No car company bailout is worse than NAFTA on steroids.

[Festivito]

At least under NAFTA the car companies have a choice of sending operations to other countries. No loan/bailout means other countries divide our market choosing how and where to spend the profits, and it won't be here.

We'll still find things to do after a painful lag. Foreign car companies will buy some manufacturing facilities, but we'll end having fewer choices between cars, if we can afford one at all.

Those bad shadow bankers stole a bunch of our money, took it out of circulation, made our retirements shaky, our jobs uncertain. Our ability to securely buy a car on credit payments is worrisome both to lender and ourselves the buyer. We don't even know how much more bad paper is out there, but I do know that it's not about to change until Obama takes the helm.

Obama will need a money maker for our future rather than the incredibly worse 3-million good jobs gone alongside another several million extended jobs dying with those.

True, we don't know how long this great recession/money supply problem will last, but how fast and how well we exit this trouble will depend on what we can build and how far down we fell.

Yes to loan or bailout, no to worse-than-NAFTA-on-steroids.

Wish I could say it better.

[FreakinDJ]

1. The Economy will not recover without Manufacturing Sector

This is why the RATpublicans are holding up any possible bailout of the Big 3. They understand the enormous undertaking Obama has had thrust upon him and so dearly want him to fail.

Heavy Manufacturing is what made Britain an Economic Super Power up to WWII and Heavy Manufacturing is what made the USA an Economic Super Power for the later half of the century, and Heavy Manufacturing is what is propelling China's economy in the new century

[Festivito]

2. Without making something, recovery will be longer.

If we recover at all. If we don't recover, not only does America go down, democracy goes down around the world.

That's the real target.