Welcome to PatsFans.com

Cash for Clunkers

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Holy Diver, Aug 3, 2009.

  1. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey

    'Clunker' sales nearing quarter-million; what now? - Yahoo! News


    Damnnnnn.......


    The money ran out in a week? Supposed to last for several months....

    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    WASHINGTON – The popular but overwhelmed "cash for clunkers" program is zooming toward a quarter-million trade-ins with the initial $1 billion in rebates, but the White House warns the special deals could sputter to an end by Friday unless the Senate quickly approves $2 billion more.

    Senate skeptics appear to be in no hurry.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------


    is it a good idea to keep this program going? are 10 MPG gains enough to offset the costs over the lifetime of the car in less fuel, and less pollution? The article states that enviromentalists think the standards should be higher.
     
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    Two (main) problems :

    1) It's human nature that the less it costs the more you do it so although the new cars are getting better mileage, I bet they're using more fuel by doing more miles.

    2) While the stimulus for the industry is nice, I suspect it's a sugar high; while some people are buying cars who otherwise wouldn't, a lot of people who were going to buy one later have probably moved the timetable up some - so while the sugar high is nice, I foresee a crash coming when the program ends and an inordinate number of people bought now leaving fewer buyers for later.
     
  3. efin98

    efin98 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Some environmentalists will never be satisfied no matter what is done to improve the environment. Doesn't matter what we do, humans will be blamed for something new by them...

    And the program was a great idea, only problem I can see is that it would have been better had it not sprouted out of the automaker "crisis". It's still a great program to nonetheless...
     
  4. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    It's only 5 MPG for $3,500, 10 MPG for $4,500.
     
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    It's not that well thought out. Why limit it to people with 18 MPG ? My car gets 21 MPG - why not allow me in if I got a car rated at 31 ? It's an interesting concept but the problems I have mentioned are real problems and it's still really just more automaker bailout by a different name.
     
  6. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    That's precisely the point of stimulus, and exactly how even this administration posits it is going to work. Obviously these funds are not going to last in perpetuity. The argument is that the economy will, in the next several quarters, rebound to the extent that the gains can be built on, while at the same time minimizing the losses. Of course, we will see if that works, but early indications are promising.
     
  7. efin98

    efin98 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I agree and was going to say something along that line but thought against it...

    The reasoning may have been to get the oldest and worst offending vehicles off the road only to just get rid of some of their overstock cars that they couldn't get rid of because of the craze in favor of the "fuel efficient" cars before the bottom fell out in the industry. They should have gone higher up on the milage requirements to do more.
     
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    The very likely scenario, IMO, is that if X cars would have been bought in the next 12 months and Y cars were bought due to CfC, we will not see a total of X+Y being bought but something like X + .1Y. In other words, I doubt many additional cars will be bought over the next 12 months but we've pushed forward some of the purchases and will then lose them later. That's not a stimulus to me, that's a sugar high. A stimulus would stimulate now without hurting later. We've pushed all these car purchases forward but what about when they would have been made later ?
     
  9. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    You've got to draw the line somewhere.

    Yes, and it's a temporary program that targets the most egregious automotive emissions offenders. While not perfect, it's progress.
     
  10. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    #80 Jersey


    I know....what I'm asking is over the life of a car, and average miles driven...is that enough of a cost offset in gas and pollution to cover the cost of the rebate.

    10,000 miles a year (avg)
    1,000 miles saved (10MPGs)
    gas is 3 bucks (avg)

    lest say you got 20MPGs and now you have 30MPGs
    20MPGs - 500 Gallons bought per year - $1500
    30MPGs - 333 Gallons bought per year - $1000


    SAVINGS
    $500/yr
    167 gallons of gas.



    9 years and the cost to the taxpayer would even out, strictly for the gas. This doesn't account for pollution. But we should assume the emissions would be less too, right?

    sounds like a decent thing to do.
     
  11. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,878
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +47 / 15 / -2

    It's not solely about "stealing" car purchases for from the future though, it's about stimulating business overall now. If more money is spent today, then more jobs are created and hopefully we start thriving again to the point that people who would never be able to buy a car at all will be able to buy one in the future.

    So if 20 cars are bought today instead of 10 now and 10 later, then hopefully 10 more cars can be bought in the future that wouldn't have otherwise been bought, or perhaps allows for production and job growth in other areas.

    Republicans would love to believe that this is just crazy drunken spending for no reason but believe it or not there are a lot of smart people behind the idea of deficit spending.
     
  12. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    I get that - and it's possible - but with most economists thinking this will be a largely jobless recovery, I think it won't work that way. I hope it does but I doubt it.
     
  13. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    And you want these people in charge of your healthcare.

    The Girl Scouts turned Thin Mints into a household word and they'd probably have run a Cash For Clunkers program better than the govt has.

    These are the same people in charge of our economic lives too.
     
  14. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,878
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +47 / 15 / -2

    ????? This program has been a success.
     
  15. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,739
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +587 / 14 / -14

    #24 Jersey

    It's gotten cars bought.

    However :

    - We have no idea if it will cut energy usage (more miles may be driven in new car).
    - We have no idea if the people could afford the cars.
    - We know buying a newer used car would have been better for most people.
    - We know we just spend another billion dollars. I know, what's a billion these days :eek:
    - We have no idea if this will hurt sales when the program ends.

    The program has been a success in moving cars now. But there's little known about whether the buyers can afford them, if they'll actually save on energy, if they would have bought a car later anyway - or if the taxpayers should be subsidizing people to buy new cars.
     
  16. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    The monies alloted were supposed to get through October but they're already out. :bricks: How can you not anticipate the reaction to immediate cash in this economy?
     
  17. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,878
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +47 / 15 / -2

    If they had allotted too much money it would have drawn ire from Republicans (it is anyway). It's not that big of a deal to see if the program works and then get more money for it. It's liking getting people to sign up for something and then when a ton of people do you complain when they run out of paper. The fact that people are participating is a good thing IMO.
     
  18. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,609
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    It's drawing ire from Reps because it ran out of money. It's drawing questions because it makes people wonder if anyone really knows what they're doing. I think it would've gone a long way towards inspiring public confidence had these economic geniuses (or at least a car czar) could've taken a great grassroots project and run with it. But no.

    I'm in awe of the people who are willing to trust these people with their futures, the futures of their children, and the futures of their grandchildren.

    They can't even forecast a clunker program in this economy, and you seriously want them deciding whether or not you or your loved one has earned the right to an X-ray. I'll just have to agree to disagree.
     
  19. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,878
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +47 / 15 / -2

    Yes, this makes sense, Republicans complaining because not enough money was used by the Dems for their program. In the same breath as saying the government shouldn't do anything at all, you criticize the Dems for not putting enough money into this:rolleyes:

    The program was more successful than originally anticipated. You can spin that negatively however you want.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2009

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>