Cash For Clunkers: Federal Rebate Revs Up Buyers

LongJim · August 5, 2009

Liberal Media Propaganda

Awesome.

It's working everyone! Ignore the slight pain in your sphincters. That's normal.

<_<

Censored by Laurie · August 5, 2009

Awesome.
It's working everyone! Ignore the slight pain in your sphincters. That's normal.

Its not normal...and now with a public option even if you couldn't afford health care previously you can go and get that checked out.

keith · August 5, 2009

This program seems similar to the way drug pushers get their customers hooked and dependent on them.

Keith

Censored by Laurie · August 5, 2009

This program seems similar to the way drug pushers get their customers hooked and dependent on them.
Keith

???

eeally · August 5, 2009

It seems to me the program is a huge success. Dealerships are moving inventory. Salesman and staff are working. Banks and credit unions are making loans. Fund this program more please. This is a way to get the economy moving!

Thank you for this spur in the economy! And yes the tax receipts off this plan will well exceed $3500 per car. Look at all who are benefiting. This is a good program any way you look at it. Even if you are a staunch conservative you must admit this sector has got a lift and as we economists know each sector of industry in a way plays to another.

Yes it is originated by your tax dollars. That is the rub and I understand your frustration with spending any money. Or money for what you might perceive as wasteful. You are entitled your opinion. Yes it does help out the person who may not have been able to afford a newer car to get around. I happen to look at the positive side of it may help that recent college grad to to the payment level on a newer reliable car to get to work. He or she now has an advantage 3-6 yrs down the road to trade it in for another. Thus keeping the economics machine turning....

Yes I do also know that we cannot just give money to every sector of the society. I would love to get cash for credit card debt>

Ok rip this post to shreds...................Please don't knock my IQ anymore! It really is quite low..

KRAM1 · August 5, 2009

It seems to me the program is a huge success. Dealerships are moving inventory. Salesman and staff are working. Banks and credit unions are making loans. Fund this program more please. This is a way to get the economy moving!
! This is a good program any way you look at it. as we economists know each sector of industry in a way plays to another.

You are an economist? Keyensian economist perhaps????? Now I see............

UNT90 · August 5, 2009

Liberal Media Propaganda

So artificially inflated sales are signs of a recovering economy???

This is simply another tax imposed by a democrat that likes to tax. But, he is a democrat, so no one should be surprised.

Censored by Laurie · August 5, 2009

So artificially inflated sales are signs of a recovering economy???

Consumer confidence does nothing for you?

UNT90 · August 5, 2009

Consumer confidence does nothing for you?

From wikipedia (too lazy to go anywhere else):

Consumer confidence is the degree of optimism that consumers feel about the overall state of the economy and their personal financial situation. How confident people feel about stability of their incomes determines their spending activity and therefore serves as one of the key indicators for the overall shape of the economy. In essence, if consumer confidence is higher, consumers are making more purchases, boosting the economic expansion. On the other hand, if confidence is lower, consumers tend to save more than they spend, prompting the contraction of the economy. A month-to-month diminishing trend in consumer confidence suggests that in the current state of the economy most consumers have a negative outlook on their ability to find and retain good jobs.

Don't see anything in there about government intervention. The true estimate of consumer confidence are sale figures before this went into effect and the sales figures after this program is over. In the mean time, we are just getting a taste of corporate welfare.

I thought you were against corporations, much less corporate welfare?

keith · August 5, 2009

It seems to me the program is a huge success. Dealerships are moving inventory. Salesman and staff are working. Banks and credit unions are making loans. Fund this program more please. This is a way to get the economy moving!
Thank you for this spur in the economy! And yes the tax receipts off this plan will well exceed $3500 per car. Look at all who are benefiting. This is a good program any way you look at it. Even if you are a staunch conservative you must admit this sector has got a lift and as we economists know each sector of industry in a way plays to another.
Yes it is originated by your tax dollars. That is the rub and I understand your frustration with spending any money. Or money for what you might perceive as wasteful. You are entitled your opinion. Yes it does help out the person who may not have been able to afford a newer car to get around. I happen to look at the positive side of it may help that recent college grad to to the payment level on a newer reliable car to get to work. He or she now has an advantage 3-6 yrs down the road to trade it in for another. Thus keeping the economics machine turning....
Yes I do also know that we cannot just give money to every sector of the society. I would love to get cash for credit card debt>
Ok rip this post to shreds...................Please don't knock my IQ anymore! It really is quite low..

A quick "sugar rush" is usually going to be followed by a crash or an industry that ultimately becomes dependent to the steady flow of sugar just to survive. A program that destroys functional assets is highly questionable IMHO. If they could not afford the automobile before, then they probably cannot afford it now. A few months of missed payments and that shiny new car is going to be repossessed. Their previously paid for car has been sent to the crusher. No car, ruined credit....are they really better off?

Keith

LongJim · August 6, 2009

Clunker Cash and Me [benjamin Zycher]

"Let’s face it: After 17 years and 232,522 miles of faithful service, my Jeep’s best days were long past. Time for some new wheels — but money’s a bit tight these days, for me as for so many others.

But, as good fortune would have it, not for the federal government: They’re willing to pay me $4,500 — $4,500! — to turn that clunker in for a new car satisfying the combined demands of political correctitude and the auto-dealer lobby. Alas, the rules specify that the big, powerful, safe truck that I want does not qualify.

And so I asked the question on the minds of millions of my fellow concerned citizens: How can I get my snout into this trough? Easy: I buy a small car qualifying for the $4,500, and keep it for a few months until the cash-for-clunkers boondoggle has run its course. At that point, the supply of used cars will have shrunk and their prices driven up; I will sell the almost-new small car for what I paid for it ($12,629 last Saturday) or more, at worst having driven it for free, and then buy the truck I covet.

I am deeply ashamed of myself, having worked the system while the poor get shafted by higher prices for the used cars they demand and by higher prices for the used parts needed to repair them. (Under the rules, the clunker engines have to be destroyed, the real-life Beltway version of the old joke about the fate of dairy farming under socialism: The government takes the milk and shoots the cows.) This is hardly the first time — nor will it be the last — that modern environmentalism has harmed those less fortunate.

As for me, I remain ashamed, but not sufficiently so to have forgone the $4,500. And, to be blunt, I am hardly the only sinner in this congregation. When the federal government starts writing checks so as to implement half-baked ideas in pursuit of yet another cause for do-gooderism, gaming the system is the system, an eternal truth relevant to the ongoing debates over health care, taxes, and much else."

— Benjamin Zycher is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute.

LINK

yyz28 · August 6, 2009

It seems to me the program is a huge success. Dealerships are moving inventory. Salesman and staff are working. Banks and credit unions are making loans. Fund this program more please. This is a way to get the economy moving!
Thank you for this spur in the economy! And yes the tax receipts off this plan will well exceed $3500 per car. Look at all who are benefiting. This is a good program any way you look at it. Even if you are a staunch conservative you must admit this sector has got a lift and as we economists know each sector of industry in a way plays to another.
Yes it is originated by your tax dollars. That is the rub and I understand your frustration with spending any money. Or money for what you might perceive as wasteful. You are entitled your opinion. Yes it does help out the person who may not have been able to afford a newer car to get around. I happen to look at the positive side of it may help that recent college grad to to the payment level on a newer reliable car to get to work. He or she now has an advantage 3-6 yrs down the road to trade it in for another. Thus keeping the economics machine turning....
Yes I do also know that we cannot just give money to every sector of the society. I would love to get cash for credit card debt>

The program is not a success. Read the government numbers I posted above. While the program has moved a few cars, it has not met ANY of the goals actually lined out by Congress and the Obama administration, as exhibited above with Government numbers.

GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF TAMPERING WITH PRIVATE ENTERPRISE!!! This is not a stimulus plan and once the free handout is over, there is no long term benefit to this program.

The fact you actually believe that the math on the Tax Receipts will exceed $3,500 per car proves to me, without a shadow of a doubt, that you are no economist.

FirefightnRick · August 19, 2009

The program is not a success. Read the government numbers I posted above. While the program has moved a few cars, it has not met ANY of the goals actually lined out by Congress and the Obama administration, as exhibited above with Government numbers.
GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF TAMPERING WITH PRIVATE ENTERPRISE!!! This is not a stimulus plan and once the free handout is over, there is no long term benefit to this program.
The fact you actually believe that the math on the Tax Receipts will exceed $3,500 per car proves to me, without a shadow of a doubt, that you are no economist.

Associated Press: SPIN METER: $3 billion buys not-so-green vehicles

WASHINGTON – Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the nation's top car salesman in recent weeks, has cited the Obama administration's best-seller list of mostly smaller, fuel-saving cars like the Ford Focus to describe the success of the Cash for Clunkers rebate program.
But what LaHood and other administration officials usually don't mention is that some trucks and sport-utility vehicles that get less than 20 miles per gallon, like the Ford F-150 truck and one version of the Cadillac SRX Crossover, also are being purchased with the new government subsidies. Both are bulky vehicles weighing more than 6,000 pounds when loaded that boast at least 248 horsepower.
Just how many consumers used the federal rebates to buy these larger, not-so-green vehicles is unclear. The Obama administration has declined so far to release detailed records of purchases under the program being compiled by the Transportation Department, listing every clunker deal requesting rebates. The Associated Press requested the data July 31.

Rick

yyz28 · August 19, 2009

Well, while I agree with the crux of the article, the writer and editor need to check their facts. The Cadillac SRX is NOWHERE NEAR 6000 lbs. It is a light weight 2 row crossover. The Esclade barely tips the scales at 6000 LBS, much less the SRX.

...just sayin.

FirefightnRick · August 19, 2009

Well, while I agree with the crux of the article, the writer and editor need to check their facts. The Cadillac SRX is NOWHERE NEAR 6000 lbs. It is a light weight 2 row crossover. The Esclade barely tips the scales at 6000 LBS, much less the SRX.
...just sayin.

True. I'm guessing he's talking about the F150. The '09 is down from 7200lbs(like my '05 ) to 6800lbs.

Rick

eeally · August 19, 2009

The analogy is a. flawed, b. not very good, and c. irrelevant.
Under what article and section of the constitution is the man's Old F150 a concern of the federal government's? I'm not sure, mabye I'm being obtuse and stopping at step one, so I'll keep reading...
Still trying to find why the Government should be involved at all here. If the man wants a new car, he should either figure out how to do it on his own, or do without. This is just how life is. If you can't afford it, do without. I'm still looking for the Constitutional authority under which "Cash for Clunkers" falls.
Cash for Clunkers - a wealth redistribution program, based on one group behaving in a way the Government desires, despite the legal freedoms of every US Citizen to make another choice the Government not like as much. Our tax dollars are being spent to allow people who can't afford a new car (or, more likely, CAN afford to get a new car without the tax advantage, but are going to take the handout because it is there) when we can't keep Social Security solvent. This points to extremely flawed priorities.
If wealth redistribution is required to gain an incentive, then there is no real business case for more economical cars. If there was a good business case, this would be happening in the free market without the (totally unconstitutional) government intervention.
If the benefit of the more efficient vehicle made a good economic sense to the consumer it would happen without a government program. There is no consideration about the fact that the energy needed to build the new car is greater than the environmental impact of 4-5 MPG over the lifetime of the vehicle in terms of (so called) greenhouse gasses. The child not dying of some respritory disorder is a straw man and a non sequitor.
The man could have had no car payment and paid slightly more for gas, and had plenty left over to still buy the ham. Do you know how much gas you can buy for the cost of a car payment?
No doubt this is a winfall for Ford, GM and the other car makers. I object in the same manner I objectected to the bailout of GM. It isn't the place of the Government to mess with the free market. These companies should rise and fall on their own merits and products.
...and there is the biggest fallacy in your argument. There is no way that the federal government's tax take on each vehicle is greater than the Cash for clunker's rebate. The ONLY way your argument be true is for the FEDERAL government to get more than $3500 tax revenue per the average vehicle sold under this program in the form of tax revenue from Ford, which, I think we all know, isn't going to happen.
Moreover, when you get past the headlines, it becomes clear that your brilliantly flowcharted scenario... Isn't what is really happening -
‘Cash for Clunkers,’ By the Numbers
By Ken Belson - Wheels Section, New York Times - August 4th, 2009
The “cash for clunkers” program introduced last week appears to have been a success, at least based on the tens of thousands of consumers who streamed into their local car dealers to swap their beaters for new, more fuel-efficient replacements.
According to a survey of car dealerships and 2,200 consumers by CNW Research, the average fuel economy of vehicles traded in last week was 16.3 miles per than the 18 m.p.g. needed to qualify for a government rebate of $3,500.
The relatively small differential suggests that consumers have not been turning in the oldest, dirtiest and least fuel-efficient cars, but instead have been getting rid of their second and third cars, according to Art Spinella, who ran the survey.
“These are third cars used for kids in school,” Mr. Spinella said.
The vehicles that consumers bought with their credits had average fuel efficiency ratings of 24.8 miles a gallon, he said.
Lawmakers hoped the “cash for clunkers” program, formally known as the Car Allowance Rebate System, would reduce America’s dependence on imported oil. But the early results of the program suggest that may not happen. The vehicles turned in were driven about 6,000 miles a year, he said. If the new vehicles are driven about 12,000 miles a year, the rough annual average, then consumers will actually use more fuel, not less.
“The energy independence argument did not ring true, at least so far,” Mr. Spinella said.
He added that the average annual income of those who bought cars with their rebates was $57,700, just under the $61,000 for all new car buyers these days. That suggests that consumers with the lowest incomes who, in theory, need the rebates most, are not benefiting from the program.
One of the problems, Mr. Spinella said, is that even a $4,500 rebate may not be enough to persuade consumers to turn in their cars, particularly if they are unable to borrow from cautious auto dealers.
“Some of the folks who drive a beater all the time are unlikely to get a new car loan,” he said. “That’s one of the problems with the program.”
...I may have missed your analogy at first, but at least I actually know something about this program. It is NOT doing what is intended. It is NOT doing what you so expertly layed out. ...and it is CERTAINLY not within the Constitutional authority of the congress to create and administer such a program.

Classic!
Rick

what is classic? The fact that you are happy we have to import oil? What is wrong with your thinking?

eeally · August 19, 2009

Cash for Clunkers is a huge success......period.

Bush for President now that was a huge failure!!!!!!!! Thanks for the recession bud....

LongJim · August 19, 2009

OMG

TheTastyGreek · August 19, 2009

Urge to kill... Rising.

Censored by Laurie · August 19, 2009

Urge to kill... Rising.

Careful...don't want you ending up in court in both Illinois and Connecticut

yyz28 · August 19, 2009

Cash for Clunkers is a huge success......period.
Bush for President now that was a huge failure!!!!!!!! Thanks for the recession bud....

We prove that the program has not met any of it's own stated goals, yet you call it a success.

You're unable to argue how the progam is constitutional, yet you call it a success.

You can't debate the point, you can only make the statement "cash for clunkers is a huge success......period" without a single fact to back it up.

...and THEN you're so bad at arguing your point, the best thing you can do is whip Bush back out, because that's the only tired ticket you've got left.

It's sorta sad really.

Oh, well...

HoustonEagle · August 19, 2009

Woooo Hoooo! I sure am glad this board is back up. Now we can all cast aside our one common denominator and find reasons to hate each other.

Censored by Laurie · August 20, 2009

Woooo Hoooo! I sure am glad this board is back up. Now we can all cast aside our one common denominator and find reasons to hate each other.

Houston sucks.

hickoryhouse · August 20, 2009

Houston sucks.

I am not a big fan of Oklahoma either.... Or Mushrooms

eeally · August 21, 2009

Mushrooms are very groovy...I like them on my pizza.

Anyway, the point has been backed up in this thread to no end! Here it is in the short version.

By the way I could rip any one of you Fox regurgitates if we could have a person to person debate. Typing really sucks.

Anyway, you and I (taxpayer) lay out $4500 for this short term program which will end. That is important to note that this will end.

$4500 from us.

A person buys a new vehicle with this incentive in mind. Spends $20,000 for a new chevy impala...or fusion whatever....

Tax on the sale--$1500

Tax on the salesman that sells it....$150.--Income tax

car preps, accounting gals, so on...$100

Tax from the company that sold the car --chevy-- $250 or more.

Jobs saved no...created...tax received ----this is where we differ------$1000 per person to make that car. Which is what this is really all about. Stimulating the economy.

Why do you think they burned through the $ so fast. Dealerships could offer to anyone off the street. Bring in a car and we will give you at least $3500. This is a freaking windfall. It is giving the auto industry new life. Your GM investment is about to yield you crazy dividends.

There for a while in the Auto Industry we had 0% for anything. And guess what the new car market was still in the toilet. The Union was draining that company. We broke up the union, and now will reap the benefits. We will sell our shares on the open market for alot.

Sorry I digressed into the fact that we own a car company that is about to triple in value. I say we keep our %40 and buy off the rest. Or we can sell, which we will, I say when USA offers you shares instead of money on your next tax return I would take it. This is the word on Wall Street. Shhhh this tip if just for GoMeanGreeners...

Anyway any time there is a sale of any kind the ripple effect of the dollar goes wild in a Recession. The dollar is weak but the more infused the stronger it gets. The wave has to hit overseas and boune back to us.

Ok when we stimulate the economy then we all win. It makes sense to me....Where do you not get it. Anyway the last one was supposed to account for another 5000 on revenues.

Oh and the finance companies win as well.