Guest Rolling Parts Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Best guess I can make is that of the 250,000 cars bought that 200,000 would have been purchased at this time of year anyway. That means that the additional new car sales of 50,000 cars cost the US Taxpayers $20,000 per car. Any reasonable, critical analysis would summize that this Government "program" cost a Billion dollars for the purpose of creating a billion pounds of waste. This is not "a good idea". So where is critical thinking in the Free Press? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B00STDZ Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Nissan 300zx N/a AND turbo is on the list! not to mention the MKIV Supra twin turbos! Those are already rare enough as it is and are worth well over 4500! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowCarbZ Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Nissan 300zx N/a AND turbo is on the list! not to mention the MKIV Supra twin turbos! Those are already rare enough as it is and are worth well over 4500! Once again demonstrating that apparently common sense has no place in today's society. Complete B.S. that cars like that would be on the list... ugh... The focus today is ONLY on fuel economy. There are so many more variables to a car's impact on the environment than Fuel economy. Production, the demand for parts at the end of the vehicle's life, the life expectancy, parts consumption etc. Narrow minded individuals is all it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhp123166 Posted August 5, 2009 Author Share Posted August 5, 2009 I think that maybe the fuel economy reasoning for doing this program that is being put forth is an afterthought, a "side effect" if you will. I think the real reason may be just to stimulate the economy (get us consumers buying) and put some money in the pockets of the moribund American auto industry. I looked at that car list and wow, those are some nice clunkers!!! What am I driving then a "sub-clunker"? I guess it comes down to which side of the car equation one is most comfortable on. If I buy a new car with a down payment and a loan I can be pretty sure that my only operating expenses will be insurance, loan payment, gas and some service although most manufacturers have pretty nice service programs. If I buy a used car, pay cash and own it outright I will have maintenance and repair from the onset, gas, and insurance (which should be less for a used vehicle). I have owned one car only (my z) for 13 years. That should tell you where I sit. PS. I don't see this as a political thread because I don't see anyone blatantly preaching and it is about automobiles after all... But that's just my perception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaggyZ Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Once again demonstrating that apparently common sense has no place in today's society. Complete B.S. that cars like that would be on the list... ugh... The focus today is ONLY on fuel economy. There are so many more variables to a car's impact on the environment than Fuel economy. Production, the demand for parts at the end of the vehicle's life, the life expectancy, parts consumption etc. Narrow minded individuals is all it is. You're referring to the buzz term "carbon footprint," which makes a lot of sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrustnut Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 I would like to know what the actual amount the government is spending per car in this program. You have the 4500.00, but then you have to destroy the car that's traded in, which costs money. So, does the dealership pay for the products and towing and dismantling and crushing ect... or are we picking up the tab for this? Any one out there know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsommer Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Our tax dollars going away again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rolling Parts Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I think that maybe the fuel economy reasoning for doing this program that is being put forth is an afterthought, a "side effect" if you will. I think the real reason may be just to stimulate the economy (get us consumers buying) and put some money in the pockets of the moribund American auto industry. LOL, fuel economy. I would not say that 4-5 mpg difference is worth 1 BILLION Dollars already spent(well, borrowed actually). Taking money out of my pocket and my children's pocket so my neighbor can buy a NEW car makes me sick. Here is a hint: WHY won't the Government just not collect taxes on new car sales for a while? Have a tax holiday? I'd buy a new car if they gave me a 100% depreciation against my income tax!!! Not only would it spur new car sales but poorer people would be able to get cheaper entry-level used cars by not destroying trade-ins. It's a WIN-WIN and the government won't have to borrow a dime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboHLS30 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 you dont get a 4500 dollar check you get 4500 towards a new car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rolling Parts Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 you dont get a 4500 dollar check you get 4500 towards a new car No, the dealer is "supposed" to get the rebate. That's a problem for dealers because they have to kill the old car (by law) before they are eligible for the rebate. They then have to "trust" that the government will eventually reimburse them. I've heard that many dealers hate the program for that reason; even an approved transaction have not gotten paid yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netrix Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 This program is bullshit, that Volvo would've made a nice car for a struggling family that can't afford a car payment. At least they could take the car off someones hands who can afford a payment and give their car to someone who can't. Plus we're going to have people who don't NEED a new car going into debt to get a loan for the DEAL OF THE CENTURY. We have Goodwill and other donation places for similar reasons. $4500 discount or not, some people cannot afford a new car. Hell that car is nicer than the one I drive and I'll bet half the people on this forum. *sigh* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlatBlack Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Hell that car is nicer than the one I drive and I'll bet half the people on this forum. *sigh* Uh... why do you think that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Challenger Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Volvo... nicer than... Datsun???? Mmmmm......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrustnut Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I would have traded my DD for that Volvo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK-Z Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Well. the destruction of the "old" car wasn't originally part of the deal. Some dealer in germany was caught trying to sell the old cars off the lot. As a result ALL dealers taking advantage of the deal now HAVE to "disable" the vehicles. The US isn't the only country doing a program similar to this. Although I agree that this will "either" be slightly beneficial, or a disaster (leaning towards that latter), because the US economy has a vastly different from other smaller countries doing the same program. Well, I thought that I might as well take advantage of this opportunity, since its here. If I didn't, than someone else would have, so it makes no difference as far as the tax I would be paying later. I traded in my 93 Jeep cherokee sport (worth $500 ) for a hyundai . So no rare cars sacrificed because of me. The amount to repair the jeep would of been 6x what its worth . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rolling Parts Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 ...As a result ALL dealers taking advantage of the deal now HAVE to "disable" the vehicles....Well, I thought that I might as well take advantage of this opportunity You used the phrase "take advantage" twice. That's what people do with Government programs. That's why the Cash for Clunkers is out of money in less than a week. The Government is in debt beyond belief for that very reason. Food for thought: We'll have this debt long after these new cars are also junked! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.