Liberal incoherence is at it again, this time in an Obama vs. Romney comparison, a battle we’ll likely have for months.
Let me break it down to its core.
Romney used to run Bain Capital, a venture capital firm with a history of buying struggling companies, gutting them and trying to make them profitable again.
In many cases this included laying off employees, and in some cases the ventures failed.
That’s the nature of business.
Obama is running our country. He recently suggested that he’d like broad authority to consolidate several departments of the U.S. Government.
In other words, he’s going to take several entities and merge them.
By doing that, he’ll cost about 2,000 employees their jobs.
The goal is to make the entities more efficient and more useful.
Romney is an evil, greedy, businessman.
Obama is a hero.
I mentioned the problem of the media’s framing of this issue last week, but I think this discussion must be furthered.
The real issue is the short-term lens through which too many people view the political world. Any world for that matter.
Our immediate gratification society, one full of drive-through Starbucks, banking on our smart phones and instant media alerts, simply can’t seem to grasp the importance of perspective.
Venture capitalists don’t always make money. No business always makes money, yet we expect them to.
Gamblers, even really good ones, never win more than 54% of the time.
Venture capitalists, any capitalist, is out to make money first and foremost. The critics of capitalism are right to be weary of just how good that is for society.
On the other hand, if a soon-to-be-bankrupt company has 1,000 employees and either everyone loses their job or they’re bought by a venture capital firm who will save 600 employees, if I’m an employee who works there, I vote for the venture capitalist.
This national fight over collective bargaining is the same. Unions decided rather than take pay cuts or accept higher insurance payments, they would accept hundreds of layoffs.
In Wisconsin, almost $800 million was saved through changes to collective bargaining that included paying into pensions (many public employees paid little or nothing), and insurance payments.
Not only that, but the reduction in collective bargaining saved thousands of jobs for teachers and other public workers.
Liberals are under this erroneous notion that utopia is possible, even plausible. The government can fix our problems, we just haven’t given them enough power to fix them.
The reality is, government hasn’t yet caught up with the rest of the economy in terms of being efficient. When a business can’t turn a profit, they have to either decrease costs or increase revenues.
It’s refreshing to see soon-to-be-former President Obama taking a step in the right direction when it comes to government accountability and efficacy.
On the other hand, we shouldn’t be vilifying people like Mitt Romney who are in the business of saving businesses. No, Bain wasn’t always successful and people had to be laid off.
But those decisions were made with a perspective of the long-term.
Our president loves to talk about “shared sacrifice,” yet all he wants to do is sacrifice other people’s money.
What we need is a leader who understands the value of money, the value of labor and the value of a big-picture perspective when it comes to both of those things.
Sometimes sacrifices have to be made in the short-term to benefit the long-term.
Taxing the rich, by itself, doesn’t accomplish that, yet it’s the only solution our president seems to have for fixing the spending behemoth that is government.
Romney, for all of his shortcomings (and there are plenty), seems to have the wherewithal and the financial savvy to institute policy to help, not punish, businesses even if that means some short-term sacrifice.
Between Romney and Obama, only one of them has a history of executing in that realm.