Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Free Minds, Free Markets: Why Mitt Romney and Bain Capital Are Good for America

Free Minds, Free Markets: Why Mitt Romney and Bain Capital Are Good for America

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

There simply is not much more to say about former House speaker Newt Gingrich’s volley of attacks on his main rival for this year’s Republican presidential nomination, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. There is, however, a great deal to be said about the institution they were denigrate: venture capitalism. Phrased by Gingrich and his fellow travelers as “vulture” capitalism, it typically is presented in a terrible light by activists, politicians, and media figures alike. Nonetheless, it has proven itself actually to be a highly effective force for positive growth and innovation in the market.

Simply put, venture capitalism is a group of investors purchasing a failing company, neutralizing its weaknesses and magnifying its strengths, then finally injecting huge sums of money into it with the hope of turning an eventual profit. This is an extraordinarily risky business to take part in; one that has created overnight billionaires just as easily as it has sent many a man jumping out of his office window. Obviously, even the best of venture capitalists are going to have more than a few pitfalls, and Romney, in his long and strikingly successful career as a corporate asset manager, was absolutely no exception to this rule.

In a nearly thirty minute propaganda film which was a piece of sheer emotionalist rubbish that I was barely able to sit through, Gingrich’s allies interviewed those who worked in many of the factories purchased by Romney’s company, Bain Capital. All of these people wound up losing their jobs due to one of the following reasons; either their respective workplaces were simply not productive enough to maintain operations, or that factory could not provide Bain with a sufficient return on its massive series of investments. While nobody in their right mind likes to see a good worker fired, when the times change too quickly for an entire industry to keep up, this is precisely what happens.

Blaming Romney for following the demands of an increasingly internationalist economy, and whose leadership allowed far more companies to experience an economic resurgence than failure, is irrationality defined. If anything, America needs more men like Mitt, and more corporations like Bain to streamline our not merely weakened, but clinically diseased state of fiscal affairs. Bringing efficiency to the private sector is, in the short term, not at all a pretty sight, but in the long term it never fails to yield fantastic dividends. We should not be chastising Romney, Bain and the capitalist system for the remarkable progress they have brought to our society, we should be thanking them.

About Joseph F. Cotto

  • Matthias Klein

    Let’s face the dire truth. The US is founded on vulture capitalism. What else is slavery?

    It is a myth that capitalism is pure and good by itself and must not be regulated.�It is now time to stand up for true righteousness and expose the hypocrisy.�

    Remember the civil war and how unwillingness and stubbornness led to the bloodiest war in the history of the US. Great Britain got rid of slavery in a peaceful way. The United States, where all men are created equal on paper,�had to have it pried out of their fingers.

    What would happen if the rich, who profit from vulture capitalism, and their powerful friends in the media and in�Washington, are as stubborn and unwilling to acknowledge the evil of vulture capitalism. Why would God not bring�justice to those oppressed by this selfish system as He did for the slaves?

    Watch my video: A German’s preachers thoughts on 2012.

  • Costello

    What’s so odd is hearing this vulture tag (isn’t all capitalism vulture capitalism?) being used by Newt and Perry. Apparently Mitt was too successful, which doesn’t jive with anything I’ve ever heard Republicans say. Wonder if they polled that line of attack?

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    First: It is rather odd how Gingrich & others are going after Romney. Romney is the poster child for Republican ideology.

    It is gratifying to see Gingrich do a great deal of the work of destroying Romney before he faces off against Obama. Huzzah!

    To characterize what Romney & Bane Capital as saviors of our economy is ridiculous. Bane did not generally go after faltering companies, many of the companies they grabbed were actually well positioned in their respective markets. Yet the Banesters came in, gutted the staff, sold off assets and then shut them down leaving hundreds without jobs, and often without health care and pensions.

    Companies like Bane Capital produce nothing: No products, no services. They just suck the life – and money – out of businesses and leave the dead carcase to rot in the sun.

  • Cannonshop

    Baritone, you know damn well that Obama’s safe with all Liberals and many moderates-a soft-shoe like Romney won’t pick up those votes-why vote for a faux conservative/moderate when you can get a real Liberal, after all?

    Establishment with a different coat of paint is still establishment, after all, and generally, if the incumbent’s Establishment, running a challenger who’s also Establishment just means re-election, for the Incumbent, REGARDLESS OF PERFORMANCE.

    It’s what was wrong with running McCain in 2008, Dole in 1996, or Kerry in 2004. Romney presents NO challenge to the Obama record-the sitting President’s basically governed as “Bush on Accellerant” for the last four years, largely with policies indistinguishable from those advocated by Romney and carried out by same during his governorship.

    Romney’s the front-runner, and he’s got the big warchest, but, honestly, he doesn’t have a chance-why would people vote for a man whose record shows his actions would be indistinguishable from the guy who’s already IN office?

  • Cannonshop

    Reagan didn’t beat Carter running left-or-centre, he presented a tangible DIFFERENCE from Carter’s philosophy in 1980, Romney’s not philosophically that different from Obama or Kerry, hence, he really has nothing to show the GENERAL ELECTION-he’s an also-ran, like McCain (whose choices in the press of the 2008 economic crisis demonstrated that the only real choice was the skin colour, and Barack Obama is,frankly, a much more handsome man with a nicer speaking voice.)

    Here’s how it’s going to shake down: If Romney gets the nod at the convention, Obama will win the general election-because people will always vote for the incumbent when there is no serious, tangible difference between the candidates… and there is none, between Obama, and Romney.

    The bellweather’s simple: the Left Likes Romney-but not enough to toss Obama out of office for him.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Cannonshop –

    “The Left Likes Romney”???? Only in Cannonshop-world.

    “Obama’s a real liberal”???? Only in Cannonshop-world. If you asked real liberals, we’ll tell you that Obama’s a moderate with conservative leanings…which is the mirror image of the opinions that ‘real’ conservatives have of Romney (since they’ll say that Romney’s a moderate with liberal leanings).

    “Romney’s record show his actions would be indistinguishable from Obama’s”???? Only in Cannonshop-world!

    Do they share some traits? Very few, as long as we take Romney’s current positions. For instance, their views on abortion are wildly different. Romney would enforce and defend the DOMA against same-sex marriage, whereas Obama directed the Justice Department to stop defending DOMA. Romney stated he would not have brought troops out of Iraq – at least not yet. Romney – though he knows full well that it’s based on his own legislation – would get rid of Obamacare in a nod to the red-meat Republicans. Romney’s tax plan would give the rich three times the financial benefit that Bush’s tax cuts did…and would cut taxes for the rest of us to a much smaller degree (Paris Hiltons of the world, rejoice!).

    It’s given that both Romney and Obama has changed their positions over the years – it’s very, very difficult to find a politician who hasn’t (unless one wants an uber-ideologue like Ron Paul). BUT Romney’s changed positions many more times, and to a much greater degree.

    No, Cannonshop, Obama and Romney are not the same, not even close to the same.

    BTW, I haven’t seen you (and most other BC conservatives) state who you’d really like to see in office. Care to state who you’d support?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Since Obama is such a “moderate with conservative leanings,” why does do “we” — “the liberals,” in this context — support them?

    Cannon is spot on in his estimation of the left as gutless and middle of the road: it only imagines its sees a difference between the two.

    Both are pandering to their respective base to make the electorate believe there is a significant difference between the two and a real choice whereas. there’s none to speak of. Both are establishment figureheads, if only in terms of fundraising from the Superpacs, Goldman Sachs, etc. Both are equally in pockets of the corporate America.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Why do we liberals still support Obama?

    1 – He’s a heck of a lot better than the alternative, which in this case would be one of the current crop of silly Republicans.

    2 – Obamacare – it’s not perfect, but once it’s on line (2014), it will be a heck of a lot better than what we have now.

    3 – It’s nice to have someone in office who actually understands diplomacy. Huntsman does – but there’s zero chance that the GOP will nominate him as their candidate. None of the other Republicans really have a clue when it comes to diplomacy.

  • Cannonshop

    #6 Glenn, as of this point in the election, there isn’t a candidate out there I’d “LIKE” to support. If you don’t recall a couple months back, I was calling the Republican field the “Seven Dwarfs”. It’s not complimentary, though now that it’s down below seven, I’m going to have to find a new insult to use.

    NONE of the men running has what I think this country actually needs-We NEED a Harry Truman, or maybe Eisenhower, someone “Liberal” on social issues, who understands you can’t spend more than you bring in indefinitely, with the balls to actually make it stick-even if it means raising taxes while you cut whole departments from the government.

    NONE of the douchebags, not the incumbent douchebag, or the “Challenger” douchebags, has that.

    What we need is someone who’ll end the ridiculous Security Theatre, block and/or veto things that violate and/or suspend the constitution, and say “NO” to further concentration of power.

    Not. Going. to. Happen.

    I’m seriously thinking I might just vote Cthulu this year-all we have are “Lesser” evils-truly lesser, banal, and in the end more destructive than praying for a fictional elder god to consume the world.

    This will be yet another year where I vote with no real enthusiasm, Glenn. The kind of people we need, aren’t the ones running.

  • Igor

    As near as I can tell the republicans have submitted NO plan for jobs. Of course, one expects that they will continue to oppose Obamas AJA, just because they can, and just because he’s dark-skinned and a democrat, too. It appears to me that the Republicans have set themselves as enemies of USA workers: they would be happy to do nothing. They are quite content to see more Americans out of work, families destroyed, and more homeless people.

    It appears that the republicans have set themselves in direct opposition to a large and ever-increasing number of Americans. Of course, eventually this will result in revolution. Violent bloody revolution. Can there be an other result? I don’t see how. Young Americans will not be willing to delude themselves the way that middle-aged Americans have. They will not be so passive, so willing to accept the judgments of their rulers.

    And the rules of imperial aggrandizement require that no let be given in the pursuit of more money and power by the republicans to the ordinary Americans whom they despise so much (they despise the very passivity that enriches them). Even as the ability to squeeze more out of the populace as it becomes even more impoverished and the returns on screwing Americans diminish, they will simply become more vicious. Perhaps they will insist on a return to indentured servitude, so that indebted Americans serve in slavery to pay off the debts at the company store, the debts that the powerful tell them they owe. A return to feudalism, which the Lords will welcome, I am sure, but which will disenchant the neo-serfs. Until they do what unhappy serfs always do: bloody revolt. Ho hum: the cycle of history, just as the Greeks predicted.

    In todays modern high-speed world, with small numbers of people having such great reach and able to deploy so quickly, all of this can happen very quickly. I always thought I’d be gone by the time the Wheel Of Misrule came around this far, but I’ll probably be fooled and get caught in the horror,but, on the other hand, why should I care? Why should YOU care? Unless, of course, you are very young.

  • Clavos

    …and just because he’s dark-skinned…

    That’s vile (and unfounded).

    Your entire comment is drawn from the fetid swamps of whatever’s left of your mind.

    You’re projecting again, Igor.

    What a canard.

  • Cannonshop

    #10 Igor, first off…if you think the Government is there to provide you a job, well, it’s not. Sorry to intrude on your diatribe with that sad fact. The Government exists and has a credit rating because OTHER people provide jobs, which in turn generate something called “Taxes”, those taxes pay for Government (theoretically).

    A “Government” jobs plan is, at best, a temporary band-aid, in this case, on a compound sucking-chest-wound and Spinal injury where the patient is bleeding out, and bleeding internally. (perhaps a better example would be putting fresh motor oil in an engine block that’s already thrown a rod.)

    SPENDNG MONEY YOU DON’T HAVE IS NOT A “PLAN”. It’s a reflex action ingrained into both the GOP and the Democrats, like the ‘extra’ behaviours in Piranha that make them swarm on anything that drops into the river, including inorganic and poisonous substances.

    Are you tracking so far?

    It’s NOT solving the problem, nor addressing the conditions that CREATED the problem. Fact is, cranking what the last guy did up to eleven and doing it again, just rewards the bad-actors, which is exactly what happened with the current malaise and the loss of Credit rating by Uncle Sam. Blame the other party all you want, fact is that when you are in debt, the first step to fixing it, is acknowledging that you have a problem and putting some brakes on the spending that CREATED the problem.

    Note that, in spite of partisan rhetoric, this has not happened YET, and likely won’t without a zimbwe-style monetary devaluation, or Soviet-Union style massive collapse.

    And the collapse is LIKELY-you can’t run a country indefinitely on delusions, if you could, the Confederacy might’ve won in 1865, the Kaiser in 1917, North Korea would be a paradise, nobody would be risking their life to escape Cuba,and the Soviets would’ve won the Cold War, etc. etc.

    (note for the historically “challenged”: Jeff Davis was tried, convicted, and executed, the Kaiser died in Exile, North Korea is a Hellpit, people are STILL risking their lives to get out of Cuba, and the Soviet Union has preceded the U.S. into the Ash Heap of History.)

    Government Solutions rarely work-there are exceptions: Governments are good at making conventional war and doing organized violence, they’re also good at building prisons, then filling them to overflowing. These are narrow mission profiles with very few variables compared to successfully implementing economic theories and/or models, which tend to exceed climate modeling in terms of complexity (which may explain why climate models tend to fail to work when you don’t massage the data, aka cook the books!)

    It’s visible that the more people depend on Government to solve problems, the less capable they and their progeny are, of surviving and overcoming problems. Sorry, dude, it’s true. Dependent people don’t make good decisions-and our malaise in this country is driven by bad decision making by a LOT of people.