Forget Bain — Obama’s public-equity record is the real scandal

[HuZkurZ]

Despite a growing backlash from his fellow Democrats, President Obama has doubled down on his attacks on Mitt Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital. But the strategy could backfire in ways Obama did not anticipate. After all, if Romney’s record in private equity is fair game, then so is Obama’s record in public equity — and that record is not pretty.

Since taking office, Obama has invested billions of taxpayer dollars in private businesses, including as part of his stimulus spending bill. Many of those investments have turned out to be unmitigated disasters — leaving in their wake bankruptcies, layoffs, criminal investigations and taxpayers on the hook for billions. Consider just a few examples of Obama’s public equity failures:

Raser Technologies. In 2010, the Obama administration gave Raser a $33 million taxpayer-funded grant to build a power plant in Beaver Creek, Utah. According to the Wall Street Journal, after burning through our tax dollars, the company filed for bankruptcy protection in 2012. The plant now has fewer than 10 employees, and Raser owes $1.5 million in back taxes.

ECOtality. The Obama administration gave ECOtality $126.2 million in taxpayer money in 2009 for, among other things, the installation of 14,000 electric car chargers in five states. Obama even hosted the company’s president, Don Karner, in the first lady’s box during the 2010 State of the Union address as an example of a stimulus success story. According to ECOtality’s own SEC filings, the company has since incurred more than $45 million in losses and has told the federal government, “We may not achieve or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis in the future.”

First Solar. The Obama administration provided First Solar with more than $3 billion in loan guarantees for power plants in Arizona and California. According to a Bloomberg Businessweek report last week, the company “fell to a record low in Nasdaq Stock Market trading May 4 after reporting $401 million in restructuring costs tied to firing 30 percent of its workforce.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...CnU_story.html

[FLA4NEB]

and there is more:

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/24/ob...#ixzz1vtYmeiXo

The biggest public equity failing for President Obama was GM and Chyrsler. President Obama pumped 10's of billions of dollars into those companies to keep them out of bankruptcy. Lots of people lost their jobs and business and lots of pension holders and retires lost their investments. Massive failure.

[Husker Mort]

The biggest public equity failing for President Obama was GM and Chyrsler. President Obama pumped 10's of billions of dollars into those companies to keep them out of bankruptcy. Lots of people lost their jobs and business and lots of pension holders and retires lost their investments. Massive failure.

This post is a massive failure. You must not be following the news, but Ford and Chrysler have repaid the debt (with interest) and GM has a timeline to do so. GM also currently holds the title of top-selling auto manufacturer. It has been nothing short of a spectacular turnaround that you choose to demoize -- all while the millions of jobs (not just from big three, but parts suppliers and manufacturers as well) were preserved.

[FLA4NEB]

This post is a massive failure. You must not be following the news, but Ford and Chrysler have repaid the debt (with interest) and GM has a timeline to do so. GM also currently holds the title of top-selling auto manufacturer. It has been nothing short of a spectacular turnaround that you choose to demoize -- all while the millions of jobs (not just from big three, but parts suppliers and manufacturers as well) were preserved.

Ford didn't get bailed out and didn't go into bankruptcy.

The tax payers are still losing money on the bailout.

I am not poo pooing GM or Chrysler but the fact that we were told that by the Obama administration that bailing GM and Chysler out would keep them from going into bankruptcy. What got GM back into the saddle wasn't the bailout but the re-org under bankruptcy.

The million jobs claim is a bogus number there wouldn't have been millions of jobs lost if they didn't get the bailout. They would have gone into bankruptcy and about he same number of jobs would have been lost.

[HuZkurZ]

Ford didn't get bailed out and didn't go into bankruptcy.

The tax payers are still losing money on the bailout.

I am not poo pooing GM or Chrysler but the fact that we were told that by the Obama administration that bailing GM and Chysler out would keep them from going into bankruptcy. What got GM back into the saddle wasn't the bailout but the re-org under bankruptcy.

The million jobs claim is a bogus number there wouldn't have been millions of jobs lost if they didn't get the bailout. They would have gone into bankruptcy and about he same number of jobs would have been lost.

And, let's not forget the sweet deal the unions got.

[Warhorse]

Ford didn't get bailed out and didn't go into bankruptcy.

The tax payers are still losing money on the bailout.

I am not poo pooing GM or Chrysler but the fact that we were told that by the Obama administration that bailing GM and Chysler out would keep them from going into bankruptcy. What got GM back into the saddle wasn't the bailout but the re-org under bankruptcy.

The million jobs claim is a bogus number there wouldn't have been millions of jobs lost if they didn't get the bailout. They would have gone into bankruptcy and about he same number of jobs would have been lost.

So the jobs number is bogus just because you say so? The bailout money allowed a structured bankruptcy to happen. There was no private money so the auto industry wouldn't have been able to go into bankruptcy they would have gone under.

[FLA4NEB]

So the jobs number is bogus just because you say so? The bailout money allowed a structured bankruptcy to happen. There was no private money so the auto industry wouldn't have been able to go into bankruptcy they would have gone under.

Is the million job number true just because a lot of politicals quote it over and over?

GM and Chrysler should have gone through bankruptcy first. It wouldn't have caused any more job loss than accrued in the actual bankruptcy.

Remember after the bailout and the Obama admin structured bankruptcy thousands of people lost their jobs and business. Thousands of pensioners lost value in their funds (most of them teachers and public worker retires by the way). GM returned to its old ways that put them into bankruptcy. The tax payers have not been paid back and GM has been given special tax privlage (as well as status for government fleet sales).

The millions don't add up because it would mean all their suppliers and dealers would have to go belly up. Almost all suppliers produce components for every other auto manufacture. Most dealers franchise multiple auto manufactures or be long to a group. Going into bankruptcy doesn't mean out of business...one million job loss is bogus number meant to scare the weak minded sheeple.

[HuZkurZ]

This post is a massive failure. You must not be following the news, but Ford and Chrysler have repaid the debt (with interest) and GM has a timeline to do so. GM also currently holds the title of top-selling auto manufacturer. It has been nothing short of a spectacular turnaround that you choose to demoize -- all while the millions of jobs (not just from big three, but parts suppliers and manufacturers as well) were preserved.

Dude, Ford didn't get a bail out and is doing great.

The post is spot on and not a failure at all. Obama's decision to attack Romney on Bain, against advice, is a huge mistake on several fronts, which have been pointed out on this post. Plus, it enlightened you on who did and didn't get a bail out. Your welcome.

[Husker Mort]

Ford didn't get bailed out and didn't go into bankruptcy.

The tax payers are still losing money on the bailout.

I am not poo pooing GM or Chrysler but the fact that we were told that by the Obama administration that bailing GM and Chysler out would keep them from going into bankruptcy. What got GM back into the saddle wasn't the bailout but the re-org under bankruptcy.

The million jobs claim is a bogus number there wouldn't have been millions of jobs lost if they didn't get the bailout. They would have gone into bankruptcy and about he same number of jobs would have been lost.

Dude, Ford didn't get a bail out and is doing great.

The post is spot on and not a failure at all. Obama's decision to attack Romney on Bain, against advice, is a huge mistake on several fronts, which have been pointed out on this post. Plus, it enlightened you on who did and didn't get a bail out. Your welcome.

Ford actively lobbied for the automotive bail-out and requested up to a $9Bn line of credit had the economy gotten worse. They did not go into bankruptcy, but DID receive $5.9Bn from the Fed that they used (and subsequently repaid) to retool a few of their production lines for smaller, more efficient cars. What pool it came out of is semantics -- they took money at the same time others were and paid it back as others have. They were also a major proponent and benefactor of the Cash for Clunkers program.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/for...n-on-bailouts/

As for the bailout, Fla, you're rushing to judgment too quickly. Payback is ahead of schedule and the citizens have actually made $41Bn so far in interest. Obviously, some of those that took funds will not be able to pay it back fully, so while you may ultimately be right it is incorrect to say anybody has lost money at present. It would be like saying my bank has lost a ton of money because I have yet to pay off my house.

http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/main/summary

[ChitownHusker]

Ford actively lobbied for the automotive bail-out and requested up to a $9Bn line of credit had the economy gotten worse. They did not go into bankruptcy, but DID receive $5.9Bn from the Fed that they used (and subsequently repaid) to retool a few of their production lines for smaller, more efficient cars. What pool it came out of is semantics -- they took money at the same time others were and paid it back as others have. They were also a major proponent and benefactor of the Cash for Clunkers program.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/for...n-on-bailouts/

As for the bailout, Fla, you're rushing to judgment too quickly. Payback is ahead of schedule and the citizens have actually made $41Bn so far in interest. Obviously, some of those that took funds will not be able to pay it back fully, so while you may ultimately be right it is incorrect to say anybody has lost money at present. It would be like saying my bank has lost a ton of money because I have yet to pay off my house.

http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/main/summary

To me, the real question is whether the bailout was a superior solution to a structured bankruptcy without the bailout. GM and Chrysler would be in basically the same financial position now if they had instead gone through structured bankruptcy but with no bailout. The basic difference between the two scenarios is that the unions would have fared worse and the secured bondholders would have fared better in a non-bailout structured bankruptcy.

It is a simple, undeniable fact, that the UAW's contracts with GM and Chrysler are not competitive with how auto manufacturing employees are compensated elsewhere in the world, or in non-union shops in the United States.

[HuZkurZ]

This post is a massive failure. You must not be following the news, but Ford and Chrysler have repaid the debt (with interest) and GM has a timeline to do so.

Ford didn't get bailed out and didn't go into bankruptcy.

Dude, Ford didn't get a bail out and is doing great.

They did not go into bankruptcy, but DID receive $5.9Bn from the Fed that they used (and subsequently repaid) to retool a few of their production lines for smaller, more efficient cars.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/for...n-on-bailouts/


From factcheck.org:

the only one of the Big Three not to receive a bailout (Ford)

It’s true that Ford was not “bailed out by our government,” as Chris says

Ford did not receive any money under AIFP

Somtimes it's better to just say you are wrong and own it.

[RedRum]

As for the bailout, Fla, you're rushing to judgment too quickly. Payback is ahead of schedule and the citizens have actually made $41Bn so far in interest. Obviously, some of those that took funds will not be able to pay it back fully, so while you may ultimately be right it is incorrect to say anybody has lost money at present. It would be like saying my bank has lost a ton of money because I have yet to pay off my house.

http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/main/summary

I thought the majority of this payback was in the stock issuance and projected increases in value. With the stock price down 1/3, the government would not recoup the money it lent.

I believe GM got $41 billion total and that is not interest received.

GM also received a huge advantage over bankruptcy. They were allowed to carry forward $16 billion in tax-loss carryforwards, so instead of paying $2 billion in federal income tax last year, they received a $134 million tax refund after applying it. There are other state tax breaks as well where the automakers get to keep the state income taxes taken from their employees paychecks.

[redmachine]

This.

This is how Romney wins.

Obama wants to talk marriage, Romney talks economy. Obama wants to talk race, Romney talks economy. Obama wants to talk energy, Romney talks economy. Etc., etc., etc......

[RedPhoenix]

This.

This is how Romney wins.

Obama wants to talk marriage, Romney talks economy. Obama wants to talk race, Romney talks economy. Obama wants to talk energy, Romney talks economy. Etc., etc., etc......

Agree. This is a clever counter to the Bain issue the Dems are using. It will obviously have its holes, like the Bain issue does, but it still works to a degree.

[FLA4NEB]

Agree. This is a clever counter to the Bain issue the Dems are using. It will obviously have its holes, like the Bain issue does, but it still works to a degree.

For me it comes down to this, do you want private equity with lost of firms via and competing for business on both sides of the table or do you want public equity where you have a few people in the government picking who gets invested in?

I am not saying that President Obama wants to do away with private equity but do we really want a lot more public equity that Presidnet Obama seems to embrace. We have seen both sides use public equity and usually it is a failure and is a pay out to politically connected friends.

Lots of private equity firms spreading the risk out or more public equity consolidating the risk on the backs of the tax payers.

[RedPhoenix]

For me it comes down to this, do you want private equity with lost of firms via and competing for business on both sides of the table or do you want public equity where you have a few people in the government picking who gets invested in?

I am not saying that President Obama wants to do away with private equity but do we really want a lot more public equity that Presidnet Obama seems to embrace. We have seen both sides use public equity and usually it is a failure and is a pay out to politically connected friends.

Lots of private equity firms spreading the risk out or more public equity consolidating the risk on the backs of the tax payers.

I have no issues with private equity firms. And I applaud Romney for what he did at Bain. I see it as a net plus for him personally.

[HuZkurZ]

On the recent ad Obama put out with former employees for GTS Steel In KCMO.

The Obama campaign also released a two-minute TV commercial about GTS Steel of Kansas City which Bain purchased in 1993 and went bankrupt in 2001, according to ABC News.
In the ad, steel worker Jack Cobb says, “He’s like a vampire. He came in and sucked the life out of us.”

What it doesn't tell you is in 1993 Bain bought GTS Steel, which was ready to go under, invested $100 million to update the plant and kept it afloat for 8 years, until cheap steel prices from China forced it to close in 2001, 2 years after Romney was no longer with Bain.

[Husker Mort]

On the recent ad Obama put out with former employees for GTS Steel In KCMO.

What it doesn't tell you is in 1993 Bain bought GTS Steel, which was ready to go under, invested $100 million to update the plant and kept it afloat for 8 years, until cheap steel prices from China forced it to close in 2001, 2 years after Romney was no longer with Bain.

That is, roughly, the same story with Solyndra (Chinese technology outpaced American development) -- so I am pleased to hear that you won't be pointing to that as a failure either.

[redmachine]

That is, roughly, the same story with Solyndra (Chinese technology outpaced American development) -- so I am pleased to hear that you won't be pointing to that as a failure either.

But one was using taxpayer dollars, no?

[FLA4NEB]

That is, roughly, the same story with Solyndra (Chinese technology outpaced American development) -- so I am pleased to hear that you won't be pointing to that as a failure either.

Solyndra was a failed idea. The basic physics don't support the design. That is the reason it failed and that is the reason no one has picked up those "ground breaking" designs.

The design was suppose to make it price competitive with china and more competitive with other power generation it failed on both accounts.