Based on his background as CEO, sole director and sole shareholder of Bain Capital, Mitt Romney says he can manage the US economy better than President Barack Obama. But as president, it appears that Wall Street Mitt intends to run the terribly weak economy into the ground even more by wiping out jobs and pensions and shifting production of goods and services overseas if his business experience is any indication of his intentions.
As CEO of Bain, Mitt redistributed income from working Americans to his 1 percent self by shifting jobs overseas. Wall Street Mitt pocketed the difference between the former old wages here and the new lesser wages there. As president one can assume Mitt intends to redistribute income from working Americans to his fellow 1 percenters by pushing legislation that redistributes more income from the 99 to the 1 percent.
An editorial in the Guardian newspaper said it best.
“For a candidate who has made his own business background exhibit A in the argument that he could run the US economy better than his opponent, Mitt Romney has a case to answer over his involvement with Bain Capital. He plainly did not “leave” the private equity firm in 1999, if a series of filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission show him listed as the sole shareholder, sole director, CEO and president two years later. Instead of denying he had anything to do with the firm that helped other companies outsource jobs overseas, lay off steel workers and wipe out their pensions, Mr Romney could lay the matter to rest by publishing his tax returns and the minutes of Bain Capital meetings for that period.”
The Guardian goes on to ask a simple question; “But none of that means it is particularly clever for Barack Obama to keep on attacking Mr Romney over his asset-stripping days. It’s fine for his electoral base, but what about the independents he also needs to swing behind him? What these American voters will want to know in November is what Mr Obama has done to turn the jobs figures around.”
A point well taken since Obama has avoided taking the advice on these matters from people who always seem to be correct in their economic remedies, people like Nobel Prize economists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman. Neither of these two, however, have identified the culprit for the weak US economy. That, of course, is the redistribution of income and wealth that has been legislatively enacted over the last thirty years.
Right now 99 percent of the US population earn about 73 percent of the total US income compared to roughly 92 percent 30 years ago. That means the 99 percent have less money to burn, which depresses wages and job creation. Free trade treaties are a primary culprit in the redistribution process.
Meanwhile, the 1 percent have increase their share from 8 to 27 percent over the same time through their political control of congress, and, of course, their presidents, including Obama. They use their money to purchase legislation to ship jobs overseas and deregulation, thereby redistributing more income from working Americans to themselves. In this way, the 1 percent have stolen 93 percent of total US income growth since 2009.
Click the link below for the rest of the story.