Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon (Post 295075)

Not me. No way. Crappy overpriced cars. They got what was coming to them, due to (among other things) their complete and utter failure to prepare for rising gasoline costs, relying almost wholly on SUV sales to stay afloat.

I much prefer the part of Romney's proposal that emphasizes transitioning Detroit in to the capital of America's energy sector. That seems much more viable to me.

Originally Posted by Venkman (Post 295174)

Maybe I'm a hypocrite, because I opposed the wall street bailout but support some sort of auto bailout. I see a difference in that wall street caused the mess and now we're bailing them out? Plus, regardless of how many banks go out of business, we're in no danger of losing our insurance, banking, financial services industries. However, we are losing our manufacturing base and we may lose our auto industry. Huge difference IMO.

However, your point is taken. I generally believe in free markets, but it's not my overriding ideology above all else. What I AM for is an strong independent America full of a free prosperous people. I believe manufacturing and the auto industry are cruicial to maintain our prosperity and freedoms and we're losing it gradually.

Here's where I break with the traditional conservative / Wall Street Journal view. They view America is a market, not a country. Losing your auto industry? Losing your manufacturing? No big deal. Our government has hamstrung industry through high taxes and regulation. Our industry is competing against foreign competition with much lower costs and with governments that support their industries. Yet when our auto industy falters, it's all their fault. Government tax, labor, and trade policy has nothing to do with it. Right.

Yes, I reject the cradle to grave welfare state and the many redistributionist policies. But I do believe that our government has the obligation to give it's industries a level playing field in the global marketplace, and they've done NOTHING in that regard. Should we go the protectionist route? I'm not sure. But protectionism dominated our trade policy until the mid-20th century and it grew this country into the greatest economic power in the world. "Free Trade" has resulted in the loss of our manufacturing base and a loss of real wages in the last 30-40 years. I'm simply no longer willing to buy all of Adam Smith hook line and sinker.

How bout a little economic patriotism? Let's give our auto brethren a little help out of the hole. One we all dug.

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug (Post 295272)

You've got your facts and theory mixed up. Protectionism didn't make US an economic power. And you ignore that the US has become a pharmaceuticals and IT powerhouse under free trade.

Real wages haven't gone down under free trade, they've increased dramatically. Real median wages have remained stagnant, but that's due mostly to technological change and CEO pay, not to trade. Europe has made the same expansion of trade and their median wages are growing at a much faster clip.

Free trade is a no-brainer for all economists. ALL economists. Conservative, liberal, it doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy (Post 295081)

It is interesting to read the shift on both boards.

A month or two ago, maybe more, lots of people clamoring to simply "let the market work it out."

Now that it is evident that this thing is a cluster-f of epic proportions,

Gasp. socialism!