you see, being a business man qualifies you to be president just about as much as being an engineer qualifies you to be a doctor, and being an accountant qualifies you to be a scientist.

seriously. government is not in the business of turning a profit. you cant just come in, buy government low, lay people off, pocket their benefits, then sell high...

how short can people's memory be?! this guy is pretty much a carbon copy of the guy who got us into this mess. what a joke.

Capitalism works quite well for the wealthy. Romney made a lot of money at the expense of tax payers and the public. That is the status quo that the Republicans want to maintain and expand, grinding the middle class into poverty.

Of course! Bain Capital still got its millions, even though the tax payers had to bail out the pension plan.

Privatize the profits (zero taxes to be paid if the accountants are good), socialize the risk.

Sad you believe that. Decades of failed Republican economic serve the rich policies drove this country into the mess it's in. The one eight year break, President Clinton. And what happened when he raised taxed on the wealthy and stopped the Republican madness? A booming economy and a surplus.
Then came GW Bush returning to Republican economics which fits the definition of insanity. Keep doing the same stupid thing over and over expecting a different outcome.

This article reads like a professional journalistic hit on Romney. I'd like to see an unbiased review of these events.

SOCIALIST!

SOCIALIZE my risk. SOCIALIZE the company's pension. I keep the profits

Typical GOP BS. Socialize the risk and privatize the profits.

THAT is what is wrong with America. Not the unions. Not the taxes (other than being TOO LOW for the wealthy, but that is NOT the GOP's argument).

IT IS THE GOP's SOCIALIST ATTITUDES.

I echo a previous poster:

HYPOCRITE!

The current administration inherited this economy. The Republicans want to follow the same economic policies that did not work for Hoover when the country went into the Great Depression ..... cut spending and protect the incomes of the rich. This economy would be in much better condition without the continued resistance of Republicans to sound economic policies.

You have no idea what this did to the city, communities, families and people who worked there. I would never vote for that man.

Nothing new here, for those of us who have been conscious and aware since the 1980's. All romney is is a michael milken who HASN'T been caught yet. And, stealing pension plans? That's been business as usual since LONG BEFORE Oliver Stone featured it in his movie Wall Street - WORKER PENSIONS have been used as piggy banks by companies, with the cover of REPUBLICAN laws and REPUBLICAN judges since tricky dick was in office.

But ALL the republicans and their supporters HERE, apparently have NO problem with scumbags like romney stealing WORKERS' money that was to be for THEIR retirement, and to pocket this WORKERS' money for themselves. I guess they have some very interesting ideas as to who owns what property - NOT the people who put their hard earned money into these funds, but some fly by night scumbag with a good set of accountants.

p111, you realize that your facts are just a wee bit wrong. The first time the US really started deficit spending was under Reagan. Both Bush's also did nothing but deficit spending (Georgie Jr doubled the structural debt). under Clinton, he also raised the structural debt in the first few years but after a bipartisan tax deal worked out with Newt, a fair and balanced tax approach was worked out which was successfully paying down our structural debt.

When Jr Bush came into office, he tossed out that tax deal, gave the rich loads of tax breaks and gave the rest of us $300 for our troubles (thanks a lot Georgie!).

I have no desire to pay more taxes but I also have no desire to pay more and more interest on the structural debt. For that very reason, I fully blame the Republicans for their fiscal position throughout the past 30 years. Instead of working to cut programs or otherwise reign in spending, they just gave tax breaks which only benefited the rich. The trickle-down effect was minimal but the effect on our long term debt was dramatic and now we have nothing but interest payments that keep ballooning.

If you want to lay blame at anyone's door, start with the Republicans since they invented deficit spending.

Ah, the democrat muckrakers, after frantically targeting the previous GOP frontrunners, Cain, Perry, Gingrich have apparently concluded that Romney may be the likely nominee. Thus, their slurs and distortions will now be primarily directed at Romney.

Poor Slick Dick, there are none so blind as those who will not see.

You want an unbiased review - here you go. About 30 years ago Wall Street figured out you could buy these long standing, Successful, Slow Growth, profitable companies. You take them over by leveraging them up with Debt, firing employees and cutting every corner. Pensions were generally insured so if you waited long enough, you could raid the pension fund and cash out.

Same thing happened during the outsource boom, lure citizens to sleep with cheap goods, get them hooked and slowly raise prices.

However we are now feeling the effects of not producing anything sustainable, Immigrant Slave labor and Politicians on the money grab for constructed loopholes.

Bain did nothing original, they just rode the coat tails of what was already created, all you really need is a lot of money. It doesn't take any special skill, its all Lawyers, Bankers and CPAs, and poof! Company gone, thousands unemployed, lost pensions while a few profit.

Romney is nothing original, he says whatever it takes to get the job and you can bet once he's elected he will do whats in his and his buddies best interest.

Thats his record in business, Period.. He created nothing, he owned nothing, he just profited from Companies others had built.

This guy is not a business genius by any stretch and being a Wall Street raider is not a qualification for President of the United States.

RON PAUL 2012!

The UAW did pretty well being bailed out while other industries as well as our Space program went down the tubes...

It is time to admit that both sides of the isle are corrupt.

More koolaid anyone. Its the unions fault, its the republicans, its the democrats, its wall street. Blah, blah, blah. You are all fools, because they are all at fault. The whole system is broken and favors the extremely wealthy. Its very simple people... Follow the money. Who benefits from all this? Union bosses, republicans, democrats and wall street among others get the money while the middle class, working poor and taxpayers have to pay for it. Stop being blinded by the division and retoric and realize its a game for the wealthy and the rest of us pay for it and argue about who's at fault.

didnt romney/bain capital get a 10 million dollar govt bailout back in the 90's? God help us all if any republican wins the whitehouse this year.

Sounds a bit like the way the presidents friends at Goldman Sachs work! Doesnt it?

Wasn't it in the 70s' that some guy bought Eastern airlines and took there retirements and ran off with the money. Is that capitalism, I call it being a crook. A poor man steels a gal. of milk for his kids. Goes to jail for 20 years. A rich man stills millions of dollars and get to keep all he has stolen. Tell me again why we split off from England????? Capitalism just lets the rich get richer and all the time the working class gets to pick up the bill for the rich. Romney is no differend.

Wet Willy, you are funny!

Ah, the democrat muckrakers, after frantically targeting the previous GOP frontrunners, Cain, Perry, Gingrich have apparently concluded that Romney may be the likely nominee. Thus, their slurs and distortions will now be primarily directed at Romney.

In case you haven't noticed, most of the mud-slinging has come from fellow candidates, not from Democrats. There is no honor among thieves...

Mitt Romney's top campaign contributors:

Goldman Sachs $235,275

Citigroup Inc $178,450

Merrill Lynch $176,125

Morgan Stanley $170,350

Lehman Brothers $154,800U

BS AG $125,150

JPMorgan Chase & Co $123,800

Bain & Co $121,475

Marriott International $121,150

Bain Capital $118,550

Kirkland & Ellis $111,700

The Villages $110,900

Credit Suisse Group $104,900

Compuware Corp $103,550

Huron Consulting $102,050

PricewaterhouseCoopers $92,250

American Financial Group $87,550

Affiliated Managers Group $82,112

Cerberus Capital Management $79,450

Sun Capital Partners $77,850

THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER ???,???
Please don't let this Pathetic Lyin, flip flopper have any more of your money.

A couple of false statements made in the above comments.

The pensions of this and other companies were not bailed out by taxpayers. The PBGC is not funded by taxpayers. It is insurance funded by the participating companies/pension plans. It has government oversight to protect these pension funds, but no taxpayer funds are involved in paying funds that go belly up.

The UAW was not bailed out by the government. The UAW and it's members did not receive one dime of government funds. You may argue that the businesses like GM who has UAW contracts were bailed out by the government, but that is not the same thing at all. UAW members made many concessions in the process as part of the bailout agreements, but they didn't get a dime of taxpayer funds. And let me remind you that the automakers bail outs have turned out pretty well.

You can point some "blame" at the Union for the bailouts, but that would be a totally misguided, simple minded analysis of what transpired. The reason bailout agreements were made with these companies is because of the enormous number of other businesses involved that would have been destroyed had the auto companies been allowed to fold. You don't have to believe this, but if you have half a mind and can analyze the economics involved, you will see that this is true.

Did promised Union benefits have something to do with the troubles the automakers had?Absolutely, but so did mis-management and a failure by management to properly fund those benefits. Not so different than the case this article points out, except enormously larger. Remember, any wages or benefits agreed to with the Unions were not forced on anybody. They were agreed to and contractually promised. The fact that the businesses who agreed to it went back on their word is not the fault of the Unions.

The business owners, in the case of the article, stole those benefits and went back on their contractual agreements. Bankruptcy courts unfairly dissolve any contract with Unions automatically. Those contracts are thrown out of any consideration when it comes to splitting up any remaining assets to stakeholders. It's not right, but that is the way it is. Had the automakers been allowed to go into traditional bankruptcy without government intervention, the number of companies affected would have been in the tens of thousands and the number of employees affected would have been in the millions. But if you are blinded by a bias against the working man because he might be Unionized, I can see who you would be too stupid to really understand what happened.

It sounds like the republican ideology still want to punish the middle class and economic oppress for having elected Obama. What we need is to find the DNA molecule that makes GOP feel superior to rest of us and remove the defected DNA slip strand, so that we don’t pass it on to our off spring and we can save our country in the future.

It will be the greed of capitalist that destroy our world in the end

Hey Joe Speranzi,

What's your point?

I love all the fact based info above and I am sure there will be 15 pages of talking points after this page by the end all about mostly Obama this republicans that. I just want add that This started to get out of control years ago when

1. corporations were ordered by the courts to exist only for profit and no longer needed to prove it contributed to society to exist.

2. The historically stable top tax rate dropped from 90% to now below 18% effective.

3.The rush to privatize all aspects of society and destroy historically government roles has now skyrocketed the cost of every thing we use to survive to benefit the wealthy.

Pure unregulated Capitalism is carnivorous! A balanced approach preserves society!

Simplton: I would say not carnivorous, but cannibalistic.

gd vegas The point is Romney says one thing and does another. He could afford to give millions to help out the workers cheated out of their retirements. I bet you ten thousand dollars he won't.

So, Mitt gets the country, merges it with China, fires all the American workers, and jumps out with a healthy dividends check!

Go Mitt!

You guys realize he left the firm two years before this "bailout" happened, right?

He is still collecting pay and dividends from Bain Capitol to this day he is profiting from the suffering of these workers no matter how you look at it.

Steven, if you live in the United States, no matter how you look at it, you're benefiting from substandard labor practices in China and India. Does that mean you should be held morally culpable?

Alex

How about if we just reject the candidacy for President of of anyone who is participates in mistreatment of workers in any country?

Vote for new additions to the political lexicon....mine are: GOPeeps - the party line followers;

Repugnicrits - GOPeeps that accuse others without any substantiation of doing things they have a historical record of doing themselves, or who make promises they have no intention of fulfilling to get others to support the GOP;

And finally, Deadwhinyweight - elected GOPeeps, usually repugnicrits.

don,

We would have no presidential candidates, since anyone natural born citizen of this country that has reached the age of 35 has almost certainly purchased a product made by a mistreated worker and benefited from that by getting a lower price.

You make a silly argument. Romney directly abused workers and that puts him in an entirely different category from a shopper.

If you want to call someone who buys a product a "participant" feel free ..... just don't expect to be taken seriously. I try to be a responsible buyer, but I don't have the resources to examine the entire history of every product I buy.

Anybody that works for corporate American, unless they are the CEO, beware because the business model of these guys is "you play ball with me and I'll shove the bat right up your ass". They could care less about their workers and the workers "suffering". And that's the real problem with America, no unity. I got mine, f#%k you!! Until that changes anything we do as a country is like arranging deck chairs on the Titanic!! With unity we are doomed as a country. "a divided house cannot stand".

SSMIKE? Care to really look into which Pres bailed out which banks?? That would be Bushwhacked.... HE started the Walstreet bailout. Obama didn't do the banks. He only did some of the Auto companies so please blame the correct president.

Ron? Are you kidding me? This story was written very plainly and factually. It wasn't slanted toward Romney or against, just the facts. I suppose when one doesn't like the facts, then one can just say it is biased.

Bain made over 16 million on an 9 million investment by loading it with debt. That is was is so sick about these hedge funds. They seldom turn around a company. They generally load it with debt, pay themselves disgusting amounts of money, then sell it in parts or close it down. Nothing noble about it. Nor particularly smart. Just something people with a lot of money are able to do.

Union officials blame the Bain managers for saddling the company with too much debt for a capital-intensive, cyclical industry such as steel. "They look at ways to try to leverage the financial resources of the company during an uptick in the markets, stream money out of it and leave wreckage behind them," said the union's Foster.

This is the business model taught in America's business schools: maximize the shareholder's short-term value no matter what the long-term cost, no matter that the business ends up in the toilet.

American-style capitalism has benefited the wealthy at great cost to this nation. Unfettered greed will be our undoing. Corporate stupidity is killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

...and some want Romney to lead us out of this mess? Good luck with that.

Thank you, kaybeetoys!!

You've hit the nail on the head. You can lay the real blame at the feet of the Harvard Business School and Columbia Business School curriculums, that ever since the 1970's, have taught that mantra "Maximize shareholder value, and to hell with everything else". This was the foundation for the excesses of the 1980's and spawned the hell that is Wall Street now. You can thank those smarmy economics profs that kept repeating "The market will take care of itself", "free markets", "no regulation".

Saying 'they are all the same' is a talking point to cover up the fact that the repugnicrites have been caught at something.

It is what 'moderate sounding' repugnicrites say to avoid sounding like the sheeple zealots.

There is nothing more nasty to American working/middle class and un-wealthy people than the repugnicrite agenda.

Obama bailed out GM, laid off thousands, closed factories, and lowered wages. Democrats don't have a leg to stand on.

p11

Bailing out GM (and Chrysler) saved millions of jobs and almost all of the money has been paid back EARLY. Romney criticized the move, saying that the auto companies should go through bankruptcy proceedings instead ....... AND THE GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE RETIREMENT PROGRAMS FOR THE WORKERS.

I think that President Obama has better "legs to stand on" than your boy Romney. How many "closed factories" would result from the Romney Plan? Are lowered wages worse than no wages (and more folks on UNEMPLOYMENT ...... AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)?

All the GOP candidates are in the same club - the SOCIALIZE MY RISK club.

Obama is not. He is FOR the working man, not the SOCIALIST WEALTHY JERK!

Every time we prop up another failed business model we take money away from companies that know how to succeed. The government needs to get out of the way and let the market determine winners and losers. This is true for Republican and Democratically backed companies. Right now, both parties interfere and cost taxpayers billions each year - this needs to stop.

Keep a decent social safety net so nobody is homeless or hungry, but don't prop up failed businesses, and don't try and pick winners by funding startups (ex: Solyndra).

I was talking about both sides: Dems and Reps...."they" are all the same. Funny how it turned into party lines as usual though.

well, GM and Ford seem to being doing quite well.

And, as for your "let them fail" nonsense, it shows you really haven't thought thru the implications of your draconian solution. I suspect you'd in this case bring up the horse and buggy model, saying hundreds of thousands of jobs disappeared from the horse transportation industry because of the car, but we didn't try to save those. well, actually we DID, locally, but MORE importantly, those jobs disappeared over 40 YEARS. Go look at pictures of New York or Chicago or even LA as late as the END of the 1930's, you STILL see horse drawn wagons moving products, and even people, around those cities. The car and the truck didn't achieve total dominance until AFTER WWII. So all those horse related jobs disappeared, BUT, at a rate that the economy could ABSORB those who lost their jobs in that sector, over 40 YEARS.

Your "solution" for the auto industry, and romney's, AND the republicans, was to just let two of the big three go belly up all at once. The result - hundreds of THOUSANDS IMMEDIATELY out of work, with HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS more to come over the following months, ALL AT ONCE, in the MIDDLE of the WORST recession since the Great Depression. It would have been the TOTAL collapse of the industry, with follow on collapses in industries that serviced the auto industry, and I don't just mean dealerships and suppliers, BUT, all the businesses that did business WITH those suppliers and dealerships, and all the business those businesses EMPLOYEES did with other businesses and on and on and on. And it would have hit the banks, HARD, as business loans here there and everywhere suddenly went into default as dealerships and suppliers and the businesses support THEM went under.

And DON'T think that GM and Chrysler would have gone into bankruptcy and simply been reorganized and would have reemerged. Using your OWN economics against you, ron, at the point in time where GM and Chrysler went under, the numbers on companies emerging from bankruptcy had DRAMATICALLY altered. Starting mid 2008, the LARGE MAJORITY of companies going into bankruptcy, of ALL sizes, ended up being LIQUIDATED, you can check the numbers yourself. Before about June/July 2008 most businesses that went into bankruptcy came back out again. After that date, most were liquidated. And chances are very VERY good GM and Chrysler would have been liquidated, with the follow on results from above.

The result, ron, of your republican solution would have been MILLIONS more unemployed, tens of thousands of failed businesses and bankruptcies, a large number of bank failures, and an economy most like over the brink of total collapse. But the rich would have made out picking up the pieces and selling them off to the Chinese, so it would have been all for the best, right?

Jon-1123510

You mean investment firm used it's resources to squeeze out a profit from the working world with the end result being everyone losing their job, get out. Seriously though, if you think this would disqualify someone from being president then you need to look closer at the other candidates as well. I don't have a favorite, just saying they all are in the same "club." The idea that someone is above it is just naive.

--------------------------

It doesn't disqualify anyone. But if you are going around telling everyone that you know how to create jobs, it makes you a liar.

Jimm Mitt has created more jobs and signed the checks than obama ever has!Unless of course it was done with public sector money!Prove me wrong!

Ron your are just plain wrong. We support all kinds of business. What about the tax money that go to big oil and big farms and hell just about anything. The Government supports railroads, Airlines company's. Hell if we factor in to the price of oil what we spend keeping the oil flowing for the rest of the world, we Americans are paying over $ 100.00 a gal.

The airlines came into existence because the US Governement (in the form of the Post Office) supported them when they were a startup. We have a long history of government paving the way for the development of successful businesses and technologies, from the Lewis and Clark expedition to the creation of the Internet, yes... by legislation introduced by Al Gore.

I think you need to look again jon.

They bought the place, got it to make a profit, did re-invest to modernize, merged with another company to try to aid a shrinking profit from stiff competition, and eventually Failed.

The executive bailing was no help. Being he bailed in '97 and Bain pulled the plub in 2002? Taking 5 years to pull the plug showed patients by Bain. Taking 5 years to fail says the manager who bailed was only concerned for himself. Absent the adequet leadership, the company was going to fold.

yuk

ryoushi12, Coulda, shoulda, woulda. GM has not paid back all the money it used to keep GM afloat, as you and I are stock holders via USGovernment.

Obama used the bankruptcy route to murder GM jobs

He is raking in millions doing his fat cat crony's bidding.

Liberals lie.

Yea, p111, but with one difference:

GM is still a viable company, MAKING PROFITS!

Where's Mitt's steel mill now?

Obama did no such thing. HE DID THE RIGHT THING as opposed to Romney doing the WRONG THING.

ROMNEY IS A SOCIALIST!

You people all sound like party lemmings. Stop looking at party affiliation and start thinking for yourselves!

Nice, from someone who backs the republican line to the hilt, judging from the postings here.

I would imagine someone feels a story posted on an internet site might be read by people in other countries, but I could be wrong.

Then why not Eruo's, etc. Your answer is pretty lame.

Yes I can. Like you I was wondering why there was a conversion to pounds. A look at the top of the story shows it came from Reuters, a British news agency. That being said, why is a British news agency appears to be writing this story and not an American news agency?

and you don't think our news agencies do stories on British new items?

No, the only thing important is American news - and that is part of the problem.

Reuters has a huge presence in the US, just like the AP has a huge presence in countries around the world. That article may have been written by an American.

by WE, do you mean you and all the others who believe that profit, money & greed are the only things that matter and that anyone is not wealthy and works for a living is vermin?

That's right. You wouldn't want facts and data to interfere with your truth.

Wasn't GW a capitalist and how did that work out for the USA?

Yeah Obama is such a "commie" that the DOW is over 12,000 and job growth is expanding.

PJ

Here are a few facts that you will not want to get in the way of your truth:

400,000 factories were sold to Communist China during the Bush regime.

You are supporting 400 families as opposed to the 100,000,000+ families they leech off of(sorry about that horrible grammar).

Corporate Welfare & Corporate Entitlements are the true reason our budget is in such trouble.

What a joke you are.

Excuse me, but it's your Repuglicans that want to outsource/offshore all of our work to Communists! You and the GOP are a bunch of traitors!

Capitalist Bush/republican congress - 5% average unemployment, $230 billion average deficits

Socialist Obama/democrat congress - 9% average unemployment, $1.3 trillion average deficits

Facts trump liberal lies every time.

To p111. Unemployment January 2009 was 7.6%, NOT 5%.

Once President Bush and the administration holed the boat, they fled, leaving the American public to bail water and paddle for shore.

Business and government are fundamentally different institutions. If you believe that an MBA and a track record of business success qualify you to run government, than you should have no trouble believing that my Ph.D. in Music qualifies me to perform brain surgery, just because I am entitled to use the title 'Dr.'

nj,

p111 was talking about average unemployment...not the unemployment number as of a specific date. I'm not a GW supporter (I thought he was a horrible president)....I'm just clarifying p111's post.

Ron-1861300

Thanks for the clarification, Ron.

obviously delusional name one communist policy put forward by obama. do you even understand the inner workings of a PE firm and what they have done to businesses in this country? Do you think you have the money to invest with one of these firms? Got a half million or a million lying around collecting dust becuase unless you do they wouldnt let you up in their elevator. These firms saddle the acquired companies with huge amounts of debt (hence the term LBO) they then march in people with no industry knowledge to turnaround the company. When that fails they sell the company at a firesale price or just fold up shop. They buy these companies in an effort to produce 15-20% returns on investment for their investors. If they succeed in actually turning the company around they then will sell the company to the highest bidder who in turn dismantles the company putting more people out of work. When these middle class people are put out of work, guess what happens. The STOP consuming creating a downward spiral in the economy. So if you think that these firms are in business to create jobs you're fooling yourself. One of the largest PE firms is known as Cerberus (a fitting name) since Cerberus guarded the gates of hell

So what P111 and Ron are saying is that Bush inherited a working economy from CLinton and by the end of his second term had completely trashed the economy he handed over to Obama. And that since Obama's election the GOP has done everything they promised, they sunk America in order to guarantee Obama's one term.

Just a couple of small corrections, Edwardo. First, there are no Iron Curtain countries anymore. Second, Russia is now an example of unrestrained capitalism, where a few rich folks own everything and the rest of the people are in a hopeless economic situation. That is the model being pushed by the Republicans, with the consent of the ignorant. They propose to remove all rules that limit what corporations can do in the name of profits, while also giving them the ability to keep every cent they make and not contribute to the economy. Keep on supporting that approach and you won't have to imagine what it will be like... you'll experience it.

great post

Edwardo, you are a hoot.

You republicans call Obama a "communist" and rant on about Obamacare and here you are about to nominate the "communist" who invented it in the first place -- Mitt Romney!

It beats Obama's.

Okay for the record p111 - sloooowly read this:

Under Bush we were losing 750 thousand jobs a month. We are now gaining an average of 100 thousand jobs a month.

Under Bush we had a net loss of 8 million jobs during his rein of terror - under Obama's presidency we have a net gain of 3 million jobs. Obama has a good record.

Chatty Kaye... for your enlightenment...

The Employment Situation

Here it is.....

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 200,000 in December, and the unemployment rate, at 8.5 percent, continued to trend down, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in transportation and warehousing, retail trade, manufacturing, health care, and mining.

Uh huh. Let's see what we actually have in here.

Heh the annualized doesn't look so bad eh? But look at the blue dashed line -- that's not so good. And we need to dig into that and figure out what's up, because I don't like that trend at all.

Ok, so the actual number of employed people went down. Hmmmmm.

"Not in labor force" went down slightly as a trend (that is, the slope decreased), but increased numerically.

How about the employment rate -- the most-important number in there, since it controls the taxing capacity of the government.

That's not good -- it's down a touch and has flat-lined now for basically two years.

Here's the problem with this report -- the non-institutional working-age population went from 240.441 million to 240.584, a gain of 143,000 people of working age. But the number of employed people went down from 141.070 million to 140.681 -- a loss of 389,000. Adding the two, which is the correct way to look at it, the economy on a population-adjusted basis lost 532,000 jobs.

It looks like the charts got lost so here's the link.

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/

Wow, denninger huh? For those who don't know this is one of the most right wing of the teabagger sites. So far they haven't faked news like Fox, Rassmussen, O'Keefe, Lundt or most of the other teabagger/GOP propaganda sites, but Denninger is definitely out in far right field on issues and facts and leaves many facts out to get the stats you quote.

Not only that; they ignore the fact that employment gains in the private sector have been largely offset by the layoffs of hundreds of thousands of cops and firefighters and teachers and other government employees across the country. Now I realize that the Tea Partiers feel that those are all useless people anyway, but when they were employed they were paying taxes, buying homes and cars and contributing to the economy. Now they are just a blended faceless statistic that the right wing can use to blame the President for the unemployment numbers. Ain't it great when you can have it both ways?

He's obviously smoking tea. And inhaling.

Stop living off of us tax payers, get off of the crack pipe, and get a job or education. That or deport yourself to some communist country, or are you already working at a university doing nothing? your a waste, Economics is not about jobs, it is about profits, and your just a resource? only you are useless to anyone, that is why you need Obamamoney. And I for one do not want to pay for you any longer.

Come up for some air and reality, edwardo- you're oxygen deprived.

Edwardo, we all know you want to pay for corporate welfare and corporate entitlements as opposed to possibly feeding hungry children and seniors.

It is important to you that a CEO can make a couple million a year as opposed to a sick child being able to go to the doctor.

We get it.

Everything you hit corporations with comes from their customers. Want to hit Exxon with $1/gal tax? The price of gas goes up $1/gal. Who pays that? We do!

Corporate taxes hare extremely regressive. Rush or Gore would laugh at $10/gal gas. How would you feel about it. Liberals are so cruel, they would gleefully punish the poor and lower middle class just to assuage their hatred of capitalism.

Wow, are the teapubs a little testy, or what? They really don't like the truth of their glorification of greed and money over jobs and people to get any print time. Just wait til the OWS movement starts moving again in the spring. That whole conversation may cause a rightwing meltdown.

Sorry P-ones--In a free market there is always a chance that the "hits" corporations take will affect their outrageously overpaid CEOs. If they raise their prices to consumers, there is always the option of not buying their products. Just ask Netflix how upping their prices worked out for them. The stealing of wealth from the middle class is all the "job creators" are after. I am surprised your employers at the RNC didn't give you better talking points. Are you working out of their office in Virginia, Texas or Utah?

If you read the article, it also stated that it was necessary for someone to be on such a shift in order to maintain the heat levels. It was the owners' fault for not hiring the right amount of people to take care of this which would have negated the need for overtime. The buck stops with the leaders, doesn't it? Or are business leaders not leaders? If you're going to run a business, you better know what it involves. Unless the leaders are too lazy to research the industry they are getting themselves into.

Union shops discourage efficiency. Not union shops encourage it. Work rules are even more horrendous then out of control union wages, they totally hobble a business.

I've been in unions, I've personally seen the destruction.

There you go again, p111. Slam the worker who is following the orders of the preppie no-nothing capitalists. I don't think that message will work with middle class anymore. We are all more than a little tired of watching the elite profit off of us. Job creators my ass.

And I've been in non-union shops were the boss works employees like dogs and tries to cheat them out of their overtime.

Give me a union shop any day of the week.

P111: I didn't know there was a Fox News Shill union?

p111 isn't bright enough to get paid for his mindless ranting. Third grade grammar and sentence structure seem to be his norm.

Sorry, Obama already owns the emperor title. He anointed himself when he ignored the courts, ignored his own blue ribbon committees, and bypassed congress thus thrashing the constitution.

It is lefty lemmings that are drinking the trickle up poverty Kool-Ade. The rich got bailed out by Obama while the middle class has been decimated. Also, household incomes fell farther during the recovery than they did during the recession.

Geez, can anybody be more clueless about economics than you p111? Or were you asleep for the last decade? Make that last few decades, as the trickle down economics or republicans decimated the middle class.

We already have an Emperor in Chief and his name is Obama. He has 32 Czars and his wife has at least 31 Ladies-in-waiting to see to her every need (no other First Lady has had more than 3).

An_Engineer: Step away from the Glenn Beck tapes, you are risking your sanity.

Daryl,

Normally good advice, but you're too late. There is no more sanity left, therefore no risk....

They seem to be coming out of the woodwork left and right. He needs to learn how to hide his shady practices better.

Meanwhile all of Obama's shady practices are totally ignored by the leftist propaganda outlets, MSDNC, etc.

What shady practices? He seems to be the only one with Christian principles. He bent over to compromise with the House and got it slapped over and over with the Republicans gleefully saying they got 98% of what they wanted. Where was the Republican Christianity there? The compromise was part of his Christian principle. That is what he learned from his American mother and his church. It seems all the Republican's can do is holler Hitler, socialist when they are afraid of someone being Christian towards them. Is it because they haven't got the Christian program down right yet? Oh yes and to say we are going to do everything possible to outs the President over the back of American people is not a Christian principle. Christian principles are more than just throwing dirt back and forth. Chritian principles are trying to help each other. Now is the shady practice you are talking about the ressession appointment he made? The Republican did it all the time. Since he got his hand slapped so much it was the one way to get something for middle class done. Get over it.

p111: If you have such a disliking for MSNBC, remind us all why you continue to grace this place with your stunning and non-partisan pearls of wisdom?

And tell us how much Fox, Drudge and O'Keefe are paying you to troll.

No, that's Obama's crony capitalism model.

You seem fine with the crony capitalism model, p111. Another case of IOKIYAR? Just hatin' on Obama?

Well stated, TheKeatingFive.

To make matters worse, Mr. Mitt then saddled the American taxpayer with paying the pensions these employees worked 30 years for. NOW Republicans are touting the approach that this corner of the 99% should pay higher taxes in order to fund deficit reduction while giving the 1% at the top more of a tax break. Even a 5 year old knows that's not fair! It seems fairness doesn't count with Bain and company: just the $$$. Is THIS what the founding fathers had in mind?

Sounds more like flipper took the retirement savings out of the company KNOWING that the feds would be forced to cover it. Good thing his buddies wrote the fraud laws.

Bush/republican average deficits $230 billion, Obama/democrat average deficits $1.3 trillion.

Facts trump liberal propaganda every time.

Here, p111. Take a while to read and comprehend the deficit.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://jimcgreevy.com/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-bush-policies-deficits-2010-6

Hey p111

of that $1.3 Trillion in current debt almost $1 trillion is structural deficits created under W's administration, ( medicare Part D, Tax cuts, and unfunded wars).

Further, accounting rules, which Romney seems to have a good grasp of results in recording profits while considering liabilities, such as Pension obligations, as off-balance sheet liabilities and not considiered when booking an "accounting profit" not neccesarily a real profit. Just like the banks claiming in the last decade to make a profit, using Mark-to-market accounting creating a paper profit, declare bonuses/dividends, strip all cash out of a company and/or even borrow money to distribute those bonuses/dividends, leaving a "paper profit" for the shareholders, that soon evaporated, when "mark-to-market" accounting later wiped out those same "paper profits" management relied to make those earlier bonuses.

Romney just knew how to play the game rather than actually create value.

HEY! Where'd p111 go?!!

He seems to have gotten awfully quiet on this point.

nj--bj: Be thankful for small favors.

P111: Using your (lack of) logic when your daughter gets raped you are the rapist because you cleaned up afterwards?

^5

Democrats love bailout money - unless they have to pay for it.

To p111.

So President Bush was what when he proposed and signed the $700B BAILOUT in 2008 BEFORE Mr. Obama was elected: confused or a Democrat?

By the way, how did Mr. Bush propose to pay for the bailout? More trickle down economics or a check from Vice President "Deficits-Don't-Matter' Chaney?

Please clarify.

If Bush really had an average deficit of $230B per year as p111 claims, exactly how did we start his 1st term with a national debt of $5.6T and end with $13.8T on his last (Fiscal 2009) budget? I always thought he just kept the cost of the wars off budget, but that would only (supposedly) account for a couple of trillions, so there must be a few more ratholes that we don't know about.

Obama is half black.

And P111 is half human.

and ALL stupid!

P111 Isn't it time to head back to Wal Mart.

Good one!! or the guy from "Other Peoples Money" played by Danny Devito!!!

It pales in comparison to the damage Obama has already done.

Yes -the 3 million new jobs created under the Obama administration - up from the 8 million lost by Bush

"3 million new jobs created under the Obama administration" but many more have been lost... the unemployment rate has only began to fall this month. The drop is just as likely to be due to people who have been out of work more than two years dropping out of the work force permanently and who are not being reported as "unemployed" any more. They are effectively "off the books" and that makes it look like Obama has actually done something to help. The unemployment statistics under-report and the error becomes larger with each month the recession continues beyond the maximum unemployment period.

Chattty; you DID stay awake during statistics and economics in school didn't you?

Really, so it's all Obama....I have heard him ask repeatedly for jobs related spending, only to be kicked in the teeth by the GOP.

They back away from their own ideas as soon as Obama agrees to them....

Get real...

What kind of party bullies their people into refusing to serve when asked....Gregg wanted to take the job at Commerce. The GOP bullied the poor guy into backing out. Look at the crap Huntsman is taking for being a good citizen.....

The number of motions for cloture has been consistently twice what it was when Harry Reiid was Minority Leader.....that does not include the number of times that no attempt was made to break a filibuster...

And then there are the appointments.....Obama came in during a major crisis, and posts have been open for 3 years because the GOP refuses an up or down vote...

The GOP needs to stop waving the flag and start being real patriots. What I have seen has turned me off to a point that I don't think I'll ever vote GOP again.

Engineer: You may want to view the chart available at this site, which illustrates that Obama has overseen a net jobs gain:

krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/03/obama-romney-jobs/

Liars figure and Krugman is a big, big liar. Cite a non biased source if you expect your statements to be validated.

Ben: How about, you cite a non-biased source that contradicts this information, rather than making claims with no basis in fact?

Yeah, I'm gonna wait around for *that* response; tick-tock, tick-tock....

It was progressives running Fanny and Freddy that destroyed the economy and progressives in government that encouraged them. Get over it.

With an average 9% unemployment and $1.3 trillion average deficits, nobody will want Obama back.

Unfortunately p111, there are lots of folks who would rather have a welfare check than a pay check who will vote for him. Although the left likes to think that racism is a "white disease", there are many blacks who will vote for Obama only because he is black. That is why they had to get rid of Cain, a "real" black man whose success came from hard work, not affirmative action. Obama is a faux black.

To: An_Engineer

Please provide evidence to back up your claim.

Your claim is like saying "I don't want to earn any money because I'll have to pay taxes." In a word, it's stupid. Are you saying that the white welfare recipients also prefer a welfare check to a pay check? What about the soldiers families who need a welfare check plus their spouse's check to make ends meet and put food on the table? You need to stop making broad, stereotype based statements and admit reality. SOME people will try to trick the system, yes. Some welfare recipients can't get a job or a job paying enough to live without welfare.

Since Mitt claims corporations are people too, and companies such as Exxon and GE actually receive tax refunds after paying zero taxes, does your claim extent to them too? They make billions in PROFITS and receive a government handout. Would you call them lazy?

Please clarify.