It Stinks...

[Alias]

NO. I wasn't against the bailout, at least not to GM. I didn't like the bailouts to Wall Street or the financial sector, but I was all in favor of the bailouts to GM, because it preserved sooo many jobs.

There are plenty of corporate welfare to cut. . .tax breaks to the oil industry, subsidies to mega farming corporations, etc. . .

I do not believe in generalization in any areas. Sorry I can't give you a "black or white" answer. . .I am more of a "gray area" person. . .contrary to my reputation for being "far left."

Where do jobs come from.....business or govt?

 

[Openmind]

Where do jobs come from.....business or govt?

Obvioulsy, in the last 10 years, jobs didn't come from business. . .just look at the statistics from the Bush Era!

So. . .when business prefers to sit on huge profits, rather than reinvest them in hiring people, the government needs to pitch in. . .and we need it badly anyway, because Bush let our infrastructure go down to the gutter. . .we are now further behind most developped countries than we were 10 years ago.

Mind you, I don't totally blame business for not hiring. . .contrary to the "trickle down" delusion, and the GOP's propaganda, it is not the "supply" that create jobs, it is the "demand." And, to get demand, people need to have money to purchase products with. . .which brings us back to needing jobs, that have NOT been "created" by the "job creators," IN SPITE of the Bush tax cuts, and the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, so. . .why would they "hire" to "produce more goods" if NO ONE CAN BUY those goods. . .especially in a Global economy in recession!

 

[dogtowner]

NO. I wasn't against the bailout, at least not to GM. I didn't like the bailouts to Wall Street or the financial sector, but I was all in favor of the bailouts to GM, because it preserved sooo many jobs.

No it preserved no jobs. Well maybe a few at the union.

for example

GM has faced strong protests from the union that its turnaround plan unfairly targets U.S. workers and plants for cuts. GM plans to trim 21,000 hourly workers and close 13 of its 47 U.S. plants by the end of 2010 as part of a tougher recovery plan sought by President Obama's auto task force. It will close three more U.S. plants by 2014.

and if they had gone bankrupt ?

Contrary to popular belief, bankruptcy does not mean companies close their doors and send employees home. This is the false message President Barack Obama tried to sell on his victory tour of Detroit. If General Motors had gone through a normal bankruptcy without taxpayer bailouts, there would still be GM jobs--maybe even more than there are now. We do not know because that was the road not taken.


We do know, however, what happened to the airlines that went through bankruptcy. Their planes kept flying, and pilots, mechanics and flight attendants reported to work, even if there were fewer of them.


Over the past decade, no industry has had worse breaks than the airlines. They took a huge hit from 9/11. They have been buffeted by fuel prices. The TSA's intrusive airport screening angered passengers. Furthermore, the airline industry is cyclical; it suffers disproportionately from economic downturns.



Compared to the airlines, GM has had a cake walk.



Indeed, four major airlines filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after 9/11 (US Air and United in 2002; Northwest and Delta in 2005). Each company was restructured by a bankruptcy court according to the rule of law. In each case, creditors took haircuts and employees lost jobs and agreed to concessions in wages and work conditions. Each airline emerged from bankruptcy and continued to operate as a going concern.

 

[dogtowner]

Obvioulsy, in the last 10 years, jobs didn't come from business. . .just look at the statistics from the Bush Era!

Oh dear, sorry that is incorrect. All jobs come from business including government ones as taxes pay for them..

 

[Alias]

Obvioulsy, in the last 10 years, jobs didn't come from business. . .just look at the statistics from the Bush Era!

So. . .when business prefers to sit on huge profits, rather than reinvest them in hiring people, the government needs to pitch in. . .and we need it badly anyway, because Bush let our infrastructure go down to the gutter. . .we are now further behind most developped countries than we were 10 years ago.

Mind you, I don't totally blame business for not hiring. . .contrary to the "trickle down" delusion, and the GOP's propaganda, it is not the "supply" that create jobs, it is the "demand." And, to get demand, people need to have money to purchase products with. . .which brings us back to needing jobs, that have NOT been "created" by the "job creators," IN SPITE of the Bush tax cuts, and the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, so. . .why would they "hire" to "produce more goods" if NO ONE CAN BUY those goods. . .especially in a Global economy in recession!

Jobs do come from business. Govt doesn't produce. Govt takes. Govt does not own our money. We are a free people who have a govt. We are not a govt who has a people that support it. Bush also let govt grow and now Obama has taken that and made a mountain out of a molehill, so to speak. Blaming Bush isn't going to make the problem go away. Stopping Obama and reversing his policies will.