When your and your family's life's earnings amount to $220 million dollars you have it in the hand's of financial advisors, Libbert. And Romney has answered the question as to why some of his cash equivalent funds (a small portion of his diversified investments) are in Swiss Bank accounts...it is for the diversification effect, and to protect against something untoward happening to the US dollar (like runaway inflation, for example). Those with less wealth can do the same, through currency Exchange Traded Funds; or the option of investing in one solid conservative mutual fund (The Permanent Fund, for example) which invests in some US and International Income Stocks, U.S. Notes and Bonds, US Growth Stocks, Stocks of Precious Metals Mining Companies, Gold and Silver Bullion, US Dollar Denominated Cash Equivalents, and...Swiss Franks. You could buy into that fund for as little as their minimum initial investment; $1,000, for example. They are headquartered in San Antonio, home of The Alamo!

Due to its internationally recognized independence and non involvement in wars (even World Wars I and II), and national fiscal conservatism, the Swiss currency is a bulwark of stability, and Swiss banks are also known for their safety and strength.

Keith L - Swiss banks are also known for their secrecy; i.e., as havens for individuals and companies who hide huge sums from the tax man, cheating their countries out of legal and needed tax revenues, which in turn make the average person's tax bills higher. Yeah, love those Swiss banks! Talk about money laundering!

Not in today's world of finance regulations, Unclwilli. May have been the past in World War II period and immediately post World War II, but not in the post 9/11 War on Terriorism period we are living in. If you are geting our information from watching old James Bond flicks on the late night cable movie channels, I suggest you search on the Internet for some information on Swiss Bank Accounts and US Govenment knowledge of same.

Romney doesn't just have the Swiss bank accounts. He has tax havens in the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Bermuda and Luxembourg. All this for diversity? That doesn't even pass the laugh test.

Romney's "blind" trust is invested in a business started by Romney's son Tagg. Blind trusts are set up so there are no conflict-of-interests--your son's business? Romney was able to stash away $102M in his IRA despite a contribution limit of $2000 per year for the entire 15 years Romney ran Bain (early 80's through mid-90's). How did he do that?

The worst thing, however, is that Romney actively worked to change the tax laws to benefit the super-rich and disadvantage regular people through his work with Private Equity Group--Bain was part of that. That's how he got his 14% tax rate, which is lower than widows and orphans get.

I don't think the American people are too happy that Romney is gerry-rigging the economy in favor of the super rich.

5% of the failing companies Bain Capital bought out and attempted to turn around to a successfuk business model have later failed, going into bankruptcy protection. A solid 80% are judged successful turnarounds, the other 15% too soon to tell.

Romney founded (with several partners) Bain Capital in Boston, Massachusetts' financial district as a private equity investment firm in the early 70s; he was CEO of Bain until he left to save the failing Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and run subsequebtly for Governor of Massachusetts in 2002. The Obama campaign attack adds have focused on a coupleof firms in troubled industries that eventually failed in years after Romney was no longer involved with Bain Capital.

Give me a "G"!

Give me an "O"!

Give me another "O"!

What am I going to spell?

GOOGLE!!

Grandpa's donned his Pinocchio proboscis again. That 5% "failure" rate on Bain Acquisitions is from outer space. Here's some documentation from a conservative website (there's plenty more out there, folks).

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-mitt-romney-dilemma

Bain Capital’s overall success and failure rate was about 50/50. The much vaunted success of Bain Capital is more a mirage than fact with all but a few deals making significant money for Mitt and Bain only through deconstructing and piecing out acquisitions.

Like I said, chop shop capitalism using leveraged buyouts with other people's money and handing governments the bankruptcy bill...

Bain Capital’s acquisition of Ampad exemplified a deal where it profited handsomely from early payments and management fees, even though the subject company itself ended up going into bankruptcy.

Dade Behring was another case where Bain Capital received an eightfold return on its investment, but the company itself was saddled with debt and laid off over a thousand employees before Bain Capital exited (the company subsequently went into bankruptcy, with more layoffs, before recovering and prospering).

And Grandpa, I was here during the Salt Lake Olympics, and the problem wasn't failure, it was a scandal because it leaked out that the organizers had bribed the Olympic Committee to secure the bid (something every other successful city had done in the past, but well, Utahovians are supposed to have "higher" standards).

He walked into a disorganized mess, admittedly, but LDS Church leadership and Utah Politicians had a ready made workforce of largely unpaid volunteers, and this was just a simple logistics operation. His biggest contribution was probably his handsome face...

Those who've followed the candidacy from sources other than FAUX are aware that Massachusetts voters are among his most vocal critics. He never would've been re-elected to a second term.

Cabbie,

I have no doubt that everything Bain Capital did was a legal as church - at least as legal as getting a 90 year old grandmother to send in her "seed money" so that her grandchildren will be delivered from some terrible sin such as being politically liberal.

The general assumption seems to be that Bain took over "troubled" businesses to save them from bankruptcy. Anything is possible, however investing in businesses truly on the path to immediate bankruptcy would have exposed Bain and its investors to unnecessary risks. A CEO who would do such a thing should be fired - certainly he or she would make a terrible President for the United States. The ideal candidate for a Leveraged Buy Out takeover would be a business with many assets, little debt and an OK market share -a steady but boring performer. Because such a company was not highly leveraged, Bain would have considered it to be "troubled".

The financial "mountain top mining" that follows is an acceleration of the normal market process that does not allow communities and other stakeholders the necessary time to adjust - that's the real hardship that LBO's place on society. Bankruptcy is not the intended outcome of a Leveraged Buy Out - more of an oppsie.

Legal - yes.

Accepted Capitalism - I don't see a lot of Adam Smith in it - perhaps the best interests of society are being promoted and I'm just not appreciating it. I do see how the best interests of a few individuals are being served.

Immoral - no - there is no evil intent here - simply the unwavering focus on the maximization of profit - exactly what is taught in every business school. (OK - the textbooks refer to it as "stakeholder" wealth - but it's done with the same wink and a nod given to "business ethics".)

Other than that - have a good day,

"Adam"

Immoral? I think you have to separate intent from outcome on that one, i.e. the "process" is essentially amoral. The outcome, however, requires an "immoral defense," i.e. lying to suggest what happened didn't happen. I note that Bain is particularly secretive about its books...

Bain originally started out as a firm offering start-up equity, but they apparently "succumbed to temptation" when Mitt took over...

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-mitt-romney-dilemma

Initially Bain Capital focused on venture capital opportunities, but Mitt quickly changed Bain Capital’s focus from startups to the business of leveraged buyouts: buying existing firms with money mostly borrowed against their assets, partnering with existing management to apply the “Bain way” to their operations and then selling them off in a few years. Bain Capital lost most of its money in many early leveraged buyouts, but then founds deals that yielded large returns. During the 14 years Mitt Romney headed the company Bain Capital’s average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent, but much of this profit was earned from a relatively few deals. Bain Capital’s overall success and failure rate was about 50/50. The much vaunted success of Bain Capital is more a mirage than fact with all but a few deals making significant money for Mitt and Bain only through deconstructing and piecing out acquisitions.

You do know that the troubled industries such as paper products and steel in the US were not exactly hot prospects for turnaround companies with poor fortunes, don't you Adam?

Keith,

Just wanted you to know I took some time to double check the steel industry in the 90’s – specifically Armco/Georgetown Steel. While the steel industry was going through bad times in the late 80’s and early 90’s the foreign steel “dumping” (kind of depends on what country you are from) apparently did not hit critical mass until the late 90’s. In the early 90’s the Kansas City plant was apparently suffering as much from problems with management as it was from outdated equipment. The assets were there – the machinery upgrade was do-able – debt load appeared to be low [1], they still had customers – as I pointed out before – this makes a company a good candidate for a leveraged buyout. This was not a “hostile takeover” but a management buyout where Bain provided 8 million of its own money for a controlling interest and facilitated the financing of the 67 million balance. A risk reducing deal was reached with Armco where Armco would cover employee pensions if the plant closed within 5 years. After purchase, the “leveraging” began and Bain recouped their 8 million investment in a few months when they were paid a 36.1 million dollar dividend – they then began charging substantial yearly management fees.

There is more to the story – but my point is that while an industry can have problems – companies in the industry can still be attractive candidates for LBO’s. Bain did a pretty good job of taking a carefully calculated risk with the prospect of a quick short term return – there was no charity here – this was a money extraction process.

[1] http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/925906/0000950144-98-002571.txt

Cabbie,

I don’t see business as operating in a world of moral and immoral behavior – just legal and illegal – if I thought a corporation was actually a person – I might feel differently. The sad thing is – from what I can gather in my research – if Bain had provided Georgetown Steel with a managerial team heavy in quality control, operations management, and organizational development instead of well educated bean counters – they might actually have made a go of it.

By the way - lying is apparently only illegal if you are Martha Stewart trying to making an extra $80,000.

Adam_Selene

Last time a woman asked me how I came to have handcuffs in the Casino hotel room in Atlantic City, NJ I told her that my Dad had been a State Trooper! I didn't tell her though that only as his stage part in an all male strippers' review. There are raasonable answers to your probing questions, Thomas.

Please look up my address on the internet and send me a copy of the "transcripts" you have in your possession that show Romney stuffing his pockets with money that is then "hanging from his pockets", or was that an error of syntax? Oh, and do you get off to watching your dirty Campaign debate video tapes regularly? Did you T-Vo them, or capture them for posterity on your outdated VHS recorder you've saved to watch your old collection of 70's porn tapes?

You and me both, Thomas Garrity. I'm hoping that BEFORE it's time for the debates that someone will nail this clown to the wall with questions about the cop uniform (I'm pretty sure his father didn't 'give' it to him, but that he stole it from his father's security detail); how many times he impersonated an officer, how many times he pulled over strangers and not 'friends', yes did he have handcuffs and use them?, the questions go on and on.

There's also the pointed question of his apparent memory problems. He was involved in a serious car accident when in France avoiding the draft. The wife of the president of the mission was sitting next to him and was killed. Romney was declared dead at the scene (bet you didn't know that!) and it turned out he was in a coma for 2-3 days. It reportedly took him a year to recover and his wife said when he came back from France, he 'was a different person'. One wonders how different and in what manner...

Is that why he can't remember holding down a screaming crying underclassman and chopping off his hair? Is that why everything he did in high school and college is a 'prank' or 'hijinks', not serious felonies?

Either he's a consummate liar, he's got memory problems, or both. We know he has sociopathic tendencies. Either way, putting him into high office would be the height of folly. Meanwhile, Gary Johnson is a fine choice for President, he's going to be on all 50 state ballots as the Libertarian party candidate, and he's practically being ignored in favor of both of these red and blue, proved they can't handle the job, picked for us by corporate money puppet candidates...

I'll give Romney a pass on that accident in France. It's likely the other driver was at fault; the mission president's wife was killed, but there were other passengers in the car as well.

What I won't give him a pass on is his avoidance of the draft during the Vietnam Era; LDS missionaries (who were wholly without ecclesiastical training before they were called) were permitted "religious exemptions" (in Romney's case it was 31 months when missions were generally two years). He followed that with four years of student deferments and then managed a high draft number in 1970.

I detailed a few clips down what military "service" consists of for "patriotic" Mormons, and his case was utterly typical.

Your time sequencing is off, Cab Driver. Romney was on his missiorary service to his church in the late 60s/early 70s. Imagine that, though, you were able to comment on that without spilling you pent up ant-Mormon bigotted speen all over your post! There is hope for you yet. You must have actually had a full two days of sobrity when you posted, hmmm? Good on you!

Rixar:

With Obama and the Democrat's in Congress actively attempting to pass a "millionaire's alternative tax bill" that was going to be retroactive it was simple common sense when your tax forms submission are so complicated and cost so much to generate with all the tax lawyers and financial advisors having to work on them then to ask for a waiver of the April 15th date, and submit them when we know what the course ahead looks like, no? By the way, that's pretty much the reason why so many small businesses that are S Corporations and the larger Corporations that would be affected by retroactive and future raises on profits and capital gains have sat on their stores of funds, and proceeded in their busineeses concerns without plans for expansion and hiring at this time; the uncertainty of fiscal life in this nation under this spend and borrow and tax Administration in DC. And the reason consumers are paying down personal debt and saving at higher rates instead of consuming; all a drag on the nation's economy.

Get the picture?

All federal workers have a pension plan other than social security and a defined benefit plan called the Thrift Savings Plan with their donations with a government match that is not run by the private sector, but by a Commission. Many of our largest non profit employers and employees in every non profit are eligible to participate in a similar program know as CREF, which has available their own mutual funds as well as selections of others, including leading very low cost index mutual funds, also with employers matches. And you are aware, are you not, that since the reforms passed under Ronald Reagan their is no "double dipping" of receiving full social security benefits and defined pension benefits also from private or public employment? So that many current public and private sector employees covered still by defined benefit pension plans and also social security (as are federal workers) will not receive the full benefits they would otherwise be entitled to in their years of making FICA tax witholding payments. It's high time for another reform. The question is just joined, and it needs to have a starting point for the debate, and Paul Ryan's plan offered that. No one else has stepped up on that issue other than George Bush, and he got the same reception on that as did his Immigration Reform proposals.

Time to stop knee jerk bashing Republicans, and try to listen and respond like grownups to what they propose, Chanel...its all debatable, and important!