I also deal with the same sort of situation every day when discussing health care reform.

This charlatan is more sold-out to big pharma and health insurance companies than any previous candidate, yet his loyal followers keep asking for a leap of faith or hope in the absence of any actual actions.

I also deal with this when discussing marriage equality.

He’s against it. He believes for religious reasons that gay people are second-class citizens (he’s farther to the right on gays in the military than Clinton in 1992!). Yet I’ve been told that he “doesn’t really mean this” and that I should have a leap of faith, or hope, or whatever. This man is a charlatan who dupes people!

The scariest thing is that they need a new enemy… now that Hillary and Palin are vanquished, there needs to be a focus for the negative emotions of the people involved in the “movement.” It will probably be some foreign con

i’m a big obama supporter but am very much against this bailout and obviously this is all for political reasons for michigan’s white union swing voters.

Hasn’t it been shot down, or at least disapproved of, in nine out of ten comments? If you’re looking for people to tear their hair out because Obama is disappointing on this issue, the fact that they are not is evidence that the obamamania you’re referring to (or kool aid or obamabot-ism, pick your internet cliche) was never as manic as it was alleged to be. Anyone that thought he was going to be perfect hasn’t been paying attention; my enthusiasm was greatly tempered by his surprising flip-flop on telecom immunity for wiretapping crimes. But I’m still cautiously optimistic. I would rather have an engaged president that compromises on some issues, knowing he is doing the wrong thing, than a disengaged one that is letting others do the thinking for him. Having Bush’s DOT support congestion pricing—what a trip that was! Does anyone think Bush could explain how c.p. works, why it is helpful and fair? Obama could, even though his DOT may not give it the same support. And as we saw in c.p.’s federally supported first attempt here, a disgraced presidential administration that is disengaged at the top is not very helpful in accomplishing whatever good things it happens to attempt.

We will see if Obama changes his automaker welfare position as economic thinkers line up against it (and mildly inform the public) the way they did against the McCain-Clinton gas tax summer partytime. I’m thinking, probably not, but there’s HOPE.

Mr. Bush indicated at the meeting that he might support some aid and a broader economic stimulus package if Mr. Obama and Congressional Democrats dropped their opposition to a free-trade agreement with Colombia

Talk about horse trading! “Why yessir, Mister ‘bama, I sure can give you that mangy old mare – um, I mean fine strong horse – you’re asking for, but she’s gonna cost you a purty penny!”

Whew, that honeymoon was over fast. Yes We Can … prop up inefficient businesses whose main product kills our children and destroys our quality of life!

I think it’s funny that this ridiculous plan isn’t immediately shot down by other members on this site. It seems to me that this Obama fellow brainwashed people into believing there was going to be a “new deal” and a national rebirth when instead it’s a feeding frenzy for auto industry lobbyists!

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/blueprintamerica/blog/the-dig-rebuilding-the-economy-with-infrastructure-spending/225/

CONGRESS: Here’s a radical plan…

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/11/solution-for-detroit-gm-friends.html

It’s this, or bankruptcy. The American Auto industry should be saved but under new conditions

Or how about Reclamation projects? Dams that feed us water now or still provide cheap electricity.

And no one can forget the Defense industrial complex.

Rather investing in America’s infrastructure and people, we invest in cooperate companies and DOD torture/death.

Compare the Dow Jones Industrial Average components list in 1900, in 1950, and today. Very few of the corporations stayed on from one list to the next. As the reality of the world shifted, people demanded new products, and the industrial base shifted with this shifting reality.

Every person who is kept on the SUV assembly line in Detroit is one less person who is put to work building high-speed rail in California, or CPU’s or anything else we manufacture.

Imagine the effect on any emerging, innovative new industry of having to compete for workers with a federally-backed obsolete industry. This could stifle innovation.

These car companies are shrinking because we don’t want their products as much as we used to. Both capital and labor need to flow to industries and projects that benefit society and the economy as a whole a lot more.

On the one hand, it diverts the productive power of America’s workers into underproductive industries instead of creating things that people actually need or want. This injures the economy in the long term, instead of helping it. Imagine if the government put everyone who is currently working in Silicon Valley to work in a telegraph factory, subsidized by Federal funds. We’d all be significantly poorer because the wealth created by computers would not exist, and we’d also be flooded with a lot more telegraph machines than we need.

On the other hand, if cars do indeed have a future as an industry in America, they’ll be built again some day. People forget that in this globalized day and age, GM is no more an “American” car maker than Honda or Nissan are–anyone from anywhere in the world can buy stock in GM or Honda or DaimlerBenz or any other multinational corporation. Hell, the Japanese car makers even employ Americans building cars for sale in the U.S. So it’s not like cars will stop being made in America once GM goes kaput.

The reason this is even being considered is the entrenched special interests (both corporate and labor) that stand to be harmed from change. Yes, change hurts in the short run, but in the long run it helps more people than it hurts. It’s just socially optimal.