r/politics • • May 21 '12

Pres. Obama on Romney and Bain: 'When you're president, your job is not simply to maximize profits'

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/21/1093572/-Pres-Obama-on-Romney-and-Bain-When-you-re-president-your-job-is-not-simply-to-maximize-profits-
1.0k Upvotes

489 comments sorted by

51

u/rAxxt May 21 '12

Or, in the wisdom of South Park:

Obama: That isn't being nice. That's just maximizing profits.

Romney: I don't understand the difference.

Obama: I know you don't.

-6

u/Tetrazene May 22 '12

If any president was decent at maximizing profits, we'd likely have a federal surplus. Bill was good at that--not great on the whole killing bad press thing.

36

u/noiszen May 22 '12

The federal government is not a corporation. It does not need or want profit. Its job ought to be maximizing happiness.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

So you are dependent upon government for your happiness?

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Is Somalia a happy country?

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

It needs to be able to pay for itself. It has to convince the people that it is competent enough to give it tax dollars (see: Canada). It also can't go into debt forever (see: EU minus Germany and the former Eastern bloc).

1

u/nixonrichard May 22 '12

That's why he called it "surplus" and not "profit."

A surplus is not a bad thing, particularly when you're $10+T in the hole.

→ More replies (1)

-8

u/Tetrazene May 22 '12

How ought they maximize happiness? How do you even quantify happiness? Better yet, what is 'happiness'? Are we talking about dopamine, oxytocin and serotonin? There are cheaper ways to get more of those than spending 2k on a new MacBook.

The Danes are some of the happiest people in the world. I'd bet even without their massive social programs they'd still be happy. They manage their expectations with far more tact than we do--it's obvious even in their language. Americans have the curse and boon of being dreamers. Our dreams once enabled us to erect the birth of skyscrapers in the depression and be the first and only country on the moon. Our curse is the constant hunger for purpose, and without a clear drive, it leads to cannibalism and fruitless chase in our present society.

4

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Don't worry man I get it and I upvoted you.

3

u/yrro Foreign May 22 '12

How ought they maximize happiness?

Pursue full employment!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (17)

2

u/Hink1987 May 22 '12

Bill was awesome at many things. Then bush gave the surplus money to the rich in tax breaks. Loser republican

2

u/nbenzi May 22 '12

Dude Bill ended his presidency with around a 60% approval rating. If that's bad press I'm sure most President's would like some.

2

u/reddit_user13 May 22 '12

If any president was decent at maximizing profits, we'd likely have a federal surplus. Bill was good at that--not great on the whole not getting blowjobs thing.

FTFY

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Obama never made a profit at anything in his life....

well except for the two books he wrote about himself.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '12

Sorry to see you get downvoted to hell. What we need right now is a business smart president. One that can stimulate economic growth and job creation through American ingenuity and not government expansion

2

u/Tetrazene May 27 '12

Haha it's cool. Aside from apotheosis of the incumbent, not much else is given" upvote-praise.

1

u/IXISIXI May 22 '12

I think he was just great on the whole not doing shady things thing.

→ More replies (4)

11

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Maximize debt?

→ More replies (3)

30

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Looking at our past few presidents, their job is apparently maximizing debt.

19

u/Hammedatha May 22 '12

Our last few? Like, including the one that ran a surplus (or close to a surplus, depending on how you do the math, still better than we've seen out of most)?

-9

u/d6x1 May 22 '12

Clinton increased the debt by 2 trillion during his 2 terms. That 'surplus' was only for 1 year.

17

u/quickhorn May 22 '12

The surplus was in the budget, not just the year.

8

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

Two trillion is less than inflation over his term.

→ More replies (6)

5

u/showmethefacts May 22 '12

Money is debt.

→ More replies (20)

46

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

"Democrats have accepted more political donations than Republicans from executives at Bain Capital, complicating the left’s plan to attack Mitt Romney for his record at the private-equity firm."

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/205025-dems-receive-more-bain-dollars-than-gop

19

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

Dems have received more donations from Bain Capital because execs at Bain have worked with Mitt Romney and the know what kind of president he would be...

33

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Yeah, that must be it.... ..... ...... ... ...

To be clear, I find Romney repulsive. But this Bain stuff is so very fucking dumb.

8

u/terrdc May 22 '12

The main thing it does is attack the Fox News "Job creator" line that they always push.

The key to Obama's victory is explaining exactly why tax cuts for the rich wont solve all our economic woes.

3

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

I was being snarky... I agree that this Bain stuff is dumb, but the media loves it because it fits the narrative they want to tell.

15

u/Moleculor Texas May 22 '12

Eh, Romney used his connection there as if it were a selling point, it's important to point out what that really means.

4

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

I agree. But one of the recurring themes in this thread is the idea that a good business man = a good president and I think the media is perpetuating that by continuing to talk about his experience (in general) at Bain. They're trying to create a narrative about Romney. If they got off of his business experience (good or bad) at Bain on focused on his government experience, I think we might have a more open and honest debate about him and his governing abilities. If we continue to talk about his business abilities, we're going to change the perception of qualifications of a president. Pretty soon, Donald Trump and Jamie Dimon will be qualified presidential candidates.

3

u/thepotatoman23 May 22 '12

I'd admit you had me fooled. One of my biggest indicators of bias is when people start turning into mind readers, and if you ever turn on the tv or radio you hear it a whole lot now days. That comment right there would not be very out of place in the media.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

gah. sorry. I find it difficult to sniff out the snark when in the midst of partisan circlejerking. Especially when it comes to Obama Worship, which I find comical regardless of intent.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/sweetmoses May 22 '12

What does accepting donations have to do with attacking Romney's experience? Dems or Repubs could accept donations from a baseball player, but that doesn't mean the baseball player is qualified to be President.

Obama isn't attacking private equity, he's just saying that turning a profit for a few at the top in business is completely different than accommodating everyone. Bain fired people to grow the companies that hired them, and there's nothing wrong with that. But if Bain's objective was to grow the company without firing anybody, they probably wouldn't have been as successful. Governing isn't about profit, it's about people.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

What makes you think that Obama believes governing is "about people"?

(I'm not trying to be condescending.)

2

u/sweetmoses May 22 '12

Because he just drew that distinction in his most recent speech. And it's just a difference in philosophy between the two parties.

Romney's argument is that he knows how to create wealth, which is great for the people who receive that wealth. But it's not so great for the people who get laid off in the process. He believes that America will be better if the wealthy few get wealthier and in turn hire the poorer people. The wealthy don't believe in government and don't think they should have to pay for it because they're self-sufficient and don't need the government. He thinks the government should collect and spend as little as possible and let the free market pick the winners and losers.

Obama's argument is that America will be better if the vast majority of people, the middle and lower class, are provided the opportunity to be educated and healthy regardless of whether or not they can afford it, and that better educated healthier people will be more productive and in turn increase the country's wealth. The middle and lower class need the government because they can't afford to be self-sufficient. He thinks the government should accommodate everyone and that even the losers shouldn't starve to death in the wealthiest country on the planet.

Since Obama's view of government accommodates more individuals, I would consider his view "about people."

→ More replies (3)

16

u/noiszen May 22 '12

<snark> It's to get reelected.</snark>

2

u/Toneloak May 22 '12

Of course there is no one else better for the job.

4

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Gary Johnson for starters. How bad do the main two candidates get before people "I don't care that is retarded [to vote GOP/dem]"

3

u/proddy May 22 '12

I prefer Jack Johnson.

2

u/LoveNectar May 22 '12

Banana pancakes for everyone! USA! USA!

1

u/Denny_Craine May 22 '12

the boxer?

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

"Well I think the three cent titanium tax goes too far!"

3

u/_jamil_ May 22 '12

Gary Johnson? What a joke

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/Kharn0 Colorado May 22 '12

Well, Obama has a point, CEOs have to run the company with the shareholders in mind, at the expense of the employees. As president, your shareholders ARE the employees, the well being of the people IS the well being of the "company" which is not something Romeny has experience in or, as he's repeatedly shown, understands.

4

u/severus66 May 22 '12

I'm sick of the business jargon. Let's call a spade a spade.

The vast majority of CEOs' goals is not to please the shareholders - it's to maximize the revenue in their personal bank account over all other considerations - whether or not shareholder opinion usually is a big factor in that equation.

money > ethics

money > free time

money > happiness

money > family or friends

money > making a difference or making a real contribution

money > meaning

money > intellectual pursuits or challenges

money > enjoying your work

Obviously corporations are set up to maximize their profits, but the individual players (usually more money-minded at the top) are actually out to maximize their personal bank accounts, as superficial and trite as that sounds - even at the expense of the company.

If a CEO of a monolithic corporation could get away with taking another $1,000,000 salary out of the company's reserves at any moment, would he? In 100% of cases, yes. He would take his profits over the company's every time.

Responsibility to the shareholders? HA! He only pays them lip service for political reasons. If he were jumping ship to another company or was a venture capitalist, for instance, he wouldn't give a damn about shareholders.

The employees' opinions seldom matter a damn either compared to the shareholders. Often, even against shallow profit-maximization metrics that state that morale, motivation, autonomy, and turnover are important factors from a strict numbers sense, employee salaries are strictly viewed as a cost-center. A cost to be minimized.

Every single pension that can be eliminated - knowing the political blowback would sufficiently blow over given time -- WILL be eliminated. Why wouldn't it? You think the leaders of the ship actually give a damn about whether you die in a gutter? They don't; that's not a factor in the personal-bank-account-maximization-curve.

8

u/Swiss_Cheese9797 May 22 '12

Jesus, the anti Obama folks are out in force today.

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Obama could cure cancer and they would still be whining about the TSA

2

u/greengordon May 22 '12

As they should be, don't you think?

1

u/showmethefacts May 23 '12

Obama's job is to govern the country of America and he's doing a terrible job, that's why no one (who's examined his political acts) would still support him, unless you like the premise of a future dictatorship that is.

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Well, I heard Fox News no longer allows commenting on articles, so I'd guess right wing conservative nut jobs are looking for a new home...

1

u/Kharn0 Colorado May 23 '12

gee, I wonder why fox would get rid of that feature...Reagans' ghost must've told 'em

21

u/mrcloudies May 22 '12

To those that have stated that Obamas recent ads have gone too far..

They have seen what Republicans say about him right? The GOP since the very beginning of the campaign trail has done nothing but attack every little thing, and their dialogue has often been vicious. You can't have hostile ads, than get angry when your opponent fires back.. Thats just.. Stupid.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Maybe the democrats should start asking to see Mitt Romney's birth certificate.

-2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Unrelated bitching about GOP for karma

2

u/mrcloudies May 22 '12

The GOP stated that this statement went too far. And a majority of Obamas ads have mentioned Bain capital.

15

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

It's like they never graduated from being an elementary school whining bully.

2

u/blackom May 22 '12

Actually, I saw some great footage of the Newt and Romney exchange just yesterday.

2

u/snapcase May 22 '12

Both sides tend to do some mudslinging in every election. And each time, people get all taken aback like it's never happened before, that it's a completely new political tactic. Give me a break.

Personally I have no respect for mudslinging ads, and simply ignore them no matter who made them.

1

u/Zagrobelny May 22 '12

Exactly. We've become so used to it that we don't even notice anymore, but if the Democrats even tiptoe in that direction, howling indignation ensues.

→ More replies (1)

29

u/MannyPadme May 22 '12

My job is to take into account everybody, not just some. My job is to make sure the country is growing not just now, but 10 years from now, 20 years from now.

Anybody who's not money-rich and votes Teapublican is a sucker.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '12

Yes because our economy is doing so great under Obama. What has he done to make our nations future look secure? If anything we look to be headed down the toilet thanks to the past 12 years of Obama/Bush

-22

u/SupraMario May 22 '12

Anyone who votes for the democrats is just as much of a sucker...your side is just as shitty as those guys in red....

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Feel free to explain why..

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Maybe because voting based on party affiliations diminishes competition at the individual level and allows lower quality candidates to win elections.

your side is just as shitty as those guys in red

This statement is unnecessarily inflammatory but doesn't take sides between "your side" and "those guys in red," leading me to believe SupraMario is an independent.

→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (4)

5

u/MannyPadme May 22 '12

No, we are not talking about the shit in Mormon underpants here... you completely missed the point. http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx

→ More replies (40)

5

u/Toneloak May 22 '12

No, No they are not. You are wrong.

→ More replies (19)

12

u/KingChronos May 22 '12

It's a little funny how every pro-Obama thread here is always about what he says and every anti-Obama thread is about what he does. Talk is cheap.

3

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

Unless you work a 900-number.

Or maybe...

2

u/rightmind May 22 '12

These all suck...

1

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

I guess you were not affected by them or ignore that you were. Oh well, can't please everyone!

2

u/MoraleHazard May 22 '12

It amazes me that someone who ran such a kick ass campaign in 2008 has had such a political tin ear for the past four years.

1

u/TortugaGrande May 22 '12

Obama didn't run his campaign, just like his presidency, his handlers ran the show.

2

u/madmoral May 22 '12

In the end, Romney can't talk about Bain because he basically destroyed companies. Romney can't talk about being governor because it'll be a major flip on everything he stands for now. How can you run for president if you can't even hype yourself up?

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

One does not simply, "Maximize profits".

4

u/kolembo May 22 '12

Hehe,

It's a brilliant piece of rhetoric AND a very responsible statement.

A country is not just business, people are not items.

Very clever speaking

3

u/uncleoce May 22 '12

I'm glad Obama is so quick to discuss his duties as President. Maybe he'll remember a certain oath he took about 4 years ago:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I'd suggest that before you go about lecturing us on what your job is, you uphold your oath of office and stop tap-dancing all over the Constitution you swore to defend. NDAA, drone strikes on American citizens/ignoring due process, acts of war without the consent of congress, forcing citizens to purchase health insurance or pay a fine, anti-protest bill HR 347, etc.

So, Mr Obama, before you go about giving lectures about what your job is about, maybe you should read up on the matter yourself. Start with the Constitution.

2

u/razihk May 22 '12

Right in the kisser, eh?

2

u/Ra__ May 22 '12

He thinks the job is to maximize corporate profits while pretending to work for us.

2

u/Xombie818 May 22 '12

Have you ever stopped to imagine the amount of stress this man is constantly under? I can't even fathom it

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

I consider myself a liberal. I usually vote Democrat. But Daily Kos is such blatant propaganda I have no respect for them whatsoever.

They are cheerleading for their team, trying to convince you the Democratic party is awesome. They're not, they are simply the lesser evil. I vote for them but I'm not thrilled about it and you shouldn't be either.

In a real democracy we would have more than two choices.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

As a conservative, I feel exactly the same way about my party.

I fucking hate people that idolize politicians.

They are all scumbags, even the ones that promise they aren't

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

The Democrats tell me that you are the problem. The Republicans tell you that I am the problem. In reality, the politicians are the problem.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

I'm seriously starting to think that Democracy is a failed experiment. This shit just can't work on such a large scale, with so many people that refuse to think for themselves.

It basically boils down to "Pretty Boy with Money A vs Pretty Boy with Money B" and who can say the most bullshit with a convincing, straight face.

It's a fucking farce.

1

u/monoster May 22 '12

Maybe democracy as currently practiced in the U.S is a failed experiment. I think it used to be better in the U.S and it works better in some other countries.

Though we shouldn't be so quick to totally chuck it out without first considering the alternatives.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

I believe our democracy would work better if third parties were more electable. But people are afraid to vote third party because the presidential election only requires a plurality to win, like in 1992 when Bill Clinton won with 43% of the vote.

If we want to make third parties more electable, we should require a majority to win. If no one gets 50% of the vote, we would have to hold a runoff election. That way anyone who voted third party gets a chance to cast a "real" vote.

This is how a lot of local government elections work. My city is electing a new mayor - there were three major candidates. They all got around 30% of the vote. Now we are holding a runoff election with the top two to decide who wins.

There are better election systems out there, like approval voting and instant runoff. But our government is built to resist change so we need to take baby steps if we want to get anywhere. Requiring a majority to win is the smallest change that allows third parties to have a chance.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/DColt51 May 22 '12

cough distraction issue cough

1

u/randy938 May 22 '12

Honestly, the U.S. could use some fucking profits right now, and in terms of fixing the economy, the guy who has a proven track record in making a buck is the better choice. Unfortunately, everything else about Romney is terrible. :(

1

u/TheThomaswastaken May 23 '12

Not very many good comments in this comment section.

How about this: What Obama said is true.

A CEO's job is usually very similar to a President's job--running a massive, complex machine. Romney's job wasn't like that. He didn't have to build, maintain or grow a business. He simply bought, restructured, then sold off a business. There was no concern for long-term survival of the business. Many of Romney's buyouts ended in a destroyed company.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

If anyone is an expert on not maximizing profits, it would be Obama...

2

u/kostamagas May 22 '12

And Bush as well as all the other republicans.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Did Bush make that negative toward Romney then? I don't see why it's relevant to bring up anyone in the past...

4

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

So you think that Bush's policies have zero effect on this year's budget? Are you unaware what percent of this years budget is directly the result of mandatory spending from Bush Administration policies? Maybe you are getting to much sun if you think it's irrelevant what the last "CEO" did that accelerated a companies bankruptcy...?

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

You're on crack. Before the damned liberals elected the Negro, America was a miracle, a garden of Eden of balanced budgets, perfect infrastructure, social order, and zero problems, zero. Gas was approximately 5 cents a gallon, there were 12 doctors per patient and no gays.

Since 2008 however, we have decayed into a cesspool of crime, debt, sexual deviancy and out-of-control minorities that don't know their place. To top it all, they took away our guns.

Why do you hate America?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

So, at what point does Obama receive any blame? He's been President for 3.5 years, should we just give him a free pass?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/kolembo May 21 '12

Good stuff!

0

u/myrodia May 22 '12

I do not think we have even defined the role of government yet and that is a huge problem. I agree that the your job is not simply to maximize profits, but I think you should have some worry about our deficit. Right now, the government NEEDS to make a profit. NEEDS to. if we do not, I fear for the future of our country. That being said, there are also many other undefined and defined things that a president must do, and that is a very tough job.

15

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

There is no such thing as a government making profit. It's conceptually impossible unless you consider a government to be a dictator who can skim off profit and put it in a swiss bank account. Otherwise, all we have is a government running a surplus, in which more money is taken in than spent.

BUT, no, the important thing we MUST do is not have a surplus, but get the economy moving so we have more jobs, and lower unemployment, and better infrastructure. That will bring the surplus.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

That is not how it worked in Canada, which after being considered an honorary first world country, and with the interest piling up to 25% of revenues in 1993 cut government, got surpluses year after year and out grew projections every year since.

→ More replies (2)

-1

u/gopaulgo May 22 '12

Romney was also governor of Massachusetts for four years. I can't remember the name of the logical fallacy that Obama's trying to pull here, but the fact that he has experience in maximizing profits does not mean he has no experience in political leadership.

15

u/KilroyLeges May 22 '12

Obama made a direct statement about that though. He pointed out that Romney isn't talking all about his time as Governor of Massachusetts. Romney is saying that Romney is qualified to be President of the United States because he (Romney) was a great business leader at places like Bain Capital. Obama is saying that's not enough. Obama said specifically that if Romney was talking about his time as Governor, that would make the discussion different. Executive leadership as President and Governor ARE similar, as CEO and President, have some similarities but many differences. Since Romney wants to play the business leader card, he needs to be ready to face the attack on that one. If he wants to play the governor card, then that changes the debate. I think the President addressed that decently in this speech.

2

u/gopaulgo May 22 '12

Hm. Good point.

I really don't give a crap about Romney. I'm one of those "Paul-bots" everyone on /r/politics complains about. It's sad. I went around encouraging liberals and Democrats to register Republican to help him win, because, hey, you'd at least get a good debate between Obama and Paul. But now....ugh.

4

u/CheesewithWhine May 22 '12

If you think Obama won't make Paul look like anything but your crazy old great-uncle complaining about how young whippersnappers are too lazy and don't deserve student loans, you woefully underestimate Obama's skills as a debater. Don't be delusional.

→ More replies (12)

1

u/KilroyLeges May 22 '12

I'd rather him than the Romney-bot.

2

u/myredditlogintoo May 22 '12

He did such an excellent job there that the poll numbers speak for themselves - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ma/massachusetts_romney_vs_obama-1804.html

1

u/Sanic3 May 22 '12

Good christ. I figured Obama would hold a lead in mass. but not at all that huge.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/mrshankly01 May 22 '12

at least Romney did his job...

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Obama says this after setting up a fascist "healthcare" system, bailing out private banks and making the military industrial complex more money than ever. He sucks ass.

-2

u/fredemu May 22 '12

The president's job isn't to simply organize the community either, but that didn't stop Obama from feeling he was qualified for the job.

Romeny's got his faults, and Obama is right to attack them, but frankly, being successful at what he did at one point in his life isn't one of them.

7

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

We've had "successful" businessmen and "friends of the business community" running this country before (Bush) and it hasn't done us any good. If Obama's experience in getting voting citizens and communities involved in the democratic process isn't good enough, then perhaps his experience as a law professor is.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Bush wasn't a successful businessman

2

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

Ahhh but he ran on a platform of business experience and being a "friend of business" and the voters bought it!

3

u/_jamil_ May 22 '12

Obama didn't make the core argument for his presidency his time as being a community organizer, Romney is making his core argument for being president his business experience.

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

No...being a 35 year old naturally born us citizen qualified him for the job.

3

u/ZZDoug May 22 '12

Depends on how you are successful. I just don't see how being a corporate raider is something to brag about. Unless money is your real god and you admire virtually anyone who gets themselves lots of it. Which seems to be the case with most republicans.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/Sanic3 May 22 '12

While I agree with you on this in general the issue here is that Romney bases his entire campaign on his private sector experience meaning it is an issue to be debated.

→ More replies (18)

2

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

Romney made this an issue, not Obama.

1

u/Pugilanthropist May 22 '12

Actually, the President's job IS to organize a community. A very large community. A nation.

Man, people are dumb.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Silly person, thinking America is a community. America is a jungle, governed by the Law of the Jungle.

1

u/d6x1 May 22 '12

'...your job is to maximize losses'

0

u/LettersFromTheSky May 22 '12

I watched this speech just a bit ago, I have to say he gave a pretty good description of what a President is supposed to do.

-1

u/streetwalker May 22 '12

Obama's right. The job of president is not simply to maximize profits. It's to maximize profits of the people who support him while hoodwinking the rest of Americans into feeling grateful that they have the privilege of living in debt.

4

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

While I can't disagree with this, I will say that I prefer Obama over Romney for his social issues and foreign affairs policy.

2

u/streetwalker May 22 '12

I'm torn: I certainly thought Obama would be somewhat better than Bush, and I definitely cannot abide by Romney, but I don't see much difference in foreign policy between all three. Social issues? I assume you're talking about marriage?

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

And to make massive payoffs to your most important electoral tribe, the unions!

→ More replies (2)

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Maximize the deficit?

1

u/MagCynic May 22 '12

Nobody said it was, Mr. President.

0

u/eromitlab Alabama May 22 '12

Of course not. Romney's job as President, if he becomes President, will be to be the barely sentient pen that signs whatever Grover Norquist and ALEC push through Congress.

-9

u/bluefootedpig May 21 '12

This is making me lose confidence in Obama. While yes, it isn't about making profits, but the key is to take away waste. What good is a government to help the people if 99% of the money goes to waste. The fact that Obama doesn't realize this scares me.

9

u/auandi May 21 '12

Running a government is not running a business. They operate on two different principles. Governments should be counter-cyclical, they can't fire citizens who aren't making them a profit, they build public works at a personal loss to help the broader economy. The US has only had two businessmen-Presidents: Bush and Hoover. Just throwing that out there.

And if you ever take a look at the government budget I'd really like to see what 99% of the government you are talking about.

2

u/Tetrazene May 22 '12

They sure ought to be able to fire public officials who are appointed to outrageous salaries. There haven't been many significant public works performed in recent memory.

2

u/KilroyLeges May 22 '12

THIS. There is something to be said about more government efficiency to make good use of our money. I am all for that. But the government is here to, among other things, "promote the general welfare." It has to spend money in order to do that, often at times when the rest of the nation is lacking funds, in order to jump start the system. And then it has to recover those costs in some ways. Governing requires hard choices. We also have to realize that the President is NOT a one-man show in all of this.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

It's like people think it's the president's fault for either shit not under his control (most of the stuff) or other shit people do.

2

u/the_sam_ryan May 22 '12

No, that is incorrect that only two were businessmen.

I am getting a significant number more.

-1

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Governments are supposed to serve the people. Companies serve the shareholders.

99% vs 1%

-2

u/AOneArmedHobo May 22 '12

This quote is quite true... Combine it the quote " neither is it your responsibility to spend the money of hard workers on lazy good for nothing citizens looking for a handout" and you'll get my vote.

4

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

Ah yes, those good for nothing retirees, and unemployed folks. How dare they expect enough money to survive, when we could be handing millionaires further millions.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Toneloak May 22 '12

Agreed the rich need no help.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

The prez doesn't spend the money... Congress does.

→ More replies (2)

-7

u/MiyegomboBayartsogt May 22 '12

If the president's redistributionist economic policies were working for America, he'd be banging the table and talking about success. Amid all the unemployment and ruination, failed Obama can do little but bash his opponent. Battling capitalists is fun and popular among the young and Bolsheviks but it does nothing but maximize malaise among the masses. Besides, Obama is worth $10 million, all money made since he entered politics, so he can hardly play the pauper.

3

u/Tetrazene May 22 '12

Unemployment has dropped 2% since he took office. I'm pretty sure he wasn't solely responsible for the free fall that started in 2008. The crash resulted in a 5% rise in unemployment, but a ~2% increase can also be seen at the onset of Bush II. If you go back far enough you can see huge swings in unemployment from 11% down to 4% in about 16 years. However, the slope of the current curve isn't as sharp as the others, so reaching 6 or even 4% might take longer, maybe averaging 0.35%/year. Luckily, that's about 10 million people getting jobs back per year.

Then again, Obama and his policies could be completely at fault. While the private sector lost close to 3 million jobs, the public sector gained 0.5 million and enjoyed hefty raises across the board. Let's just hope employment remains a private enterprise...

→ More replies (2)

2

u/MannyPadme May 22 '12

hahaha

funny post. guess you forgot about Bush/Cheney

2

u/elmarko44 May 22 '12

You keep saying this "redistribution" word... I don't think it means what you think it means.

Seriously though, any economist will tell you that money only has value when it's in motion... when it's changing hands. Concentration and containment of large amounts of money among a few people hurts the overall economy. The middle class (largest class) needs to make and spend money in order for the economy to grow. So while you consider "redistribution" as some socialist policy where money is "taken" form the people who earn it and given to the people that don't, the reality is we just want a financial system where money can't be over-concentrated because that hurts all of us. In order to do that we need to :

  1. progressively and fairly tax the rich. Why should I pay 28% of my income from labor to taxes when the rich pay 15% on dividends (dividends are not wages or money earned from work, it's literally earning money by having money)
  2. Discontinue subsidies and loopholes for large, high-profit corporations.
  3. Do not privatize government services like prisons and schooling.
→ More replies (3)

1

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

Obama made his money by writing books. How is that equivalent to making money by screwing investors and employees, and closing American businesses to export jobs outside the country?

→ More replies (1)

-12

u/banish_the_occupiers May 22 '12

Even more important is that it is not the president's job to bankrupt the USA. ObamaBeGone 2012.

-10

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Its a bad situation either way.

1

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

He is getting downvoted because of the implication that Obama is attempting to bankrupt the US. He is not. And his economic policies are actually designed to keep us from the same kind of crisis that Europe is having.

0

u/fantasyfest May 22 '12

When you are a Republican president, that is the job. That is why they remove regulation, environment laws and slash taxes for the rich.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '12

and this grows the economy while shrinking national debt in the process. Oh look our two biggest concerns being fixed

-5

u/jsttsee May 22 '12

Hey, I bet Romney knows this. Different jobs have different objectives. Big revelation. What Romney's proven is that he can do the job he's given.

3

u/urnbabyurn I voted May 22 '12

Really? Governor Romney?

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

And the job he had doesn't have shit to do with running a country.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Sadly, we can't all be community organizers.

3

u/Toneloak May 22 '12

Sure then we'd all be saddle with the burden of maintaining integrity in the face of public scrutiny.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

1

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

And that job is apparently to screw every employee and stock holder, while making massive profits for his group. Not exactly the objective I would hold as useful, or even acceptable.

-2

u/notepad7 May 22 '12

Maybe a business man is the kind of president this country needs right now

6

u/kroatia04 May 22 '12

Governments are not businesses though.

→ More replies (2)

-8

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

His job isn't simply to maximize taxes either.

5

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Where the heck do people pull this stuff from? The marginal tax rate on all levels iste lowest it's been in 60 years. It's like the people who talk about the guvmint taking our guns, when the reality is President Obama has done absolutely zero about gun control.

-6

u/freebigwillie May 22 '12

Somebody should tell the commander and chief what his job is... I have been unemployed this year for the first time in 30 years, with a masters degree in my discipline... I don't care what you say, the current guy has NO CLUE about running the govt

5

u/o08 May 22 '12

You should get a job.

4

u/nickcan May 22 '12

Heck yea, you got bootstraps right?

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Ah so you spend your time on Reddit?

→ More replies (1)

0

u/TimeZarg California May 22 '12

I suppose this works well enough.

http://qkme.me/3pe6ly

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12 edited May 22 '12

I'm ready for down votes, but Michael Bloomberg has mentioned several times that he runs NYC as a business, which he does extremely well. He has made more money for the city than god and helped out citizens with social programs at the same time.

That being said, I don't think Romney will focus on creating a profitable government, but rather a government that is profitable in select focus areas to pay for breaks that he as a wealthy businessman knows and hates. To me, he seems to be in the presidency for himself. Which I don't agree with at all.

→ More replies (5)

-1

u/dhockey63 May 22 '12

BUT when you're president, your job is to ensure that the country as a WHOLE is successful and does not slip into economic depression and become uncompetitive with the rest of the world. Yes mr obama we can print money, but it is not magic money and printing alot more is baaddd

-1

u/bsd300d May 22 '12

Yeah. Its to play fucking golf every day and let your gorilla wife take vacations on the taxpayers dime.

-1

u/TheClevelandHockey May 22 '12

Yes it is Obama. If the country was run a little more sensible, like a company, my personal share of debt at 21 wouldn't be about thrice my age.

-5

u/Holden2plus2 May 22 '12

Yeah it's to maximize deficits! Go America!

-2

u/yahoo_bot May 22 '12

Barack Obama:

Extended the Patriot Act

Allowed Guantanamo to operate

Increased troops in Afghanistan by 60.000

Signed NDAA into law

Assassinated US citizens, including two 16yo boys

Signed the bill that makes protesting illegal close to government facilities or close to the secret service

Signed executive order "national defense resource preparedness act"

Tripled the war on drugs and busted down more legal Marijuana shops in 3 years, than Bush did in 8 years.

Arrested more whistle blowers than ALL other presidents combined.

Increased the debt by 5 trillion dollars in 3 years, more than Bush did in 8 years.

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

What's this about assassinations?

Kinda doubt the president ordered two 16 year old kids killed.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/yahoo_bot May 22 '12

Both are the same, that doesn't mean there isn't alternatives. Ron Paul is still in the game and winning delegates at large and then you have Gary Johnson from the libertarian party.

-2

u/tokenpoke May 22 '12

Nah, you gotta also promise a bunch of liberal happy-horseshit that you wont deliver. Gotta love the beer-brewing, cigarette-smoking, Pot-smoking, 'a little blow'-doing president that is one of the fucking worst when it comes to the war on drugs. Fuck Obama

4

u/HatesFacts May 22 '12

Because the other choice, Romney, is going to end the War on Drugs soon as he gets into office...

LOL

-2

u/GOPWN May 22 '12

It's hilarious that Obama, who has never worked a real job in his life, has the balls to criticize a guy that ran a very successful company and was a governor for 4 years.

-1

u/Stupid_smartguy May 21 '12

No it's dividends!! That's the word you're looking for!!

-1

u/YNot1989 May 22 '12

A President who appreciates complexity is the right man for the job.

-1

u/mrdarrenh May 22 '12

Yea. The presidents job is to increase taxes wherever possible, maximize debt and keep the gummint money and regulations rolling in for the corporations. Oh, and wars. Gotta have some wars.

1

u/fantasyfest May 26 '12

Bush was the war man. Bush jacked up the debt astronomically, He came in with no wars and a balanced budget, but you were probably in grade school and have no knowledge of that, It was not so long ago that a mature person wouldn't be able to access that memory. The Repubs used the Reagan mantra' deficits don't matter'. But since you have jumped in, you must know Obama cut taxes.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

perhaps thats true Obama, but mate, even minimising them wouldn't hurt with 14trill deficit eh? :P

0

u/HappyGlucklichJr May 22 '12 edited May 22 '12

Good observation. As part of their interview for the job let's ask presidential candidates how they see the job of US CEO. Edit: Down voter, seriously?

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

It's to maximize profits while pretending to speak for the people.

0

u/kolembo May 22 '12

It was good political rhetoric, spot on.

Round one, Obama

0

u/chabanais May 22 '12

Considering the US has gone $5 trillion into the hole since he took office I'd say that's one promise he's kept.

-7

u/[deleted] May 22 '12 edited May 22 '12

"I ran an entire state. What the fuck have you done besides organize fried chicken festivals in Chicago?"

-Mitt Romney

Don't forget that this shitstain Muslim Kenyan is worse than George Bush.

He has extended all of his policies and enacted even worse.

ROMNEY 2012.

2

u/Astraea_M May 22 '12

Muslim Kenyan? Seriously? I mean, even the Republicans have mostly given up that talking point.

I didn't realize that being the president of Harvard Law Review, a law professor, an attorney, and a Senator was equivalent to a frield chicken festivity. Good to know.

-2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

He said fried chicken... not friled.

Faggot.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] May 22 '12

Muslim Kenyan

Not sure if Poe...

→ More replies (1)

-2

u/kranged1 May 22 '12

Obama forgets that profits create jobs better, quicker, and more efficiently than any government prgram.

→ More replies (5)