He agrees with Obama then. With the exception of honesty, those “ethics” are enforced by the market. Some companies should be shut down so that the workers and assets can be used more effectively in a different enterprise. The notion that we shouldn’t allow any company to fail is a socialist one.
Who said a company shouldn’t be allowed to fail? Restructuring is a classic thing, but that wasn’t what Romney was doing.
He was stripping assets (cash and pension funds) of companies that were faltering, dumping the corpses, and then expecting the taxpayer to make up the difference.
The notion that we shouldn’t allow any company to fail is a socialist one.
*************
Exactly!!!! You’re exactly right. So, why did 75% of us who objected to the bailout of banks get the collective obscene gesture from the plutocrats Republicans who gave money to their rich friends?
You have affirmatively identified the problem, my friend. But, like Rush, it appears that you see it one way- that only liberals are socialists. If 2008 taught us anything, it’s that Republicans expect us to subsidize the losses of the rich at the expense of the taxpayer.
McCain, Bush, Romney don’t give a damn if you can live under capitalism or communism— they just want to maintain their wealth and their fiefdoms.
And when a “liberal” identify states that reality-— well, it’s still reality.
Bingo.....that’s why I vehemently opposed the original Chrysler bailout in 1977, it set the precedent that government would bail out companies that made bad decisions....the fact Chrysler paid it back is immaterial. If Chrysler went out of business, somebody else would have bought the assets and made good use of them. Now the expectation was set that government would step in and save companies that were “too big to fail.”
Thank you.