CNBC's Cramer Doubles Down on Romney Being 'Job Destroyer': He Used 'Code Words For Firing People'
On Tuesday's NBC Today, co-host Matt Lauer invited CNBC Mad Money host Jim Cramer to elaborate on calling Mitt Romney a "job destroyer" as the head of Bain Capital on Sunday's Meet the Press: "You speaking as a pundit, or do you have some experience here?" Cramer declared: "He was talking about rationalizing the workforce, making it so that the companies were more efficient. Matt, these were code words back then. Code words for firing people."
Like on Sunday, Cramer spoke about his interest in working for Bain out of college: "I went to hear the presentation when I was at Harvard Law, trying to figure out whether to work for them or somebody else. They were talking about rationalizing the workforce....And by the way, it was viewed as being very positive. It wasn't something that we thought was like, 'Wow, that would be really bad if you're running for president.' It was like, 'Wow, that could be really good if I work there.'"
Lauer followed up by wondering: "Was it smart business or was it a problem with capitalism?" Cramer acknowledged: "It was smart business. This was the way to make money if you worked for Bain. That kind of was why you interviewed with them."
Here is a transcript of the May 22 exchange:
7:47AM ET
(...)
MATT LAUER: You made headlines over the weekend on a different subject. You weighed in on Mitt Romney's time at Bain Capital. Something that's been being discussed a lot now. Whether it's a liability or an asset in his run for the presidency. You said, "Romney's known as a job destroyer, not a job creator." You speaking as a pundit, or do you have some experience here?
JIM CRAMER: Look, I went to hear the presentation when I was at Harvard Law, trying to figure out whether to work for them or somebody else. They were talking about rationalizing the workforce.
LAUER: They were talking or he was talking?
CRAMER: Bain – well, he was there.
LAUER: Okay.
CRAMER: He was talking about rationalizing the workforce, making it so that the companies were more efficient. Matt, these were code words back then. Code words for firing people. And by the way, it was viewed as being very positive. It wasn't something that we thought was like, "Wow, that would be really bad if you're running for president." It was like, "Wow, that could be really good if I work there."
LAUER: Was it smart business or was it a problem with capitalism?
CRAMER: It was smart business. This was the way to make money if you worked for Bain. That kind of was why you interviewed with them.
LAUER: Jim Cramer. Alright, we'll leave it at that. Appreciate it very much. You can catch this guy on Mad Money week nights at 6:00 and 11:00 Eastern Time on CNBC.
- Kyle Drennen's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I think CNBC would be more
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:02pm.
I think CNBC would be more efficient if they fired Krazy Kramer...................then he would REALLY have something of substance to flap his spittle-flecked jaws about. And he did admit that it was 'smart business' for Bain (and Romney) to operate in the way that they did..............hey, Kramer - what 'business' are you in??? Do you succeed when it's done in a 'smart' way, or in a 'stupid' way. Maybe you can lay out a list of 'smart' business moves that your Boy Baraka has made????
Okay, so maybe "rationalizing the workforce" is a
Submitted by WhoIsJohnGalt on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:06pm.
euphemism. So what? Was it necessary to fire some people? Or to downsize the workforce in order that the company may survive and be more efficient, more profitable, more able to weather the business cycle storms and survive? Or did he Bain Capital just go into a company willy-nilly and start firing people, just to work up an appetite for their next meal?
Or is you biggest complaint the use of euphemisms?
rationalizing
Submitted by Agnostic on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:16pm.
infers that each job needs to have a rational need for existence or it should be eliminated therefore you build an organization in a rationalized manner.
Let us compare that to the governments methods of doing cutbacks in the workforce:
First - grab the budget and the local news clips and find out where the greatest pressure to cut jobs will be and the least political down fall will come from for the cuts.
Second - Assign the person who has mismanaged the effected department to the point that it is bloated and over budget with the task of cutting a certain percentage of his/her payroll.
Third - report to the constituency about the hard decisions you had to make.
Or, in the case of local government,
Submitted by Chaitealover on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 4:05pm.
First threaten to fire teachers, firemen, and policemen, then tell the suckers that it won't have to happen IF they just vote for the latest tax increase.
Chai
Very true,
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 05/23/2012 - 7:57am.
Local governments, most - not all, had close to 30 years of increased tax revenues and I bet you could count the number that saved for a rainy day on one hand if you included every local government nationwide.
Leaders plan for the future - why should any of them have a job when they had thirty years to plan for a few bad years of economic activity and completely failed.
Cramer went to Harvard Law? OMG.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:15pm.
That place is no longer an Ivy League institution, it's an incubation pod for radical libtards. Unbelievable.
I think you just repeated
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:24pm.
I think you just repeated yourself!!!
Where's the profit?
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 1:38pm.
So Obama single handedly shutting down the Keystone Pipeline, wasn't that an act of 'job destroying'?
Well
Submitted by octavioj on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 2:06pm.
Is not rationalizing the workforce always a synonym for workforce reduction?
It's called saving the company
Submitted by c5then on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 2:31pm.
This is what happens in a bankruptcy. The buyer trims down the company to it's most lean form where it can make a profit. This saves the largest part of the company and all the jobs that go with it. It's like amputating frostbitten toes and fingers in order to save the patient. Cramer being a financial talker ought to know this, but of course he is acting as a liberal activist not a financial analyst.
And the Irony is that the specific example cited by Obama, the steel company, was when Romney was not at Bain Capital but was heading up the LA olympic committee and saving that effort. He turned it around and made it a success. In fact, the LA olympics are the only modern day olympics to actually make a profit.
Here is irony...If not for Bain Captial, there might not be a Comcast Communications today. Bain came in and saved the company from itself.
Maybe they are affraid he will rationalize the government if he gets elected
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
They are overlooking the fact
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 2:35pm.
that the companies that were closed, would have closed anyway. The difference is, some companies were saved.
But they're overlooking the fact that Romney wasn't even at Bain during some of the closings they're talking about.
I really hate and despise Obama.
Definition of a lickspittle
Submitted by gussie'sowner on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 2:36pm.
Webster's should put Kramer's picture in for the definition of 'lickspittle". When you see him on Morning Joe you always see him looking to see if what he says meets their approval. Vile disgusting little man.
gussie'sowner
Submitted by amyshulk on Wed, 05/23/2012 - 4:43am.
lickspittle - it fits! Kudlow & State of the Union with Candy Crowley are the only CNN shows I bother with, and Kudlow was having this cretin Kramer on!
I watched the first few, but now I just fast forward his spots, he is so incredibly inane. After listening to Kudlow, who is rational, he just proves his inanity!
Ronald Reagan
Jim Cramer, didn't he admit
Submitted by inquiringmind on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 2:50pm.
Jim Cramer, didn't he admit to stock price manipulation and even get called out on it by Jon Stewart?
Hey Jim, how much money was lost by novice invstors because of your criminal activity?
It's All About Leftist Jobs
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 3:23pm.
Romney is being attacked for eliminating union jobs at companies that became insolvent due to unsustainable labor contracts. Pure and simple.
The Left thinks the private sector can't go bankrupt, that a business should just keep borrowing money to pay the workers, just like the federal government does. Well, the handwriting is on the wall...
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
No offense . . .
Submitted by Clemenza on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 3:45pm.
But this the same dumb left wing POS that told us Lenny Dykstra was one of the "Great Ones" in the financial analysis business. Go sell crazy somewhere else baldy, we're all full up here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lo77x4VeoQE
I;ve got a code word for you
Submitted by CobraMan on Tue, 05/22/2012 - 10:31pm.
I've got a code word for you, Cramer. Tabula rasa. For that's what you are. A person who knows nothing!
Look at it this way, is it better for a failing business to lay off a few employes in order to save the company, or lose the company completely and lay off everyone?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
I can see both sides
Submitted by amyshulk on Wed, 05/23/2012 - 4:34am.
In 2007, when my husband didn't get his annual bonus, I knew things were changing, and that the recession the pundits/oped writers kept talking about had arrived. For months, the big bosses at the plant started talking about going from 24/7 to 8/5, and eventually the new line was put on that schedule. Not long after, the new line was shut down, and overtime/shift pay was cut.
By now, businesses were dropping like flies and all I could think was how happy I was his plant was trying to weather the storm!
So when my {usually} taciturn husband groused - why was he being "punished" when his output hadn't decreased - I told him he was actually lucky. That didn't go over well. But now, years later, I think he gets my point, and he is, well, "happy" isn't fitting, but with no more talk of cutting hours, or pay, relieved works!
Ronald Reagan