Thursday, February 5, 2009

Didn't Harper just give Bombardier $350 million, to create 3,000 jobs, rather than lose 1,360 jobs?


In February 2008, the Harper government extended $350 million to Bombardier, on the premise that it would create 3,000 jobs in the launch of the C-Series jet. Here’s the outcome of that "stimulus":

Bombardier cutting 1,360 jobs

Globe and Mail Update

February 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM EST

MONTREAL — Faced with a greater-than-usual level of deferrals and cancellations for business jets in uncertain times, Bombardier Inc. is slashing 1,360 jobs, or about 4.5 per cent of its total aerospace work force.

4 comments:

Dr Mike said...

It just goes to show you that to toss money randomly at a problem will not necessarily get you jobs.

The job creation has to be by direct investment in the creation of those jobs.

Throwing billions at GM & Chrysler will have just about the same effect as the money tossed at Bombardier--if there is no market , no product is required.

Demand has to be increased by freeing credit--no leasing , no car sales--no loans , no car sales.

One thing we can be sure of is that if the gov`t pours cash into infrastructure jobs are created & we have something to show for the cash.

Dr Mike.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm?

Not a good leading indicator of the hapless Harper’s stimulus prowess.

Flaherty was right, governments aren’t very good at picking winners from losers. Especially his government.

Oh well, as with the income trust fiasco, Flaherty will probably say "It's not my fault"?

Cherniak_WTF said...

The Bombardier spokesthingy was explaining that not as many are buying the product... Hence part of the problem, no matter how much money you give, no one is buying the planes in sustainable quantities...

Oddly the spokesthingy was saying that Bombier was hiring 880 employees @ another project (some retraining maybe necessary). Asked how many clients had signed for this project that supposed to create jobs, she said "none"....

Anonymous said...

Doesn't Bombardier have a history of doing things like this? Whine, cry and threaten jobs in Canada in exchange for federal money? Isn't it typical once this company receives federal money - it is usually spent in foreign economies?

Didn't the Auto 3 use Bombardier and Air Canada as models or examples of how to beg and receive a good chunk of federal money? Both Bombardier and the Auto 3 are constantly guilty of telling consumers what they will buy instead of offering stuff consumers actually want and need.
Strictly from a consumers point of view ... it seems the feds are always willing to bailout companies with the worst customer service and products.