 Ford’s Windsor plant gets $700M in auto union dealBusiness | 206718 hits | Nov 01 11:12 am | Posted by: shockedcanadian Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2026 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2026 by Canadaka.net
Guess who's fitting the bill for this "expansion"?
Guess who's fitting the bill for this "expansion"?
The same people that bailed Ford out in 2008?
Guess who's fitting the bill for this "expansion"?
The same people that bailed Ford out in 2008?
Guess who's fitting the bill for this "expansion"?
The same people that bailed Ford out in 2008?
Yes, precisely. "Just put it on the tab Sam"...but in this case, Sam can't send Tiny and a two by four to collection.
Guess who's fitting the bill for this "expansion"?
The same people that bailed Ford out in 2008?
Yes, precisely. "Just put it on the tab Sam"...but in this case, Sam can't send Tiny and a two by four to collection.
Ford didn't get a bailout in 2008. Trick question.
So, yes, Ford will pay for this expansion, just like in the contract.
The same people that bailed Ford out in 2008?
Yes, precisely. "Just put it on the tab Sam"...but in this case, Sam can't send Tiny and a two by four to collection.
Ford didn't get a bailout in 2008. Trick question.
So, yes, Ford will pay for this expansion, just like in the contract.
Oh that was really tricky of you. Here are a little more accurate facts that may be inconvenient to you. The first link from 2014:
Taxpayers gave Ford $140,000 per job – but deal’s details are secret
http://globalnews.ca/news/1600388/heres ... auto-jobs/
Ontario government gave out $907M in corporate grants since 2013
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/201 ... -2013.html
We don't even have the deals of the latest deal yet, because it seems corporate welfare and gifts from government into the so-called "free market" are kept away from those with the most skin in the game, the taxpayer. This is anything but a laissez-faire economics.
They ought to take a page from Reagan. At least 80% of those jobs should be eliminated to improve shareholder value.
The economy was doing well while Reagan was running the show, and Communism faded away without a shot being fired by either side.
When companies expand they will hire new people. Taxpayers shouldn't be funnelling tax dollars to private industry so that they can sustain their businesses.
The economy was doing well while Reagan was running the show, and Communism faded away without a shot being fired by either side.
Selective memory don'cha. First of all he wasn't. This is fucking Canada.
Meanwhile in the US there were deficits, Japanese taking over, AMC went tits up, Chryaler bailout, layoffs, international gong shows to wave the flag...
Oh that was really tricky of you. Here are a little more accurate facts that may be inconvenient to you. The first link from 2014:
. . .
We don't even have the deals of the latest deal yet, because it seems corporate welfare and gifts from government into the so-called "free market" are kept away from those with the most skin in the game, the taxpayer. This is anything but a laissez-faire economics.
Iz a trickster precious!
Here's a little tidbit for you as well - incentives and things like this are generally good for the economy because they end up putting more tax money into the coffers than the original incentive. They are net gains on employment and economics.
The economy was doing well while Reagan was running the show, and Communism faded away without a shot being fired by either side.
Yeah, the '80s are remembered for the great economic times. You should Google up a "business cycle" graph. You'll note the steep downward slope during the '80s. Ask any of us Gen-Xers what the job prospects were like in those days. And no shots were fired against communism, eh?
When companies expand they will hire new people. Taxpayers shouldn't be funnelling tax dollars to private industry so that they can sustain their businesses.
Is that a philosophical statement or one supported by evidence?
Maybe you should stick to loony conspiracies and leave the history and economics alone because you clearly don't know what you're talking about on either count. Play to your strengths, brother.
The economy was doing well while Reagan was running the show, and Communism faded away without a shot being fired by either side.
Yeah, the '80s are remembered for the great economic times. You should Google up a "business cycle" graph. You'll note the steep downward slope during the '80s. Ask any of us Gen-Xers what the job prospects were like in those days. And no shots were fired against communism, eh?
When companies expand they will hire new people. Taxpayers shouldn't be funnelling tax dollars to private industry so that they can sustain their businesses.
Is that a philosophical statement or one supported by evidence?
Maybe you should stick to loony conspiracies and leave the history and economics alone because you clearly don't know what you're talking about on either count. Play to your strengths, brother.
Got ya. Two tenths of a percent growth last quarter, loss of full-time jobs replaced by part-time jobs. How is this "strategy" working out?
Got ya. Two tenths of a percent growth last quarter, loss of full-time jobs replaced by part-time jobs. How is this "strategy" working out?
Got some research to support your "loss of full-time, replaced by part-time jobs" contention?
We want slow, steady growth. That's exactly the point of economic policy: to limit swings. 0.2%/quater is just fine. Ideal, in fact.