You can't completely discredit Ford's CEO as he did have a large role in their not needing the bailouts.
Yes, he secured their line of credit before the bottom fell out. I don't think that was due to any genius, just a matter of fortuitous timing.
Ford failed fiscally years before and realized they needed to change their business in a drastic way out of necessity. He was a major catalyst in that.
Hey, I like the Focus and the Mustang too.
As for economics, I find that comment ironic given the title used for this thread. The article didn't really have a whole lot to do with job exports
No, it was about a class of executives who were making a fortune from any easy (if slightly treasonous) business model.
, but a glut of manufacturing jobs is a sign of a weak economy. There will always be some, but the stronger an economy, the more it moves to being service based versus goods (manufacturing) based.
That is a major fallacy, brought to you by those who want to plunder your wallet.
Economics is nothing more than the study of trade. Pretty simple really, you make me a bear skin rug and I provide you a sack of green beans.
Ahh, but because this is not a particularly efficient means of trade, govt's came up with the idea of using currency as a common vehicle to trade goods and services.
Now let's think about how wealth is created. Say I dig up a chunk of earth. It has some value. Next, lets say the person who buys it, processes it by extracting the minerals. The contents of that piece of earth now has some value greater than the previous value. Next let's say the minerals are sold to Ford who makes a camshaft out of them. That camshaft now has a value greater than the minerals.
This is how wealth is created. Not only has value been brought to the economy though the creation of this tangible good, but it is lasting as that camshaft may be a useful and trade-able good for years to come.
You can play out this scenario with any goods producing job you like. Now let's think about services.
Suppose I cut your hair. There is no value created. I give you money and in return, I don't have to push the hair out from my eyes. This is not a wealth creating endeavor. It is a luxury and there is nothing wrong with it, but it does not create a country's wealth.
Existing prosperously as a service economy may be possible *if* you can find a wealth creating nation to buy your services.
For instance, if the people of Germany (a very industrious, wealth creating nation) used Greece as its exclusive vacation destination. A portion of the wealth created by Germany could be transferred to Greece for use of their beaches and Waverunners.
In the US, we have few such services. We largely service ourselves with retail stores, police, military etc. No wealth creating country is going to pay us for any of that.
Hence, we run big deficits to keep the charade running and depend on foreign nations to invest their currency with us, because we are safe i.e. we have big guns.
I hope this helps you understand why I say that your service economy statement is bogus.