- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Strickland, UAW say auto bailout saved the economy

Published: Mon, April 23, 2012 @ 12:18 p.m.

Strickland, UAW say auto bailout saved the economy


Former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and national United Auto Workers President Bob King said without the president’s decision to bail out the American auto industry, it likely wouldn’t exist today.

On a conference call, Strickland said President Barack Obama, a fellow Democrat, “did the right thing” by pushing through an $82 billion government bailout of General Motors and Chrysler in 2009.

“I believe an entire economy was saved from sliding into a deeper recession or even a depression,” Strickland said.

The Obama campaign said it will have press conferences this week throughout the state to highlight the positive impact of the bailout. The events will feature local auto workers and local elected officials. One of the stops is Warren, near the Lordstown General Motors complex, which makes the Chevrolet Cruze.

In response, Chris Maloney, Ohio Republican Party spokesman, said the Obama campaign is highlighting one part of the president’s record, and ignoring issues such as his health-care reform plan, the stimulus package and job losses.

For the complete story, read Tuesday’s Vindicator and Vindy.com


1AtownAugie(884 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

"without the president’s decision to bail out the American auto industry, it likely wouldn’t exist today" -- Yes, I guess Ford thrived only through luck. And how's that GM bankruptcy working out for shareholders and retirees? The president gave the UAW a gift: Ownership of the "new" GM. And now the UAW will use the workers' union dues to support him for ever. (Hey, why not rename the "Volt" the "Obama" in his honor?! Oh, wait: it would blame all of its problems and minimum support/sales on its predecessor, the Volt. Never mind.)

Suggest removal:

2redeye1(5615 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Its amazing these two fools only think that BO did it all for the auto industry. But who really started the bailouts Bush that's who!!!!!! If he hadn't , they would have been in bankrupcty even before BO was elected. Secondly BO didn't have a choose , because of what Bush had started. If these people want to keep working, they better vote GOP in Nov.

Suggest removal:

3peacelover(838 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

i guess they would have rather seen closed and boarded up businesses, vacant homes, and tumbleweeds blowing down the streets than see the GM plant humming away. Not to mention all the job losses in connection with the auto industry.

Suggest removal:

4DwightK(1535 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

President Obama absolutely saved the auto industry and in doing so, kept people working in hundreds of thousands of jobs. Ford would have gone out of business because they couldn't support the automotive part suppliers all by themselves.

People have to look past their political orientation and see what was really accomplished. It doesn't do any good for your "team" to win if it means hurting the country.

Let's all remember that hundreds of thousands of people working is better than hundreds of thousands of people collecting unemployment benefits.

Suggest removal:

5thinkthentalk(310 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Ok redeye, if i read you correctly, it was Bush that saved GM? mmm, yeah ok.
Thats not what your candidate Romney says. He would have rather GM went bankrupt.
Vote GOP, and Romney's company Bain will buy GM, sell off the assets, add to his fortune, and put everybody at lordstown on unemployment.

Suggest removal:

6bmanresident(607 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Should've let 'em fail. The UAW makes crappy cars anyways. Why work hard when the union protects you. Why quit the drugs when the union protects you. Unions have outlived their usefulness.

Suggest removal:

7Freeatlast(1991 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Hey !! GM , Ford and in part Chrysler are comeing back and doing good and getting better ..
And I for one say GREAT
Shame on you who just put them down

Suggest removal:

8Ytownnative(1121 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

So who should get the next bailout and who decides ? How come best buy and kmart didnt get anything when they had to close stores? Maybe the newspapers are next? It doesn't seem like any provate company should get that much tax dollars. It was fine when all the other companies shut the doors and moved overseas. fannie mae, freddie mac, AIG, GM, they should be on their own. What happens next time? couple more trillion thrown at them ?

Suggest removal:

9redeye1(5615 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Fand E I'm voting BO out no matter what. He's has done more harm to this country then any other president. He send his 13 yr daughter along with 12 of her friends to Mexico to stay in a luxurious hotel . They had to take 25 secret service agents to protect them. That along with two air force jets to haul them there. It cost the taxpayers around two million dollars for this little trip Here we are in a bad economy and this guy can't say NO to his own kids.

Suggest removal:

10WarrenRicheyKid(169 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

1 in 8—or 848,000—Ohioans have jobs related to the auto industry. Romney, still want GM to fail? Or will you flip on this, too?

Suggest removal:

11thinkthentalk(310 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Hey redeye, $50k a day for the secret service to protect Newt. And he never had a snowballs chance since day one. At least Ron Paul has some principles and turned the protection down. redeye, if you and your kind are so concerned about that, why didnt you vote for him?
Utica, you are obviously inhaling too much NG.

Suggest removal:

12exlonghorn(45 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Try telling the 1000's of GM dealers and their employees who were cut off by the "bailout" how the auto industry was "saved"

Suggest removal:

13taxme(361 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

President Obama wins the election by atleast 5% of the vote. Doesnt mean he will win the election though. Remember George Bush lost the popular vote to Al Gore but won the money vot, I mean electoral college. Gore had won 51% to 48% for Bush.

Suggest removal:

14Freeatlast(1991 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

To F&E

21000 pay for 500,000
WOW you guys must have been way overpaid . And you still have enought money to have a computer and the Internet and a place to use it. Maybe you had to much . Did you work for Delphi or did you own them

Suggest removal:

15casper77(136 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Notice how F$E bashes the Unions then whines that the Unions are not helping his cause...DUH!!!

Suggest removal:

16Freeatlast(1991 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

F&E turned down a chance to have a union
But they did not need them , The company (Delphi) would take care of them.

Suggest removal:

17praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

The Chevy Volt cost about $200,000 to make and retails for around $35,000.
How? Government off sets. That's why socialist governments fail.

Suggest removal:

181loaf(100 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

I can't wait for Mr Obama to get re elected and watch what he does when he has "More Flexability". I foresee this country joining some South American and Middle Eastern countries and Cuba with President for Life forms of government. I bet you don't think it can happen! Neither did the poor slaves in those countries when they voted for the dictators who rule their lives. An aside, It was so much more civil when Talk without thinking took a few days off.

Suggest removal:

19JME(802 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Here's how Stricklands policies helped Ohio's auto industry:

"Auto parts company to shut Ohio plant, reopen Indiana one

Wednesday August 11, 2010 8:16 AM "


Suggest removal:

20taxme(361 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

President Obama did bail out the auto industry not Bush. I just love how some people would cutnoff their nose to spite their face. I guess some people would have rather bailed out the very rich instead. Lol. I will say this. I was for bailing out the auto industry Obviously was the right move but we the people should have been bailed out. We all should have had a major tax refund to spend our way out.

Suggest removal:

21JME(802 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago


Bush through GM/Chrysler a loan in Dec. 2008 after Congress refused.
If not for those loans, GM/Chrysler would have sunk before Oblama showed up.

Suggest removal:

22redeye1(5615 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

JME Thank you Its nice to see that there are still smart people in the valley. Instead of all of these kool-aid drinkers.who think they know it all. They only know what their union leaders tell them.They are too blind to see what really is happening!

Suggest removal:

23thinkthentalk(310 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Stop with the typical right wing spin of taking credit when Obamas work is successful while stabbing him in the back.
If you fox/rush zealots actually got your way and let GM fail, let lordstown close, put your neighbors that work at GM out of a job. Your house would be worthless and YOU would be out of a job. And then, you would be crying today that Obama did not do anything to save those jobs.
JME, Bush lent GM and Chrysler $17bil to avert the disaster in the last days of his term. Then it was Obamas/Tim Geithners team that developed the plan to keep them in business. Remember, this plan had the conditions that made the hard decisions that the automakers didnt make.
I think it was the right thing to do. Saved the jobs, saved YOUR job and house, and GM is paying back the loans.

Suggest removal:

24praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Where in Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States does the federal government have the authority to take over a business/industry?

Benjamin Franklin said upon the ratification of the Constitution, "we have given you a Republic, if you can keep it."

Suggest removal:

25praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Overreach of government authority is never appropriate no matter who the president is/was or what party the president hails form.
If we do not jealously guard are individual liberty the government will slowly and incremental take liberty away.

Suggest removal:

26cambridge(4065 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

The state of Ohio receives more money from the federal government than they pay in federal income tax. None of the auto loan came from any federal taxes from Ohio. Your community is enjoying the benefits of the auto loan without paying a dime but you all still bitch instead of just saying thank you.

The link defaults back to Alabama so If Ohio isn't on the screen when you click the link you can search the link. This is the most recent data available that I know of.


Suggest removal:

27Jake(112 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

The assertions put forth by Strickland and the UAW are absolute economic nonsense. Whether they're stupid enough to actually believe what they're saying is up for debate, but it is clear they think their audience IS stupid enough to believe it.

Suggest removal:

28peacelover(838 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

If no money was loaned to GM and if this area became a ghost town all these "geniuses" would be the first ones to cry that the President did nothing to save the jobs.

Suggest removal:

29praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

FLHTCUI, I want our Republic to survive. I and those that think like me place our faith in God and the entrepreneurial spirit of the American people. I have more faith in a free people then I do in a top down controlled economy and government solutions to every problem.

Our country achieved its greatness through freedom and we will suffer our demises by sacrificing our freedoms for security.

If Ron Paul had a sane approach to foreign policy he would have done better in the republican primaries. As for Ms Bachman, it was her first time on the national stage.

Suggest removal:

30MrYikes(14 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Praxis95 - Ron Paul for president! Let's accelerate GM's collapse and introduce radically deflationary monetary policy. You know, because property values are already too high. Mehh, I'll leave this one up to God...

Suggest removal:

31thinkthentalk(310 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

praxis, stop kidding yourself and others. You are just proving your naivete. For the election, the republicans will promise all the constitutional jargon that you want to hear. Tax cuts, which means less revenue, will lower the deficit. Decreased spending will be accomplished by cutting programs that dont affect you, yet. They will just affect some igsignificant poor defenseless nameless faceless schmo.
Funny, if it was that easy, why wasnt it done from 2001 to 2008?

Suggest removal:

32VINDYAK(1824 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Yes, we taxpayers sure bailed out GM. Gave them lots of freshly printed cash ... and they still filed bankruptcy! Hummm, seems like I have read this happening before with other companies.

Suggest removal:

33MrYikes(14 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

@VINDYAK ::face palm:: ... that was the plan. The 'bailout' was a structured bankruptcy with the government meeting GM's liquidity demands. This warded off the private equity types (think Mr. Romney and Bain Capital) who would have hyper-leveraged the company, ripped it into pieces, and still filed bankruptcy. I prefer the former solution.

Suggest removal:

34praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

Think: every time income taxes have been cut the result has been increased revenue to the federal government. the problem is the corresponding spending increase that the federal government engages in. The more money we send to Washington the more they spend.

Additionally, the tone of your post suggest that our Republic is lost. Since you appear to want the government to do for the individual what the individual should do for themselves.

Suggest removal:

35MrYikes(14 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

@praxis95 By golly I think you've found a rift in the space time continuum! Decreased taxes and INCREASED revenue? Sign me up!

Suggest removal:

36praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 2 months ago

President Kennedy cut the top marginal rate and revenue to the fed went up, Regan cut the top marginal rate and revenue went up, Bush cut the tax rate of every one and revenue went up. Revenue goes up b/c the private citizen has more money to spend (disposable income) and more money to invest.

Continually raising taxes stops private investment and consumer spending. (the law of diminishing returns)

Government should be limited to the functions that require a collective effort, government ought not be involved in doing for the individual that which the individual can do for themselves.

That's why defending our shores is in the Constitution as a ligament function of government. Many communities have voluntary fire departments that serve them well, even though policing our communities and providing fire departments are ligament functions of government.

Suggest removal:

37praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

It does not matter if revenue is increased when congress spends more more then it takes in. If tax cuts increase revenue by say 2% and congress increases spending by say 4%, the county is still increasing debt. That has happened every time. Congress calls an increasing in a budget a cut if the increase is not as high as they want. And the top marginal rates do matter and rather you like it or not cutting the top marginal rate leads to economic growth.
The economic expansion under Reagan was NOT driven by gasoline taxes, it was driven by tax cuts and a return to sane regulator policy.
The unemployment rate NEVER reached 10% during the Bush administration. Unemployment topped at 8% in Bush's last year in office.

Suggest removal:

38praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

Bush 1 lost his reelection bid b/c he raised taxes.

Suggest removal:

39ice(28 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

Should have let them crash and burn

Suggest removal:

40praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

Reagan cut taxes, in fact Reagan cut the top marginal rate from over 70% to around 39%.

Suggest removal:

41praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

A republican controlled house and senate.

Suggest removal:

42praxis95(51 comments)posted 4 years, 1 month ago

Obama added more to the national debt in one year then GW did in 8 years.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2016 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes