Skip to comments.Wall Street on Trial
Posted on 01/13/2012 7:10:35 PM PST by Hojczyk
When asked by TIME Magazine whether Mitt Romney is a job creator or destroyer, Warren Buffett said that while businesses shouldn't hang on to people they don't need, "I don't like what private-equity firms do in terms of taking out every dime they can and leveraging [companies] up so that they really aren't equipped, in some cases, for the future." Voters need to understand the kind of economy Mitt Romney's experience entails - and it doesn't sound like the kind of economy that's built to last.
Gasparino Speaks to Daley
How will Romney respond? Does not signify in the end.
This remains a contest about POTUS Obama's performance in office.
The Bill Daley exit from the White House is the critical tell. Spoke Charlie Gasparino, FBC, re the Daley tour of duty at WH.
Gasparino wrote a column last September that identified how Valerie Jarrett had elbowed him out of the way and made it unlikely he would gain access to POTUS ear re the rift with Wall Street and American business.
Daley called Gasparino to complain, however when Gasparino quizzed him about what was true or not, Daley returned non-denial denials.
One fact did emerge that Daley and FLOTUS had called Geithner to ask him to remain Treasury, and to to believe the rumours that Daley was about to take SecTreasury.
Gasparino says that Daley left when it became clear that Obama was going hard left anti-Wall Street, pro-OWS.
Daley family opinion is that Obama is hurting the down tickey and the party -- that a win as aan anti-Wall Street reformer will leave the Democratic Party adrift, perhaps for a generation.
(Excerpt) Read more at johnbatchelorshow.com ...
And if government creates laws simply because it wants to control free economic behavior, then what you have is fascism, and I suppose the people should stop the government.
Dammit, Warren Buffet knows better. This is NOT the only thing PE firms do. Oftentimes they will restructure companies (doing things the companies themselves should have done, but lacked the knowledge or willpower to do so) which allows them to become profitable enough that the PE firm will inject new capital to create new products, improve or expand facilities, etc - or will provide the capital needed to do acquisitions that will make these companies bigger and stronger thus protecting jobs in the long run.
If I thought those promoting these arguments were really this naive, uninformed, or just stupid - I would be worried. But we all know this is “just politics”.
>> And if government creates laws simply because it wants to control ...
Why so conditional? The tyranny and fascism is self-evident.
Whatever yuh grave robbing vulture
Seems to me, all the anti free market people wish to let a company that is failing, to fail, and just have the bankruptcy judge fire everyone and that will make them feel better. Then the same people can buy it for less and sell the assets. Results would be the same. Now do not confuse this with the illegal crap that came from tarp. It is not the same thing.
If they want to put Wall Street on trial, how about we start with Jon Corzine?
We don't need unethical business people representing us. And we sure as heck don't need anymore of this perfectly legal privatizing of the gains and leaving the taxpayers with the bill when it fails. All while taking your plunder to questionable foreign markets...like the limousine liberals so like to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.