Rick Tyler: ‘100,000′ Romney Jobs Created in Southeast Asia and Mexico, Not USA
by Charles C. JohnsonYesterday on Breitbart.tv Rick Tyler of Newt Gingrich’s Super Pac told us that all of the 100,000 jobs that Mitt Romney and his surrogates advertise having credited were created in Southeast Asia and Mexico.
“Mitt Romney gives a bad name to capitalism,” Tyler told Steve Bannon on Breitbart.tv. Tyler served as a communication adviser for many years to Newt Gingrich and though they are legally prohibited from coordinating with the Gingrich campaign, there is little doubt that Tyler is doing his former boss’s bidding.
Tyler, who is running a series of anti-Romney ads after acquiring a film profiling the former Massachusetts governor’s Bain years, backed off his harsher language today in a Washington Post story:
“Show me where those jobs are?” Tyler said, in a reference to Romney’s frequent claim that he created over 100,000 jobs at Bain. “I would contend they are Mexican jobs and southeast Asian jobs.”
. . .
“This is not free-enterprise in the sense of Steve Jobs and Apple,” Tyler said. “People think of these [firings] as isolated incidents. But there is a Bain victim in nearly every state of the union. If voters learn about a pattern of predatory corporate muggings, I think they’re going to get angry.”
Mitt Romney hasn’t shared how he calculated the 100,000 jobs that he and his campaign have been advertising, but he assures voters that they are there.
But Mitt Romney’s role at Bain has been profiled in every single Massachusetts race he has entered. In 1994 The Boston Globe profiled Bain, which was then actively involved in 61 companies, noting that “of those, 36 added jobs, 14 had no change in employment and 11 had decreases, most quite modest. Even allowing for a certain amount of fudging – the job totals cannot be easily verified – it’s clear Bain’s winning percentage was better than the economy’s as a whole.”
Tyler also mentioned a Bain-closed plant in South Carolina, where Mitt Romney is currently holding onto a slight lead in the polls.
But as The Boston Globe noted in October 1994, Bain was quite successful at helping Brookstone, Inc., which is based in New Hampshire, expand. Indeed, Brookstone grew by 14 stores in 1993 and 20 stores in 1994. Brookstone became one of Mitt Romney’s best capital buys at Bain.
Today’s Wall Street Journal also looked over Mitt Romney’s time at Bain, which began in 1984 and ended in 1999. They found the following:
– 22 percent either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses.
– An additional 8 percent ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
– Ten deals produced more than 70 percent of the dollar gains.
– Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested.
– Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50 percent to 80 percent annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms in that era.
– Academic research has shown that buyout firms during this era exited their deals on average after 5½ years, but in a large percentage of cases were still involved beyond seven years. … If the Journal analysis were limited to bankruptcies and closures occurring by the end of the fifth year after Bain first invested, the rate would move down to 12 percent. That measure would exclude several cases that have brought Mr. Romney political criticism, where businesses filed for bankruptcy seven or eight years after Bain’s investment.
James Pethokoukis, over at the American Enterprise Institute, points out that Romney’s successes at Bain were industry leading.
Of course this would not be the first time that one of Mitt Romney’s political adversaries made political hay of his Bain experience. Ted Kennedy and his union allies trucked in employees from a then-striking Indiana steel plant. Kennedy accused Mitt Romney of putting ”profits over people.” After shuttering the Indiana plant, Ampad moved its operations to Indonesia, where Staples, another company Mitt Romney worked with, continued to acquire its supplies.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
30 Comments
We are watching the obama campaign rile against Mitt right now………..
better get used to it and have a good come back. True or false this will be the accusation against Mitt IF he is the one. (when that's what this POTUS has been doing for 3 years).
I did not know that Willard Romney played the Agriculture markets.
Knowing his business acumen, he went the Farm Subsidy route.
Of course, I'm just judging from the photo.
It looks like a well maintained Cube Farm.
Its about time people start examining claims like this.
The issue to me is not why a VC/Turn around PRIVATE EQUITY investor group ships jobs offshore. The real question is why does our Government PROVIDE INCENTIVES in the US TAX CODES to the benefit of other nations???
In the 19th century, instead of computers,…..
these sweat shops had sewing machines.
But at least, they were here in the United States,……
where the opportunity for a better way of life was possible.
I guess this is just a more economic way of "nation building".
President Downgrade has been preparing a game plan against Mitt Romney since 2007, IF he is the nominee the attacks will be blistering and unending.
Race and class warfare will be President Downgrade's central themes, IF Romney hopes to win he'll need to go hard at his affiliations with communist radicals, George Soros and anti American hate groups like the #Occupy and the NCLR.
Every one of the moves President Downgrade is preparing to make against the republican nominee are not only predictable they're well documented in "Rules for Radicals".
IF anyone is to be successful against president Downgrade they MUST call him what he is, a devout communist.
When President Downgrade accuses whomever the nominee is of being "against working people" the counter MUST be "where are your college transcripts, your graduate thesis and articles as president of the Harvard Law Review".
When President Downgrade says "republicans are trying to keep blacks and hispanics down" the response MUST be "why are there so many LARGE "planned parenthood" clinics in poor black and hispanic neighborhoods?
Any candidate that fears this strategy will lose, right now Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are the only people even bothering to take President Downgrade to task for his affinity for socialist / communist policies.
So far, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have a record of refusing to call him what he is.
WHY don't the GOP candidates start taking OBAMA down, instead of each other?? THAT'S what the American people want to focus on!!!
Yesterday on Breitbart I asked if Rick Tyler's biblical view of capitalism supports casinos. this is because the money he used to buy "King of Bain" came from Sheldon Adelson who has done quite well in the casino business. While I do not care whatsoever any legal business Adelson engages in and I applaud Adelson's conservatism (and am happy for his business success), I question Tyler's consistency. Why attack Bain and Romney for making people poor when casinos do the same thing? Like casinos, trying to flip a business is a gamble; only and educated one. To win in casinos, one relies largly on luck whereas in Bain it is upon economic knowhow.
Look at his "firing people" context, in full. In Mittens world, individuals have a better chance bargaining w/health insurers, then small businesses or health care providers. Not reality, Mitt. You just like blindly tipping the scales against people.
Now I read from Hot Air that Newt himself has/had direct ties to doing exactly the same type of business as Bain Capital did/does. The difference is that Gingrich was tied to Forstmann which is now closed for business because they *betted* on the wrong market whereas Bain is still live and kicking. Bain also has a total success of resuing businesses at the ration of 3-1. This is evidence that Romney knows economic; Newt, not so much. To be fair, it is not clear how much say-so Newt had in Forstsmann.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/09/pawlenty-wh...
As the title of this Hot Air article says, why in the world are "conservatives" attacking capitalism?
" Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested."
And what jobs were created from creating a $1.4 billion profit? Are jobs created when a company generates a $1.4 billion profit? Conservatives, such as one Newt purports to be, should say "yes".
Besides, the economy, is going to be propped up such that,……..
it will be a plus for Obama, which is supposedly,……..
a Romney "strong suit".
This Romney nomination is sure shaping up to be,…….
a one two punch on America.
So unless we have a candidate who has the guts to,……….
expose the true Obama, he just might win again.
And a Romney win will merely put our march to socialism,….
into second instead of third gear.
If Mitt wins the nomination despite these ads, then Gingrich has handed Obama his most powerful advertising weapon. Way to go, Newt. I thought it was basically a rule that you don't swiftboat your own party's likely candidate.
Additionally, when did this become the party of labor protectionism? If labor costs are value-destructive, then smart management is supposed to fix that.
Remember how McCain handled his own supporters when they asked him to go at President Downgrade..???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTMloaj6b68
We DO NOT need another McCoward who is unwilling to call the grass green, the sky blue and a democrat a red.
Anything less is surrender.
Grow up folks. Who hasn't heard it is a global economy? Where do you think Apple makes all its products? China.
Why?Labor costs, taxes and regulations in the US. If you want communism, total control of any jobs, vote Barack Hussein Obama or Newt, both clueless about business.
Newt is losing America with his anti-business attacks on Mitt and sucking up all the oxygen with his vitriolic stance most loved by OCCUPY, showing he is not a conservate . I would not start a new business under his rule. Really evil.
Connie you read my mind. That's the only issue worth discussing. We must address the underlying issues that result in jobs going offshore. These issues include unions, tax burdens, regulatory burdens, "free" trade agreements, crony capitalism, etc. Until we address these issues expect more lost jobs. The flat tax would go a long ways toward leveling the field. It's time to build Americas economy into the wrecking ball it should be. A vibrant economy would provide wealth not just domestically but throughout the world. Greater national security, as every Chaves/Castro would have to spend their time catching up rather then making trouble. If only we could address progressivism…
Somehow I missed that. What a putz! I sure would like to call him on those statements today, see it jiggle watch it wiggle it's a RINO!!
Agreed rckmom. It makes me wonder if the conspiracy theories are true. It sure seems like they are handing him a second term by design. After watching McCain fail to attack Obama with cold hard facts and losing…let's do that again!? WTF!!
RE: “Mitt Romney gives a bad name to capitalism,” Tyler told Steve Bannon on Breitbart.tv.
Isn't finding cheaper labour abroad one of the hallmarks of capitalism? Isn't capitalism all about making the most money for your investors regardless of the social costs?
It's a false narrative. No one is "required" to create jobs, period. Bain Capitol exists to make sound investments that earn the investors profit. If the tax/labor/regulatory environment is agreeable jobs shall result. If these conditions suck, and they do in Amerika, then jobs leave our shores. It's that simple…Really.
Because politicians are egotists first and ideologues only second.
I think you misunderstood my post. I agree with you 100%.
Is my a false narrative or is Rick Tyler's a false narrative? My post is *only* in reply to the main post which is that Romney should be looked down upon by conservatives for creating jobs in foreign countries. I've no inherent problem with that. In fact, one can argue, as do I, that the money a company saves by outsourcing jobs gives them more capital to invest here in the states. Also, my remark is directed to Rick Tyler who Romney and Bain Capital as "predatory corporate raiders". That they buy companies only to shut them down jsut ot make a buck. Truth be told, some companies fail and some succeed. Bain Capital overall places companies on the succeeding side of life. It is Rick Tyler which is purporting the notion that people have some sort of "right" to a job, not me. Jobs come and jobs go. Reality is that we are better off for allowing the freedom for both to happen according to individual talent, passion, knowhow, and free market principles.
My apologies, I did not intend to ruffle your feathers. I am frustrated by the false narratives and a do nothing media that spout those narratives while not performing their jobs. The last debate is a great example, the house is on fire yet George Stepanidiot is worried about the color of the drapes. We, everyday citizens must push back against these false flags as well as the division coming from the democrat party. Until we get dirty they win.
Feathers not ruffled. I only wanted to clarify. My post today is built upon previous posts I made and so I can understad confusion on the reader part. Ultimately I blame myself for not clarifying in the beginnnigthe gist of my post.
I too am displeased by the false narratives being sent out there. What's a bit unnerving about these false narratives right now is that they are coming from a campaign from a person who was a short while ago gathering lots of conservative votes and they are being suported by two others who too seek the conservative votes. Conservatives should roundly reject Newt for perpetuating these false narratives and also Perry and Huntsman for supporting them. (Especially Perry).
An excellent post on what Bain Capital does and why the Gingrich campaign (Huntsman and Perry as well) ges capitalism all wrong in their attacking Romney as oposed to commending Romney.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/287654/rom...
I really loathe Mitt Romney so it pains me to have to defend him here.
So called "corporate raiders" perform a highly important function in a free market economy. They find businesses that are inefficient and unproductive. This is usually because there are large numbers of unproductive people working there. This is not the fault of the workers. It's not because they are lazy or stupid, it's because the company is poorly organized and therefore does not provide a structure in which these workers can be most productive.
Since the market for the company's products is limited the solution to the problem is to restructure the company so that it is profitable at present sales rates which means getting more product from fewer people. This means that people will be let go. Increased efficiency will result in more jobs, but not necessarily at the salvaged company. The major result of greater efficiency is cheaper goods which create more jobs with the money that consumers have left over because of the lower prices they are paying.
Ultimately, the attack on "corporate raiders" is the same as the Luddite attack on power looms in the 19th century. Increased efficiency doesn't kill jobs, it increase the goods and services available and in the long run increases the number of jobs.
You may be able to argue that Romney was not a very good corporate raider, or perhaps that he used political connections to acquire the companies. I don't know the history of Bain Capital but I'm sure that will come out over time. However, this Luddite attack on corporate raiders is playing right into the hands of Democrats and will kill any attempt to unseat Obama.
Excellent point. Thank you.
Wonder how the toddler would fare if the LSM checked out his record in the investment arena? Solyndra and several other green energy companies the brat hailed as great investments have tanked, are tanking or will shortly tank.
The LSM also neglects to review the toddler's involvement in GM, GE, and LightSquared – perfect examples of crony socialism or the obummercare waivers the brat and his cartel have given to unions, etc. .
Another item not discussed is the unfavorable business climate industry, etc have faced since the seventies – excessive regulation, high taxes, and high employee costs due to unions and rising health care costs. Worse yet is the government's own involvement in industries relocating off shore due to federal agencies recommending relocation to foreign countries to "aid" their economic development. State and USAID really ring a bell when considering outsourcing of jobs and physical plant..
Yep, Romney may have done his corporate raider thingy. However, on a scale of 1 to 10, Mitt is at a 7 whereas the inept small community agitator is at 0.
Nope. Your question is way too simple and ignorant of all of the factors to be answered without understanding the root causations. Maybe in Canada you use social costs as a smokescreen to disguise the government taxation, over-regulation and pricey union labor. Americans are becoming aware of that tactic used by the Obama Administration to hide the gross government interference in the business process. If wages and government costs were comparable to foreign sources then the production of the product would stay in America. But it also is a global economy and capitalism is a worldwide practice. Not everything will be made in America as the raw materials and mineral rights needed to produce the product are heavily under negative influence by government NIMBY over-regulation and taxation. The cost of doing business influences where a product is manufactured. When the government interferes, the cost of business is negatively infuuenced to the point of the loss of jobs and productivity as seen with the current administration's antibusiness attitude.
So that's why McCoward,….
endorsed McRomney.
Maybe that's why he got shot down in Vietnam,…
he didn't want to fire on the commies because,…..
"they are decent people"
You must be logged in to post a comment.