OMG. I thought you were kidding about CEO’s not thanking Obama. :smack:
All of the above if you have the time. The first isn’t a given. I have work I pay humans to do that could be automated but which fails the cost benefit test. Automation, when it makes economic sense to implement, usually decreases prices. Although I’m sure we could contrive some examples where that’s not the case. I’m less interested in that question.
But I’m more interested in the later bunch. How do you know how many jobs it created/destroyed, when did it switch, and why do you draw the line there? Especially in light of the U.S. having more jobs than ever before and having a greater manufacturing output than ever before. No, those aren’t manufacturing jobs, but manufacturing jobs as a percentage of the workforce have been decreasing since the 1950s, 8.4% in November down from 32% in 1953 (see FRED’s MANEMP and PAYEMS datasets.) Mostly from people doing other stuff. We never had more than 20MM manufacturing jobs (it peaked over 35 years ago; I wonder how many of those people are still alive and working), and our workforce today is over 145MM.
It must be eating you up inside to criticize Trump for actively saving jobs.
Macys to cut 10K jobs. Closing 68 stores.
Where’s that put his numbers?
So says the one that thought that electric cars should not make it in America, of course the evil hood of subsidies to electric cars made possible a lot of what Ford is doing here. And I do think that Ford, General Motors and many others are looking to the near future to then dare Trump to remove the subsidies and help to the Auto industry for the new zero emission cars because it would mean that then Trump would be killing those new American manufacturing jobs.
Here is the trouble for giving the credit to Trump: a lot of the progress is also thanks to the efforts of the Bush and Obama administrations that gave credit to owners of electrical cars so as to then reduce emissions. So then a lot of automakers are betting that electric cars are indeed going out of their niche market in the very near future.
But, El Trompo does believe that global warming is a Chinese invention so the irony here is to see Trump and many conservatives take credit for an effort that was:
A) Already planned by Ford and others.
B) To crow about a path that Trump and many republicans in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry think is an unnecessary one because “there is no global warming at all”. And:
C) Jobs that in reality are more the result of the policies of the Obama administration.
Yeah, very sad.
You don’t understand; job losses are Obama’s fault, while any new jobs or jobs saved are due to Trump’s efforts.
From a year ago.
Donald Trump gloats after massive Macy’s job cuts
Yep. He celebrated the loss of American jobs because he was dissed. And called for more.
I’ll bet Trump Tower is dripping with semen now.
Cite? I’m a huge fan of electric cars. When a fast charge battery hits the market EV’s will replace ICE cars quickly.
If you bothered to read the cites posted you’d see that the Ford jobs going back to Michigan are for electrics.
Here’s the problem with dismissing Trump’s drive toward jobs. He’s done it BEFORE taking office and he did it to jobs Obama said couldn’t be saved while he was in office.
It’s sad that you’re attempting to discredit Trump’s job efforts before he’s even in office. He’s done something the acting President said couldn’t be done.
I’m going to enjoy watching the oil reserves opened up so we can benefit from our own oil at the expense of terrorist nations. Lower fuel prices will allow more commerce and put more tax money back into our coffers. and when EV’s take their natural place in history will be then end of the global warming craze and we can go back to worrying about cancer and other diseases.
As pointed, you concentrate on the evil government subsidizing some of the costs of owning an electric car. But in reality a lot of past discussions show that not even the effort made by American car makers are worthy of much consideration.
Precisely my point, you need to read carefully.
On the contrary, nothing what you have said counters the points mentioned.
And that you for showing to all that indeed you in the end you are against electric cars anyhow.
Again, the EVs will not be a big hit if Trump dismantles all regulations, regulations that are a big reason why Ford is investing in jobs that are related to EVs.
You seemed to have missed where Trump lost 1,000 to Mexico and failed to impose punitive tariffs. Instead, he rewarded Carrier with tax breaks.
He doesn’t care if jobs are lost to automation as long as they don’t go overseas. Meanwhile, the person who lost their job is still out of a job.
He tries to take credit for plans put in place well before his election. This is according to statements by the respective CEOs.
Lets see if he has saved any jobs by the end of his term.
He should set the example by bring production of his own products to the States.
And motor vehicles are by no means the only source of pollution.
More comments and a correction too to my early reply:
And thank you for showing to all that indeed you are in the end against electric cars anyhow. With an added helping of ignorance about climate change science.
Again, the EVs will not be a big hit if Trump dismantles all regulations, regulations that are a big reason why Ford is investing in jobs that are related to EVs that now are going away from their niche market and into the general one.
what bit of logic are you going to use on this?
Trump doesn’t have to do squat for EV’s. I’ve predicted they will grow rapidly on their own worth without any outside intervention once they break the charging-time barrier. Just because I’m not an Elon Musk disciple with $100 K to throw down doesn’t move my position one micron. If you want to go down another Tesla fanboy rabbit hole start another thread.
People really like to believe the president controls the economy, or oil prices, or language use, or whatever else is bothering them. Even my red state high school highlighted capitalism’s tendency towards boom and bust cycles.
Except for the very new plant Ford is talking about. Unless you are backing away from the point of course.
That is nice, but that is not what is going on right now, right now the subsidies for the EVs have helped demonstrate the technology and the weak points of it, meaning that Ford will get into the market with a better footing and hoping to still get some advantage with subsidies.
And looking at the big picture this effort by Ford and others does not make any sense unless they are indeed taking global warming seriously.
And then the point stands, I do think the credit Ford is giving to Trump is a very clever tactic, not only he will have to tell his minions to help them in the end to develop the technology more, they will push Trump to be careful to not dismantle many regulations that will help the EVs to grow in the market because otherwise groups like Ford will remind all that Trump did then killed those new jobs that were made possible by the new regulations to deal with carbon emissions.
And that takes us again to the other points that you are missing: It is really hard to give credit to Trump when he does not even believe on the reason why new technology is being developed to take care of that issue. The jobs that are being created thanks to EV technology and the efforts to deal with the emissions problem are in reality anathema to his current ideology, and I have seen many examples if it even in this very message board for years.
But I’m happy to see that contrarians (that are usually conservatives) are not noticing the contradictions in this specific case. The point that jobs are actually being created to deal with the issue is usually virulently denied because it goes against the narrative of many conservatives that are against climate science and the efforts to deal with it. Because, even by experience in the SDMB, the mantra has been to claim day in and day out that dealing with the emissions issue would kill the American economy. Or to send us back to the stone age.
WHAT jobs are “going back” to Michigan ?!??
From what I’ve seen, production of the Ford Focus is moving to Hermosillo, Mexico, creating some unspecified number of new jobs there, and ~700 new jobs that never existed anywhere before are being created in Michigan. Ford is creating some new positions, in the U.S. and in Mexico, but no jobs are actually “going back” anywhere. Do you have a cite that shows differently?
Which brings up the next point: what jobs at Ford are you claiming (or is Trump claiming) are being “saved”? What exactly did he do that President Obama said couldn’t be done?
How exactly is this supposed to work? The oil reserves will be opened up to actual production if and only if it is cheaper to pump the oil here than it is in Saudi Arabia or Nigeria or wherever. Drilling for oil in the High Arctic isn’t cheap. Right now, drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico isn’t cheap; while production is up, exploration drilling is down, as companies are finding it just isn’t worth sinking great sums of money into deepwater wells when crude is so cheap. (For example, deepwater leases offered last spring in the eastern Gulf of Mexico failed to attract any bidders at all, and leases in the central Gulf saw "the lowest industry interest in the history of such sales.")
Cheap crude is great for consumers, but in the oil patch it is disastrous; bankruptcies in the Bakken field in North Dakota, for example, have been soaring, and the hotly-disputed Dakota Access Pipeline may be in financial trouble. If Mr. Trump succeeds in increasing U.S. production, that’s more likely to bankrupt U.S. oil industry firms, throwing more people out of work.
Yep, he is wrong, but one can grant that the 700 jobs will be jobs that Americans are getting.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-autos-idUSKBN14N1T0?il=0
It is still a sight to behold on how many that defended inaction on the issue of emissions and poopooed many EV efforts, are suddenly champions of the effort. Of course, they do not notice that to help Ford keep those jobs many of the regulations that team Trump has proposed to eliminate will be removed. They will have to be disposed among the Trump followers with the usual “Trump was only kidding”. And many of the Trump followers will eat the excuses with gusto.
The same way it worked before when people like you said was impossible. Fracking drove down the price of fuel. The more reserves that are tapped the harder it is for OPEC to drive up the price of fuel. We had this argument years ago and gas is now under $3/gallon.
This was done independent of Obama and now that he’s on his way out the door all his bullshit oil drilling restrictions go with him. ICE engines are on their way out and we should exploit our resources to their maximum while that happens. It’s a win/win for the economy and security of the country.
Never mind science and safety! Full speed ahead!
What is your goal here? The post I quoted was talking about “benefit[ing] from our own oil at the expense of terrorist nations”; that’s a different goal than just cheap oil.
Moreover, cheap fuel is not necessarily a “win/win” for the economy; cheap natural gas, for example, has devastated coal country. People who own oil rights are finding out that wide-open spigots in a time of low oil prices make those oil rights worth substantially less. The governor of Kansas is blaming cheap oil for that state’s economic problems; a third of Texas oil drillers have lost their jobs because the price of oil has been driven down. There are winners and losers with cheap fuel.
Finally, cheap fuel makes it harder to move away from internal combustion engines; what is the incentive to invest in an expensive electric vehicle when gas is $2.09? However, if we use up most of the easily-recoverable fuel reserves in this country and still need the oil that can be found in Russia or Iraq or Nigeria, what do you suppose is going to happen to the security of the country?
SHORT TERM GAIN! SHORT TERM GAIN! SHORT TERM GAIN!
It’s the American Way.