Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Cash for KlunkersFollow

#52 Aug 16 2009 at 9:19 PM Rating: Decent
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,632 posts
It's a great program that I think could have been better. I'm going to go ahead and quote Gbaji since he actually made a couple good points.

gbaji wrote:

They could have identified "clunkers" as any car 10 or more years old. Or any car with over 120,000 miles on it. Or, if they really wanted to match the "clunker" definition, cars with significant problems, like rust, engines failing, etc. Maybe even looked at smog ratings in relation to what the car got when new.


My current car is eleven years old, has 131k miles, has some rust issues, the engine is on it's way out, and I get about 17 or so MPG. My car is the epitome of a clunker but because they go off of their estimate of the MPG instead of the actual MPG I don't qualify for the program. It seems to me that they could have come up with much better criteria than just an estimate of the mileage. Oh well, I'm still buying a car, I just won't get a discount like the person turning in their shiny near new 9 MPG pickup.

Edited, Aug 17th 2009 2:38am by Turin
#53 Aug 16 2009 at 10:34 PM Rating: Decent
**
438 posts
Quote:
Minuses:

- This money is coming from the taxes of people who may not even own cars.


Yes, but in many areas, the funds for rapid transit (HOV expansions/light rail/new buses and transit programs) are coming from license tab taxes.

So I'd call it even. They get their light rail and shiny new fuel efficient hybrid/electric buses, and the local drivers create a little less smog. That's win/win in my book.

#54 Aug 16 2009 at 11:07 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,211 posts
trickybeck wrote:

The environmental harm caused by scrapping a few million perfectly operational vehicles and using resources and energy to build new ones pretty much cancels out any benefit via gas mileage improvement. One of the rules of thumb of lowering your impact on the environment is that it's almost always better to continue using something inefficient until it breaks, rather than throwing it away and buying a new one. I'm sure someone has done the math on all that already. There may, however, be a long term sociological benefit in getting people to prefer efficient cars over their testosterone machines.


I think one of the benefits not being discussed is that with better fuel economy, we become fractionally less dependent on the global oil market. Sure this isn't much by itself, but I do see it as a step towards one of Obama's long term goals of lowering foreign oil usage.
#55 Aug 17 2009 at 5:39 AM Rating: Default
Kylen,

Quote:
Your definition of "irresponsible" seems to be different than Gbaji's. I don't get why you're assuming that the majority of people taking advantage of Cash for Clunkers had loans on their cars that they couldn't afford.


On the contrary, I'm assuming the majority of the people taking advantage of this program won't make their car payments on this new loan.

#56 Aug 17 2009 at 6:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
publiusvarus wrote:
I'm assuming the majority of the people taking advantage of this program won't make their car payments on this new loan.

That would be the fault of the lenders. Hell, you don't even have the "The gummint MADE them lend the money!" arguments you have with the mortgage fiasco since nothing about the C4C program affects lending.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#57 Aug 17 2009 at 6:54 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Kylen,
On the contrary, I'm assuming the majority of the people taking advantage of this program won't make their car payments on this new loan.
Why?

I understand the "1984 or newer car requirement" was lobbied in by the classic car association folks. They did't want to see any old classics accidentally 'crushed'. Smiley: lol
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#58 Aug 19 2009 at 2:43 AM Rating: Default
publiusvarus wrote:
Has anyone actually done this? Are there any credit requirements? Just curious if we're loaning more money to people who won't be able to pay for the loans they're getting.



I think it's a stupid idea for 2 reasons: First, the nation has better things to do with it's money than buy it's citizens new cars (fixing the economy comes to mind); second, experts agree it's more economical to keep an old car running than to junk it and buy a new one. I haven't really seen obama try to make any long-term changes to the economy, all he's done is use our dwindling resources to try to make our lives just a little bit better. When he gets around to actually doing something about our economy instead of suggesting ********* ideas like this, i'll take him a little more seriously.
#59 Aug 19 2009 at 5:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Zaikimaliki the Vile wrote:
the nation has better things to do with it's money than buy it's citizens new cars (fixing the economy comes to mind

Heh.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#60 Aug 19 2009 at 5:37 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
Zaikimaliki the Vile wrote:
the nation has better things to do with it's money than buy it's citizens new cars (fixing the economy comes to mind


Smiley: dubious
#61 Aug 19 2009 at 7:11 AM Rating: Good
****
4,512 posts
Zaikimaliki the Vile wrote:
When he gets around to actually doing something about our economy instead of suggesting bull-sh*t ideas like this, i'll take him a little more seriously.


Priceless.
#62 Aug 19 2009 at 8:33 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Zaikimaliki the Vile wrote:
the nation has better things to do with it's money than buy it's citizens new cars (fixing the economy comes to mind



I work in the auto industry, and this Cash for Clunkers has certainly stimulated us. We have more work now than we are prepared for. GM, Ford, and even Chrysler has upped orders a ton. Honda, Toyota, and Hyundai orders are up.

So this is bringing about economic "fixes". Will it be permanent? Who knows. It may stop as soon as the program ends. Or maybe the sudden boom will be a kick start, and things will stay moving after?

But I can say this has brought us out of a slump and made us start to make a profit again, which is leading to more growth outside the auto industry for our company. That will ensure that regardless of what the Auto Industry does, our company will have received enough of a kick start from this program to continue to thrive.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#63 Aug 19 2009 at 1:38 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
GM is putting over 1300 people back to work. Perhaps rebuilding one of America's biggest industries may help the economy somewhat?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
1 2 3 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 96 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (96)