<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Horse Sense</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/06/04/horse-sense/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/06/04/horse-sense/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Desmond Bliek</title>
		<link>http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/06/04/horse-sense/#comment-7606</link>
		<dc:creator>Desmond Bliek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.howwedrive.com/?p=923#comment-7606</guid>
		<description>It's all in the numbers.  9,163 establishments versus the big 3.  Presumably the 'little 9,163' weren't adequately organized, or maybe they all saw themselves getting a piece of the action in the emerging automobile market and thus didn't think that they (each individually) needed a bail-out.  Or maybe things were done differently back in the day and nobody thought to ask for assistance - though the experience of granting land etc... to railroads in the 1870s-1910s suggests otherwise.

The number of vehicles doesn't seem particularly relevant, though the level of employment - if we take the reasons for the bail-out at face value and with an anaemic level of cynicism - might be.  The excerpt above doesn't mention what the current number of workers is, or how it sits as a share of the total population, which would shed some light on policy factors beyond the slickness and success of GM and Chrysler's lobbying efforts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s all in the numbers.  9,163 establishments versus the big 3.  Presumably the &#8216;little 9,163&#8242; weren&#8217;t adequately organized, or maybe they all saw themselves getting a piece of the action in the emerging automobile market and thus didn&#8217;t think that they (each individually) needed a bail-out.  Or maybe things were done differently back in the day and nobody thought to ask for assistance - though the experience of granting land etc&#8230; to railroads in the 1870s-1910s suggests otherwise.</p>
<p>The number of vehicles doesn&#8217;t seem particularly relevant, though the level of employment - if we take the reasons for the bail-out at face value and with an anaemic level of cynicism - might be.  The excerpt above doesn&#8217;t mention what the current number of workers is, or how it sits as a share of the total population, which would shed some light on policy factors beyond the slickness and success of GM and Chrysler&#8217;s lobbying efforts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
