Cash for Clunkers A BRIBE ?

Joined: 08 Jul 2003 Posts: 6309

Couldn't the cash for clunker program be considered a bribe for clunkers .

http://www.pantagraph.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_9306014a-83c1-11de-88d3-001cc4c002e0.html

As far as stimulating the economy that's a crock. Just look at the Toyota plant closing Calif and Toyota was the biggest beneficiary of the program. Then would the pollution caused and energy used in getting rid of these so called clunkers be worth the purchase/benefit of a new car ?

Now were going to do the appliance version of cash for clunkers. So that means that Whirlpool will rehire the 1,100 they just laid off -right.

I say it be cheaper just to GIVE out the CFL or curly Q flourescent light bulbs to save energy.

Joined: 26 Aug 2008 Posts: 306

I was a huge non-fan of TARP. I think it's proven that all it has accomplished is saving the asses and executive enrichment of the Wall Street Socialists. Banks still aren't and can't lend. Records are being broken by the sheer number of bank failures. There are 10x the failures expected within the next year. Small to medium sized businesses still can;t get bank loans... .arg

I hated bailing out the auto industry. The reasoning behind doing it was that economy couldn't take the job loss hit. We're getting hit anyway. It dumped money into GM and Chrysler to keep them from bankruptcy, which is exactly where they both wound up anyway. What the hell! Those billions are gone into the ether.

Cash for clunkers was a SLIGHTLY better idea. But, there was zero bang for the buck. The only thing it did was provide a means for the automakers to work down thier existing inventory. A costly, temporary fix to a problem that needs a long-term solution. Now that it's over, the auto industry isn't any healthier than it was when the program started. The American consumer has no more money today than when the program was initiated.

The Appliance rebate program I imagine will have much the same effect. It will have little to no impact on the economy as a whole. It won't stimulate retailers or manufacturers to put more people into employment. None of that money will filter back into the economy.

The only thing I like about the Cash for Clunkers program and the upcoming Aplliance program is that they both at least, to some extent, provide some benefit to the consumer. None of the others did.

Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 556

Joined: 06 Jul 2003 Posts: 8380 Location: Central CA

Yeah, I have to agree there too... there was no way I could get rid of my 12 year Ford because any way you slice it, I would have been forced to take on a payment I can't afford. Once again, money has been taken from all of us to pay for what basically amounts to welfare for a few... the few that can afford to receive welfare.

So far, not one of these programs has been of any real general benefit to people in my age group, my health classification or my my economic situation. As always, with our government, the spoils go to those that already have while those with nothing get little but the bill for it. So much for "change".

My little old car, as old as it is, gets 38 miles per gallon highway and has cost me next to nothing in repairs over the years. If I could have afforded to take part in the program I probably would not have but I'm unique among most of my peers in that I even HAVE a car.

Joined: 26 Aug 2008 Posts: 306

Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 556

I have bought ONE new car in my lifetime. One. And that new car was a dealer demo that had 8,000 miles on it. So I got a huge discount. I have never been able to afford much. Always the kids, the house the bills. Something has always had to come first. The only way I could afford the new car was during the days of 0% financing and it took me 5 yrs to pay it off.

700,000 people took advantage of the "Cash for Clunkers" program. How many millions of americans could that money have housed and fed?

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07312009/watch_excl.html

Or how about taking care of the medical needs of Millions of americans? The above video is just One of the ways that money could have been better spent.
My tax dollars are being wasted so "some" can have new cars. If you can afford a new car or new car payments then you don't need my tax dollars to buy it. If you can't afford your diabetes medicine, I will gladly help you buy it.

Joined: 08 Jul 2003 Posts: 6309

Just think about all the useable more affordable used cars taken off the market as well . This was a load of crap about fuel efficiency . It was an attempt at stimulating the economy by inflating auto sales . They tried to manipulate that segment of the economy only . It was a favor to UAW and the auto industry for not giving them a 100% bailout -(please forgive us,we bailed out the finance guys who totally screwed up and didn't bail you out)

It was simple and basic manipulation of the supply and demand principles . Less cars on the market = higher price = higher profit = hopefully more capital spending . But it is the last part is where this crap falls apart . What's it called : supply side manipulation ?

There are many areas of the country where public transportation sucks and someone would've gotten more benefit out of that used clunker than the economy did .

Joined: 22 Dec 2007 Posts: 461

Just a few things

1) some thought that this was "free money" when it fact it is really just a discount for a trade in...dealerships usually accept a trade in at some value. It's not like someone just traded in something 20 years old for $4500 and now has $4500 (if this has indeed happened I'd love to see the link)

2) The other fees associated with having a new car have as of yet to kick in. This means higher excise taxes, probably higher car insurance. Not all cars that are new actually work the way they should. Supposed the ford focus was recalled about eight times (to be fair toyota trucks had a rust problem that was hardly reported)

3) Supposedly whatever the "cash" is...might be considered taxible income!
http://www.examiner.com/x-18664-Detroit-Business-Development-Examiner~y2009m8d29-Is-clunker-cash-taxable-income not so much on the federal government but by the state. We also shouldn't forget that there's sales taxes on this and that can add up significantly given that states have started to raise some taxes. At 6.25% of 20K that's $1,250 in my state.. So the savings might not always be that much

4) The qualification were what....simply getting 18 mpg or less. I'm sorry but this is simply rewarding cars that get less mpg. Expanding mpg at all costs is pretty lame. It reminds me that a hybrid makes sense on mpg but it depends as to what you have to start with. I get 35mpg in the summer and 30 in the winter (I hardly use a/c but I crank the heat up to 11 in the winter). I don't think getting another 5mpg is work spending thousands of dollars.I use a tank of gas maybe every two to three weeks.

5) we've simply created another bubble just like housing in lowering the standards of those that can afford it. Oprah a few years ago gave some cars to some people down on their luck...these were pontiacs that had V6 engines..not exactly the best economically. Some had to sell them off because they could not afford them (they had to pay the sales taxes too).

Lastly the easiest thing to help would be to help those that rely on public transporation. If you live in a city there's less reason to have a car. So this program is meaningless for them. There are plenty of people that are forced to buy a car because there simply is not the amount of buses, trains and rails to get them from point A to point B.

	Forum Index -> Politics Schmolitics	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1