This is so delicious for you all, but it's short lived. After all, the businesses Bain 'harvested' (or 'closed' to be more PC) were because of the inability to make a profit. I thought we all understood that capitalism has a dark side, eat or be eaten. The bright side is that that businesses are not created to provide jobs, but to make money. Thank God for that, when you really think about it.

It's refreshing to hear a Mitt Romney that sounds honest for once. These day's he's always talking in an elevated, pandering tone, sounding like he's trying to coax a dog into the bathtub.

I don't see what's so damning about this. This is some proper business-speak, professional and stodgy, but it doesn't do what you say it does. There are plenty of opportunities more recent and more blatant to point out Mitt's hypocrisy.

This recalls the "Chaos on Bullshit Mountain" segment that aired on the Daily Show, where they take Fox to task for airing a 1998(?) clip of Obama saying something stupid, right next to grousing about how dirty and down-low it is to film a private speech. This is 1985! Let's go a whole year back to 2011--"corporations are people" is a lot sweeter and a lot scarier than this non-issue.

It's not damning, but the point is that this video shows that Romney has the capacity to tell the truth about what his business did/does - at least, he did in 1985 - whereas he's been framing himself as a job creator in this election. This is just more evidence from the horse's mouth that he has nothing reality-based on which to run for president.

I'm really upset to see people crowing over this one. Yes, the word "harvested" is unfortunate, and yes, what Romney and Bain did to the companies it targeted was exploitative and downright tragic. The problem is, what Romney describes in the videotaped speech wasn't exploitative and tragic - and it wasn't what Romney and Bain did, either. Contra #4, Romney was not being honest - though it's possible he was lying to himself as well, that in 1985 he still thought the plan he described was the path he'd follow.

As Taibbi brilliantly explains, among others who've done so, Bain Capital was established, as Romney says in the 1985 speech, on the argument that the hot management consultants of Bain could spot the potential in an underperforming company, take the company over, apply their business smarts to restore its fortunes, and in five or eight years the company would be a revitalized force in its industry, a highly desirable property that Bain Capital could cash out of, "harvesting" the gains. This is not a vision to be ashamed of; quite the opposite.

In practice, what Bain Capital rapidly discovered was that the plan I've just described was hard, slow work for an uncertain and modest reward. Instead, Bain Capital could target companies with unrealized borrowing power, take them over, force the taken-over company to borrow huge sums to pay Bain ten-fold on their investment in instant profits, and then maybe run the company for a few years. If the company survived this evisceration and remained viable, there was the opportunity to make still more money from selling it after a few years of Bain managing it - but that wasn't the business model. The business model was basically to suck it dry and drain its workers' pensions, and make huge profits from this act of piracy within weeks if not days of the takeover - not the five-to-eight years Romney describes in the videotape.

Sigh... He's saying that Bain isn't about creating jobs. It's about taking over companies and "harvesting" them once their value has been inflated at a later point. That "harvesting" has nothing to do with maintaing jobs or contributing to the fabric of community. That's irrelevant in Mitt's eyes.

So the point of this video - and the reason this is important - is that it demonstrates that Romney and Bain were never *anything* about being job creators, and that he has zero concern for those affected by his actions.

Mitt Romney, with his sharp suit, grey sideburns, slicked hair, and corporate-centrist approach, has long reminded me of Michael Douglas's Gordon Gekko character in the movie Wall Street. Mitt Romney is basically Gordon Gekko running for president. This clip isn't flashy, but it's basically his "greed is good" moment.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather have the community organizer in charge instead of Gordon Gekko. I feel like he shares more of my concerns, ya know?

@1: and under Obama, corporations are producing record profits! I knew you'd come around!

Gordon Gekko had charisma.

Retroactive Man never claimed to be a job creator himself. Retroactive Man knows how to make money off of job creators.

How to harvest all the profit he can off them and throw away the chaff.

America needs profits not workers.

Vote for Retroactive Man.

Gay Dude for Retroactive Man.

In organ transplantation, "harvesting" is the word used for taking organs (i.e., useful objects) from already-dead people. Similar concept, except that Mitt's actually killed companies and fired their employees to harvest profits from them.

soyent green is people!

@1, because money is more important than people.

What, that wasn't the point you were trying to make. Too bad. Can't take it back now.

(just like I can't take back that second period, which was supposed to be a question mark)

It's been noted in the media that 'harvesting' is shop-talk term used by investment bankers. Case closed.