Romney at Bain: job creator or destroyer?
This caught my attention:
Given the nation’s economic condition, Mr. Romney’s experience at Bain Capital has become central to his narrative for Campaign 2012. At a time when jobs are the issue, the narrative goes, voters ought to entrust the country to somebody with real experience in the private sector where jobs are created.
That’s apparently going to be part of Romney’s “multi-pronged” approach to the Bain charges:
They’ll start with advertisements featuring employees of companies started and rescued by Bain telling their stories – a direct response to the documentary released by the pro-Newt Gingrich super PAC that features employees of four companies closed by Bain that brutally slams Romney as a job killer…“For every scare story that they try to present related to the governor’s experience in the private sector and free enterprise,” [Romney advisor] Madden said, “we can point to a whole host of successful enterprises that have resulted in job creation and wealth and prosperity.”
I probably don’t have a future as a strategist for a candidate, but I have to say that I never thought Romney’s Bain experience was being touted because it meant he was such a hot jobs creator. When he mentioned those 100,000 jobs Bain supposedly created, it seemed to me it was more to defend himself against the charge that Bain destroyed more jobs than it generated by reorganizing the troubled companies it advised.
What I thought Romney’s Bain experience was about that would be a plus in this election was the ability to size up an organization, decide where the fat resided, and cut in order to make it more profitable. I thought that making companies leaner and yet retain (or enhance) their efficiency was exactly what he was selling, and that the argument would be that he’d apply it to the government rather than the private sector.
I’ve assumed he’d be making that argument soon. But I’ve learned not to assume that my assumptions are correct—especially when they’re prognostications.
[NOTE: So, is it time for me to start a “Romney” category on the blog?]
The “jobs created” metric endorses the narrative that Presidents and government are actually supposed to create jobs. It is implicitly big-government.
And I as continue to protest, the jobs stuff obfuscates and distracts from the deeper systemic problem. Bain was engaged in financing debt to create short-term profit, then walking away from debt-crippled enterprises. They are looters.
Romney is not Steve Jobs or Sergey Brin or Thomas Edison. He’s J.P. Morgan or Jay Cooke or Carl Icahn.
foxmarks: you know, I’ve now spent about 20 full hours reading the history of Bain from tons of sources, both pro and con. And I’ve read nothing that indicates that when Romney was there that’s what he did. Every assertion I’ve read about that (and at some point I hope to write a post that goes into the details) is a distortion or misrepresentation of the whole picture of what happened, if you read more deeply. And even if you take the worst reports for the truth (although there’s no reason to do so), the picture is only bad for a couple of companies.
But the entire controversy highlights disagreement about finance itself, what’s permissible and what’s not, what’s desirable and what’s not, and where Republicans and fiscal conservatives stand on this. That’s another post I’m working on.
This stuff really merits a book, and I’m not the person to write it.
“Every assertion I’ve read about that (and at some point I hope to write a post that goes into the details) is a distortion or misrepresentation of the whole picture of what happened, if you read more deeply.”
Tell that to Herman Cain.
neo,
Your assertion that Romney’s business experience in cutting fat from organizations would carry over into government is a good one, IMO. Being able to prioritize and think through organizations to make them more efficient is exactly what we need. Whether Newt, Santorum, or Perry would be as good at that is hard to tell from their records which are primarily in government.
I believe they all want to reduce spending. However, to cut spending in government requires an ability to make the case for something that is resisted at many levels. IMO, Romney has the experience to marshall evidence for the cuts.
foxmarks,
If Bain is a vulture capital outfit, can you name any venture capitalists that you consider to be providing a needed service? Too many people don’t understand what these companies do and why they are a necessary part of the mix. That’s why it is easy to slime them – too many uninformed people.
The GOP is going to have to address the headcutcount issue if Romney is nominated. Some Democrats may need to do similarly in the future. Massive head count reduction may be necessary in some cases, but can hardly be viewed as a cause for celebration. Neutron Jack Welch understood this, which is why he contunually declined to run for public office.
The problem, as I just began to illustrate on the newer thread, is that a firm can do both venture and vulture deals.
The deals in NewtPAC’s movie are vulture-oriented. The ones Mitt would like us to focus on, like Staples, are venture-oriented.
There are books on my reading list that deal with the problem of the financial sector. Econned, by Yves Smith, promises to show how the righties colluded with finance guys to screw us. Leverage, by Karl Denninger, promises to show how both parties are tools of the financial sector that screwed us.
Jumping right to a Godwin violation, Romney is running to become Albert Speer for the bi-factional bankster party. Obsessing about Romney and his career at Bain(s) is to divert our attention from the systemic problem.
From yesterday’s comments about the Deseret News story, we have an example where Romney was the manager of a financial company but allegedly did not participate in the financing. He only made the trains ran on time, he didn’t count how many Jews were on board.
[I’m not so serious, just having fun with the rhetoric]
Well, Have you ever heard the expression: Get Halliburton off the backs of the U S taxpayers. ?
Dick Cheney made the millions in no bid contracts via HALLIBURTON from Uncle Sammy’s runs over, time. It
boosted his stock options.
IF Romney is running to attack some government worker who was an Inspector on a project like the Big DIG in Boston, then can he explain how the project in Mass went from 2 billion to costing $ 23 billion….?
You raise an excellent point, what does Romney’s experience in gaming a HEDGE like Fund have to do with running the FEDERAL Government….?
Bain was great at gaming UNCLE SAMMY, as you may have notices it has trillions in DEBT…
Well, counting those on the Romney train, it is his CLASS, for sure, and God forbid any raise any questions, or they will be branded as ANTI-FEE Enterprise.
Yes, ANTI FEE, not FREE.