If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Detroit Free Press)   If you had "4 days" for how long it would take the Cash for Clunkers money to be exhausted, please claim your prize   (freep.com) divider line 374
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

12119 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jul 2009 at 10:19 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



374 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-07-31 12:50:49 AM  
We finally find a way to incentivize consumer spending while subsidizing auto manufacturing and it's so wildly popular that they shut it down after four days?

VAT A COUNTRY!
 
2009-07-31 12:52:18 AM  
orbitalfreak: This is one program I would like to see expanded. It funds cleaner air. It gets rid of older, problematic vehicles. It reduces oil consumption. Generates demand for newer vehicles. Scrap metal gets recycled.

Can you take multiple clunkers in and trade them towards a new car? three old beaters laying around the back yard could turn into a cheap Kia or Hyundai, or even halfway to a new car.


You forgot to mention how it puts everyone who's already struggling to pay their bills into even more debt. Anyone that can look past the surface of this program can see it's problems. Yes it will spur vehicle sales, but didn't giving people tons of credit contribute majorly to the economic crash? What happens when many of these people are unable to pay back their loans on the cars?

If you really think getting a few more MPG's is going to turn this earth around then you aren't as bright as you seem.

I'm personally tired of having my money taken away via taxes to fun others irresponsibility, their ineptitude in managing their money and making smarter choices. I'm not against taxes they are a necessary evil, but there are limits to what I should be responsible for just because you want to help out the soccer mom who was too big of a consumer whore to resist the urge to buy that Hummer.
 
2009-07-31 12:52:24 AM  
moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: Someone really didn't think this asinine plan through very well.

Could they at least have made it so they had to buy AMERICAN CARS??

It's OK, you can stick a flag ribbon on the bumper and square it all up there, patriot.


They are all out of "Bort" plates. Sorry comrade.
 
2009-07-31 12:56:38 AM  
3_Butt_Cheeks: moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: Someone really didn't think this asinine plan through very well.

Could they at least have made it so they had to buy AMERICAN CARS??

It's OK, you can stick a flag ribbon on the bumper and square it all up there, patriot.

They are all out of "Bort" plates. Sorry comrade.


What about "Boortz?"
 
2009-07-31 12:58:13 AM  
hudef: As a means of "fighting pollution" this program was conceived by morons. MPG is only one factor. The "embodied" environmental damage of building a vehicle has, apparently, not been taken into account. If you trash a perfectly serviceable 8 year old car, only to replace it with a newly manufactured one, you will not save the planet.

The goal is not to 'save the planet'. The goal is to start taking steps to modify the American lifestyle to be more conservative (about energy usage). I'd have preferred tax incentives for higher MPG car ownership, but this pilot program shows that a moderate financial incentive can help make us more energy independent. I look forward to more incentives in the future.

I think tax incentives for ownership of efficient houses, on-demand water heaters, high-efficiency appliances and high MPG cars is the way to go. I really don't care if ultra-rich douchebags drive around in Ferraris. But I'd like to see working people get incentivized and jazzed about energy conservation. Yes, a new car generates more burned energy, resources and pollution than the gain from 16mpg to 27mpg. But that's the tradeoff now, today. The bigger picture is an American public becoming increasingly accustomed to energy efficiency and pollution reduction.

NeoCons whharble about how the Libtards are all unicorns and rainbows, but thinking people simply hope for gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. We won't get there in weeks or decades. It will take generations. The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

So STFU.
 
2009-07-31 12:58:35 AM  
Hmm maybe I'm doing the math wrong but we've gone through 950,000,000$, right? Also, there have been 22,782 trades. That comes out to roughly 41,700$ per trade. Obviously I'm missing something here.
 
2009-07-31 12:58:53 AM  
Action Replay Nick: I predict these threads will be pretty empty of Fark Independents until Rush and Malkin issue the talking points either late tomorrow or Monday. Though I can't imagine how they will spin this as failure... it's possible they'll wait a week or two and then refer to it as 'having failed' until it gets more funding, and which time they will just stop mentioning it.

It failed because it worked too well. Or something. I don't know I'm too tired to figure it out.
 
2009-07-31 12:59:54 AM  
moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: Someone really didn't think this asinine plan through very well.

Could they at least have made it so they had to buy AMERICAN CARS??

It's OK, you can stick a flag ribbon on the bumper and square it all up there, patriot.

They are all out of "Bort" plates. Sorry comrade.

What about "Boortz?"


I'll ask him next time I see him.
 
2009-07-31 01:00:10 AM  
OldHickory Then, try 20 pounds of CO2 per gallon of gasoline.

You are violating the laws of physics, so don' try and call someone on a math error.

A gallon of gasoline doesn't even weigh 20lbs.
 
2009-07-31 01:02:28 AM  
CitizenTed: The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

By putting people into debt via buying cars because they are cheaper?

Who is benefiting here exactly? The evil finance companies?
 
2009-07-31 01:02:55 AM  
BlackCat23: It's also been a paperwork nightmare for dealers.

Yes, because unemployment is perferable to tricky forms.
 
2009-07-31 01:03:28 AM  
MicroE Hmm maybe I'm doing the math wrong but we've gone through 950,000,000$, right? Also, there have been 22,782 trades. That comes out to roughly 41,700$ per trade. Obviously I'm missing something here.

I think atleast one sig fig.. adjust one decimal place to the right and perhaps try again.

DNRTFA
 
2009-07-31 01:04:14 AM  
FootInMouthDisease: OldHickory Then, try 20 pounds of CO2 per gallon of gasoline.

You are violating the laws of physics, so don' try and call someone on a math error.

A gallon of gasoline doesn't even weigh 20lbs.


Someone never took a chem or physics course did they? What do you think that substance is that is taken into the vehicle to facilitate combustion? I'll give you a hint: it's the same stuff you are breathing now. Oxygen, Nitrogen and other trace elements we call "air" is needed to actually burn.

read this if you don't belive me http://www.fueleconomy.gov/Feg/co2.shtml
 
2009-07-31 01:05:24 AM  
CitizenTed: NeoCons whharble about how the Libtards are all unicorns and rainbows, but thinking people simply hope for gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. We won't get there in weeks or decades. It will take generations. The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

I think it's a good idea that has been poorly implemented.
 
2009-07-31 01:05:48 AM  
3_Butt_Cheeks: moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: moriarty23: 3_Butt_Cheeks: Someone really didn't think this asinine plan through very well.

Could they at least have made it so they had to buy AMERICAN CARS??

It's OK, you can stick a flag ribbon on the bumper and square it all up there, patriot.

They are all out of "Bort" plates. Sorry comrade.

What about "Boortz?"

I'll ask him next time I see him.


Why would he know?
 
2009-07-31 01:06:25 AM  
actually nitrogen isnt needed only oxygen - but it's 78% of the air we breath, so its just along for the ride, and to make that wonderful chemical NOX
 
2009-07-31 01:09:01 AM  
Yea Government Programs!!!! Let's start the presses to cover the BHO meltdown of the US economy since no one will want to buy our T-bills soon with the dollar damn near in free fall.

FTFA: sending the Obama administration scrambling to find additional money tonight and avoid a shutdown of the program.

Between March - June 2009, the dollar's value has fallen 11% against the euro. This is a result of the growing U.S. debt, which is reducing confidence in the dollar's value.

Further more; Since January, the value of the dollar as measured by Treasuries has weakened. On May 18 2009, the 10-year Treasury Note yield was 3.21%. This is a 49% increase since January 15, 2009 when the yield was 2.15%. An increase in the Treasury yield is a decrease in dollar value.

Do you really think that this bunch of clowns who can't run a simple thing like the Cash For Clunkers program can handle another 17% of the economy and take over Healthcare? Your healthcare and get it right without killing what's left of the economy and a lot of US citizens in the process? Citizens who paid taxes and FICA for years? Want to bet your life on it?
 
2009-07-31 01:09:15 AM  
CitizenTed: The goal is to start taking steps to modify the American lifestyle to be more conservative (about energy usage).

By destroying products already built still in their useful lives and using energy and resources to build replacements.

There's nothing responsible about that at all. It's just about throwing something away because it's 'old' or no longer fashionable.
 
2009-07-31 01:10:51 AM  
I have a '96 Jeep Grand Cherokee that qualified. Government ratings says it got 16mpg avg. I was actually averaging 18 city, 22 hwy. The vehicle has it's share of small problems and door dings, but it runs just fine and will last many more miles. I could have purchased a Nissan Murano that averages 20mpg by the book and got at least $3,500 from the government for a car that, in reality, is a net gain of 0mpg.

Also, I've watched TV a bit this week, I think the dealerships have spent as much on Cash for Clunkers TV spots as the government will be reimbursing them for the cars. Why can't dealers just yank their ads and cut their car prices?
 
2009-07-31 01:13:10 AM  
orbitalfreak: This is one program I would like to see expanded. It funds cleaner air. It gets rid of older, problematic vehicles. It reduces oil consumption. Generates demand for newer vehicles. Scrap metal gets recycled.

Can you take multiple clunkers in and trade them towards a new car? three old beaters laying around the back yard could turn into a cheap Kia or Hyundai, or even halfway to a new car.


How much energy does it take to create a new car?
 
2009-07-31 01:14:40 AM  
leadmetal: There's nothing responsible about that at all. It's just about throwing something away because it's 'old' or no longer fashionable.

media.comicvine.com
 
2009-07-31 01:14:48 AM  
CitizenTed:
NeoCons whharble about how the Libtards are all unicorns and rainbows, but thinking people simply hope for gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. We won't get there in weeks or decades. It will take generations. The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

So STFU.


I'd love gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. This doesn't make any positive changes to our habits. It simply teaches us "if you buy the least energy-efficient car you can find, the government may give you a nice bonus some day". Next time I buy a car, that will push me slightly towards a less gas-efficient car because I might get a government bonus.

Also, it is costing us $20,000 per new auto sale. http://www.businessweek.com/autos/autobeat/archives/2009/07/cash_for_clunke_2.ht ml

Edmunds figures that CARS will only help drive about 50,000 incremental new car sales. How is this possible? Edmunds.com's research shows that typically 200,000 vehicles worth less than $4,500 are traded in for new vehicles every three months. At best the current Cash for Clunkers program will fund 250,000 such transactions in the same time period-a gain of only 50,000 vehicles, says the company. Given that this program is budgeted to cost $1,000,000,000, this increase will come at the cost of $20,000 per extra sale.
 
2009-07-31 01:17:35 AM  
I've got a "clunker" I wouldn't mind trading in for one of these:

img396.imageshack.us

But that's not going to happen... not directly at least.
 
2009-07-31 01:21:22 AM  
JohnnyC: I've got a "clunker" I wouldn't mind trading in for one of these:



But that's not going to happen... not directly at least.


You can't buy a scooter with the rebate? If true, I'm not happy about that.
 
2009-07-31 01:24:22 AM  
CitizenTed: The goal is not to 'save the planet'. The goal is to start taking steps to modify the American lifestyle to be more conservative (about energy usage).

THIS

Not sure why conservatives are against conservative behavior, but the mainstream ones seem to be...

If I had a dollar for every time I heard some farktard "conservative" whaargarbling about how they were going to go do donuts in a parking lot just to use up gas, because some liberal told them they should use less, I'd be a wealthy man.
 
2009-07-31 01:27:14 AM  
moriarty23: You can't buy a scooter with the rebate? If true, I'm not happy about that.

Actually... I'm not sure if you can or not. I just assumed it was a "car/truck for car/truck". I should find out... because if I can... I just might.
 
2009-07-31 01:27:59 AM  
theMightyRegeya: If I had a dollar for every time I heard some farktard "conservative" whaargarbling about how they were going to go do donuts in a parking lot just to use up gas, because some liberal told them they should use less, I'd be a wealthy man.

Wouldn't you automatically hate yourself then, but simultaneously be pleased you will have your taxes increased to pay for other people?

What a dilemma.
 
2009-07-31 01:28:09 AM  
CitizenTed: hudef: As a means of "fighting pollution" this program was conceived by morons. MPG is only one factor. The "embodied" environmental damage of building a vehicle has, apparently, not been taken into account. If you trash a perfectly serviceable 8 year old car, only to replace it with a newly manufactured one, you will not save the planet.

The goal is not to 'save the planet'. The goal is to start taking steps to modify the American lifestyle to be more conservative (about energy usage). I'd have preferred tax incentives for higher MPG car ownership, but this pilot program shows that a moderate financial incentive can help make us more energy independent. I look forward to more incentives in the future.

I think tax incentives for ownership of efficient houses, on-demand water heaters, high-efficiency appliances and high MPG cars is the way to go. I really don't care if ultra-rich douchebags drive around in Ferraris. But I'd like to see working people get incentivized and jazzed about energy conservation. Yes, a new car generates more burned energy, resources and pollution than the gain from 16mpg to 27mpg. But that's the tradeoff now, today. The bigger picture is an American public becoming increasingly accustomed to energy efficiency and pollution reduction.

NeoCons whharble about how the Libtards are all unicorns and rainbows, but thinking people simply hope for gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. We won't get there in weeks or decades. It will take generations. The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

So STFU.


You libtards are so farking condescending. Always talking about changing the habits of the less-enlightened. And babbling on about your utopian, fascist, social engineering programs while yelling "STFU" at anyone who has opposing views.

You lack the introspective integrity necessary for civilised conversation.
 
2009-07-31 01:29:14 AM  
I am all for the "Cash for Hookers" program, and I too am also exhausted after 4 days of the program.
 
2009-07-31 01:31:54 AM  
wilbret: We have a 2000 Chevy Blazer that has been paid for since 2000.
We put a new engine in it in 2008. Runs like a champ. The KBB value is roughly around $4,000. If we turn it over to the program, they will DESTROY a nearly new engine, for what purpose?


I wasn't aware that the government was holding a gun to your head and demanding that you turn your car in. I mean, if I were in your case, I'd probably keep my car and its new engine rather than buying something I don't need, taking on monthly payments when I don't have to and wasting the money I'd just spent on it, but evidently, you can't do that. The government is forcing you to participate. That must suck.

I'm not saying the program's perfect, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
 
2009-07-31 01:32:41 AM  
theMightyRegeya: Not sure why conservatives are against conservative behavior, but the mainstream ones seem to be...

Well... I think it's because most "conservatives" are only "conservative" when it comes to social aspects (religion, sex, recreation, etc). When it comes to environmentally conservative (energy, natural resources, etc) they generally only seem concerned about money and social status.
 
2009-07-31 01:33:05 AM  
JohnnyC: moriarty23: You can't buy a scooter with the rebate? If true, I'm not happy about that.

Actually... I'm not sure if you can or not. I just assumed it was a "car/truck for car/truck". I should find out... because if I can... I just might.


I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade. It wouldn't surprise me, but trading an suv for a free scooter seems like the very spirit of the bill.
 
2009-07-31 01:33:24 AM  
The money allocated for "universal health care" will be exhausted quicker than the government projects it will too, just like the "cash for clunkers" program.
 
2009-07-31 01:33:25 AM  
Something that occurred to me:

Are Local/Municipal governments eligible for participation in this program? (I noticed that the local PoPo has gotten some nice new toys this week) Police cars get shiatty mileage, so I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but if a few medium-sized cities decided to upgrade their fleets, that would do in the C4C budget right quick.
 
2009-07-31 01:36:40 AM  
moriarty23: I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade. It wouldn't surprise me, but trading an suv for a free scooter seems like the very spirit of the bill.

Well... technically it wouldn't be free. That's an $8,000 scooter. It's 500cc (2010 model is rumored to be a 750cc). But I would happily take one of those for $3500. :)
 
2009-07-31 01:36:46 AM  
theMightyRegeya: If I had a dollar for every time I heard some farktard "conservative" whaargarbling about how they were going to go do donuts in a parking lot just to use up gas, because some liberal told them they should use less, I'd be a wealthy man.

I AM GOING TO DO DONUTS...

I don't waste gas. Too farking expensive.

I do waste water. They've been pushing low gpf toilets for years and I have adamantly resisted updating mine. I have tried the newer models, and I require something a little more "robust". I feel I'm at a point in my life where I shouldn't worry about getting a plunger every time I take a crap, and I will gladly pay for that privilege no matter how expensive water gets.
 
2009-07-31 01:39:50 AM  
belowner: They've been pushing low gpf toilets for years and I have adamantly resisted updating mine. I have tried the newer models, and I require something a little more "robust". I feel I'm at a point in my life where I shouldn't worry about getting a plunger every time I take a crap, and I will gladly pay for that privilege no matter how expensive water gets.

Preach it, brother!

TESTIFY!!!!
 
2009-07-31 01:40:37 AM  
CitizenTed: The goal is not to 'save the planet'. The goal is to start taking steps to modify the American lifestyle to be more conservative (about energy usage). I'd have preferred tax incentives for higher MPG car ownership, but this pilot program shows that a moderate financial incentive can help make us more energy independent. I look forward to more incentives in the future.

I think tax incentives for ownership of efficient houses, on-demand water heaters, high-efficiency appliances and high MPG cars is the way to go. I really don't care if ultra-rich douchebags drive around in Ferraris. But I'd like to see working people get incentivized and jazzed about energy conservation. Yes, a new car generates more burned energy, resources and pollution than the gain from 16mpg to 27mpg. But that's the tradeoff now, today. The bigger picture is an American public becoming increasingly accustomed to energy efficiency and pollution reduction.

NeoCons whharble about how the Libtards are all unicorns and rainbows, but thinking people simply hope for gradual, intelligent changes to our habits. We won't get there in weeks or decades. It will take generations. The cash-for-clunkers was a step in the right direction.

So STFU.


i would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
 
2009-07-31 01:41:24 AM  
JohnnyC: moriarty23: I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade. It wouldn't surprise me, but trading an suv for a free scooter seems like the very spirit of the bill.

Well... technically it wouldn't be free. That's an $8,000 scooter. It's 500cc (2010 model is rumored to be a 750cc). But I would happily take one of those for $3500. :)


but you'll make it up in charisma. =free?
 
2009-07-31 01:41:30 AM  
JohnnyC: When it comes to environmentally conservative (energy, natural resources, etc) they generally only seem concerned about money and social status.

Well duh. Money lets you buy more resources so you don't have to care about conservation.

This isn't limited to conservatives. Rich liberals use a shiatton of resources, too. They just spout off about how we should "all be doing our part". What they really mean is that you should be doing your part, and then will donate money to some cause so they don't have to alter their behavior. I call it the "conscience credit". Rich people of all political stripes have been playing that game for years.
 
2009-07-31 01:41:34 AM  
moriarty23: I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade.

Never mind. Can't make that trade. The first line of the rules faq I found here says:

The CARS credits of $3,500 or $4,500 are for new car purchases. New as defined by the laws in your state which normally means that it has never been titled. The new car can be a 2008, 2009 or 2010 model.

So I guess that won't work... A new scooter like that is classified as a "motorcycle" and is definitely not a "new car".
 
2009-07-31 01:44:26 AM  
JohnnyC: moriarty23: I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade. It wouldn't surprise me, but trading an suv for a free scooter seems like the very spirit of the bill.

Well... technically it wouldn't be free. That's an $8,000 scooter. It's 500cc (2010 model is rumored to be a 750cc). But I would happily take one of those for $3500. :)


farm2.static.flickr.com
 
2009-07-31 01:45:10 AM  
GomezAdams: Do you really think that this bunch of clowns who can't run a simple thing like the Cash For Clunkers program can handle another 17% of the economy and take over Healthcare? Your healthcare and get it right without killing what's left of the economy and a lot of US citizens in the process? Citizens who paid taxes and FICA for years? Want to bet your life on it?

Under Obama's plan you can keep your current health insurance. So the government is hardly "taking over" healthcare. If you don't like the job they're doing, keep your current insurance.
 
2009-07-31 01:51:58 AM  
joethebastard
Under Obama's plan you can keep your current health insurance. So the government is hardly "taking over" healthcare. If you don't like the job they're doing, keep your current insurance.

I suggest you actually read the bill and not listen to the voices in your head from TV. You may get to keep your current policy but the government Health Care Czar will define it and control it.

Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC EXCHANGE to bring private HC plans under Govt control.

Pg 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange
 
2009-07-31 01:53:33 AM  
belowner: This isn't limited to conservatives.

Fair enough. But while there are rich liberals who are all talk and no action, I still prefer them over the so-called "conservatives". Some liberals might be hypocrites about some things, at least they don't try to tell me who I can marry, when and with who I can have sex, or what video games I can make/play. And that's just the tip of the iceberg those control freaks try to tell me... so yeah... I'll take a whole herd of liberals over even one so-called "conservative".
 
2009-07-31 01:58:03 AM  
joethebastard: Do you really think that this bunch of clowns who can't run a simple thing like the Cash For Clunkers program can handle another 17% of the economy and take over Healthcare?

Yeah, Medicare is a huge failure. Interestingly, my mother received very good healthcare survivor benefits under from my father's federal pension. He worked 30 years as a civilian for the US Navy.

No one is talking about a program similar to Britain's NIH, and we are almost all under some sort of Managed Care with some fairly draconian rationing with some fairly arbitrary rules.
 
2009-07-31 02:02:38 AM  
JohnnyC: moriarty23: I'd be a little upset if you couldn't make that trade.

Never mind. Can't make that trade. The first line of the rules faq I found here says:

The CARS credits of $3,500 or $4,500 are for new car purchases. New as defined by the laws in your state which normally means that it has never been titled. The new car can be a 2008, 2009 or 2010 model.

So I guess that won't work... A new scooter like that is classified as a "motorcycle" and is definitely not a "new car".


Plus, you'd have to know some mean shop kids to get a scooter that ran
 
2009-07-31 02:02:42 AM  
feckingmorons: GAT_00: feckingmorons: Mercedes SLK 3.0L Roadster

Wait, how did you get a trade in for this when a Google says that car only gets 26 MPG Highway? Is that right? If it is, you didn't just use a program you opposed, you abused it with wasteful government spending.

Yes, yes I did. The government says a 93 4WD Suburban gets 13 miles per gallon. My new car gets 21 according to the government, it it got 23 I would have score a extra 1 large.


In true republican form - government spending is bad, unless it benefits me.

And you dumb asses wonder why the entitlement programs you loath will never be repealed.
 
2009-07-31 02:04:24 AM  
ran under 18 miles to the gallon
 
2009-07-31 02:04:27 AM  
If the government offers a plan, I will lose my health insurance within the first pay period because my employer will no longer choose to offer the option.

So yes, the government is "taking over" healthcare.
 
Displayed 50 of 374 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report