Obama says Romney would be an ‘outsourcer in chief’

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
6-22-2012

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnM-;_ylv=3

Obama says Romney would be an ‘outsourcer in chief’


President Barack Obama mocked Mitt Romney on Friday as an "outsourcing pioneer" who shipped jobs overseas to places like China and India. Obama's assault borrowed the words of a Washington Post report that Bain Capital, which the former Massachusetts governor founded and ran for 15 years, invested in companies that specialized in hiring low-wage workers abroad to do jobs once done by Americans.

"During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission."
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Private sector is doing fine. Unemployment above 8% is not a problem.
 

CaptainGoodnight

Golden Member
Oct 13, 2000
1,427
30
91
Yeah, that maybe true, but given Obama's past history everything he accuses his opponents of, he is usually guilty of himself.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,596
475
126
The source article is here


http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...obs-overseas/2012/06/21/gJQAsD9ptV_story.html


Mitt Romney&#8217;s financial company, Bain Capital, invested in a series of firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by American workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like China and India.

During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

According to the wikipedia.org entry on Governor Romney he left Bain Capital in 1999 on a leave of absence then later said he would not be returning during his leave of absence.

If you read the Washington Post article it's apparent that Bain Capital started investing in companies that outsourced jobs and helped other companies outsource jobs years before he left it.

Bain&#8217;s foray into outsourcing began in 1993 when the private equity firm took a stake in Corporate Software Inc., or CSI, after helping to finance a $93 million buyout of the firm. CSI, which catered to technology companies like Microsoft, provided a range of services including outsourcing of customer support. Initially, CSI employed U.S. workers to provide these services but by the mid-1990s was setting up call centers outside the country.



Private sector is doing fine. Unemployment above 8% is not a problem.

According to this link over 500k public sector jobs were lost.


http://www.politifact.com/new-jerse...ssman-bill-pascrell-says-more-600000-public-/

According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the nation has lost 512,000 government jobs at the federal, state and local level in the past 18 months.

Of course many were probably lost as a result of concern over deficit spending and austerity programs

If those jobs weren't lost the unemployment rate (as it's counted now) might be under 8.0% today.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
Yeah, that maybe true, but given Obama's past history everything he accuses his opponents of, he is usually guilty of himself.



100% guilty in this case, and just like Clinton before him did with NAFTA, he bought off or silenced the unions.

http://firedoglake.com/2010/12/03/u...rade-sells-out-taxpayers-who-bailed-them-out/

UAW To Support NAFTA-Style Korea Free Trade, Sells Out Taxpayers Who Bailed Them Out

By: Jane Hamsher Friday December 3, 2010 8:25 pm
Tweet88

UAW's Bob King, who dineth on the White House weenies

FDL has learned that the UAW, which was bailed out by American taxpayers two short years ago, will endorse the trade pact and act as the liberal “postage stamp” for the deal. UAW President Bob King decided to endorse it despite strong opposition from his staff.


Earlier today, the White House invited interested parties to a briefing where they announced that they had reached a deal with Korea on a NAFTA-style Korea Free Trade Agreement. They embargoed the story until 7pm, however, so that they could go out in the dark of night.

According to sources close to the discussions, King was on a plane from Europe all day and when he landed, the first one who got him was Obama. King told UAW staff that he supports the deal because he trusts the President, and is confident that it will be a good deal for auto workers because Ford has endorsed it.

Ford, however, manufactures in China — and Thailand, and the Phillippines – and so what is good for Ford is not automatically good for the UAW. But by choosing to endorse this NAFTA-style free trade agreement, which includes many of the provisions that Obama promised to oppose on the campaign trail, King once again demonstrates that the UAW has become a Chinese-style union: much closer to the interests of management and the government than those of its line workers.

Tonight Sander Levin, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, has been on the phone trying to whip support for the bill. Heavy pressure is being brought to bear on United Steelworker President Leo Gerard, in an attempt to keep the AFL-CIO on the sidelines. Getting a rather cheap “give” from the Koreans to the auto industry to buy off the UAW was actually quite clever — because the Steelworkers are also being told that with all the cars that will be sold to Korea, there will be US steel used to make them.

Of course, that’s a crock. Korea would still face a lower tariff — 2% — in the US than the US will face in Korea — 4%.
The deal will devastate the building trade unions, also part of the AFL-CIO, who have been the hardest hit by NAFTA-style trade agreements. Much of their work has been building factories in the midwest, and as those factories get shipped overseas, their jobs have disappeared. In splitting the member unions, the administration hopes to sideline the powerful resources of the AFL-CIO which would otherwise organize to protect the building trades.

It’s quite a brilliant plan, which makes me suspect it didn’t originate at the White House. Unsurprisingly, the Chamber of Commerce has come out in support of the deal, and are already organizing online to pass it.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has also been on the phone, pressuring labor Presidents into supporting the trade deal. As someone who raised money for her and supported her when she was in congress, she can officially kiss my ass in Macy’s window.

The White House had recently told the building trade unions, that they had no intention of dealing with Korea Free Trade for another year. They used the same tactic with the Social Security groups earlier this year — telling them they would not take it up this year, knowing all the while they would spring the deficit commission on them imminently.

In June of this year, Obama said he wanted to submit the George W. Bush negotiated Korea Free Trade Agreement to a vote in Congress. That bill contains many provisions which are in violation of the pledges Obama made on the campaign trail, and there has been no signal from the White House or anyone else involved that any fixes have been made other than sweetheart deal for autos and beef.

Earlier this month, Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips launched a broadside attack against NAFTA-style free trade agreements. It will be an interesting first test for the freshmen Republican members of Congress — will they stick with the Tea Party activists who carried them into office, and who largely oppose such deals — or will they be captivated by Republican leaders like John Boehner, who (like Freedomworks head Dick Armey) strongly supported NAFTA?

It remains to be seen whether USW Leo Gerard will join with the UAW and help the White House undermine the building trade unions and ship more American jobs overseas. I hope not. The UAW are a bunch of selfish pigs and I have no problem joining hands in a transpartisan alliance against them, but I don’t want to wind up fighting Leo Gerard and the Steelworkers on this.

But we will fight them. Because this is a terrible, terrible deal for America, at a time when unemployment is soaring and the White House has zero plans for creating jobs — unless you’re in the international bank looting business. Everyone involved should be deeply, deeply ashamed of their participation in this, and we will do everything in our power to organize against its passage.
]
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,493
3,159
136
Where are the millions of green jobs Obama promised?

OMG... Well first, you got to convince republicans in congress to accept the fact we can have an effect on climate with foresight and taking action. That hasn't happened. Duh...


But to be fair, if Romney is infact the outsourcer in chief, Clinton fathered the tribe.
Old Ross Perot hit this nail on the head. Clinton was elected, NAFTA was put in place, and that giant sucking sound did indeed take place.

I doubt that trend can or will be changed/altered in the future by any American president.
We've passed far beyond that point. No turning back now.
However... What I believe Romney will be master at doing if elected, is figuring out how to outsource American based jobs now thought be to un-outsourcable.
If anyone can achieve that goal, Mitt Romney can. And he will.
Why?
Because its good for business. Not employment, but business.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,446
7,508
136
Come up with a plan to stop the outsourcing of jobs, and it would be Congress that is required to enact it. Whether the Republicans support or care for such a plan is questionable. Then again, you better say the same thing of the Democrats.

What do you expect the President to do about it?
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
A plan to stop outsourcing would come with it cautions like how prices on certain things in walmart will increase in price. Then you'll have the knee jerk American response that one need pull oneself up by one's bootstraps and get some real skills and this wouldn't be a problem anyway. End result is wheels keep spinning as outsourcing keeps chipping away at jobs and nothing gets done.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,560
8
0
Any tarrifs or protectionism would be greeted with calls of socialism and craziness.


If people had to pay more for goods the calls for public beheadings would bring out many Madame Defarges....
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
A plan to stop outsourcing would come with it cautions like how prices on certain things in walmart will increase in price. Then you'll have the knee jerk American response that one need pull oneself up by one's bootstraps and get some real skills and this wouldn't be a problem anyway. End result is wheels keep spinning as outsourcing keeps chipping away at jobs and nothing gets done.

Higher prices aren't a given, but lower profits likely are. It's all about the ever smaller ownership class, the deified "Job Creators!" of right wing myth & legend. As if financial manipulator Billionaires actually need to make a profit, anyway, in the same terms that working & middle class people need to make a living.

Gotta love the whole song & dance about "real skills", anyway. It's as if the tech bust never happened, as if yesterday's highly sought skill set isn't just today's losers, as if there are sufficient jobs demanding skills for everybody to be employed if they had such skills. It's the usual Catch 22.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,949
133
106
if that's true then most of you cry babies can finally leave the country you hate and for once in your miserable complaining life get a job in a country doing the work. Who knows..maybe the country your going to has legal dope.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
if that's true then most of you cry babies can finally leave the country you hate and for once in your miserable complaining life get a job in a country doing the work. Who knows..maybe the country your going to has legal dope.

Heh. That's an argument? Looks more like your usual state of denial...
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,537
6,975
136
I'd rather outsource jobs then in-source poverty from Mexico like Obama is doing.

You know, if you're going blame Obama for the immigration problem without first and foremost blaming the big businesses who break the law by hiring these millions of illegals to exploit them for higher profit, you should at least first mention that you only want to rant about Obama and you're not really attempting to make a valid point about what kinds of problems illegal immigants create in the USA.;)
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Make sure to pass it after you've taken a toke. What company is okay with lower profits when they have an opportunity to raise prices?

When their volume of sales goes down, more than offsetting any gain in margin from higher prices. If you have a factory capable of making 1000widgets/hour that you can sell for $X, you lose money if the sales volume drops to less than 1000widgets/hr at the price of $X+1.

That's business 101.

The price of imported goods is set by what the market will bear, not by the relationship between production costs & sales revenues. Current margins are enormous, well in excess of what companies need to be profitable. Witness Apple. Witness the enormous cash reserves of big business in general.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
You know, if you're going blame Obama for the immigration problem without first and foremost blaming the big businesses who break the law by hiring these millions of illegals to exploit them for higher profit, you should at least first mention that you only want to rant about Obama and you're not really attempting to make a valid point about what kinds of problems illegal immigants create in the USA.;)

It makes no sense to "blame" the businesses because I assume a priori that they will do all they can to maximize profits. (And I'm not sure why you think big business uses more illegal labor than small business, the opposite is probably true) If the government is going to leave the borders open and create a second class of worker that is exempt from labor laws, then sweeten the deal by providing a backdoor subsidy by providing social services to said workers, what do you expect will happen? The government is supposed to be the grown up in the room and is held to a different standard.

It's like blaming a dog for begging for food at the table. You don't blame the dog, you blame the owner.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,537
6,975
136
It makes no sense to "blame" the businesses because I assume a priori that they will do all they can to maximize profits. (And I'm not sure why you think big business uses more illegal labor than small business, the opposite is probably true) If the government is going to leave the borders open and create a second class of worker that is exempt from labor laws, then sweeten the deal by providing a backdoor subsidy by providing social services to said workers, what do you expect will happen? The government is supposed to be the grown up in the room and is held to a different standard.

It's like blaming a dog for begging for food at the table. You don't blame the dog, you blame the owner.

I agree with the bolded premise. However, let's not forget who has the most influence over our legislators and the resultant actions our legislators take. It's certainly not those who keep pushing for closed borders because that's never happened and it's certainly not those illegals who cannot vote. With big and small businesses (as you mentioned) definetly NOT pushing for closed borders, and with the huge amount of latino voters definetly pushing FOR open borders, both political parties are hesitant to do anything substantial in the way of keeping the flow of illegals out of the country.

So in my view, it's not the government that's actually "responsible" or to "blame" for leaving our borders open. Instead, its the huge campaign contributions pouring into Repub coffers from businesses that are illegally exploiting the illegal immigrants and the huge number of possible votes from the latinos the Dems can win that's keeping the borders open. Both parties are stymied and paralyzed by their supporters wants and needs in this regard.

Therefore, in keeping with my original comments, your mentioning how Obama (now being referred to as the "government" in your reply) is failing in controlling our borders must also mention in the same breath how businesses (big and small in toto) are breaking the law to provide the illegals with their main reason for entering the USA "uninvited".

IRT to your closing comment, I see the "dog" as being our legislators and the "owner" as being the voters and big monied interests who "own" the dog. :)
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
You can bring all the jobs you want back to America but it won't do a damn bit of good untill Americans start taking a little more pride and stop buying $5 made in Chine POS toasters.