This all sounds vaguely familiar

One difficulty about blogging and/or reading blogs (besides: spelling, coherency, vituperativeness, etc) is that one assumes others have similarly read the myriad of articles, are rational, and are working from the same information base. Not necessarily the case. For instance, should this article be highlighted?

One assumes that after reading this:

Advocates for the nation's automakers are warning that the collapse of the Big Three -- or even just General Motors -- could set off a catastrophic chain reaction in the economy, eliminating up to 3 million jobs and depriving governments of more than $150 billion in tax revenue.

That any reader would have a slight reptillian flicker and recall the exact same wording used as a reason for the banking bailout in September.

One assumes after reading this:

"We've got to do this because the cost of inaction is so high to communities, to workers, to companies," said Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio. He was among many lawmakers worried that an industry collapse would be devastating for everything from school districts to small businesses.

That any reader would think, "Why does this politician care so much?" Possible answers: humanitarian, economist, statesman, keeper of the people ....... not quite:

If the industry failed, among the hardest-hit communities would be Lordstown, Ohio, a village of 3,600 people about 50 miles east of Cleveland that has been home to a GM factory since 1966.

Ahhh, so it might just be a vote-getting ploy.

One assumes after reading this:

A study by the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor estimated that the failure of Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. would eliminate up to 3 million jobs, including those at parts suppliers and smaller businesses that rely on the automakers.

That any reader would take a spin around the Center for Automotive Research website to see what their bag is and who funds that bag (a'la Exxon funds all global-warming debunk reports). Sadly, no such financial information on the site. One can assume the Big Three give a few bucks to the non-profit organisation. A vested interest?

One assumes after reading this:

State, local and federal governments would lose more than $150 billion in tax revenue over three years, the study said.

That any reader would see the true attention-getting aspects of the CAR report. Assuming the CAR report is entirely correct, the 3 million unemployed is one thing to try and get political attention (as well as possible future funding all around). It is the loss of more than 150 billion USD in tax revenue which really is designed to grap the political types by the lapel and say "the goodie bag will be a lot slimmer (as well as possible future non-funding all around)".

One assumes after reading this:

David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, said Detroit is losing money now because it has too many factories making more vehicles than the market is buying.

That any reader would also need to be told that grass is green and beer makes you drunk, a truly blinding revelation.

Maybe I am the only one who knows about this type of thing and how it works. I just assumed everyone else did as well.