Even without the bailout, the newly unemployed would get money — via unemployment compensation if they don’t take other jobs. Auto workers shouldn’t receive any greater benefit than other jobless people. And I would expect the Dems, with full control of the government, to substantially extend eligibility periods.

“wouldn’t a few swift anti-trust measures save most of the jobs”?

Detroit lost oligopolistic control of the market years ago. We now have the most competitive auto market since, oh, before WW I.

Exceptions exist but, generally…

mass and local media exist to make a profit for the owner(s).

Ads are the main revenue source.

Who spends more on ads…

the auto industry at all its levels and permutations or the chap advertising his garage sale?

Can’t bite the hand that feeds you.

You’re gonna walk into a door frame – ’cause you’re missing an “i”.

And a better picture/title for this post would have involved Robert Wagner and Stephanie Powers….:)

The “which ones scare you the most?” intrigues me the most, as that seems to be the most common way to answer any question any where any more.

reading this post and your coverage of the Vegas trade show, I am glad to find this is an outlet that doesn’t bend to a few reader comments and water down their content with soft ads for the manufacturers at the event… cheers for that.

the more i read about the inevitability of the auto giants failing, the more i feel like putting that same 50bil into the hands of the newly unemployed when they do finally fail would be far more effective. no one wants to see 2.5mil people out of work, but if GM is “too big to fail,” why not break it up? wouldn’t a few swift anti-trust measures save most of the jobs without rewarding management who have failed to innovate?