President Barack Obama's recent comments about small business created a firestorm that could become a focus of the 2012 election — even as Obama and his supporters say his comments were taken out of context.
"Look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own," he said during a July 13 speech in Virginia. "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help ... If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Take the Patch poll below: Who plays the most significant role in creating jobs and economic growth?
That's not the entire speech, which you can read on the independent FactCheck.org. According to that post, the comments were taken out of context:
"There’s no question Obama inartfully phrased those two sentences, but it’s clear from the context what the president was talking about. He spoke of government — including government-funded education, infrastructure and research — assisting businesses to make what he called 'this unbelievable American system that we have.' "
With small business being the backbone of the local economy in all of our communities, Obama's words and the ensuing discussion have put an emphasis on whose responsibility it is to create jobs and economic growth. According to a recent Gallup poll, only 35 percent of business owners approve of the job the president has done.
So let's talk. Take the poll below and tell us in the comments:
- Which has the most valuable impact on a local community: small business, big business, local government or federal government?
- Are small business owners primarily responsible for the success or failure of their business?
- Were Obama's comments taken out of context, or do his critics have a fair point?
COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED ON THIS POST.
Can you provide a link to some of Romney's statements where he says that war will cure deficits?
Can you provide a link to some of Romney's statements where he says that war will cure deficits?
Sorry, that you are MISINFORMED...the fact is, Bain never went to ANY company unless they were requested and/or approved by that company. Only then Bain would do an analysis. What may, or may not be done. Then this was presented to the ownership, board of directors, etc. The decision on whether to let Bain take over was up SOLEY to the ownership. There was NEVER a leveraged buyout of hostile takeover. The owners KNEW, if/when they CONSENTed, exactly what the plan of action was. Still, there were no guarantees it would succeed. If ownership said NO, Bain left. Bain offered capital & management to provide a FAILING business an opportunity to succeed. Some people lost their jobs, but, the greater good was served. The alternative was EVERBODY lost their jobs & the community suffered. Bain NEVER went in to buy a SUCCESSFUL businesse. They risked their money. More jobs were created & communities served in a positive way than jobs lost & communities folded. Bain looked for companies that could become successful as only a FOOL would try to save a boat that is already sunk....but, again, Bain NEVER went to a company/business they were not INVITED to or ownership &/or Board didn't approve BEFOREHAND.
Some corporations have record earnings, others don't. Based on the uncertainty, it would WRONG for corporations not to have increased their cash reserves if they had the opportunity. Individuals and families have cut back on our spending, too. The rule of thumb of of having 6-months living expenses in the bank has changed so that the goal is to have a 12 to 18 months living expenses available. With the possibility of another downturn looming ahead, businesses need to have more cash available than they did. If instead, they spent their cash - and then went bankrupt because they couldn't pay their long-term debt, liberals would be screaming that those failed corporations did not meet their fiduciary responsibility. Please consider the reality of the situation.
As of 12/31/2006, unemployment was 4.4% and the federal debt was ~$8.7T. Three days later, Democrats took majority control of both houses of the 110th session of Congress. That's when the misery started. Instead of successfully dealing with the economic issues at hand, the Democrats who ran Congress spent their time and effort instead: 1) Undermining the Bush Administration; 2) Working to elect Barry, and; 3) Advancing their social agenda. I have to laugh about Dems' complaints that Bush vetoed their efforts to deal with the economy. Bush issued FEWER vetoes (12) than any president since Warren Harding - and 1/3 of Bush's vetoes were overruled by Congress! Furthermore, none of the successful vetoes had anything to do with bills pertaining to the economy. Consider that FDR used the veto 635 times - more than 50 times as often as Bush did. That's what REAL obstructionism looks like. And also consider that Dems locked Reps out of discussion sessions. Bush's biggest mistake was to try to include Dems in the government - like letting Ted Kennedy write NCLB or retaining Dem judges instead of replacing them.
Bain NEVER went in to buy a SUCCESSFUL businesse. Bain NEVER went to a company/business they were not INVITED to or ownership &/or Board didn't approve BEFOREHAND. Assuming that is true, which I have no idea of, how do you know that ALL of these companies were unprofitable? I find that hard to believe. I know one thing for sure. You can make more money moving the business to China or some other 3rd world country where people will work for as little as $200 a month versus $15 to $30 an hour in the U.S. I'll bet you could really stock up some serious wealth in a Swiss bank account doing that for a living. But don't call yourself an American when your fortune is made destroying American jobs and don't have the nerve to run for President. If he was a real American, he'd have figured out how to protect our jobs and keep them here, not be one of the main profiteers making money from destroying our job market. Our politicians were paid well to look the other way while millions of jobs went where the labor was dirt cheap. We gave the companies huge tax breaks and they moved the jobs anyway. We should have laws to keep those jobs here. If you want to make your products somewhere else and sell them here, be prepared to pay a nice big tax when you bring it into the country. That is the way it should have been. Maybe we'd have kept most of the jobs here if we'd done that..
7:02 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012 Mission and Philosophy. It is true, they have never went in where they were not invited and/or allowed.... As far as moving a company and jobs to another region, country, or even continent MAY happen. That is true also. That said, the ownership and/or board of directors is given that plan ahead of time and told if that is an option. The ownership makes the FINAL decision to agree or sennd Bain packing. They are under NO OBLIGATION, they are NEVER leveraged or taken over. Bain does not even BUY the company all times. Sometimes they offer capital for cash flow and management. When the company has made difficult changes or moves, if they opt to, they can institute their management and resume control of their company for a fee. Part of Bain's philosophy is also to retain all jobs in America. UNFORTUNATELY, this is not always an option. Some companies have gone overseas as a last resort...those people would have LOST THEIR JOB by way of closing anyway at that point. But if they DO go OVERSEAS, their are times the company got back on its feet and moved or expanded into AMERICA again. If they go overseas maybe their should be some questions as to why....is tax making profit impossible, do regs make profit impossible, does healthcare or other benefits prohibit proft? The choice to go overseas is the difference of surviving or sinking. It is a part of Bains
Is it realistic to begin the process of putting a referendum on the 2012 ballot at this point? Have your researched this? What do you want to use instead of US currency?
However, if you remember a short phrase from the email you received, you can use your browser's search function (usually activated with ctrl-f) to search for and find the target post in very little time.
(Dave, that's not true, btw. If only).
www.mybadbankexperience.com write all you want on that one too!