Steve Rattner coming to defense of Bain

[halik]

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=3FF6BE47-F3D0-478D-AEEE-CD992023310D

Just caught his interview on CNBC, great stuff. He said that it was a hilarious and odd that other "conservative" republican candidates are attacking free enterprise like Bain. (Rattner was Obama's car czar)

 

[Ausm]

I love it.

 

[theeedude]

This "I was just doing what's right for my investors" is an even lamer excuse than "I was just following orders." Unlike soldiers, Romney always had an option of resigning if he took objection to ruining people's lives to make a quick buck for himself and his investors.

 

[halik]

This "I was just doing what's right for my investors" is an even lamer excuse than "I was just following orders." Unlike soldiers, Romney always had an option of resigning if he took objection to ruining people's lives to make a quick buck for himself and his investors.

Obviously the better answers is never to fire anyone and let the business go bankrupt. Taking pages from the circa 1990-2005 GM playbook I see... Try RTFA.

 

[xBiffx]

This "I was just doing what's right for my investors" is an even lamer excuse than "I was just following orders." Unlike soldiers, Romney always had an option of resigning if he took objection to ruining people's lives to make a quick buck for himself and his investors.

When the goal is to make a company into a positive sometimes firing a few to save the many is the way to go. Spock had it so right, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

/nerd

 

[theeedude]

When the goal is to make a company into a positive sometimes firing a few to save the many is the way to go. Spock had it so right, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

/nerd

Not for Romney they don't. Needs of the many don't outweigh his greed, much less his needs.

 

[halik]

Not for Romney they don't. Needs of the many don't outweigh his greed, much less his needs.

That's the most retarded retort I've read in 2012... You may as well have said Romney eats babies.

 

[theeedude]

That's the most retarded retort I've read in 2012... You may as well have said Romney eats babies.

Zero substance, as expected.

 

[halik]

Zero substance, as expected.

How can you argue against FUD?

All of capitalism runs on "greed" - starbucks, apple, google all exist on the basis on making profit. Your argument is completely asinine; if those places don't make money, they'll cease to exist.

Ford fired,or, to use your emotionally charged vernacular in lieu of logic, "ruined lives" of thousands of people in 08-09 to remain solvent and managed to survive and now is picking back up. The ideas you put forth lead to Chapter7

 

[HomerJS]

Obviously the better answers is never to fire anyone and let the business go bankrupt. Taking pages from the circa 1990-2005 GM playbook I see... Try RTFA.

Obviously a strawman but I'll bite.

Why is Romney buying up a company saddling then with debt until they go bankrupt and everyone losing their job better for those employees then the company going bankrupt on their own?

 

[theeedude]

How can you argue against FUD?

All of capitalism runs on "greed" - starbucks, apple, google all exist on the basis on making profit. Your argument is completely asinine; if those places don't make money, they'll cease to exist.

Ford fired,or, to use your emotionally charged vernacular in lieu of logic, "ruined lives" of thousands of people in 08-09 to remain solvent.

Many of them ceased to exist after Bain loaded them up with debt, not to invest in expansion, but to pay Bain itself huge dividends.
So these jobs were lost not to make these companies solvent, but on top of making them more insolvent, and hosing bond inventors who were sold this debt by Romney's Wall Street buddies.
Romney is part of everything that's wrong with modern capitalism.

 

[halik]

Many of them ceased to exist after Bain loaded them up with debt, not to invest in expansion, but to pay Bain itself huge dividends.
So these jobs were lost not to make these companies solvent, but on top of making them more insolvent, and hosing bond inventors who were sold this debt by Romney's Wall Street buddies.
Romney is part of everything that's wrong with modern capitalism.

Bloomberg debunked those claims by the way, we're not talking about 80s junk bond crazy where this would be a far more valid argument.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...while-taking-his-comments-out-of-context.html

The Claims: By 2009, the debt accumulated by KB after Bain took control “was too great. KB Toys was no more.”
Background: KB closed almost half of its 1,200 stores after seeking bankruptcy protection in 2004. The retailer filed for bankruptcy again in 2008 and liquidated its remaining 431 stores.
The Facts: A unit of the private equity firm Prentice Capital Management took a 90 percent stake in KB after it emerged from bankruptcy the first time in 2005. The company said market forces, not its debt, were to blame for the first bankruptcy, according to the Boston Business Journal. The same weak retail environment that prompted the company to file for bankruptcy the second time also contributed to the bankruptcy of other chains such as Linens ‘n Things Inc. and Circuit City Stores Inc. (CCTYQ)

As someone that invested in bonds for living, dabbling in high yield is always a probabilistic game. You expect that a certain portion of your portfolio will default and that is priced in; it's hardly "hosing investors".

 

[theeedude]

Bloomberg debunked those claims by the way, we're not talking about 80s junk bond crazy where this would be a far more valid argument.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...while-taking-his-comments-out-of-context.html

So you believe debt had nothing to do with a company's bankruptcy. Anything else we need to believe to sign on to your argument. Trickle down economics maybe?

 

[halik]

So you believe debt had nothing to do with a company's bankruptcy. Anything else we need to believe to sign on to your argument. Trickle down economics maybe?

Oh I'm sure it didn't help and IIRC they got sued by the bondholder of the dividend. That being said, the outcome most likely would not have been any better without the buyout. The company was struggling through the 90s and the real estate on their balance sheets was about the only thing of value.


http://www.knowthis.com/blog/postings/will-the-long-list-of-bankrupt-retailers-soon-include-borders/

I thought you're arguing against the private equity business model, not one particular deal?

 

[theeedude]

Oh I'm sure it didn't help and IIRC they got sued by the bondholder of the dividend. That being said, the outcome most likely would not have been any better without the buyout. The company was struggling through the 90s and the real estate on their balance sheets was about the only thing of value.
http://www.knowthis.com/blog/postings/will-the-long-list-of-bankrupt-retailers-soon-include-borders/
I thought you're arguing against the private equity business model, not one particular deal?

You are the one who brought up that particular deal, not me.
Private equity is a broad term, but if part of your business model is to fire people, dismantle companies and load them up with unsustainable debt for your own short term profit, that is your legal right, but so is being a porn star for money. It's your right as a private citizen, but it's fair game if you are running for president and made your career part of your case for getting elected.

 

[halik]

You are the one who brought up that particular deal, not me.
Private equity is a broad term, but if part of your business model is to fire people, dismantle companies and load them up with unsustainable debt for your own short term profit, that is your legal right, but so is being a porn star for money. It's your right as a private citizen, but it's fair game if you are running for president and made your career part of your case for getting elected.

I think that description is more apt of the late 80s junk bond stars than private equity. I would argue that business model is counter productive at best and is generally unviable nowadays (poison pills, HY investors paying more attention after the 80s crash etc).

Rattner in the o/p and interview makes the argument that Bain was not one of those companies and on average did more VC-like deals more than anything else.

 

[theeedude]

I think that description is more apt of the late 80s junk bond stars than private equity. I would argue that business model is counter productive at best and is generally unviable nowadays (poison pills, HY investors paying more attention after the 80s crash etc).

Rattner in the o/p and interview makes the argument that Bain was not one of those companies and on average did more VC-like deals more than anything else.

Maybe, but so what? On average, pretty much everyone is a good person. It's the exceptions that tell us how much of a moral person someone is. If he is not above gutting a company's workforce and saddling it up with debt to make a quick buck, even once, that tells you about what kind of person he is. Maybe he didn't do it to more companies because it wasn't productive or viable enough, but it doesn't change the fact that he would have done it if it made him a quick buck.

 

[Fern]

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=3FF6BE47-F3D0-478D-AEEE-CD992023310D

Just caught his interview on CNBC, great stuff. He said that it was a hilarious and odd that other "conservative" republican candidates are attacking free enterprise like Bain. (Rattner was Obama's car czar)

Rattner's description of Bain Capital is the same as my understanding of BC.

With so many months to the election, I believe there's a pretty fair chance the true nature of BC's work will be absorbed by most and this issue won't play any role of significance.

If Romney and Bain are to be blamed for the loss of jobs following a start-up effort (BC's venture capital type efforts) I'm looking forward to seeing how Dems answer for all the job losses (and, OMG!, peoples' lives ruined!) at Solyndra. The Obama admin gave them start-up money and Solyndra went bankrupt with everyone losing their job.

Then the auto bailout. Somehow, in Bain's private equity deals (more mature companies etc) they are to be blamed for layoffs and downsizing. In Obama's auto bailout dealerships across the country were closed resulting in a lot of job losses. I.e., Obama used downsizing too.

Not too difficult to make this a 'pot calling the kettle black' thing.

Fern

 

[xBiffx]

Rattner's description of Bain Capital is the same as my understanding of BC.

With so many months to the election, I believe there's a pretty fair chance the true nature of BC's work will be absorbed by most and this issue won't play any role of significance.

If Romney and Bain are to be blamed for the loss of jobs following a start-up effort (BC's venture capital type efforts) I looking to seeing how Dems answer for all the job losses (and, OMG!, peoples' lives ruined!) at Solyndra. The Obama admin gave them start-up money and Solyndra went bankrupt with everyone losing their job.

Then the auto bailout. Somehow, in Bain's private equity deals (more mature companies etc) they are to be blamed for layoffs and downsizing. In Obama's auto bailout dealerships across the country were closed resulting in a lot of job losses. I.e., Obama used downsizing too.

Not too difficult to make this a 'pot calling the kettle black' thing.

Fern

You should go find the clip from Fox News Sunday where Chris Wallace ripped the DNC chair's ass on just this very topic. He claimed (rightfully so) that Romney is to Bain as Obama is to Solyndra. That bitch Schultz could do nothing to defend it but saying "nuh uh, nuh uh". It was fucking hilarious and what I expect from the left since the two scenarios are practically identical and you can't attack Romeny without at the same time attacking Obama for doing the exact same thing.

 

[theeedude]

That's the point though. It neutralizes Romney against Obama. Bain may go away if Romney stops talking about his private sector record, just like Romneycare may go away if Romney stops talking about his government record. But then what's Romney going to run as? Anti Wall Street Wall Streeter? Anti Obamacare Obamacarist? Pro Jobs Job Cutter?

 

[Fern]

-snip-
But then what's Romney going to run as?

As not being Obama.

As has long been said, and I agree, the Repub needs to make this a referendum on Obama and the economy over the least 3-4 yrs. Keep the spotlight on Obama.

- Unemployment

- National debt

- Annual deficits

- Lost our AAA rating

- Housing market and foreclosures

- Solyndra

- Operation Fast-n-Furious

Etc.

Fern

 

[theeedude]

As not being Obama.

As has long been said, and I agree, the Repub needs to make this a referendum on Obama and the economy over the least 3-4 yrs. Keep the spotlight on Obama.

- Unemployment

- National debt

- Annual deficits

- Lost our AAA rating

- Housing market and foreclosures

- Solyndra

- Operation Fast-n-Furious

Etc.

Fern

Going to work out about as well as Kerry making 2004 a referendum on Bush.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Going to work out about as well as Kerry making 2004 a referendum on Bush.

I can only hope that there are many like you who feel there's no way Obama can lose and choose not to vote.

 

[theeedude]

I can only hope that there are many like you who feel there's no way Obama can lose and choose not to vote.

That's your only hope.

 

[xBiffx]

That's your only hope.

Obi Wan is my only hope.

/nerd