Clunker bait - car dilemma?

[FinallyRetired]

At least this clunker of a program only costs us $1B. It'a not real money until you get to $1T. Besides, it's our grandkids who have to pay the bill, so party on!

Auto ‘Clunkers’ Offer in Doubt After Going Through $1 Billion
Auto ‘Clunkers’ Offer in Doubt After Going Through $1 Billion - Bloomberg.com

 

[Rustic23]

Just heard this on Glen Beck

'Cash for Clunkers was funded through October or November..... they are out of money in 4 DAYS! .... and these are the same people you want to run your health care?"

He does have a point.

 

[ERD50]

Just heard this on Glen Beck

'Cash for Clunkers was funded through October or November..... they are out of money in 4 DAYS! .... and these are the same people you want to run your health care?"

He does have a point.

So obviously, they could have spurred the intended demand with a much lower rebate. They really, really wasted a lot of our taxpayer's money. And gave it to a select few who qualified for the program (I don't). It is the opposite of democracy.

Why couldn't they do a "reverse auction" of sorts? Offer $300 rebates until the demand drops, then raise it to $400, then $500, $600 etc, until the funded amount is used up over the intended time frame. It would be easier to project demand with the nibbles and bites that each incrementally larger rebate would create. They probably would have got 2x to 3x the number of cars purchased under the program as they are.

But, Congress will call it a "success" because so many people went for it

Proof again that Congress is just not in a position to deal with financial matters. At least not directly, it just does not work.

-ERD50

 

[Rustic23]

ERD50,
I don't disagree with what you say, however, I also think it proves that there are better ways to 'stimulate' the economy than the rest of the $750 billion dollar plan. If you reward the consumer you will get consumer spending, and possibly a return of the economy, but, this is a discussion for another thread.

 

[REWahoo]

But, Congress will call it a "success" because so many people went for it

More to come...

Congress trying to rescue ‘cash for clunkers’: Lawmakers aim to pass $2 billion bill to keep rebate program alive

 

[samclem]

But, Congress will call it a "success" because so many people went for it

And the other metric Congress and the administration are sensitive about: How quickly the stimulus money is being spent. They want to show they are doing something, and apparently the rapidity with which tax money can be shoveled into the economy is now a measure of effectiveness.

Proof again that Congress is just not in a position to deal with financial matters. At least not directly, it just does not work.
-ERD50

I've read several columns comparing the Clinton approach to health care reform with President Obama's approach. Clinton tried to take it slow, design the program over a period of many months, do the detailed work in the executive branch, and finally present the whole package to the legislature for consideration. President Obama has turned the whole project over to the legislature, giving only general guidelines and a very ambitious timeline.

I think detailed work and analysis is best done in the executive branch rather than in Congress. I also think sometimes it's better to take some time and figure out the best approach.

But, Clinton's effort to get health care reform legislation failed.


Okay, cash for clunkers is dead. Hopefully there won't be a call for more money to continue this mess.

 

[REWahoo]

Okay, cash for clunkers is dead. Hopefully there won't be a call for more money to continue this mess.

Uh oh. See previous post...

 

[ziggy29]

Imagine that. People lining up to collect free money. Never would have guessed it...

 

[ERD50]

More to come...

Congress trying to rescue ‘cash for clunkers’: Lawmakers aim to pass $2 billion bill to keep rebate program alive

And it never occurred to them that just maybe they could lower the rebate amount going forward since they had such high demand? I guess that just is not a consideration when you are spending someone else's money

Arghhhhh. I'm starting to feel like spending should have to go up as a referendum and get voted on by the public. Maybe even base your vote weight on your 1040, After all, no taxation w/o representation.


-ERD50

 

[FUEGO]

Hey guys, I have a new idea. Call your congressperson and senator about this.

Introducing cash for clunky houses.

The government needs to spend just $1 trillion to promote energy efficiency and stimulate the housing industry. They could bulldoze any houses built in 1972 or earlier that meets minimum required energy inefficiency standards and replace it with a brand new energy star rated house with the latest in energy saving devices. 6.7 million houses could be bulldozed and rebuilt at an average cost of $150,000 subsidy per house.

This bill would improve energy efficiency. It would promote green energy and green technology and sustainable development. It would stimulate the housing sector and construction industry which is sorely needed.

What do you guys think?

 

[FinallyRetired]

More to come...

Congress trying to rescue ‘cash for clunkers’: Lawmakers aim to pass $2 billion bill to keep rebate program alive

They ran through $1B in four days. Obviously the solution is to make this a $2B program and make it last at least 8 days.

 

[FUEGO]

Sounds like it is going to be a very busy weekend at the bars, clubs, etc once those car salesmen get their commission checks.

 

[ziggy29]

Sounds like it is going to be a very busy weekend at the bars, clubs, etc once those car salesmen get their commission checks.

Maybe they'd better save it. They've probably absolutely killed demand for new cars for at least a few months once the program is finally over, since anyone close to buying a new car will have had the decision to "pull the trigger" accelerated to *now*. All that would be left are people not planning to buy a new car for a long time.

They'd be wise to have a big emergency fund when it's over.

 

[W2R]

Maybe they'd better save it. They've probably absolutely killed demand for new cars for at least a few months once the program is finally over, since anyone close to buying a new car will have had the decision to "pull the trigger" accelerated to *now*. All that would be left are people not planning to buy a new car for a long time.

They'd be wise to have a big emergency fund when it's over.

Well, SOME of us would love to buy a new car but aren't driving clunkers so maybe there are a few sales yet to be made.

I took my car to the Toyota dealer to have the broken inside door handle fixed, this morning. They didn't have the part in stock, so I had to order it from their parts department and pay in advance. Then when they get it in, I can arrange for them to install it at the service department. When they told me it was $51 just for the part (installation will be a separate transaction), I almost didn't order it because I was tempted to fuggidaboutit and go buy a new car instead. Almost.

 

[FUEGO]

Maybe they'd better save it. They've probably absolutely killed demand for new cars for at least a few months once the program is finally over, since anyone close to buying a new car will have had the decision to "pull the trigger" accelerated to *now*. All that would be left are people not planning to buy a new car for a long time.

They'd be wise to have a big emergency fund when it's over.

Well, there's another $2 billion on the way. Maybe after that they can throw another $3 billion at this "problem".

 

[FUEGO]

I'm thinking the thread title should have been clunkergate instead. More like the scandal that this is.

 

[ERD50]

I'm thinking the thread title should have been clunkergate instead. More like the scandal that this is.

I'm curious what the general public's reaction will be.

Clearly, one side is pointing out the obvious flaws. But the other side is spinning this as "success", "look at all the cars that were sold, it spurred the economy, we are environmental angels (though I'd bet the early demise of a running car is worse than the gas saved), etc". So we are going to do MORE of this, it was so wonderful!...

How's that gonna "play in Peoria"? I wonder if any polling data can sort it out.

-ERD50

 

[FUEGO]

I'm curious what the general public's reaction will be.

Clearly, one side is pointing out the obvious flaws. But the other side is spinning this as "success", "look at all the cars that were sold, it spurred the economy, we are environmental angels (though I'd bet the early demise of a running car is worse than the gas saved), etc". So we are going to do MORE of this, it was so wonderful!...

This will probably be viewed favorably by the majority. It has a green thumbprint on it. It helps out ordinary people buy cars. It stimulates the economy. What's not to like (other than the 1 followed by 9 zeros price tag)?

 

[ERD50]

This will probably be viewed favorably by the majority. It has a green thumbprint on it. It helps out ordinary people buy cars. It stimulates the economy. What's not to like (other than the 1 followed by 9 zeros price tag)?

But remember, not all that many cars qualify as clunkers. One that I own that I would consider for the rebate does not qualify. Why? Because I bought the model with the smaller engine to get better fuel economy.

Hypothetically, my neighbor who bought the same vehicle, but opted for the big powerful engine that got worse mileage, and burned up more gas in the past 11 years could qualify. He gets $3500 for being a gas hog, and I get the bill. I wonder if there will be more people mad about that, than there are happy with being able to take advantage of the program.

At least some people are questioning the gas savings versus the early scrapping of a running vehicle. Cradle-to-grave and embedded energy figures get complex, but at least the question is out there. Not everyone sees it as a slam-dunk environmental win.

And, if you are not in the auto industry, you might be angry that *they* are getting a boost, and your industry isn't.

That could add up to a lot of negativism. Oh, that "1" with nine zeroes looks to be a "three" with nine zeroes now

-ERD50

 

[FUEGO]

But remember, not all that many cars qualify as clunkers. One that I own that I would consider for the rebate does not qualify. Why? Because I bought the model with the smaller engine to get better fuel economy.

Hypothetically, my neighbor who bought the same vehicle, but opted for the big powerful engine that got worse mileage, and burned up more gas in the past 11 years could qualify. He gets $3500 for being a gas hog, and I get the bill. I wonder if there will be more people mad about that, than there are happy with being able to take advantage of the program.

....

That could add up to a lot of negativism. Oh, that "1" with nine zeroes looks to be a "three" with nine zeroes now

I was talking about this in front of the whole company today. Apparently no one had really heard any of the details of this program sufficient to form an opinion of it. Mostly just vague stuff like "you can trade an old car and get a new one and the government gives you money". No one knew any details, so I doubt anyone here would be irritated by this program. And this is a room full of engineers (ie not math challenged).

And what is another $2B among friends? Obama is hooking us up right?

 

[ERD50]

I was talking about this in front of the whole company today. Apparently no one had really heard any of the details of this program sufficient to form an opinion of it. Mostly just vague stuff like "you can trade an old car and get a new one and the government gives you money". No one knew any details, so I doubt anyone here would be irritated by this program. And this is a room full of engineers (ie not math challenged).

Hah! My first reactions was - "hey, a bunch of engineers should be all over the details"... But then I realize I'm an old retired phart, sitting around reading the news and digging into the details/background too much of the day.

Sure, when I was working I didn't keep up with this stuff so much, I should not be surprised. But it does get me a bit aggravated that people with little knowledge of what they are voting on get an equal vote, but that is the way it is.

OTOH, the Gallup polls are showing deep declines in Obama's approval ratings, and steep increases in his disapproval ratings, and therfore a shrinking "undecided". So the average Joe/Jane is paying attention to *something*, maybe not the right things, who knows?

-ERD50

 

[youbet]

Also irked me that my '96 Sable did not qualify. I guess I was a bad guy for selecting a car with a combined mpg rating over 18..........

 

[BunsGettingFirm]

I think some sense of proportion is called for here. We loaned AIG, alone $82 billion, $13 billion of which went to Goldman Sachs in the form of CDS payout. Yet we are here blowing a heart valve over $3 billion that's going to ordinary folks to help them buy cars? Yes, the CARS program is not the most efficient program ever devised, but why spend so much energy on $3 billion? I'd be more interested to see if all the companies that received bailout money will ever pay it back.

 

[Texas Proud]

I think some sense of proportion is called for here. We loaned AIG, alone $82 billion, $13 billion of which went to Goldman Sachs in the form of CDS payout. Yet we are here blowing a heart valve over $3 billion that's going to ordinary folks to help them buy cars? Yes, the CARS program is not the most efficient program ever devised, but why spend so much energy on $3 billion? I'd be more interested to see if all the companies that received bailout money will ever pay it back.

Also, this is IMO a good stimulus package... Bush gave everyone a check and most just put it aside... no stimulus...

Congress doled out almost $800 billion on junk projects... very little stimulus... and a LOT of wasted money...

I might not be able to use this program... and I hope I can... but I am not against this one as there are a few points that help...

 

[W2R]

Nice for him - unfortunately I did not. I got a call earlier this evening from a dealer that had a vehicle I was interested in letting me know that the deal is no longer available.

Sorry to hear that, but....

Does that mean that you are no longer interested in getting a new vehicle? It's hard to let go of an impulse like that once it has taken hold, even with the deal having been rescinded.