Obama Auto Bailout 'Saved Our Community,' Toledo Worker Tells DNC
Reminding viewers once again of the successful rescue of the auto industry, Democrats trotted out a group of everyday "American heroes" Thursday night led by Kenyetta Jones, a Toledo auto worker who said she wouldn't have her job today if not for the auto bailout.Full Story
#1 Sep 7, 2012
She wouldnt have a job today- if Obama gave GM over 100 billion dollars of taxpayer maoney,( at a cost of 12.600.000.00 per job! Do the Math, thats not including tax abatement,or Ally Bank, or Direct tv
#2 Sep 7, 2012
Call Bill Clinton, ask him for a calculator, and some lessons in using it.
Your arithmetic is a bit askew.
Since: Feb 12
#3 Sep 7, 2012
Well that's easy detroit dave. "Take two tax cuts, roll back some Regulation and call us in the morning."
#4 Sep 7, 2012
Obama mocks Kasich for ignoring auto bailout:
President Obama couldn't resist talking today about the Republican convention speaker "who wasn't entirely on script."
No, not Clint Eastwood -- John Kasich, the governor of Ohio.
Most of the Republicans who spoke last week bemoaned the state of the economy and blamed him, Obama noted; but Kasich touted job creation in Ohio -- though he left out the part about the Obama administration's auto bailout.
"Now, I guess the theory was that it's all the governor's doing," Obama told members of the United Auto Workers in Toledo, Ohio. "But I think we need to refresh his memory -- because a lot of those jobs are autoworker jobs like yours."
Obama noted that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney opposed the bailout, and would have let Detroit carmakers go bankrupt.
In an interview last week with USA TODAY reporters and editors, Kasich said that of 122,300 jobs created in Ohio in recent years, only 1,200 are auto jobs.
While grateful for the stabilization of the car industry, Kasich that is not what is leading Ohio's economy.
Contributing: Richard Wolf
#5 Sep 7, 2012
In fact, Ohio might look very different today had Obama not acted early in his presidency. During those first few months, as economists openly debated the prospects for a global depression, the American economy was contracting at an alarming rate of more than 6 percent, and the administration was watching some 600,000 jobs a month vanish. As global demand fell and employers flailed, the demand for public assistance, mostly in the form of unemployment insurance and Medicaid, soared. Municipalities, watching their tax revenue shrink, were looking at huge cutbacks in schools and essential services. The panoply of economic and social curses that can result from such a cycle — more foreclosures, more crime, more untreated illnesses — can send states and cities tumbling for decades. If you need proof, go visit Detroit.
Obama’s first remedy of choice, the stimulus package worth more than $800 billion, remains unpopular. This is partly because three years later, the stimulus doesn’t really seem to have stimulated much real growth. But it’s also because a lot of the short-term assistance that came to states during that time wasn’t really visible to the public; it was used to maintain existing commitments to social programs and capital projects, the kinds of things that would have been noticed only had they suddenly disappeared — which could well have happened without federal intervention. According to figures kept by the administration, Ohio received some $3.5 billion in additional Medicaid payments, and more than 860,000 residents received expanded unemployment benefits. In addition, Ohio claimed about $8.8 billion for other projects, including public school systems, roadwork and police departments. It stands to reason that Ohioans, who make up about 4 percent of the country, received about that proportion of nearly $540 billion in tax breaks and income subsidies. If the Recovery Act didn’t turn things around in Ohio, it surely kept things from getting markedly worse.
And then, just a few months after the stimulus package, came the structured bankruptcy of G.M. and Chrysler, financed with public dollars because no private investor wanted anything to do with it. How much impact the auto bailout really had in Ohio is a question, like so many political debates, of how you assemble the data. Kasich was citing authoritative numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics when he initially told me that the state had added only 700 jobs related to auto manufacturing. In August, after the bureau issued its latest figures, the Kasich administration revised that tally downward, claiming that the state had actually lost 3,200 auto jobs since the governor took office. In other words, even while he was talking up his state’s economic momentum, Kasich was insisting that the auto sector there had actually lost ground — and thus the president’s bailout had nothing whatever to do with the good news in Ohio.
Kasich’s aides arrived at these numbers by adopting the most limited definition you can reasonably have of what constitutes an auto job, taking into account only two categories of employees: those who assemble cars and those who make auto parts. The White House and the Obama campaign, not surprisingly, prefer a somewhat more expansive definition — one that includes, for instance, jobs created in dealerships and auto-parts stores. By their count, the federal auto bailout can be directly linked to more than 17,000 new jobs in Ohio over the three-year span beginning in June 2009 — and that’s not counting the new hires who make some of the steel that ultimately goes into all of these cars.
#6 Sep 7, 2012
We can’t know how many new jobs would never have existed if not for the auto bailout, but it’s beside the point. What’s more relevant, and all but impossible to calculate, is how many previously existing jobs would have disappeared in Ohio had at least two of the three major American automakers gone under. The Council of Economic Advisers under George W. Bush, who undertook the first federal intervention in the industry back in 2008, estimated (probably conservatively) that a million American jobs would be vulnerable, most of them in the Midwest. Obama’s advisers during the auto crisis privately discussed the possibility of a “Lehman risk” if they stood by while the auto companies tanked — in other words, a sudden collapse of the automakers might cause a catastrophic failure of the entire industrial sector, just as the dissolution of Lehman Brothers sunk the financial markets.
Eric Burkland, the longtime head of the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association, explained to me the accepted wisdom that for every guy who works in an actual auto plant or makes an auto part, there are seven jobs in supporting industries, usually in proximity to the plant — paint suppliers and sandwich shops, robotic designers and engineers, accountants and lawyers.“I spent a lot of time with a lot of automakers back then, and it was scary as hell,” said Burkland, who, like most of his members, counts himself as a Republican.“We were looking at a calamity of unknown proportions.”
#7 Sep 7, 2012
Ohhhhh. So now you're focusing on job dominos. Why were you not so concerned about associated work in the closing of the Gulf oil? Nobody on your team really concerned about what kind of jobs were lost by the closing of all those auto dealerships.
If we did nothing, and I mean nothing, the automobile manufacturers would have filed for bankruptcy. Then it would have went to court. Then they would have restructured according to the judge.
But lets take the worst possible scenario. GM closed down, and that would have been the end of them. Now what? Well...... I guess Americans would just have to stop buying cars and trucks now wouldn't they? GM workers would have no place to go except the unemployment line.
I guess what Eric Burcland didn't figure on is that nobody is going to stop people from buying new vehicles just because GM shut down. They would run to Ford, Toyota or a number of other manufacturers to purchase those new vehicles. Those operations would then need to expand, and where better to expand to than closed GM plants that are already setup for such manufacturing.
Every time we discuss what Obama didn't do, you guys keep giving me readings from the crystal ball. What if??? Well I can what if too! What if DumBama didn't pass Commie Care? More people would be insured today, more companies would bring jobs back from overseas or at the very least, some of those trillions of dollars. What if DumBama didn't mess around with credit card companies and banks? My crystal ball says there would have been more consuming in the US; that by now, we would have finally seen some real improvements to our economy instead of all these fake unemployment numbers that try to make Obama look like he destructed nothing.
#8 Sep 7, 2012
I'm pointing out that Kasich is full of shittt.
Add your comments below
|CEO to reveal 5-year strategy in early 2014; ke... (Nov '13)||3 hr||Bob||13|
|GM Telling Pontiac, Saab Owners Not to Allow Fr...||Wed||John Jeffery||1|
|Commodore replacement may have special insignia||Oct 19||John Jeffery||1|
|Chrysler enlists workers for help (Dec '06)||Oct 13||the fuher||6|
|Off With Their Heads (Dec '06)||Oct 13||1979jnap||2|
|Chrysler arranges Chinese cars for U.S. (Sep '06)||Oct 12||1979jnap||11|
|Chevy Impala Owners File Class Action Lawsuit A... (Jul '11)||Oct 11||Guest||33|
Find what you want!
Search Automakers Forum Now