Why it's bad to have a Vulture Capitalist as President (unemployment, voting)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OP, perhaps you could provide a skelaton summary of the argument. I don't feel like spending the time to read this fairly lengthy article, part II of a three part effort, at least without having a clue as to the writers credentials or whether he has a promising argument. If it's just partisan tripe ("Republicans are good job killers"), I'll pass.
When it comes to jobs, the case for Romney is pretty simple to me. Pres. Obama wants to give the public sector ever more responsibilities, while Romney wants to shrink it.
In other words Obama wants to take us in the direction of the European model, where 8-10 pct unemployment has been the norm for many years. A public sector job can only exist by drawing a little blood from multiple private sector jobs (so to speak). So the more public sector jobs there are, the more impairment of private sector jobs, and the weaker the private sector job market generally.
While I am not voting for Romney, it has nothing to do with his former affiliation with Bain Capital or Venture Capital.
Senesta is a global company and employs about 3800 ( non- manufacturing) people in the greater Boston area. Most of its manufacturing has been and will continue to be done in Asia because it's not cost effective to do so in the U.S. and their customer base is global.
I have no doubt that Illinois will create tax incentives to retain the 175+/- manufacturing jobs in Freeport, Illinois and in doing so, redistribute wealth to retain these jobs. This kind of reaction is not sustainable in the long run.
The situation has nothing to do with Senesta or Bain Capital and all to do with the decades long errosion of manufacturing jobs in the U.S. No President or program is going to reverse this trend.
Romney has only been successful in creating wealth for a small group of people. Himself and share holders. Every decision he has made as a businessman involves getting rid or jobs to improve the bottom line. He run America just like a business except the share holders won't be the American people.
Romney has only been successful in creating wealth for a small group of people. Himself and share holders. Every decision he has made as a businessman involves getting rid or jobs to improve the bottom line. He run America just like a business except the share holders won't be the American people.
True! Romney made money at the expense of other people, not because of ingenuity.
This same method of operation, if practiced by a president, would sell of America bit by bit to the highest bidder.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
