Quote Originally Posted by Detroitej72 View Post
Just by saving GM and Chrysler, the president took a bold step and saved thousands, perhaps half a million jobs. Now, he should stand up and take credit for stopping the unemployment rate from skyrocketing even further.
It is difficult to say exactly what would have happened without bailouts. To prove something that didn't happen would have happened because a bailout is a bit like saying I saved the corn crop because I prayed for rain. If I hadn't prayed for rain, the crops would be ruined. It is difficult to prove otherwise. Consumers might also have purchased more Fords or other interests, such as Fiat, might have stepped up and purchased Chrysler and empty GM factories otherwise. Buying more Fords would have increased employment at Ford. I can't prove that either, but it makes as much sense as assuming troubles at GM would result in American consumers would stop buying cars. To extend you logic, should the US government have bailed out Hudson and American Motors too? I have an Uncle who lost all of his seniority at Hudson Motors, yet the world rolls on.

We do know though that officially unemployment has risen from 5.7% to 9.6% in the two years in which Obama has been President. We also know that the up to $45B in GM tax breaks will be offset with up to $45B in some other form of government spending. We don't know if that money would otherwise have gone to health care, military needs, high speed rail projects, etc. but we do know that something else in the budget will have to take a corresponding hit resulting in, at best, a pyhrric victory for the administration.