What's with Ann Romney addressing us as “You People?” On July 19, presumptive GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's wife, Ann, while reinforcing her husband's refusal to make public several years of tax returns, told ABC News “we've given all YOU PEOPLE need to know” about the family's finances. She went on to further denigrate us people by stating that “You know, you should really look at where Mitt has led his life, and where he's been financially.” Duh ... That's why we are asking for full disclosure on his finances, Ann.
Us people would really like to know more about where Mitt has been financially. We know that his money has been off-shore and in Swiss banks. We know that he has perfected the art of “Vulture Capitalism” by taking over companies, breaking them up, stripping the assets, flushing the liabilities and shipping jobs overseas. We know that he owns really big homes on large bodies of water and has, at least, one jet ski. Smile. What we don't know is why he won't step up like his father George did in 1968 and allow transparency regarding his personal income tax returns. What is he attempting to hide? If nothing, then what's the point? Maybe Ann said it all!
This isn't the first time those from the Right have used the words “you people” to address us peasants. I personally remember several occasions in my life where those two words were used to address myself and others even though they knew us on a first-name basis. It's as if we are being talked down to ... treated as a class of people ... impersonal, etc. I found it to be rude, tasteless, insensitive and, frankly, insulting.
Has Ann Romney unwittingly opened the gate to the mindset of her husband Mitt? Is the real reason that he won't release his tax returns that he simply doesn't believe that us people would understand or be able to relate to where he has been financially and, therefore, we would misunderstand his business dealings?
I'm not sure that we want a king for a president. I don't believe that his ability to make and hoard money translates into us people having more money. I'm real sure that he's not sharing any of his money with us people!
The insight that Ann Romney has offered into how they see us people may prove invaluable to Team Obama. Don't forget, Ann, that even peasants in this country have as many votes as you -- one! See ya in November.
mnjcpa posted at 8:06 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
We already have a `king` for president Jon - the one that circumvents the constitution at every turn.
What Ann was referring to was Obama's handlers - the pathetic media who are nothing more than a tool for the Obama agenda.
The Romney's started out just like you - get over yourself that you weren't able to do anything with the same freedoms that were given to you and all you have to say about yourself is being a recalled mayor of Fountain Hills.
mnjcpa posted at 8:24 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
This alleged `controversy` is a giant smokescreen to take everyone's eyes off of the real problem - the Obama economy.
Every time I see an ignorant comment like Jon's it makes my blood boil. There's NOTHING in those tax returns that would make any difference. The IRS is at his doorstep on a routine audit every 3 years, and he would have to be the dumbest person in the world to put aside his wealth to run for office and whose history is squeaky clean. That is of course until Obama's slimy media correspondents get a hold of them to make something out of nothing.
If you want to know if he was compassionate - the only thing on those returns that would reveal that would be charitable contributions. And we already know he was hands down better than Obama and Biden. So the only thing left would be foreign investments. Are you even slightly aware that foreign investments are important to ANYONE that does any investing at all to have a portfolio that's balanced - including middle class taxpayers. I own them myself.
I guess you forgot all of the investors Mitt made money for, or the businesses that were saved and employees kept their jobs. You see Jon in the real business world, some businesses shouldn't be saved. The problem is the economy Jon. Your guy has a ZERO success rate - Romney's was over 70% at Bain.
Good for Ann dismissing those slimeball journalists. They have NOTHING so they're trying to create controversies.
Arizona Willie posted at 8:27 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
No no no no ... mnjcpa ... Mitt Romney did NOT start out just like us.
He had millions of dollars in trust funds the day he was born.
He never had to depend on a paycheck to pay the rent.
He never worried about being laid off.
His being born wealthy is not his problem.
His problem is what he did with the company he founded Bain Capital, using his inherited money.
He made more fortunes by busting up companies and selling the parts with no regard to the effect it had on the people who worked for that company or the community where it was located.
He defined vulture capitalism.
And, he says we should elect him because of his business acumen and then refuses to be transparent about his past tax returns that possibly show he lied about not being in control of Bain during certain years. He doesn't want to take the blame for what his company did. He happily took the money and stashed it in foreign countries to avoid paying taxes though.
Not the kind of person I want to be President.
mnjcpa posted at 8:43 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Yeah, yeah, AZWillie.......we definitely want to keep someone that takes us over the economic cliff. That's a smart strategy. You do realize don't you that when that happens those fat pensions that Big Labor promotes will be redone don't you? How anyone could vote for Obama again when you examine the statistics are beyond me.
Bain Capital's reputation is sterling in the financial community. There were thousands of people affected by their success, and your limited understanding of the free market gets in the way. You don't save something like GM just to save out of touch, out of reason pensions. Just like we saw in Wisconsin.
You wouldn't understand this because you're one of those angry Big Labor proponents that think it's perfectly okay to bankrupt companies to get yours - even when it's unreasonable and out of touch.
Mitt came by his wealth honestly. And I suspect there's a whole lot of people like me that feel the same way come November.
Cerulean posted at 10:16 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
“we’ve given all YOU PEOPLE need to know” Ann Romney
mnjcpa, The charitable donation that Mitt favors most, after the LDS church, is the Tyler Foundation. Who does the Tyler Foundation support? The LDS church, the Bush library, Harvard Business School and $20,ooo for Homes for Our Troops.
Here in the U.S. even peasants get to vote and I know that I will vote for the one who is ‘of the people and for the people’ – Barrack Obama.
chuckles3 posted at 10:21 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Hmmm...way to start a nothing controversy. Fact is, Ann never said "you people" based on analysis by ABC, hardly a "right wing' news source. And, she was referring to the media, not us folks.
We already know who you are voting for, why do you need to know more about a non-issue? Lets talk about the economy.
In fact, here's a quote from our Dear Leader:
“It shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican issue,” Obama said. “America is not just about you people doing well. America is about everybody doing well.”
Wait, he said 'you people"! Insert false outrage here.
A King for President? You mean the guy we have, who by Executive fiat has bypassed Congress on Welfare work requirements and immigration ? You know, laws, they passed ?
mrconservative posted at 10:30 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Yeah, Jon, we'll see you - your pal O-blamo will be packin' his bags starting on November 7th. If not, well, O-blamo may very well be the last president this coutry ever has, because it will no longer exist after another four years of this failed presidency.
mnjcpa posted at 10:50 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Cerulean - is that same person that is of the people and for the people the same one where minority unemployment is staggering - 15-40% in many cases? Just what about the `people` does that help?
I donate to charities of my choice too. If it helps people less fortunate then why do you or your media sycophants decide if that's appropriate or not. It's disgusting where this administration has taken us. Obama's only business experience was with known felons before taking office and he's proven he doesn't have a clue how to run the US economy.
But your inability to do anything with the freedoms given to you you're going to double down and vote for the same thing that has created this economic nightmare just because the media portrays Obama as some warm, compassionate man of people nonsense. No wonder we're in trouble.
Cerulean posted at 12:48 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
mnjcpa, Barack did not create this economy. I know Republicans are ecstatic to give the unemployment problem to President Obama. This is the Republican rhetoric, “Government does not create jobs business creates jobs and when is the President going to create jobs”
Here are some of the things President Obama has done.
• Obama has overhauled the food safety system
• Advanced women's rights in the work place
• Ended Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) in our military
• Stopped defending DOMA in court.
• Passed the Hate Crimes bill.
• Appointed two pro-choice women to the Supreme Court.
• Expanded access to medical care and provided subsidies for people who can't afford it.
• Expanded the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
• Fixed the preexisting conditions travesty [and rescissions] in health insurance.
• Invested in clean energy.
• Overhauled the credit card industry, making it much more consumer-friendly.
• While Dodd-Frank bill was weak in many respects, it was still an extremely worthwhile start at re-regulating the financial sector.
• He created a Elizabeth Warren's dream agency: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
• He's done a lot for veterans
• He got help for people whose health was injured during the clean-up after the 9/11 attacks.
http://obamaachievements.org/
All of that plus Michelle planted an organic garden at the White House - YEAH!
mnjcpa posted at 1:05 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Not one of the things you mentioned have created jobs. What it has done is waste a great deal of taxpayer dollars and the regulations you speak of have only harm businesses. All its done is further embedded liberals in government, none of which puts a single dime in to American's pockets.
Oh but yeah - an organic garden - that's the ticket! That's forward progress!
Bizarre - we really do live in different worlds.
Cerulean posted at 1:39 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
mnjcpa, for now, all I can say is that no recent regulation has hurt corporate profits. For the past three years corporate profits have been higher than at any other time. The first quarter of 2012 corporate profits were up 13 percent. How does that reflect in the U.S. jobs market? I hasn't.
Dale Whiting posted at 1:59 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Now, now boys, calm yourselves down.
Whether Ann was referring to the press or to the voters at large, the phrase "you people" whether spoken by her or others can appear to be demeaning. And with all that money offshore, Ann needs to learn to sound more friendly.
I'm waiting for a reasonable explanation of why Mitt and Ann are not willing to voluntarily disclose more about their finances. But I'm not holding my breath.
Too bad Jon Huntsman could not hang in. I'd much rather see an Obama-Hustsman contest that an Obama-Romney contest. Huntsman has more credentials that does Romney. He just did not have the name recognition. 2012 will prove to have been Romney's turn. If he fails, perhaps 2016 can be Huntsman's.
mnjcpa posted at 2:18 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
You're talking about public companies, which represent a teeny percentage of the economy - less than 1%.
I deal with thousands of small business owners every year that have revenue in the $5 million - $100 million range. In the Obama economy, these folks - who don't have big outlandish pensions like government or union employees have literally been crucified in the Obama economy. Many have lost if not all of their net worth and a large portion and are dependent upon their businesses to fund their retirement not to mention their lack of confidence in hiring.
Of course you don't hear those stories. If you're listening to the main networks then you're not going to hear it. But if any business owner had doubts, all they had to do was hear Obama clearly for what he believes when he went off teleprompter in Roanoke. I've never seen him backpedal, but he knows he stepped in it. He wasn't taken out of context - his words and his body language showed exactly what he felt about businesses. I believe it is purposeful and intentional. He was raised by communists, never held a job other than government, and his best practice in business was with known criminals. But the best proof is his record. I respect your idea that those `accomplishments` are important - but I and a great deal of country aren't in agreement with those decisions.And even in the face of the fall 2010 elections, he had an opportunity to change direction and instead doubled down. That's arrogance in my world.
My bet is people don't care near enough as much about `don't ask don't tell` or organic gardens, and a whole lot more about whether they can care for their family and keep their homes. I would invite you to consider a different point of view rather than holding on to the same tired liberal dribble.
mnjcpa posted at 2:47 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
I'll tell you why Dale. Because all it is is fodder for the media that try to pass themselves off as journalists. The same ones who accused the murderer in Colorado to be part of the tea party. What so they can decide if he is fair or not? There's no way he's hiding anything - the IRS audits his returns routinely.
Many people keep their money off-shore for asset protection. It's due to the number of lawyers that any ne'er do well will sue you if they think you have a dime. Many doctors I know do so because of ambulance chaser lawyers. All having an account off shore means is you're protecting your hard work and risk and even then, you're taxed on your worldwide income. Of course the media isn't going to convey that message because they no longer try to hide their agenda. They're doing their best to detract people from what the real problem is - the Obama economy.
Romney would have to be the biggest moron in the world to be hiding anything. Unbelievable given how little has been vetted about Obama.
Engaged Voter posted at 4:02 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
"Oh but yeah - an organic garden - that's the ticket! That's forward progress!"
Yes, it is.
But you were being facetious, weren't you?
Bizarre, indeed. Could "you people" please go find another planet to infect with your garbage, religion, etc - this one is all full.
Cerulean posted at 5:37 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
mnjcpa said, "I deal with thousands of small business owners every year that have revenue in the $5 million - $100 million range. . . . these folks - who don't have big outlandish pensions like government or union employees have literally been crucified . . .."
Some business, and the majority of households, have taken on so much debt that they cannot pay themselves a pension from their income. That is not President Obama’s fault. That is bad business decisions.
mnjcpa posted at 6:13 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Cerulean you're really showing your naivete. Business owners didn't make bad business decisions or go in to debt. They're a product of a horrible, stagnant economy where the focus hasn't been on growth and instead boondoggle liberal policies that are just as you outlined that have nothing to do with growing an economy. It's the result of an administration that's completely out of touch with the private sector and expected from someone that's never run a business in his life.
You bet it's Obama's responsibility. Big labor pensions have done quite fine, thanks to the tax revenues paid by these entrepreneurs.
November can't get here soon enough to get these yahoos out of office.
mnjcpa posted at 6:14 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Right back at you Enraged, excuse me Engaged.
Where in the world did religion make it to my comments?
StrongChristian posted at 11:07 pm on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.
Enraged Voter is actually a better name, or perhaps "Enraged-Voter/Atheist-who-hates-it- when-people-mention-religion-on-newspaper-websites."
Though that second one might be a tad too long . . . . [wink]
I know, I know, I'm only ASSUMING that you're an atheist, but you've yet to deny it, and you HAVE said that God is a myth. I'm only using your own comments to back me up. The way I see it, only an atheist would ever say that God is a myth.
God is NOT a myth. He is very real, EV. Someday you will admit it. Not today, perhaps. But someday, you will (No, that is not a threat. It is merely a fact.).
And I've forgiven you for your hatemongering, EV. God bless you.
Cerulean posted at 8:30 am on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
mnjcpa wrote, “Many have lost if not all of their net worth and a large portion and are dependent upon their businesses to fund their retirement not to mention their lack of confidence in hiring.”
To blame President Obama for a business that lost all of their net worth in the past three years is stupid! If a business person depends on their business to fund their retirement and they blame President Obama for not supporting that dream – that is just fantasy.
If you support Romney because he is a member of your clan, fine. You should just say so. That, would be more believable.
“And even in the face of the fall 2010 elections, he had an opportunity to change direction and instead doubled down. That's arrogance in my world.”
Is your point that President Obama doubled down on a health care reform bill? That passed! Therefore, he is arrogant.?
In my opinion that is small of you.
Cerulean posted at 10:19 am on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
And, if giving money to the LDS church is charity, then we need to redefine what charity means.
mnjcpa posted at 3:39 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
What are these constant rants from liberals about people's personal faith choice? No, I'm not a member of the LDS but since when is that anyone's business and it has NOTHING to do with a sputtering economy.
Cerulean you're so out of touch with the life of an entrepreneur I don't even know where to start. If you don't get the connection between policy choices by the government and how that impacts private sector business, I would invite you to start reading the Wall Street Journal to learn something about it. Because policies undertaken by the government have EVERYTHING to do with the monetary system and economics which directly impacts small businesses.
You're all proud of those so called accomplishments of Obama's but not only do I disagree with most of those choices but they are a misdirected vision of what the MAJORITY of the country wants. That's a decent shot at retirement and a home for their families. Obama has crucified small business. I'm sorry for you that you're so oblivious to their pain.
Engaged Voter posted at 3:47 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
Aww, how cute! The "morally superior" StrongChristian, who fled like a dog with his tail between his legs when I exposed his lying rants, is back, and with all new juvenile insults! Yippee!
"And I've forgiven you for your hatemongering, EV."
New insults, but still the same old filthy lies. Not surprising, but still pathetic.
"The way I see it, only an atheist would ever say that God is a myth."
The way you see it? Is that how ALL uneducated idiots see it?
"MYTH (noun) - an imaginary or fictitious thing or person, or a thing or person with no verifiable evidence for its existence"
The way I see it, anyone with an education and knowledge of what the word MYTH means would say this...or lie, their choice. So now, StrongChristian, that you know what the word MYTH means, you will either have to admit your god falls into that category, or lie some more. (gee I wonder which one you'll choose LOL)
"Someday you will admit it. Not today, perhaps. But someday, you will"
I will tell you the same thing I told the other cowardly Christian snake who threatened me...take your superstitious threats and shove them up your mother.
(I hope that offended you as much as your weasel threats offended me)
Arizona Willie posted at 5:57 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
Mitt Romney reveals his incompetence for all to see.
Britain calls Mitt worse than Sarah Palin ... and they are right.
http://tinyurl.com/cyzjeju
mnjcpa posted at 5:59 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
Cerulean I missed commenting to your last point about the 2010 elections. The ones where it was a landslide victory for the Republicans? Obama missed that message.
Clinton understood bad results in the mid-terms elections that he needed to retreat to the middle because the public was trying to tell him something. Obama ignored it. And since this column is about the Ann Romney's faux snottiness that's really Beydler's insecurities, I'm not going to go off on the zillion reasons that Obama ignored that mid-term message.
Barack Obama exists only as the sock puppet of his handlers - Big Labor and George Soros - people who have maneuvered and manufactured this pathetic individual's life.
Arizona Willie posted at 6:02 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
mnjcpa ... I don't think Mitt intentionally covered anything up in his old tax returns.
At the time he had no idea he would be running for President and want to distance himself from the actions of his company.
So he probably factually listed himself and CEO of Bain during years when he now denies being CEO.
That's why he doesn't want to reveal his tax returns.
They possibly show him to not be telling the truth about not having control of Bain.
mnjcpa posted at 6:50 pm on Thu, Jul 26, 2012.
AZWillie - That's a fine piece of investigative journalism on the link you provided. You might want to take notice of the subheading of the website `Real Liberal Politics`. This is another liberal hack site devoted to the very vile things they accuse conservatives. You're right in there with the likes of NBC and ABC.
I've explained this tax return business so many times in this column that my fingers are worn to the nub and you still don't get it. His personal taxes have NOTHING to do with Bain. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I'm sorry to say you're really showing your ignorance in business matters.
You're either ignoring my previous comments or you're another zombie. Could be all you got is attempting to demolish Romney, so I get it.
Arizona Willie posted at 7:44 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
mnjcpa ... because something is reported on a liberal website doesn't make it false.
As it happened I walked out in the living room to tell my owner and she said she had just heard something about that too and she had the TV on ABC.
And I will tell you over and over and over that Romney's tax returns MIGHT have a lot to do with if he lied or not.
He claims to have had no control over Bain but he was reported as CEO and sole stockholder on SEC forms during the period when he claims to not have been in control.
That makes him appear to be lying.
IF he filed his taxes for those periods and declared himself to be CEO of Bain then that would be proof that he did indeed consider himself to be in control during the times he claims he wasn't.
You need to do something about your mindless worship of the rich.
mnjcpa posted at 8:03 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
Are you delusional Willie? You and your liberal friends hypocrisy is galling. ABC lost any notion of `journalism` a long time ago and I see them for the hacks that they are. Please don't post things as truth, when its obvious that all it does is prop up a political opinion.
I don't have a mindless worship of the rich. It's more about supporting the real producers of this country - not people who risked nothing and expect everything.
You and your journalism aka hack sites have nothing and they know it. How do I know? Because I've worked in the tax field for 20 years. It's complete and total BS. But when you've got an incumbent that has the worst record in presidential history, I don't blame you for trying.
Cerulean posted at 8:37 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
mnjcpa, If you were to provide specifics about what President Obama could or should have done that would have prevented every small business person from cruci-fiction, then your argument would have substance.
BTW, I am not sure of the exact numbers (I will look it up for a later day), However the small percentage of publicly traded businesses are, the percent of jobs they represent in the economy is much larger.
mnjcpa posted at 9:44 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
Cerulean - I appreciate your questions. It's a common misperception that people have about public companies. A good place to get these statistics are the Small Business Administration. http://web.sba.gov/faqs/faqIndexAll.cfm?areaid=24
Our firm just did a survey of over 200,000 business owners across the US and the conclusions were over 95% of them are frightened, as they should be if Obama gets reelected. Fear creates a lack of confidence. Lack of confidence means you don't hire, you don't borrow, you don't grow. When everywhere they turn they're vilified by Democrats do you expect them to feel any different? The damage that liberalism has done to small businesses is insidious.
All Dodd-Frank has done is thrown costs back to the middle class. Not ONE of the accomplishments you listed of Obama did a single thing for a business owner. Obama and his handlers are replicating the mortgage crisis fiasco right now forcing banks to give mortgages to minorities with risky credit. Democrats are the one that started the mortgage mess - not the banks.
Need I mention the vilification of people that make over $250k a year? Do you not understand that most of these people are small business owners that don't have ridiculous, out of touch lifetime pensions? Their business HAS to be the vehicle to get them even close to the same retirement benefits as someone like AZWillie that was stylin` at 53 with a lifelong union pension when he had NOTHING at risk.
Please open your eyes Cerulean. I"m not saying Romney's a messiah. But his business experience is sterling. He understands a free market better than anyone. Pick up the Wall Street Journal today and you'll find that growth this quarter was a measly 1.5%. And when you compare Obama's performance to Clinton - who I actually liked - here are the results:
Business taxes Under Clinton - CUT Under Obama - RAISE
Food stamps down $2 billion Up $40 billion
Gasoline Stayed even at $1.22 per gallon Up 91%
Household wealth Up 42% Down 35%
The corruption of the American dream has never been more clear than now. The Obama administration has been nothing more than a massive skimming operation to create a giant dependent class. This galls me and I would hope you open your eyes to this nonsense.
Cerulean posted at 10:35 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
mnjcpa, A retirement plan takes three times longer to build as the time one expects to be retired. The problem with retirement plans is that people do not contribute to them. 50 percent of the population have $30,000 or less invested in a retirement plan. They are depending on Social Security or business opportunities that may or may not be there to tide them through. The nature of business, and everyone in business knows that nothing is guaranteed, not even a union negotiated pension.
“95 percent are frightened” of what, exactly? You see, mnjcpa, I do not trust you. You are dishonest.
mnjcpa posted at 11:52 am on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
I'm honestly trying to answer your question.
You're wrong about the union pensions – they’re binding contracts. What you're referring to are employee private pension plans - a business owner is quite different.
Every day they have risk. They borrow money, employ people, or are hounded by the IRS or other government agencies with the hope that one day they can sell it and get a decent return on the risk they took. That's evaporated in the Obama economy.
What were the 95% frightened of? Here are a few of the questions and answers -
Do you plan to hire over the next year? 95% said No if Obama was reelected.
Do you plan to invest in capital equipment or expansion over the next year? 95% said No if Obama was reelected.
There were another 10 questions about their business, but overwhelmingly they reported their fear of a Obama reelection. The truth hurts but rather than hurling insults as good liberals love to do, educate yourself better.
Cerulean posted at 3:18 pm on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
mnjcpa, I said “a union negotiated pension.” Many times, private companies negotiate with union representatives within the company to arrive at a fair pension or 401K matching plan. There may be a contract, however if the company dissolves, contracts can and do change. Nothing is guaranteed, not even contracts within a union – everything is subject to change.
I am not wrong.
Your survey is a tea party, right wing opinion slur.
mnjcpa posted at 4:45 pm on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
You still don't get it. Small business owners don't get ANY guarantees, or any retirement if their business isn't successful. And they have ALL of the risk.
The survey was done on an independent study of businesses - with unknown political preferences - that purchase property and casualty insurance. There's no way to understand their political persuasion because that insurance is required of all business owners.
It's really sad when people like yourself bury their heads in the sand. How can you possibly be so close minded in the face of an appalling 1.5% GDP in the second quarter.? Then I give you a direct link to the SBA website confirming that over 90+% of employment is by small businesses. And when you put both of those together......yeah....it's got to be a right wing conspiracy.
What a fool.
fae4now posted at 11:05 am on Sat, Jul 28, 2012.
Interesting thread here folks. And for the most part an honorable discussion. Save for the gutter dwelling Chuckles and the fanatical Christian it appears you have driven the Trolls back under the bridge! Celebrate!
Cerulean, it is important to note that if a company dissolves any union contracts don't simply change - they dissolve along with the company! And that is in no one's best interest - the company, union, worker or the public, and I suppose we should add the government too.
Not sure if Bain Capital ever 'invested' in a company with a union but when he (Romney or his representative, because we all know he wasn't really in charge of anything other than cashing the checks) dissolved some of those companies I understand that anything of value, including worker's pensions, went into his pocket. The 'liability' of the company shifted to the 'asset' column of Romney. Perhaps I'm wrong. I do watch those cable news channels. I wonder though if a union contract could have protected those pensions for the people who worked for and counted on them?
And while they may have been perfectly legal such actions are morally wrong. You see mnj, there's no column for 'integrity' on a balance sheet!
fae4now posted at 12:31 pm on Sat, Jul 28, 2012.
Now mnjcpa, I come in peace but I must take you on on these subjects of small business and risk.
Would you be so kind as to give a specific example of a regulation that can/will crucify (your word) a small business? For the sake of education, not argument please.
I sympathize with the loss of net worth or diminishing prospects of return on investment for small business owners but they are no different from the rest of us. Their uncertainty is everyone's uncertainty. Retirees have no certainty and have seen their net worth deteriorate. Nor does the soon-to-graduate-with-a-load-of-debt college student see prospects of a bright future.
While I understand that minimizing risk is good business it seems to me businesses these days want, from our government, too-big-to-fail type guarantees. And those are not to be had. Risk is the name of the game. If one is unwilling to risk, perhaps one should not go into business.
And what of the firefighter, the miner, the teacher or the construction worker? Are they not risking something when they go to work each day? Perhaps their very lives? Not all risk is financial.
Even the pencil pushers and don't-get-my-hands-dirty management types like me risk our futures, investing our careers and hoping that the business owners we work our tails off trying to make a profit for make wise decisions to sustain their businesses. It is sometimes more frightening to be the passenger than the driver.
Your frustration in making your points stems from, in my opinion, taking too narrow a view of the issues. Raise your head above the crunching of numbers to hear the sounds of life beyond small business. Were we a 'one note' nation with a singular focus of small business success and fiscal responsibility your points would all be perfectly on point, correct and well received.
But unlike a business whose sole function is to produce a profit (aka Romney) a government leader (aka Obama) must consider the well being of an entire nation of, in this case, 300,000,000 people, only a small percentage of whom I suspect are small business owners.
Which, by the way, makes Ceruleans list of Obama accomplishments completely valid. [wink]
mnjcpa posted at 1:22 pm on Sat, Jul 28, 2012.
Hi again fae4now – I liked your comment to Cerulean on the pensions. The IRS and Dept. of Labor govern qualified plans, so they get rolled over in to other qualified plans. Those federal departments would have been down Bain’s throat if they fooled with people’s pensions.
I think what you're saying is that through creative accounting Mitt was taking advantage of those employees. But why when those employees had ZERO at risk? If you purchase a home, borrow money from the bank, fix it up, and sell it - do you owe your profits to the people you paid to remodel it? Of course not. Your money was at risk – there’s wasn’t. They were paid for their work. There’s nothing insensitive about that at all.
But this is exactly what you're complaining about Mitt and Bain. Wouldn't it also make sense for those employees to share in the LOSSES of the companies that didn't work? Of course not, but they also have zero claim to anything further than what they received - a salary and benefits.
When someone owns a business they have their personal money and credit on the line that employees never have to worry about. If those employees put up their own money by all means they should share in that wealth. Otherwise you lose me on the debate.
Bain probably didn’t have companies with unions, because those companies CANNOT run profitably. Romney was accountable to investors. It's why you see jobs outsourced or to right to work states. No one is being a meanie, it just doesn’t make economic sense to pay outlandish pensions from the early 50's equating to multiple millions over a lifetime. It's unrealistic in a global economy. People in the public sector and union positions should retire like everyone else in the private sector – 65-70 years old. But try to talk to someone about this is like Dennis Miller recently described as `running in to an angry raccoon in the alley`. Talk about `fairness`, because being reasonable doesn’t work with these people like we saw in Wisconsin. And the taxpayer is paying it!
What you may have missed is the thousands of jobs Bain saved, improved, and grown – a 70% success rate. The Olympics was a financial nightmare too, and he turned that around. Contrast that with Obama’s ZERO percent success rate, and the choice to me is clear if we’re going to get out of this sinkhole.
mnjcpa posted at 1:42 pm on Sat, Jul 28, 2012.
Hi again Fae - We must have posted at the same time!
When the employees put their personal money on the line, just like I described in my previous post of your refurbishing a home - then you'll have me on the debate. I'm not shortsighted at all.
Employees get paid for services and they can leave at anytime they want, whenever they want. Everyone works hard these days. But that doesn't mean the ones that put their personal money on the line owe others for the risk they took.
Numbers aren't everything but with $40 billion in food stamps and unemployment at staggering levels I think makes it pretty conclusive that it's very important. And those `accomplishments` that Cerulean pointed out. Not a one of them I consider an accomplishment and considering the fall 2010 elections were a landslide in the other direction, so much for Obama considering everyone's opinion.
mnjcpa posted at 3:19 pm on Sat, Jul 28, 2012.
Fae - I didn't answer your question about how regulations have crucified businesses.
First, Obama made it abundantly clear to me how he felt about businesses from his `You Didn't Build That` snarky speech. He can back peddle all he wants, but business owners saw with the teleprompters removed who this guy really is.
These are not at all inclusive, but you'll get a sense of why I and many others like me believe he's anti-business. I believe he's intentionally trying to collapse the US economy.
• Obama’s first 3 years, 106 new federal regulations were added costing over $46 billion. Before August 2011, he proposed another 340 regulations costing $65 billion to businesses that are already struggling to create jobs. No other president has burdened businesses with a higher number and larger cost in a comparable time period. (resource: Wall Street Journal)
• Payroll taxes continue to increase, while the facts are shown that medicare is close to bankruptcy. 21 new taxes embedded inside Obamacare.
• Energy exploration non-existent under Obama’s regime and gasoline 91% higher since he took office. We would have never heard the end of it from Obama’s media sycophants if this happened under Bush. At the same time he encourages foreign countries produce oil gives taxpayer dollars to finance it!
• After pouring millions in to building a new plant in South Carolina, Boeing was stopped from building a plant specifically because it was a right to work state which means Obama’s big labor buddies weren’t paid off.
• GM bondholders lost millions but big labor and millionaire pension holders came out fine at taxpayer expense.
• Obama’s argument that the 1% don’t pay their `fair share’ is deceiving. Consider that most of these people own businesses. They already pay 35% - the highest corporate tax rate in the world. 30% of ALL tax revenues already come from these people – 50% pay NOTHING. Top earners that pay 39.6% are also paying state tax – in New York that’s 12%. So effectively, this group pays 85% in taxes and yet they're vilified for not paying their fair share.
* The tsunami of them all is Obamacare and if its not repealed the regulatory nightmare and costs will implode the economy.
Obama has disingenuously implied that conservatives prefer economic anarachy – free of laws, regulations, and fairness as if because I believe in a free market that means I oppose anti-trust or other rules that prevent unfair business practices. That’s absurd.
But to Obama, only the strong arm of the government gives equal opportunity, income distribution, and economic growth. What he doesn’t understand is OVERREGULATION is smothering the economy – NOT UNDERREGULATION.
He doesn’t discuss the disastrous effects of his own policies or of the unfairness of government choosing the winners and losers by fiat – with all the cronyism and corruption that goes with it.
I guess I am about the numbers. I care about whether people keep their homes and have a decent retirement. I just believe its the free market and private sector that gets us out of us - not some radical liberal extremist that plays to the fringe factors of society and creates a giant dependent class.