The Federal Bailout That Saved Mitt Romney

The Federal Bailout That Saved Mitt Romney [rollingstone.com]

Quote : Mitt Romney likes to say he won't "apologize" for his success in business. But what he never says is "thank you" – to the American people – for the federal bailout of Bain & Company that made so much of his outsize wealth possible. Federal records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal that Romney's initial rescue attempt at Bain & Company was actually a disaster – leaving the firm so financially strapped that it had "no value as a going concern." Even worse, the federal bailout ultimately engineered by Romney screwed the FDIC – the bank insurance system backed by taxpayers – out of at least $10 million. And in an added insult, Romney rewarded top executives at Bain with hefty bonuses at the very moment that he was demanding his handout from the feds.

So who here thinks Rmoney won't bail out Wall St (again)?

He's already said he will repeal Dodd-Frank which puts meager taxpayer protections in place.

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that Obama or Romney won't bail out politically favored groups.

Quote from Danman114 : I don't think anyone is under the illusion that Obama or Romney won't bail out politically favored groups.

No question for those whose failure would bring down the economy.

Question is, who will back regulation which prevents such failures from having that potential.

Dodd-Frank is a meager effort at that, but it is still too much for Rmoney.

Quote from 124nic8 : So who here thinks Rmoney won't bail out Wall St (again)?

Say Mittens gets the job, what would WS need a bail out for exactly and how large would Mitt have to make it?

Take out a bunch of loans, spend the money and then give creditors the option of getting back a little or nothing at all.

If you could do this on repeat, wouldn't it generate an infinite amount of cash?

Romney is a true SlickDealer.

Quote from Lilian : Take out a bunch of loans, spend the money and then give creditors the option of getting back a little or nothing at all. If you could do this on repeat, wouldn't it generate an infinite amount of cash? Romney is a true SlickDealer.

To borrow the lexicon of the DS & Grocery subforum, Romney is a smash & grabber.

Quote from barnz008 : Say Mittens gets the job, what would WS need a bail out for exactly and how large would Mitt have to make it?

Something like LTCM? [wikipedia.org]

If it was obvious, it could be stopped. Presuming Mittens had the will to do it.

Quote from 124nic8 : No question for those whose failure would bring down the economy. Question is, who will back regulation which prevents such failures from having that potential. Dodd-Frank is a meager effort at that, but it is still too much for Rmoney.

Just read the full article. Isn't it amazing that in that long of an article, with all that info from the Freedom of Information Act, they make no mention or estimate what the FDIC would have pulled in had Bain gone bankrupt?

(Unless it is that 3 or 4 million dollar figure they sneak at the end, in which case he saved the tax payers some cash)

Obama, Romney, who cares? They will both bail out their buddies and leave the taxpayer holding the bag. It just a question of who the buddies are. I think a California bailout that benefits public sector unions in particular is significantly more likely under Obama. Not sure who Romney would bail out in Cali. Probably the pension fund holders.

Quote from 124nic8 : If it was obvious, it could be stopped. Presuming Mittens had the will to do it.

I tend to think not. If our elected morons had any economic sense at all, there would be no need to stop anything. Mit or Barry...I don't care if it's Mary F'n Poppins....they will do what the creditors demand which always keeps the flow going to the top...in such austere ways they don't even have the courtesy for a reach around.

Quote from Danman114 : Just read the full article. Isn't it amazing that in that long of an article, with all that info from the Freedom of Information Act, they make no mention or estimate what the FDIC would have pulled in had Bain gone bankrupt? (Unless it is that 3 or 4 million dollar figure they sneak at the end, in which case he saved the tax payers some cash)

It's $3.56M.

He cost the FDIC $10-16M by threatening to squander B&C money on exec bonuses, and made $4M for himself.

Just like GS Steel; screwed the employees out of their pensions and took mega-fees for Bain Capital.

Quote from Danman114 : (Unless it is that 3 or 4 million dollar figure they sneak at the end, in which case he saved the tax payers some cash)

Isn't that like setting up a car bomb, having it blow up only the basement instead of taking down the whole building, and then saying the terrorist deserves some credit for limiting the destruction?

Quote from 124nic8 : It's $3.56M. He cost the FDIC $10-16M by threatening to squander B&C money on exec bonuses, and made $4M for himself. Just like GS Steel; screwed the employees out of their pensions and took mega-fees for Bain Capital.

So let me get this straight.

1. A crappy bank makes a bad, unsecured loan to Bain & Company to the tune of $30 million.
2. FDIC takes over said crappy bank, and now holds that $30 million dollar note.

IF FDIC pushes Bain & Company into bankruptcy, it gets $3.56 million dollars and Bain is liquidated.
IF FDIC negotiates with Mitt Romney, it gets $14 million dollars and Bain continues to operate.

Yet, it's Mitt (not the people in charge of that bank, the FDIC, or Bain when it requested the loan) who cost tax payers $10 million dollars? If my math is correct, the FDIC is $10.44 million dollars better off because of Mitt's efforts.

* Granted, this is just what I gather from reading a poorly written article that seems to make leaps forward and backward in time, and obviously omits a number of important facts without linking the source documents. *

Quote from gunnerusa : Isn't that like setting up a car bomb, having it blow up only the basement instead of taking down the whole building, and then saying the terrorist deserves some credit for limiting the destruction?

Well, in this case, Mitt Romney isn't the terrorist. He was running a separate area of Bain that was successful at the time. Mitt came in and helped reduce the amount of damage after someone else had messed up.

To equate it to your terrorist example, it'd be like a terrorist putting a car bomb in a building, and Mitt getting it in the car and driving it somewhere where the damage would be much less substantial.

You can blame Mitt for moving it to where he did, or you can credit him for risking his life saving what he saved (in your wacked out example).