President Barack Obama recently made the powerful proposition that he would like to replicate the success of the auto bailout of GM with every manufacturing industry.

Some say that GM's success is cost taxpayers too much money for the result ($60,000 per job saved) and that the bailout hurt bondholders and other auto manufacturers that didn't take government money. Furthermore, they argue, the bailout is only a success because of the same type of low interest loans that killed the housing market.

Proponents of the bailout say that it not only preserved an American industry, but the jobs that it saved will easily payoff in the long term. On top of preserving jobs,  proponents argue, the auto-bailout kept American jobs in America and did so without shipping jobs overseas.

Arguments on both sides have at least a few flaws, we want to know what you think!