ca$h for clunker$ @ stealership

[tonycarreon]

just got back from my local stealership - picking up an oil filter - and noticed this clunker sitting there. made me laugh.

[Lil bastard]

Interesting. I was just at my local dealership yesterday where I brought the subject up to the GM and the bulk of his sales force, and they said that the cash-for-clunkers program has done nothing for them - haven't had a single one, nor did they expect any.

They said that their usual clientele doesn't normally keep a car long enough to qualify as a clunker.

Collectively, their political view of the program was that it was a useless, wasteful, 'feel good' with little real effect either on the current economic woes, or in it's impact on environmental concerns.

[gstoli]

I explored this opportunity for getting a new car for my wife.

You can get all the info you need at http://www.cars.gov

There you'll read that

"Trade-in vehicles must be registered and insured continuously for the full year preceding the trade-in"

and also that the clunker needs to have an MPG efficiency lower than 18. If you have an old Jeep (Wrangler) you could qualify for that, but again you would be able to sell it for $4000 anyway...

I don't think many cars qualify...

Still, it's funny that people are trying to sell junk cars as "clunkers"

[RandallNeighbour]

What bothers me is the fact that the government didn't limit the program to domestic new car purchases. We're giving millions of dollars to Asian car makers when we partially own 2/3 of the domestic brands right now.

Makes no business sense whatsoever. Pay yourself back first.

[gstoli]

Randal, The aim of the CARS program is to limit foreign oil imports.
By allowing Asian cars to participate in this program they actually help customers getting rid of their old inefficient cars while buying (almost) whatever they like or find more affordable.

The government will get their money back because of all the pros that come with (loosely speaking) energy independence. So, the idea is clever...

Now, what is that car that costs less than $4500, has been in your possession and fully insured for the last year and has an MPG higher than 18? That's a question I haven't been able to answer :-)

[tonycarreon]

on this randall we do not disagree and maybe that makes me a bad democrat...

however i think the problem in limiting it to domestic cars is that it's getting harder to define what a domestic car is, is it one where the co. is based in the US? is it one where the car is built in the US?

toyota has a large presence here so cutting them out would have possibly meant layoffs in ?retaliation? either way, the program had potential, as did TARP, but then we let lawmakers set the rules and it went downhill from there.

( and this thread is getting close to being a lounge thread. i knew i should have created it there. )

[urban_legend]

Is very bad and is not at all capitalism. For one thing, other countires always retaliate. This was a major factor in the great depression. You don't buy their cars they don't buy your planes or corn and so on. Besides what is an america car today? A honda built in ohio or chrysler built in canada?

Also in any of these programs there are unitended outcomes some funny, some not. I sold my ford explorer to my neighbor two years ago for $2,000 and he spent $500 for tires - last Saturday he bought a new ford focus and got the $4.500. We got a good laugh over beers on that.

But, the teenager or poor young adult (unemployment here is nearly 25%) just lost a chance to get a good, dependable cheap truck - since it now crushed and off the market. And with poor credit scores they can't qualify for a new car purchase - so on this one Obama screwed the poor...not the rich.

[Lil bastard]

The Obama administration - if they had half a brain, they'd be half-wits!

Look at how the world is beginning to respond - Foreign Tax Breaks

In case you don't get it, India is now going to give a 10 yr. tax break on foreign revenue earned by indian automakers.

So what you say?

Well, Tata is now the owner of Jaguar, to name just one. This is a form of dumping, and whatever else, is certainly not gonna make the big three competitive.

And, the Senate is proposing tax breaks for those automakers who recieved federal bailout money. Ford, who didn't request or receive any federal money and is the only US automaker to try and make it on their own, without the dole, will be excluded by this bill.

Waaay to go Mr. Prez.

[tnoice]

Originally Posted by RandallNeighbour

What bothers me is the fact that the government didn't limit the program to domestic new car purchases. We're giving millions of dollars to Asian car makers when we partially own 2/3 of the domestic brands right now.

Makes no business sense whatsoever. Pay yourself back first.

Just have to say; Toyota and Honda produce just as many cars in the US as Ford and GM. Toyota and Honda atleast do not outsource to Canada and Mexico.

[fatmike]

Does my '02 Boxster S qualify as a clunker? Does anyone know?

[fatmike]

I'll answer my own question:


* To qualify a car meet certain conditions, such as it must be registered to you and insured for the past year and it must get "18 mpg combined" or "less".

* What is the government's rating on the '02 Boxster S???? Anyone know? I do. It qualifies @ 18 mpg combined.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm

I think I'm driving an official clunker... wooo hooo!!!

We're getting all righteous on this thread when maybe we should consider going car shopping? I did notice that the "new" car you buy isn't allowed to have an MSRP about $45K for the base vehicle. Need to continue to investigate this. But, so far looks promising. Has anyone taken the next step?

[mptoledo]

The gmc suburban and One of the hummers qualify as one of the cars you could buy.

As for your porsche, even with a blown engine and four flat tires its still worth more then 4500!!

[urban_legend]

Check the sales figures
- 0% financing after 9/11
- employee pricing (for all)
- cash for clunkers

All provided a great short term stimulus to sales...then sales came back to earth.
Like a sugar high then a crash.

[sandyman65535]

Politics aside (I won't add to your debate about US politics, I know how you guys looove when foreigners do that) people trading in their old buckets of crap for new cars should result more cars with modern safety features: airbags, ABS, ESP etc.

So over time you should see net savings on police/fire/paramedics/physiotherapists etc that would be required in the event and aftermath of a car accident. Also means you and your pretty Boxster are less likely to be killed or injured by someone in an old s--tbox.

[d18mike]

Newbie here -- my first post so I will strenuously avoid discussing politics. But a couple of comments from here in Michigan.

1) I find it remarkable that a plan that had hopes of helping to perk up the American automotive industry has yielded the following results:

Top 10 cash for clunkers purchases
Toyota Corolla
Ford Focus
Honda Civic
Toyota Prius
Toyota Camry
Hyundai Elantra
Ford Escape FWD
Dodge Caliber
Honda Fit
Chevrolet Cobalt

More than half the cars in the top ten are from companies headquartered outside the USA. I know many are built here ... but that leads into the more important point.

The central issue for the American car industry is reigniting the country's passion for the automobile. It does not lie in rebates or tax incentives or even in quality (table stakes). It's about producing something that doesn't look and drive like a jellybean on 4 wheels and understanding that the difference breaking even and making a profit lies in the passionate consumer.

[Brucelee]

It's funny, but Robin Hood is the model for the whole "redistribute the wealth" myth. Robin Hood, was in fact, a thief. The fact that he gave his stolen property to the so-called poor is in my book, irrelevent.

Now, it is so 60s to think RH was a cute guy and that what he did was a good thing. However, once you decide that stealing is OK for some, well then, the slippery slope has begun.

Indeed, when those in power decide that YOU are the guy to have his wealth re-distributed (stolen), you may feel differently about RH and how cute he was.

Hey, money is a relative thing. Someone ALWAYS has less than you do. If so,

HAND IT OVER>

[timothy]

Texas instituted a Robin Hood school finance plan in 1993. Since we do not have state income tax, property tax revenue funds K-12 education. The idea was to take money from property tax rich districts and give it to districts with lower property tax values. As many expected the state to waste huge amounts in redistribution, one option enabled a "rich" district to partner with and write a check directly to a "poor" district.

The district where I was a student wrote a big fat check to one in southwest Texas. So what did they did with tens of millions in new found wealth? One would expect the poor district to buy supplies, hire better teachers, expand lunch programs, etc. No, instead they built a brand new football stadium. Soon after our district severed ties and sent money to the state instead.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by timothy

Texas instituted a Robin Hood school finance plan in 1993. Since we do not have state income tax, property tax revenue funds K-12 education. The idea was to take money from property tax rich districts and give it to districts with lower property tax values. As many expected the state to waste huge amounts in redistribution, one option enabled a "rich" district to partner with and write a check directly to a "poor" district.

The district where I was a student wrote a big fat check to one in southwest Texas. So what did they did with tens of millions in new found wealth? One would expect the poor district to buy supplies, hire better teachers, expand lunch programs, etc. No, instead they built a brand new football stadium. Soon after our district severed ties and sent money to the state instead.

Sad but typical. "Free" usually means that folks who get free don't value it.

[Lil bastard]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

Sad but typical. "Free" usually means that folks who get free don't value it.

Thomas Jefferson: "The value of something given for free is not perceived"

[Brucelee]

Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.


Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.


I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.


My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

Never spend your money before you have earned it.

Power is not alluring to pure minds.

Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves.

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

The moment a person forms a theory, his imagination sees in every object only the traits which favor that theory.

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

We may consider each generation as a distinct nation, with a right, by the will of its majority, to bind themselves, but none to bind the succeeding generation, more than the inhabitants of another country.








Thomas Jefferson