Originally Posted By fkurucz "remember Obama's private sector "fine" gaffe?" Given that Corporate America is still reporting record profits, I don't see how that's a "gaffe". Corporate America is making money hand over fist. Private sector employment is a disaster, thanks to the offshoring bulldozer, which actually receives tax breaks for offshoring jobs, (thanks blocking that tax break repeal, GOP!)
Originally Posted By TomSawyer It's telling that the health care industry is on the ropes, with even the most successful health care systems posting minimal profits or margins, while the health insurance industry is facing record profits and cash holdings.
Originally Posted By fkurucz ^^My GP's practice resembles a ghost town these days. Years ago, there was a wait as long as a week to see the doc. Today I can get in the same day. When I arrive, the waiting room is deserted, and if there is anyone else waiting, its a senior (probably on Medicare). In asking around informally, I keep hearing the same story from friends and acquaintances: Now that they've been forced into High Deductible plans by their small to medium sized employers, they can't afford to see the doctor and simply do without. This situation is going to continue to deteriorate and it's my opinion that our healthcare system will collapse in 5 to 10 years as providers become insolvent due to a lack of "customers"
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Both parties have them. You can identify which party they came from by if they get their own TV show afterwards (like North and Liddy).<< Be careful you will get slammed for making that observation...
Originally Posted By TomSawyer "Now that they've been forced into High Deductible plans by their small to medium sized employers, they can't afford to see the doctor and simply do without." That is one of the things that Obamacare changes - by 2018 you will be able to get preventive and annual check-ups care with no co-pay. Already, any new insurance plan is required to provide that. The health care system that I work for has opened a ton of new primary care clinics in the past few years getting ready for that, and for the new trend in corporate health insurance to have employees participate in wellness programs. We're also ramping up our family medicine residency programs.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>That is one of the things that Obamacare changes - by 2018 you will be able to get preventive and annual check-ups care with no co-pay. Already, any new insurance plan is required to provide that.<< True, but for anything else you still have to pay out of pocket. For a lot of people, having to cough up $100+ at the doctor's office, followed by more money at the pharmacy (and heaven help you if your prescription is for anything remotely new, it can cost you 100's) is a show stopper. I actually know of someone who was having chest pains and "toughed it out" because he knew a visit to the ER would cost over $1000.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Be careful you will get slammed for making that observation...> Slam away. Or give me a prominent Democrat with equivalent crimes to North and Liddy who got his/her own show.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Back OT, it just gets worse for Romney. <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/bain-capital-mitt-romney-outsourcing-china-global-tech" target="_blank">http://www.motherjones.com/pol...bal-tech</a> The Globe piece showed that Romney was still involved with Bain from 1999-2002, when some of the most egregious vulture capitalism was going on resulting in companies going belly up and American workers losing their jobs (but Bain making out like bandits). The Romney camp continues to try to say "hey - not responsible for that period!" but the Globe piece is making that a hard sell. Now this Mother Jones piece shows that in 1998 - when Romney was unmistakably calling the shots - Bain invested in a CHINESE company who specialized in poaching US manufacturing jobs. "Yet there is another aspect to the Romney-as-outsourcer controversy. According to government documents reviewed by Mother Jones, Romney, when he was in charge of Bain, invested heavily in a Chinese manufacturing company that depended on US outsourcing for its profits—and that explicitly stated that such outsourcing was crucial to its success. This previously unreported deal runs counter to Romney's tough talk on the campaign trail regarding China. "We will not let China continue to steal jobs from the United States of America," Romney declared in February. But with this investment, Romney sought to make money off a foreign company that banked on American firms outsourcing manufacturing overseas." (snip) "Both SEC filings identified Romney as the person in control of this investment: "Mr. W. Mitt Romney is the sole shareholder, sole director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Brookside Inc. and thus is the controlling person of Brookside Inc." Each of these documents was signed by Domenic Ferrante, a managing director of Brookside and Bain." (snip) "At the time Romney was acquiring shares in Global-Tech, the firm publicly acknowledged that its strategy was to profit from prominent US companies outsourcing production abroad. On September 4, 1998, Global-Tech issued a press release announcing it was postponing completion of a $30 million expansion of its Dongguan facility because Sunbeam, a prominent American consumer products company and a major client of Global-Tech, was cutting back on outsourcing as part of an overall consolidation. But John C.K. Sham, Global-Tech's president and CEO, said, "Although it appears that customers such as Sunbeam are not outsourcing their manufacturing as quickly as we had anticipated, we still believe that the long-term trend toward outsourcing will continue." Global-Tech, which in mid-1998 announced fiscal year sales of $118.3 million (an increase of 89 percent over the previous year), also manufactured household appliances for Hamilton Beach, Mr. Coffee, Proctor-Silex, Revlon, and Vidal Sassoon, and its chief exec was hoping for more outsourcing from these and other American firms." (snip) "Brookside downsized its Global-Tech holdings later in 1998. An SEC filing submitted on December 21, 1998, reported that the Bain affiliate now controlled only 4.63 percent of the company's shares. But Brookside was sharing its stake in Global-Tech with Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors LTD—a Bermuda-based corporation of which Romney was the "the sole shareholder, a director, and President." That is, Romney had split his Global-Tech holdings between two of his various business entities. (The SEC filing doesn't indicate why he did that.) Sankaty is a story in itself. It was recently the focus of an Associated Press investigation that reported that Sankaty "is among several Romney holdings that have not been fully disclosed" and that there is a "mystery surrounding" Sankaty. Reporting on this Romney entity, Vanity Fair noted that "investments in tax havens such as Bermuda raise many questions, because they are in 'jurisdictions where there is virtually no tax and virtually no compliance,' as one Miami-based offshore lawyer put it." With Sankaty, Romney was using a mysterious Bermuda-based entity to invest in a Chinese firm that thrived on US outsourcing." Ruh roh indeed, Rillard.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage Why are you still touting the Globe article when it has been shown to be false? <a href="http://factcheck.org/2012/07/romneys-bain-years-new-evidence-same-conclusion/" target="_blank">http://factcheck.org/2012/07/r...clusion/</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/do-bain-sec-documents-suggest-mitt-romney-is-a-criminal/2012/07/12/gJQAlyPpgW_blog.html?hpid=z2" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...?hpid=z2</a>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Why are you still touting the Globe article when it has been shown to be false?> Still? Both those articles came out today. Having just read them both for the first time, they basically say that the Globe doesn't prove Romney was making day to day decisions for Bain - but that it remains possible that he was. Which is basically what the Globe piece (carefully) said. The question is the extent of his involvement. Romney has basically said there was no involvement whatsoever; the Globe questions that, and I believe common sense does also. If you were sole stockholder and CEO of a company, even if you were doing a temporary gig in SLC, it beggars belief that you wouldn't have some knowledge of the goings on, the investments, the layoffs, etc. happening during this time. Did he make the decisions that led to these things? Maybe, maybe not. But he must have at the very least been aware that HIS company was doing these things. Meanwhile, the Chinese company adds a new wrinkle. This was 1998 - when Romney was unquestionably in charge.
Originally Posted By andyll Bain Capital is a venture capital company. While there are day to day tasks in the investment of its funds and companies it owned shares in the bread and butter of a venture capital company is to find and vet new oppotunities to invest in. It boggles the mind to believe that the sole stockowner would not be involved in any major deals. And if he was officially the President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board then he was legally responsible for any decisions it made whether he was working day to day or not. The 'fact-checking' in this case is not passing the smell test.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "Both those articles came out today." What is the date on the FactCheck article? What is today's date? What is the date on this article? <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/12/politics/john-king-bain/index.html?hpt=hp_c1" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/12/...pt=hp_c1</a> Why are you relying on Mother Jones as a primary news source?
Originally Posted By andyll <<What is the date on the FactCheck article? What is today's date?>> Posted on July 12, 2012 , Updated on July 13, 2012 <<Why are you relying on Mother Jones as a primary news source?>> Are you claiming the SEC documents are faked? Are you claiming Romny did not claim he was a MASS resident during the Olympic planning?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<"Both those articles came out today.">> <What is the date on the FactCheck article?> Updated July 13. <What is today's date?> July 13. Seriously, you shouldn't make it so easy. <Why are you relying on Mother Jones as a primary news source?> It's an excellent magazine, and David Corn is particularly good. If you can disprove its findings, feel free to do so. We'll wait.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "Are you claiming the SEC documents are faked?" What does my question have to do with yours?
Originally Posted By Vic Sage "Updated July 13." Why did you leave off the original posting date? "If you can disprove its findings, feel free to do so." Hasn't the Washington Post, FactCheck, and CNN already done that?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Updated July 13.>> <Why did you leave off the original posting date?> Because the update was what made it new. This is not rocket science. <<If you can disprove its findings, feel free to do so.>> <Hasn't the Washington Post, FactCheck, and CNN already done that?> Not that I've seen. I'm talking specifically about Bain investing in the Chinese company in 1998. You've found articles that disprove that? Link, please, or we'll have to conclude you're being intentionally misleading. Which would put you in the company of a certain presumptive GOP nominee.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan When will Mittens release his tax records? That would clear things up.
Originally Posted By ecdc I read through the Washington Post link. It definitely takes the Obama camp to task for labeling Romney's activities as potentially criminal. Even before I saw these, I thought that was a bit of overreach on their part. That said, they corroborate that documents do show Romney was involved in the company after 1999. To what extent is unclear, but as someone pointed out, it's difficult not to imagine Romney being at least consulted on major decisions, given that his name appeared on several documents.
Originally Posted By Vic Sage <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mystery-mitt-romney-exit-bain-stericycle" target="_blank">http://www.motherjones.com/pol...ericycle</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/globe-to-credit-tpm-mother-jones-in-bain-romney-story/2012/07/12/gJQACiobfW_blog.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...log.html</a> If the Globe article relied on the Mother Jones article, and the Globe article was wrong, doesn't that make the Mother Jones article wrong? "Link, please, or we'll have to conclude you're being intentionally misleading." Do you often accuse people of doing things you are doing?
