Steve Jobs vs. The Auto Bailout: Who Created the Most Jobs?

No...those companies had lots of employees before they were ready to go bankrupt. So, as far as "creating" jobs, the government didn't do that. The government loaned the money for the companies to reorganize and perhaps rehire some of those thousands who had previously been laid off. At this point, the companies haven't expanded their manufacturing in the US.

In 2001 the US 3 car manufacturers, had 300,000 hourly employees. As of October 2011, there were 112,000. "
By reducing jobs and factories to better match their market shares, the Detroit companies have drastically reduced the level of industry sales at which they can break even." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/business/au...

But GM did probably cause more hiring in China, Korea, Japan and Mexico since they shifted production to those countries for exporting to the US.

Most of Jobs jobs are in China, under conditions the corporations that run our Gov't would like to enact here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ie...

If a company creats 6 jobs in China and 2 jobs in the Unites States do the 2 jobs in the US exist? Krugman, as is often the case, does not have a valid point.

What would an I-pad cost if it were made by UAW labor?

Would it have to be subsidized with taxpayer money in order for its retail price to be low enough to attract buyers...

Don't like apple? Don't buy one.

If the Chevy volt is so darn wonderful, how come the taxpayers are subsidizing their production to the tune of $250,000 for each copy?

If the car had any merit, it could be sold at a net profit.

David Christman wrote:

If a company creats 6 jobs in China and 2 jobs in the Unites States do the 2 jobs in the US exist? Krugman, as is often the case, does not have a valid point.

Krugman is a self adimited liberal and an Obama/democratic party pitch man. Most ,if not all,of his columns are spun so far left even the real democrats laughs at them.I don't think that I have to say anything about the NYT's,we all know what side they are on,maybe that is way they are loosing readers at a record rate.If the DNC wants to survive they better get rid of their far left liberal/socilist loons as soon as they can.

Dismayed wrote:

But GM did probably cause more hiring in China, Korea, Japan and Mexico since they shifted production to those countries for exporting to the US.

You are making things up... again...

You have a "tell": anything that follows the word "probably"... a lie.

A word you use on a regular basis...

Simple Question wrote:

If the Chevy volt is so darn wonderful, how come the taxpayers are subsidizing their production to the tune of $250,000 for each copy?.

If you make a lie a really big lie...

Dismayed wrote:

No...those companies had lots of employees before they were ready to go bankrupt. So, as far as "creating" jobs, the government didn't do that. The government loaned the money for the companies to reorganize and perhaps rehire some of those thousands who had previously been laid off. At this point, the companies haven't expanded their manufacturing in the US.
In 2001 the US 3 car manufacturers, had 300,000 hourly employees. As of October 2011, there were 112,000. "
By reducing jobs and factories to better match their market shares, the Detroit companies have drastically reduced the level of industry sales at which they can break even." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/business/au...
But GM did probably cause more hiring in China, Korea, Japan and Mexico since they shifted production to those countries for exporting to the US.

Let's first vstart bwith Apple;

Had Microsoft not invested in Apple, they would not exist.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/10/opinion/l-b...

Next, emploees at GM;

Inducements were offered to get employees at higher salaries out, and hire new employees at substantially lower wages. Also, the new contract negotiated with GM and UAW workers gives only a 1% increase per year over 5 years - far less than the rate of inflation.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/companie...

Be a bit more factual. These were smart moves, and the automotive industry is back again! You should be happy about this - imagine what the unemployment rate would be now if the government had not intervened?

You also fail to acknowledge the fact that the automakers were already in negotiations with Bush for bailouts prior to Obama even getting elected;

http://themoderatevoice.com/24947/bailout-for...

http://bigthreeauto.procon.org/view.additiona...

Bush approved the bailout - Obama simply delivered the check, under more stringent regulations ensuring taxpayers got their money back.

Where's the problem?

Simple Question wrote:

If the Chevy volt is so darn wonderful, how come the taxpayers are subsidizing their production to the tune of $250,000 for each copy?
If the car had any merit, it could be sold at a net profit.

This may have some merit, but the fact that this country decided in the late 80's to ignore the benefits of a hybrid, which we created the concept, and our competition decided to create one that is much more fuel efficient, and got it to market is strictly the governments fault.

What about Bush's $100,000.00 tax write off on vehicles over 6000 lbs? Forgot that he was pushing SUV's down our throats at taxpayer expense? My former boss in 2005 bought a Hummer for just over $25,000.00 with this tax write off.

Don't believe me?

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1220-...

Who benefitted from this?

The oil companies that had loads of vehicles getting 10 mpg.
http://www.chevyavalanchefanclub.com/cafcna/i...

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
You are making things up... again...
You have a "tell": anything that follows the word "probably"... a lie.
A word you use on a regular basis...

I don't lie, but if what I've read in my research has no definite proof, I won't use it as absolutes. And I did read that GM had planned to do that...wanna read it? http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20090509/A...

Somebody pee in your cornflakes this morning?

Dismayed wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't lie,

Someone must have stolen your alias and posted as you.

Dismayed wrote:

And I did read that GM had planned to do that...

Ah... planned... like the colony GingRICH is going to put on the moon- you buy your ticket yet?

Dismayed wrote:

But GM did probably cause more hiring in China, Korea, Japan and Mexico since they shifted production to those countries for exporting to the US.

****since they shifted production to those countries*******

Maybe you just need to take an English class and learn your tenses?

Those Chinese factories sound like a rethug wet dream-low wages, no benefits, dangerous working conditions, abusive supervisors and a total disregard for the welfare and rights of the workers.

Look at the high suicide rates of workers in China, then tell me why anyone would vote republiCON? This is what they want for YOU.

Sheik Yerbouti wrote:

Those Chinese factories sound like a rethug wet dream-low wages, no benefits, dangerous working conditions, abusive supervisors and a total disregard for the welfare and rights of the workers.

The Chinese factories are in a country run by leftists. Further left than Democrats, but far from Republicans.

celticwarriors wrote:

Look at the high suicide rates of workers in China, then tell me why anyone would vote republiCON? This is what they want for YOU.

Because those Chinese workers live in a country run by Communists and Republicans are stronger opponents of Communists than Democrats are.

David Christman wrote:

<quoted text>Because those Chinese workers live in a country run by Communists and Republicans are stronger opponents of Communists than Democrats are.

No, "free" market ideology is pure repuglyCONism. It's a race to the bottom for workers, and maximum profits for the CEOs.

TonyT1961 wrote:

<quoted text>
This may have some merit, but the fact that this country decided in the late 80's to ignore the benefits of a hybrid, which we created the concept, and our competition decided to create one that is much more fuel efficient, and got it to market is strictly the governments fault.
What about Bush's $100,000.00 tax write off on vehicles over 6000 lbs? Forgot that he was pushing SUV's down our throats at taxpayer expense? My former boss in 2005 bought a Hummer for just over $25,000.00 with this tax write off.
Don't believe me?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1220-...
Who benefitted from this?
The oil companies that had loads of vehicles getting 10 mpg.
http://www.chevyavalanchefanclub.com/cafcna/i...

Stupidity in the past is no justification for current or future stupidity. Quite the contrary in fact.