• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney economics--job loss and bankruptcy at Ampad

Travis007 said:
Its laughable.. Obama has wiped out the jobs.. and never has so many abonded looking for a job...

I beer can could do a better job.. but Obama is actively looking to destroy the economy...

I will bet Romney has created more jobs personally then Obama has
Click to expand...

"[They] loot companies, leave behind broken families, broken towns." —Newt Gingrich

"It's the ultimate insult when Mitt Romney comes to South Carolina and tells you he feels your pain—because he caused it. [...] There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business. I happen to think that is indefensible." —Rick Perry

"Governor Romney has claimed to have created over 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof of that claim? And was it U.S. jobs created for United States citizens? [...] And that's fair, that's not negative campaigning." —Sarah Palin

"Governor Romney enjoys firing people." —Jon Huntsman

"While Mitt Romney was at Bain Capital, almost one out of every four companies they were involved with went bankrupt or went out of business." —John Brabender, Rick Santorum campaign manager
 
danarhea said:
"[They] loot companies, leave behind broken families, broken towns." —Newt Gingrich

"It's the ultimate insult when Mitt Romney comes to South Carolina and tells you he feels your pain—because he caused it. [...] There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business. I happen to think that is indefensible." —Rick Perry

"Governor Romney has claimed to have created over 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof of that claim? And was it U.S. jobs created for United States citizens? [...] And that's fair, that's not negative campaigning." —Sarah Palin

"Governor Romney enjoys firing people." —Jon Huntsman

"While Mitt Romney was at Bain Capital, almost one out of every four companies they were involved with went bankrupt or went out of business." —John Brabender, Rick Santorum campaign manager
Click to expand...

Romneys and amature on job killing compared to Obama.. LOL
 
Dickieboy said:
Ampad's president, Charles Hanson, said Romney is not involved in the operation of his company. He said three of Romney's Bain partners sit on the Ampad board of directors
Click to expand...
So are you trying to argue that the partners were operating against Romney's plan....that secretly Romney did not want the layoffs to happen?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
So are you trying to argue that the partners were operating against Romney's plan....that secretly Romney did not want the layoffs to happen?
Click to expand...

No one wants the layoffs to happen. But if the workforce is your primary expense and its past a certain point, its the only thing that can be cut to make costs line up with profit. There are exceptions but unionized shops have a high labor cost percent.
 
OpportunityCost said:
No one wants the layoffs to happen. But if the workforce is your primary expense and its past a certain point, its the only thing that can be cut to make costs line up with profit. There are exceptions but unionized shops have a high labor cost percent.
Click to expand...
You are just confirming that the partners were following Romney's plan.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
So are you trying to argue that the partners were operating against Romney's plan....that secretly Romney did not want the layoffs to happen?
Click to expand...

No, presumably not since we do not know a)if it WAS ‘Romney’s plan’ or b)if ‘Romney’s plan’ included layoffs. Wolpow has an agenda as evidenced by the Boston Globe article in that they had personality and business differences thus his impartiality is in question (not to mention his political affiliation). Hanson appears to have no ‘ax to grind’ thus his ‘Romney is not involved in the operation of his company ‘statement could be more believable.

I could presume that Romney’s plan was ‘do whatever it takes to make this Ampad deal work’ or ‘do whatever it takes to get this labor cost down’ both of which would be legitimate instructions from a partner and be part of business plans. And within the context of the layoffs AND these presumed plans, yes, Romney would be responsible. But in the end, as I understand it, Bain came in laid everyone off and rehired 192. The union decided to strike over this which lasted 5 weeks and ultimate shut the plant down. In this analogy is the union not just as culpable in these job losses as Romney?
 
Dickieboy said:
No, presumably not since we do not know a)if it WAS ‘Romney’s plan’ or b)if ‘Romney’s plan’ included layoffs. Wolpow has an agenda as evidenced by the Boston Globe article in that they had personality and business differences thus his impartiality is in question (not to mention his political affiliation). Hanson appears to have no ‘ax to grind’ thus his ‘Romney is not involved in the operation of his company ‘statement could be more believable.

I could presume that Romney’s plan was ‘do whatever it takes to make this Ampad deal work’ or ‘do whatever it takes to get this labor cost down’ both of which would be legitimate instructions from a partner and be part of business plans. And within the context of the layoffs AND these presumed plans, yes, Romney would be responsible. But in the end, as I understand it, Bain came in laid everyone off and rehired 192. The union decided to strike over this which lasted 5 weeks and ultimate shut the plant down. In this analogy is the union not just as culpable in these job losses as Romney?
Click to expand...
It might be, if your analogy was true, assuming that Wolpow is lying, that both partners were not following the wishes of Bain (Romney) and your speculation on the labor disputes is correct.

I would rather take the word of someone who was there, whose actions along with the other partner coincide.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You are just confirming that the partners were following Romney's plan.
Click to expand...

Yeah....you seem to have some clairvoyance issues. You do not know what Romney had for a plan and are adopting the rediculous position of him making decisions when he is no longer with the company after shifts in the industry in question.

You dont have a shred of credibility with your argument, its all assumption.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Yeah....you seem to have some clairvoyance issues. You do not know what Romney had for a plan and are adopting the rediculous position of him making decisions when he is no longer with the company after shifts in the industry in question.

You dont have a shred of credibility with your argument, its all assumption.
Click to expand...
Uh, no, it is based on historical record and the statements of those who participated along with their documented actions.

Again, I didn't force you to admit what the apparent reasons and carried out events were:
OpportunityCost said:
But if the workforce is your primary expense and its past a certain point, its the only thing that can be cut to make costs line up with profit. .
Click to expand...
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Uh, no, it is based on historical record and the statements of those who participated along with their documented actions.

Again, I didn't force you to admit what the apparent reasons and carried out events were:
Click to expand...

You both want to damn him for not succeeding when he wasnt there and not praise him for successes that occurred when he was not there. Capitalism means sometimes things work, sometimes things fail. Bain did not set out to destroy Ampad, they aquired other companies around the industry that interfaced with Ampads products in an attempt to build synergies and profit lines.

Your dogged persistence in a simple minded explanation is both pathetic and misleading. Its not that simple. If it was, a lot more people would be rich.
 
OpportunityCost said:
You both want to damn him for not succeeding when he wasnt there and not praise him for successes that occurred when he was not there. Capitalism means sometimes things work, sometimes things fail. Bain did not set out to destroy Ampad, they aquired other companies around the industry that interfaced with Ampads products in an attempt to build synergies and profit lines.

Your dogged persistence in a simple minded explanation is both pathetic and misleading. Its not that simple. If it was, a lot more people would be rich.
Click to expand...
You seem to think that a bankruptcy/wind down of a company happens instantaneously and that the plans of business completely change when the owner steps aside.

I just can't help your confused views....at all.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You seem to think that a bankruptcy/wind down of a company happens instantaneously and that the plans of business completely change when the owner steps aside.

I just can't help your confused views....at all.
Click to expand...

There is a two year gap. A lot can happen in 2 years and reorgs do not take that long, Ampad wasnt that big.
 
OpportunityCost said:
There is a two year gap. A lot can happen in 2 years and reorgs do not take that long, Ampad wasnt that big.
Click to expand...
You are ignoring the events, on purpose. I can see from this discussion and another with you that this is going no where.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It might be, if your analogy was true, assuming that Wolpow is lying, that both partners were not following the wishes of Bain (Romney) and your speculation on the labor disputes is correct.
Click to expand...

But the labor dispute was substantiated in the previous post, not speculation.

I would rather take the word of someone who was there, whose actions along with the other partner coincide.
Click to expand...

So Hanson, who WAS THERE, is not credible? Who is this 'other partner'? Have you previously furnished evidence other than Wolpow? If so, I missed it.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You seem to think that a bankruptcy/wind down of a company happens instantaneously and that the plans of business completely change when the owner steps aside.

I just can't help your confused views....at all.
Click to expand...

Now I'm confused...instantaneously? Bain bought Ampad in '94. They didn't file chapter 11 until 2000 ultimately to exit bankruptcy and is still a viable company. Six years is not 'instantaneously' I think.
 
Dickieboy said:
But the labor dispute was substantiated in the previous post, not speculation.



So Hanson, who WAS THERE, is not credible? Who is this 'other partner'? Have you previously furnished evidence other than Wolpow? If so, I missed it.
Click to expand...
If a person says "Romney is not involved in the operation of his company", when Romney is known as a hands on guy....then no...it does not jibe with facts.
 
Dickieboy said:
Now I'm confused..
Click to expand...
Um...YEAH....since that post was NOT direct to you....FFS!


.instantaneously? Bain bought Ampad in '94. They didn't file chapter 11 until 2000 ultimately to exit bankruptcy and is still a viable company. Six years is not 'instantaneously' I think.
Click to expand...
I'm glad you agree that the wind down was NOT instantaneously...that WAS MY POINT!

Give it a rest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom