Cash for Clunkers Success

[Riot]

GM loses twice both in service work and sales which may have gone to them if a $4500 incentive wasn't there to buy a more expensive Honda or Toyota. Cause some people will buy crap if it's the only thing they can afford..

So your position is that people should be forced to buy crap?

You should be comforted that the socialist takeover of of the auto companies by our government will result in cars that are fuel-efficient and that sell.

Cash for Clunkers is a resounding success. Car dealers have had their best quarters in years. They are running out of new cars - thus the manufacturers have to gear up production. That creates and keeps jobs (the Taurus is coming back, btw) and spreads throughout all the manufacturing and ancillary segments that supports the auto industry (railroad and OTR transport, plastic companies, steel companies, etc)

Crappy old cars that don't get good gas mileage and cost people alot in repairs (you pointed that out) are off the road in favor of new, more mileage-efficient cars that put more money in the pockets of people that own them, year after year, in lowered gas and repair costs.

I see no reason to get angry, as you did, about people buying cars that will break down less, and cost their owners less money as a result. Gives people alot more money in their pockets to spend and help the economy recover.

And those cars are manufactured in the US, thus providing jobs, jobs, jobs.

And as Scuds pointed out, and a major goal of the clunkers program, was that we use less oil as a country, a very good thing, keeps us less dependent upon foreign oil and keeps the cost down by keeping demand down.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Riot

And as Scuds pointed out, and a major goal of the clunkers program, was that we use less oil as a country, a very good thing, keeps us less dependent upon foreign oil and keeps the cost down by keeping demand down.

OMG. How is this not the most important part? Even the most self-centered Americans can eventually be taught to see the upside of giving Muslims $5-$10 less each time they go to fill up. Even if they hate to help the car industry, there's an even more important aspect. I don't know if the other money spent on programs comes back, but whatever is spent on this program starts coming back into the economy in $5-$10 chips (right away.) People can't see this?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

So your position is that people should be forced to buy crap?

You should be comforted that the socialist takeover of of the auto companies by our government will result in cars that are fuel-efficient and that sell.

Cash for Clunkers is a resounding success. Car dealers have had their best quarters in years. They are running out of new cars - thus the manufacturers have to gear up production. That creates and keeps jobs (the Taurus is coming back, btw) and spreads throughout all the manufacturing and ancillary segments that supports the auto industry (railroad and OTR transport, plastic companies, steel companies, etc)

Crappy old cars that don't get good gas mileage and cost people alot in repairs (you pointed that out) are off the road in favor of new, more mileage-efficient cars that put more money in the pockets of people that own them, year after year, in lowered gas and repair costs.

I see no reason to get angry, as you did, about people buying cars that will break down less, and cost their owners less money as a result. Gives people alot more money in their pockets to spend and help the economy recover.

And those cars are manufactured in the US, thus providing jobs, jobs, jobs.

And as Scuds pointed out, and a major goal of the clunkers program, was that we use less oil as a country, a very good thing, keeps us less dependent upon foreign oil and keeps the cost down by keeping demand down.

but it's not just clunkers going off the road. i could trade in my four year old car and get a rebate if i found something that got better mileage. as for saving money....my husbands f-250 is paid for, is only five years old with about 55k miles on it-we don't use it much. so, if i got rid of it, and bought a car that cost me 20k but got ten more miles to the gallon--just how many gallons of gas would i have to buy over how many years to pay back the $20k i spent to get a more fuel efficient ride? depending on what you're trading in, maybe it'll be cost effective. but more often than not, it won't be. but it puts sales on the car co's books, so they can pay off a better dividend to their shareholders at the end of the next quarter.

and i won't be getting rid of the truck, it pulls our bass boat when we go fishing.

[herkhorse]

Originally Posted by Danzig

but it's not just clunkers going off the road. i could trade in my four year old car and get a rebate if i found something that got better mileage. as for saving money....my husbands f-250 is paid for, is only five years old with about 55k miles on it-we don't use it much. so, if i got rid of it, and bought a car that cost me 20k but got ten more miles to the gallon--just how many gallons of gas would i have to buy over how many years to pay back the $20k i spent to get a more fuel efficient ride? depending on what you're trading in, maybe it'll be cost effective. but more often than not, it won't be. but it puts sales on the car co's books, so they can pay off a better dividend to their shareholders at the end of the next quarter.

and i won't be getting rid of the truck, it pulls our bass boat when we go fishing.

If your car or truck is worth more than 4500.00, it makes no sense to trade it in for cash for clunkers because that is all you get.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by herkhorse

If your car or truck is worth more than 4500.00, it makes no sense to trade it in for cash for clunkers because that is all you get.

right, no trade in because of the requirement that the vehicle be destroyed....i guess using my truck was a bad example.