If someone comes in for a job interview and tells us that his major qualification for the position is his experience creating jobs, then I’m going to be interested in details of that experience and I’d like to know he’s not lying about it, in addition to deciding whether the claimed skill set, character and strengths match what I need.

I hope that clears things up for you.

Who cares about this? No one who is an undecided vote.

Every company in the US that could has moved jobs overseas.

Are you going to blast every CEO?

Romney is just throwing a ton of stuff up there and some of it is sticking. Obama did it last time and it worked out okay, at least enough to get him elected.

His name is Silvio Berlusconi.

(Originally posted here.)

Consider this my last post to you and I hope vice-versa.

Meanwhile, a little economics 101: governments are not private business (or personal households). Mitt Romney is running for president, not CEO. Let me remind you that we are in a thread where the WAPO has demolished Mitt Romney’s claims of creating jobs.

President Obama’s record on the economy is stellar, especially in comparison with the failed proposals of both John McCain and Mitt Romney (see GM). Barack Obama rescued an economy DESTROYED by the same failed GOP dogma that Mitt Romney now promotes.

You must admit, what Obama/Axelrod did to Clinton in 20008, almost making out to be David Duke’s twin brother, was reprehensible. Clinton is a better man than I thought for even being on the same stage but that is another story.

Back to Mitt and his money. He didn’t make it gambling, or earning interest on dads trust fund, or marry it like Kerry. He did it the old fashion way, he earned it in the private sector, where budgets ate metro or you go out of business. If this election is about Mitt’s record in the private economy, he will win by 10 pts.

Mitt Romney was very good at making money for himself and his buddies – nobody is disputing that, nor could they. Hardly a presidential qualification.

Another great read!

* The recovery has been slower than it should be.
* One reason: Obama’s bad policies (regulation, expanding the public sector, etc.)
* Another reason: Obama has no private sector experience so he has no idea how to create jobs.
* For me, Romney, creating jobs was my job.

There are a number of counters to this:

* If not for Republican opposition and obstructionism, the recovery would have been faster.
* The public sector has shrunk significantly over the past few years.
* In this economy, regulation can have two very good effects: It can prevent another financial meltdown. It can force companies sitting on cash to invest in technology to meet regulatory requirements.
* Growing national employment requires different expertise than growing a company.
* Romney’s job was outsourcing jobs, not creating them.

Those counters require steady repetition, too.

I say, balderdash. Verizon wants – needs – to sell its phones here, and they will find a way to do it. No way will they price themselves out of the US market. They are clever folks – they’ll find a way. They’re already working on it.

Personally, I find your lack of faith in the ingenuity of American business people to be disconcerting.

I’m not wild about such an economy but that is basically the choice. If you told Verizon they could only hire call center workers in the USA, you would never get anybody on the phone. They just wouldn’t hire the workers.

If you demanded that Verizon hire USA workers for jobs formerly outsourced, they would jack up the price of phones until most people could not buy them.

If you demand that Verizon sell phones for cheaper, they would stop selling phones. How is that good?

Let’s think these things through.