We have some good news on the job front.

http://www.bostonherald.com/business...&position=also

In short, employment of Americans in the auto industry has gone from 623,000 on 2009 to almost 700,000 - 12% up since then (compared to 0.2% increases in the rest of the sectors). Places like Tennessee with their new Volkswagen plant (2000+ workers) and Honda hiring another 1,000 workers in Indiana. Auto parts suppliers are hiring - it's all across the board.

As much as I can't believe it, like the Chrysler bailout of loan guarantees in 1980, this round of 'saving an industry' appears to have worked. That cursed union - the UAW? The new contracts allow GM, Ford and Chrsyler to hire new workers at $14/hr base pay instead of around $28.

There were estimates of up to a million extra jobs lost IMMEDIATELY plus untold ramifications if GM and Chrysler were left to go Chapter 7 (close and sell). Sure, GM got a MUCH better deal than Chrysler did (being forced to be sold to Fiat) and there's some question of the accounting behind some of the loan paybacks - but GM *did* go through an IPO and the government IS in the process of divesting it's stock.

For those who complain that much of GM was 'given' to the unions, I'll say this. It puts the workers in the position of being owners. When I worked for companies that had employee stock ownership plans, the companies, IN GENERAL, did better. There was more of a sense of cameraderie.

Originally Posted by djplong

We have some good news on the job front.

http://www.bostonherald.com/business...&position=also

In short, employment of Americans in the auto industry has gone from 623,000 on 2009 to almost 700,000 - 12% up since then (compared to 0.2% increases in the rest of the sectors). Places like Tennessee with their new Volkswagen plant (2000+ workers) and Honda hiring another 1,000 workers in Indiana............

For those who complain that much of GM was 'given' to the unions, I'll say this. It puts the workers in the position of being owners. When I worked for companies that had employee stock ownership plans, the companies, IN GENERAL, did better. There was more of a sense of cameraderie.

Oh please. I thought you were the one commenter here who is willing to give credit where credit is due. This is the result of MANY factors and individual/group leadership, and not just the person in the Oval Office.

While it seems to be good news, it looks like it's a lot better news for Volkswagen, Honda and Fiat--foreign companies--than for American-owned companies.

Oh there's plenty of credit to go around. My purpose in posting this was to see if the "Nothing Obama Does is Good" crowd could acknowledge that something good HAS happened.

To be honest, though, I would have liked to have seen the comparative numbers for Ford and GM employment. The story didn't have quite the details on their hiring.

Yes Good news. Now I would like to hear some good news regarding Boeing and their attempt to hire another 2000 workers in South Carolina with no loss in the other state that they have a factory.

All they need is another factory to keep up with the orders so they can compete with Airbus.

Oh....in addition to those 2000 workers, the related support business of everything from resturants, to tire companies, etc.

Originally Posted by blueheronfan

yes good news. Now i would like to hear some good news regarding boeing and their attempt to hire another 2000 workers in south carolina with no loss in the other state that they have a factory.

All they need is another factory to keep up with the orders so they can compete with airbus.

Oh....in addition to those 2000 workers, the related support business of everything from resturants, to tire companies, etc.

yes!!!!

But how many applied for unemployent benefits this week?

Originally Posted by ilovetv

yes!!!!

As for the new hires at GM, the hourly wage is $14-15/hr compared to the current employees who make around $28 an hour. Granted it beats minimum wage, but $15 x 40 hrs a week for 50 weeks is only $28,000 before taxes. So a family man better have his wife working too if they want to be considered middle class. Most factory jobs now require a 2 year degree.

Just think without the loans to GM and Chrysler around 3,000,000 jobs would have been lost. That includes suppliers and the effect even on Ford. Then there are retail businesses, bars, restaurants, schools, etc..

Why wouldn't "a wife" want to be working? She is just as capable, if not more, than her husband. Do you think in the 21st century that a woman should be a "housewife" and her job is to stay home, clean the house, fix meals, and produce offspring?

If a man is earning a $28,000 salary and his wife earns about the same, you have a family earning $55,000 to $60,000 per year. Not too tacky.

Tbugs--- Guess you aren't big on stay at home moms. As one who did it both ways I can tell you it is a lot easier to go to a job than stay at home and raise your kids.

At what point in our lives were we suddenly supposed to be able to have a house and family supported by the wages of A STARTER JOB?

I started working in the 1970s. Minimum wage was $2.50 and, if I wanted to move out of the house, I needed this concept called *a roommate*.

That $14/hr is where you START. Not bad when you consider that you get benefits along with that.

Heck, my ex-wife got a job with the Post Office that started around $15/hr and it wasn't too long before she was clearing over $50,000/year with overtime. (And believe me, she WORKED for it - and still does - physically intensive labor sorting packages)

Originally Posted by Tbugs

Why wouldn't "a wife" want to be working? She is just as capable, if not more, than her husband. Do you think in the 21st century that a woman should be a "housewife" and her job is to stay home, clean the house, fix meals, and produce offspring?

If a man is earning a $28,000 salary and his wife earns about the same, you have a family earning $55,000 to $60,000 per year. Not too tacky.

I refuse to be a kept man.............for less than a woman who is making $350,000 a year