his cool aid. I agree that, as a general rule, having the government buy private companies is not a good idea. In this case it is working out well so far.
How do you feel about taxpayer subsidies to the oil companies, i.e., the depletion allowance which goes to some of the most profitable companies. And the "carried interest" loophole which allows hedge fund operators and private equity vultures like Romney pay capital gains tax on what would be ordinary income for anybody else?
If you are interested in amiable, honest discussion or debate you will acknowledge your error regarding the timing of the concessions from the UAW and other parties, including myself. There is room for honest disagreement over what would have resulted if Romney's recommendation of a bankruptcy workout without government financing, but not over some of your other misconceptions. If you want to discuss anything further with me, have the good grace and honesty to acknowledge your error when you are proved wrong.
Billions of dollars.
GM was losing something like $1.5 billion every month.
The bailout didn't work. The bailout was an attempt to save them from bankruptcy.
Best course of action... go through bankruptcy immediately(you're losing over $1 billion every month, the writing is on the wall). IF financing is needed an unavailable for the bankruptcy process, then have the government loan that money.
Taxpayers would have saved billions of dollars it will never see. GM would be stronger with actual restructuring that didn't favor unions. Don't give GM carryover losses from before the bankruptcy(that's such a crock, should never have happened).
The government messed up, big time. Romney was right, they weren't going to survive just because we gave them a couple dozen billion. Wasted money, and a worse outcome.
Some quick info on Bain Capital and pension funds, which shows some pension funds covered by government insurance and others not covered and therefore lost:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/2 … -with-Bill
More info about Bain's leveraged buyouts, this from Bloomberg.com, not exactly a hotbed of liberalism:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-1 … osses.html
The fact that Romney refers to "harvesting assets" shows his real thought process: not looking to save companies or jobs at all, but availing himself and his investors of assets, however that has to be done.
BTW, pension funds represent money already earned by workers through their labor, and shouldn't rightly be considered company assets.
Habee, OH no, he has Romnesia...thank God, Obama care covers that :p
I invite you to go take a look at Joe's verbal track record and consider it carefully.
He either talks like there is a pull string in his back or talks like he has no brain. Did you hear what he asked the father of the fallen Marine at Bengazi?
Joe Biden is the gift that keeps on giving in terms of gaffes.
Almost right, Romney helped him with the math! lmao...Heard that number from Romney so many times apparently Biden got tripped up! The real concern are the Republicans who believe it! LMAO
Well, Obama admitted on some talk show that he had trouble with helping his daughter with math, now that she was in Jr. High school.
Joe was in Ohio Thursday - He opened his speech with - (We feel your pain here in Iowa) - Smart Smart Guy
When I saw this thread in my email inbox I didn't know what to expect.
Having just seen Joe's powerful eulogy of McGovern I thought maybe you meant that.
It strikes me that anyone can be approved as a GOP candidate as long as they have never ever ever ever made any money at all int heir lives.
You know....like Warren Buffet.
Is someone using a new account to get around a forum ban?
Voting is a tossup between two bad choices. Obama scares me more then Romney. The indebtedness is truly horrendous. A senator from my state was on the committee to cure it, but it did not work out. Whoever wins has a job I wouldn't want. May the best man win!!!!
A lot of this indebtedness doesn't represent increased spending on Obama's part, but the fact that he added all the money we owe from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the list; the Bush administration didn't count that as part of the debt, but hid it. It's not an upswing in debt, but a more accurate account of what we already owed.
The bank bailout has been paid back, with interest.
I just feel better with Romney at the helm. I've watched Obama campaign for 4 years straight, he is too much into Obama. Obama sees America as an evil place where the citizens need protection, hence big government. Romney believes, as I do, in American Exceptionalism.
by Ralph Deeds 8 years ago
Romney apparently subscribes to the theory that if you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it.Todd Spangler in the Detroit Free Press "Romney auto ad ignores the facts--and industry job growth in U.S.The ad: Mitt Romney, on the campaign trail in Ohio, repeats a false story about Jeep...
by Ralph Deeds 8 years ago
Romney's Lie: Romney told a rally in Defiance, Ohio, that he'd "seen a story--that one of the great manufacturers in this state, Jeep, now owned by Italians, is thinking of MOVING ALL PRODUCTION TO CHINA."The truth: Chrysler is in the process of investing $500 million at a Jeep plant in...
by David Stillwell 8 years ago
As voters, Why are we excepting either Romney or Obama as presidential candidates for 2012.The argument over leadership and leadership abilities, lost job, jobs sent overseas, economic policy, foreign policy, national and foreign debt, national banking and international banking issues, has raged......
by Stevennix2001 6 months ago
I know the election isn't closed yet, but assuming Biden wins as it seems likely at this point, would you be opposed to Donald Trump running for president again in 2024, and if so, then would you vote for him? Please discuss.
by Dr Billy Kidd 9 years ago
From several exchanges, I learned why some people are voting for Romney. It is because Romney will launch a war against Iran. Generally, it is said that Muslims will attack the U.S. again. And that Iran will use nukes, maybe suitcase bombs. Muslim, socialist Obama won't stop it from happening.Now,...
by Man from Modesto 8 years ago
Do you research candidates before voting? How could anyone vote for Romney or Obama?I wrote articles about a local Modesto mayoral election in 2012. Though I was on the first Google results page for the biggest search phrases on Google (and there weren't too many!), only a few dozen read the...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|