Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
I wouldn't buy a bad business in the first place. I'm more of a "collective" thinker.
Bullshit, if you could make 100% profit you would. I dont think anyone is that above financial gain.

If I'm gonna sink 10k into a failing business, I'm gonna re-invent it, make it profitable again, that way, instead of a quick 100k, I have a continuous stream of revenue.
SOme businesses CANNOT BE SAVED no matter what. They go under. Or they have to be downsized, or broken up into pieces. If you can save the company you will of course, but what about the company that ISNT SAVEABLE? Look at KODAK, they arent viable, they got too far behind on technology, ran into the ground by FUJIFILM and now theres nothing left. Someone will buy them though for pennies on the dollar and slice them up and part them out. SO WHAT?

I guess thats the difference between people with a lot of ideas, and people with one idea.
you act like thats ALL romney did. Obviously he didnt. Companies he could save , they did(BURGER KING). Companies that could be expanded, he did (STAPLES). Companies that couldnt be saved, they gutted and made a profit. Again, SO THE FUCK WHAT?


The RSX is a bad example. If I part out the car, no one else is gonna to hungry because of it. If I sell off a company for 100k, but then 10 people can't feed their children next week, then I haven't really gained anything.
I was just showing how 1 persons assets could be worth more in the hands of someone with more options. One persons bankruptcy could be another persons gold mine. Again, it comes down to who is smart, who has connections, and in many cases, who has the money to turn a company around.

The 10 families you talk about were going to be out of a job anyway, so nothing changed. IF they save the company , then they got lucky.

What if someone bought the company and instead of 10 workers, cut it down to 5 workers, and returned the company to profitability because their workforce was too big. Would you be just as upset then? Or would you still call him a bad guy cause "he cut 5 workers".



Sure it's a proven model. It works to make a few people a couple bucks fast. It's too easy.
Whats wrong with being easy? So people should only make money if its HARD?

It just sounds to me like you think every company HAS to keep jobs and has to employ people regardless of their revenue stream. People go into business to become wealthy. The real world operates on numbers and cents. If you can make your company more efficient by downsizing, and to be competitive, then do it. Sucks to lay people off but it sucks to go out of business too. If you experience a boom and want to hire 100 more people then you should do it. But when the boom dies, those 100 extras gotta go. Should we artificially keep them because "its the right thing to do"?

Not every business owner fires people to buy themselves another yacht or mansion.

If you hate what Romney did, then you should be bashing OBama for letting Solyndra waste 500MILLION dollars in YOUR MONEY, and LAYOFF 1000 WORKERS.