Greed and Debt

[NikFu S.]

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital

In the end, Bain never bothered to come up with a plan for how KB Toys could meet the 21st-century challenges of video games and cellphone gadgets that were the company's ostensible downfall. And that's where Romney's self-touted reputation as a turnaround specialist is a myth. In the Bain model, the actual turnaround isn't necessary. It's just a cover story. It's nice for the private equity firm if it happens, because it makes the acquired company more attractive for resale or an IPO. But it's mostly irrelevant to the success of the takeover model, where huge cash returns are extracted whether the captured firm thrives or not.

"The thing about it is, nobody gets hurt," says Patnode. "Except the people who worked here."

...

In an even more incredible disregard for basic morality, Romney forged ahead with the deal even though Milken's case was being heard by a federal district judge named Milton Pollack, whose wife, Moselle, happened to be the chairwoman of none other than Palais Royal. In short, one of Romney's first takeover deals was financed by dirty money – and one of the corporate chiefs about to receive a big payout from Bain was married to the judge hearing the case. Although the SEC took no formal action, it issued a sharp criticism, complaining that Romney was allowing Milken's money to have a possible influence over "the administration of justice."

After Milken and his junk bond scheme crashed in the late Eighties, Romney and other takeover artists moved on to Wall Street's next get-rich-quick scheme: the tech-Internet stock bubble. By 1997 and 1998, there were nearly $400 billion in leveraged buyouts a year, as easy money once again gave these financial piracy firms the ammunition they needed to raid companies like KB Toys. Firms like Bain even have a colorful pirate name for the pools of takeover money they raise in advance from pension funds, university endowments and other institutional investors. "They call it dry powder," says Slavkin Corzo, the union adviser.

After the Internet bubble burst and private equity started cashing in on Wall Street's mortgage scam, LBO deals ballooned to almost $900 billion in 2006. Once again, storied companies with long histories and deep regional ties were descended upon by Bain and other pirates, saddled with hundreds of millions in debt, forced to pay huge management fees and "dividend recapitalizations," and ridden into bankruptcy amid waves of layoffs. Established firms like Del Monte, Hertz and Dollar General were all taken over in a "prairie fire of debt" – one even more destructive than the government borrowing that Romney is flogging on the campaign trial. When Hertz was conquered in 2005 by a trio of private equity firms, including the Carlyle Group, the interest payments on its debt soared by a monstrous 80 percent, forcing the company to eliminate a third of its 32,000 jobs.

...

If you haven't heard much about how takeover deals like Dunkin' and KB Toys work, that's because Mitt Romney and his private equity brethren don't want you to. The new owners of American industry are the polar opposites of the Milton Hersheys and Andrew Carnegies who built this country, commercial titans who longed to leave visible legacies of their accomplishments, erecting hospitals and schools and libraries, sometimes leaving behind thriving towns that bore their names.

The men of the private equity generation want no such thing. "We try to hide religiously," explained Steven Feinberg, the CEO of a takeover firm called Cerberus Capital Management that recently drove one of its targets into bankruptcy after saddling it with $2.3 billion in debt. "If anyone at Cerberus has his picture in the paper and a picture of his apartment, we will do more than fire that person," Feinberg told shareholders in 2007. "We will kill him. The jail sentence will be worth it."

Which brings us to another aspect of Romney's business career that has largely been hidden from voters: His personal fortune would not have been possible without the direct assistance of the U.S. government. The taxpayer-funded subsidies that Romney has received go well beyond the humdrum, backdoor, welfare-sucking that all supposedly self-made free marketeers inevitably indulge in. Not that Romney hasn't done just fine at milking the government when it suits his purposes, the most obvious instance being the incredible $1.5 billion in aid he siphoned out of the U.S. Treasury as head of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake – a sum greater than all federal spending for the previous seven U.S. Olympic games combined. Romney, the supposed fiscal conservative, blew through an average of $625,000 in taxpayer money per athlete – an astounding increase of 5,582 percent over the $11,000 average at the 1984 games in Los Angeles. In 1993, right as he was preparing to run for the Senate, Romney also engineered a government deal worth at least $10 million for Bain's consulting firm, when it was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. (See "The Federal Bailout That Saved Romney")

But the way Romney most directly owes his success to the government is through the structure of the tax code. The entire business of leveraged buyouts wouldn't be possible without a provision in the federal code that allows companies like Bain to deduct the interest on the debt they use to acquire and loot their targets. This is the same universally beloved tax deduction you can use to write off your mortgage interest payments, so tampering with it is considered political suicide – it's been called the "third rail of tax reform." So the Romney who routinely rails against the national debt as some kind of child-killing "mortgage" is the same man who spent decades exploiting a tax deduction specifically designed for mortgage holders in order to bilk every dollar he could out of U.S. businesses before burning them to the ground.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...#ixzz25LHEwqbn

[Lookin4SVX]

I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
I want to give the Libertarian Party a voice at the national debates.
Many pissed off Ron Paul supporters are going to vote LP, just to screw the GOP.

Romney or Obama .. Coke or Pepsi?
I'll have a Mountain Dew, thanks.

[icingdeath88]

Originally Posted by Lookin4SVX

I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
I want to give the Libertarian Party a voice at the national debates.
Many pissed off Ron Paul supporters are going to vote LP, just to screw the GOP.

Romney or Obama .. Coke or Pepsi?
I'll have a Mountain Dew, thanks.

I'm a Dr Pepper man myself lol.

[NikFu S.]

Originally Posted by Lookin4SVX

I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
I want to give the Libertarian Party a voice at the national debates.
Many pissed off Ron Paul supporters are going to vote LP, just to screw the GOP.

Romney or Obama .. Coke or Pepsi?
I'll have a Mountain Dew, thanks.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter and my current stance is "anyone but Romney". That man is out to further his own interests and nothing more. I might lean toward Gary Johnson if I had a bit more concrete history on him.

[Lookin4SVX]

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter and my current stance is "anyone but Romney". That man is out to further his own interests and nothing more. I might lean toward Gary Johnson if I had a bit more concrete history on him.

Gary Johnson is no Ron Paul, ill tell you that.
But he does believe in sound money, he wants to end the empire building, end wars of aggressive invasion, and bring the troops home.

He is still 1000% better than a Romney or Obama, who both want to keep increasing the role and power of government.

It doesn't really matter, we are not getting Gary Johnson elected, but if we can get 5% of the vote, this gets the Libertarian Party a spot in the national debates, which will help in 2016.

It is just step 1 in having a viable 3rd party, a liberty party.

Just having Gary Johnson explain live in prime time debate how empire building is destroying this country, how all great empires end this way, by over extending its borders and taxing its populous into serfdom to pay for the expansion of the military, will help the cause.

Having him explain how the government sold us out the the bankers in 1913 when the federal reserve was created, and explaining to the American people how the government now pays interest on money that they could print interest free themselves.

To have another platform to help educate the American people, is worth my vote.

I am a Libertarian. I switched to the GOP for the last 8 years to vote for Ron Paul. I am returning home to the LP this year with many new friends.

Anyways the www.dailypaul.com/ is now basically become the the Daily Johnson...
And this image is now making its way across the web:

[92 SVX]

Originally Posted by Lookin4SVX

Gary Johnson is no Ron Paul, ill tell you that.
But he does believe in sound money, he wants to end the empire building, end wars of aggressive invasion, and bring the troops home.

He is still 1000% better than a Romney or Obama, who both want to keep increasing the role and power of government.

It doesn't really matter, we are not getting Gary Johnson elected, but if we can get 5% of the vote, this gets the Libertarian Party a spot in the national debates, which will help in 2016.

It is just step 1 in having a viable 3rd party, a liberty party.

Just having Gary Johnson explain live in prime time debate how empire building is destroying this country, how all great empires end this way, by over extending its borders and taxing its populous into serfdom to pay for the expansion of the military, will help the cause.

Having him explain how the government sold us out the the bankers in 1913 when the federal reserve was created, and explaining to the American people how the government now pays interest on money that they could print interest free themselves.

To have another platform to help educate the American people, is worth my vote.

I am a Libertarian. I switched to the GOP for the last 8 years to vote for Ron Paul. I am returning home to the LP this year with many new friends.

Anyways the www.dailypaul.com/ is now basically become the the Daily Johnson...
And this image is now making its way across the web:

Thats awesome, I was a republican, mainly because my entire family has always been republican but for the last 12-15 years I have felt way out of step with that party, I moved to Fl (where you have to register to vote ND did not need that) and so I registered independent. I wish I had registered republican so I could have voted in the primaries, even though it would not have done any good

[NikFu S.]

You know the GOP has changed a lot over the last few decades, according to the information I have gathered. I would be surprised if anyone was in lock-step with it for any significant amount of time.

Just look at Clint Eastwood, he's from that bygone era of "real" Republicans who don't give a **** about people's personal business, but they showcase him at the RNC as if he even represents them at all, which he doesn't.

Someone was arguing with me over something or other, gays marriage probably, and they fell back on Eastwood like "Ha, well look who WE have on our side!", and 2 minutes of Googling later I pulled a quote from him stating the opposite of what her position was.

Originally Posted by Lookin4SVX

Hilarious. A lot of my friends who are on the fence with Ron Paul really like him. I just haven't known him long enough to trust him, whereas Paul I have been following since '07, I know his ins and outs, I know exactly what he's going to say at every speech, and I like that I am never surprised by it. He is definitely at that age though he should consider passing the torch. Trouble is he won't endorse anyone who doesn't precisely follow his ideals.

[92 SVX]

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

You know the GOP has changed a lot over the last few decades, according to the information I have gathered. I would be surprised if anyone was in lock-step with it for any significant amount of time.

Just look at Clint Eastwood, he's from that bygone era of "real" Republicans who don't give a **** about people's personal business, but they showcase him at the RNC as if he even represents them at all, which he doesn't.

Someone was arguing with me over something or other, gays marriage probably, and they fell back on Eastwood like "Ha, well look who WE have on our side!", and 2 minutes of Googling later I pulled a quote from him stating the opposite of what her position was.



Hilarious. A lot of my friends who are on the fence with Ron Paul really like him. I just haven't known him long enough to trust him, whereas Paul I have been following since '07, I know his ins and outs, I know exactly what he's going to say at every speech, and I like that I am never surprised by it. He is definitely at that age though he should consider passing the torch. Trouble is he won't endorse anyone who doesn't precisely follow his ideals.

I have to admit I like this about him though. No compromise on your ideals is a great trait

[ensteele]

But when it comes right down to reality, if you vote for anyone other than Romney, you vote for Oboma, and then you can kiss this country good by - at least the one we used to know.

[92 SVX]

Originally Posted by ensteele

But when it comes right down to reality, if you vote for anyone other than Romney, you vote for Oboma, and then you can kiss this country good by - at least the one we used to know.

Sorry I believe romney will do exactly as obama has done, a vote for either of them will result in the same thing.

[ensteele]

Apparently I am supposed to be more angry about what Mitt Romney does with his money than what Obama does with mine.

[92 SVX]

Originally Posted by ensteele

Apparently I am supposed to be more angry about what Mitt Romney does with his money than what Obama does with mine.

I dont care what he did/does with his own money but look at his backers/bankers goldman sachs etc he will owe them more favors then the people who do you think he will try to please?

And look at his time as governor it appears he was obama before obama was

[benebob]

Originally Posted by Lookin4SVX

Gary Johnson is no Ron Paul, ill tell you that.

Thank goodness for that. He doesn't have the crazy kooks following him around like he is some sort of god.

He also has the joke we have today of a Republican party running scared and getting him booted from the election by outspending him in the courtroom.

In PA he submitted over 2x the amount of needed sigs for a 3rd party can. which is 19k to get on the ballot. Romney submitted his 3k then proceeded to challenge every single sig on Johnson's list meaning if they aren't exactly the same as on the election rolls (i.e. John D. Doe not John Doe then the sig doesn't count and JOHNSON has to pay the legal fees if they come up with more than the 23k in errors plus he needs to supply the people to do the checks on top of it.

Romeny did the same thing to the Constitution party who gave up after paying 300k in legal fees for one state ballot.

Obviously the Republicans are simply trying to buy your vote. At least in the USSR they didn't have to do that.

For their ignorance I will never again cast my vote for a Republican liar, cheat or a$$hole. They can rot in hell with all their voters belong for buying not only votes but the freaking ballot as well.

[benebob]

Originally Posted by ensteele

But when it comes right down to reality, if you vote for anyone other than Romney, you vote for Oboma, and then you can kiss this country good by - at least the one we used to know.

This is by far is the dumbest statement I've ever seen on the internet.

[sunvalleyray]

Great article! For another great read...It's Worse Than It Looks by Thomas Mann & Norman Ornstein, two congressional scholars who have been studying our Congress for thirty plus year.

As bad as the Democratic party is the Republican party is worse. As disappointed as I am with President Obama, Mit Romney would be far worse.

For a historical perspective to what has happened to the Republican party, read What's the Matter With Kansas by Thomas Frank, a former conservative writer.

Ray