Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-24-2009, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,182,754 times
Reputation: 6552

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
I'm not against the program per say. The way the administration ran this program should make everyone nervous.

It wasn't a complcated program. The same people that couldn't figure out how long the money would last, it was supposed to go from Aug. 1st thru the end of Nov., it lasted 4 days. then they had to infuse 300% more money and it didn't even last to the end of Aug., the computer system kept breaking down, no data availablr. the dealers have not been paid, are the same people trying to get the government involved more in our lives.
This is exactly what bothers most of us about Gov managed anything..
Poorly written policies with even worse execution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:01 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,182,754 times
Reputation: 6552
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandraMoore66 View Post
I wonder how many of people traded their paid for car and now deeper in debt? It's going to be interesting over the course of the next year how many of these cars are repossed.
If you have ever dealt with a gov agency the one thing that stands out is that the priority is to justify their own existence. Not solid execution, not efficiency and not to be a viable working program. The object is to spend every penny the quarterly allotment allows and not 1 penny less.
Customer satisfaction is irrelevant. Case in point the IRS. How much could be saved by implementing a streamlined tax policy?
The gov likes to keep people dependant upon it. It justifies their existence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:27 PM
 
4,067 posts, read 2,266,143 times
Reputation: 4384
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
If you have ever dealt with a gov agency the one thing that stands out is that the priority is to justify their own existence. Not solid execution, not efficiency and not to be a viable working program. The object is to spend every penny the quarterly allotment allows and not 1 penny less.
Customer satisfaction is irrelevant. Case in point the IRS. How much could be saved by implementing a streamlined tax policy?
The gov likes to keep people dependant upon it. It justifies their existence.
Sad but true...and the more we let government in our lives the harder it will be to say enough is enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:32 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,531 posts, read 24,648,910 times
Reputation: 9980
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdne View Post
The Three Billion Dollar Boondoggle is about to end. Now just what did it accomplish? Not much.....

A few billion dollars worth of wealth was destroyed.

Low income families were damaged

Taxpayers were ripped off

The federal bureaucracy added another 1100 people

The environment wasn't helped

The auto industry got a "sugar high",..nothing more

Cash for Clunkers: Dumbest Program Ever?
As the truck from CatoGroup drops by and dumps another load
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 07:58 PM
 
1,043 posts, read 1,289,836 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdne View Post
The Three Billion Dollar Boondoggle is about to end. Now just what did it accomplish? Not much.....

A few billion dollars worth of wealth was destroyed.

Low income families were damaged

Taxpayers were ripped off

The federal bureaucracy added another 1100 people

The environment wasn't helped

The auto industry got a "sugar high",..nothing more

Cash for Clunkers: Dumbest Program Ever?
Yea, i've read this article from the Cato instutute and while i agree with the authors opinion on the effects on the environement everything else was just complete hogwash.

For starters the program did not destroy wealth (well in a sense it did), but reality is those cars would have already been counted in previous GDP numbers when they were initially created, so who gives a dam, if they were destroyed and not re-used at used car dealerships? This is of little concern and is fluff. He knows the new cars that were bought will be counted in this years GDP numbers, so it will add in an overall increase (Formula C+I+G+(Net Exports) -will increase C (consumption) and a ramp up in production will increase I (investment)

The other over-hyped issue in the article is the fear that somehow 750,000 clunkers would result in higher prices paid at used car dealers and would result in a lot less used cars on lots. He's only able to pull the wholl over your eyes, if you are ignorant to the actual numbers of used cars, that still currently remain outstanding. I tend believe the 750k that were turned in and destroyed, will be maybe 1-5% of the total used cars outstanding in America. Notice he left those comparable figures out. If this is the case there will be no rise in prices due to limited availability of cars.

"Automotive News Data Center reports that there were 7,884,601 cars sold in 2008. There were 8,269,351 trucks and SUVs sold, making for a total of 16,153,952 new vehicles sold in 2008. Compared to the 2007calendar year, overall sales were down 2.5%, with car sales down 3% and truck sales down 1.9%."

I would assume used cars sales are probably a small percentage of the 16.1 Million new cars sold each year, so do you really think 750k clunkers turned in really made a dent that will significantly affect used car inventories?

He also makes some pretty extravagant assumptions as to how many car buyers participated, that would have either driven their cars for a few extra years or bought a car now, that they will not be able to buy in the future. It is safe to say while the program was wildly successful it did not represent everyone that plans on purchasing a new car, because not everyone could afford to go to the dealer and purchase a new car. (even with the added benefit of the program)

Low income families were damaged how? They were selling some brand new cars for 4500-5000 bucks after all rebates from the dealer and government were factored in, so how could the poor be worse off from this program? Assuming they were in the market for a car?

He also does not point out that there were no income limits on who could participate in the program. There were no government limitations on the rich, the middle class, or the poor participating in the government tax break to purchase a new car.

If he was against this program, I'd like to see, if it is partisan, because he would have been heavily against the 1980's Regan investment tax credit, which basically did the same thing cash for clunkers did.

This is partisan politics at its worse.

The only few things I'd agree with him are on the environment and the possibility that demand will fall off significantly once the program ends, which is what was expected. However, the boost to GDP is significant and the slight increase in production, as well as the hiring, of additional workers is significant albeit short lived. This will all have a direct impact on GDP in a very positive way, which he fails to point out.

This is an extremely disappointing article put out by the CATO institute, I'd like to see how they viewed a similar tax cut enacted by the Bush Administration to provide a jump in Auto sells. You cannot trust anything you read anymore, i think the only plus beside a lot of the spin is he did raise a few valid concerns

1. Environment issue
2. Slow down after the program ends (i agree it was a quick sugar high and may not last)

Everything else was fluff and spin to scare individuals into believing things that will not happen

1. Increase in Second Hand Auto's (because of a limited supply he has no proof of this)
2. Tax payers were ripped off? (from a program that operated like a tax cut in two ways, because it gave you 4500 off for a fuel efficient car and you also get deduct this from your taxes next year.)
3. Low Income Families damaged (no empirical evidence at all to substantiate these claims)

Last edited by dorock99; 08-24-2009 at 08:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 08:03 PM
 
4,465 posts, read 7,984,998 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Since when are programs extended based on if they work or not?
example. Corn Ethanol????? Another classic pork project that keeps getting extended.
Cash for Clunkers Widely Thought to Help Revive Economy


"But who listens to Bastiat or Hayek? Ten countries have taken up 'Cash for Clunkers' programs. In Britain, the government puts up 2000 pounds to grease the deal...with a total of 300 million earmarked for the program. In America, the 'Cash for Clunkers' program was extended last week, giving buyers a bonus of $3,500 or $4,500 when they turn in an old vehicle. In France, buyers get 1,000 euros toward the purchase of a new car. Everywhere, the program is hailed as a success. It is widely thought not only to boost auto sales, but to help revive the economy, reduce pollution, cut oil imports and even lower highway deaths. We haven't heard that buying a new car contributes to weight loss, but we haven't seen the TV news. Even 'free market capitalists' such as Larry Kudlow say they like it:
"The Cash-for-Clunkers rebate program is working. ...And the price tag of the program is a mere $2 billion compared with the trillions of dollars Washington has been wasting. So, for once in our lives, Washington spending is giving us a good bang for the buck."


That from Supply Sider Larry Kudlow.

In retrospect, the definitive sign that it IS working is that CATO says it isn't, as they are counter-indicative of the truth.

But fyi, it seems it has been extended by only 1/2 of a day- and only because so many people bought cars at the last minute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 08:09 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,300 posts, read 22,182,754 times
Reputation: 6552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geechie North View Post
Cash for Clunkers Widely Thought to Help Revive Economy


"But who listens to Bastiat or Hayek? Ten countries have taken up 'Cash for Clunkers' programs. In Britain, the government puts up 2000 pounds to grease the deal...with a total of 300 million earmarked for the program. In America, the 'Cash for Clunkers' program was extended last week, giving buyers a bonus of $3,500 or $4,500 when they turn in an old vehicle. In France, buyers get 1,000 euros toward the purchase of a new car. Everywhere, the program is hailed as a success. It is widely thought not only to boost auto sales, but to help revive the economy, reduce pollution, cut oil imports and even lower highway deaths. We haven't heard that buying a new car contributes to weight loss, but we haven't seen the TV news. Even 'free market capitalists' such as Larry Kudlow say they like it:
"The Cash-for-Clunkers rebate program is working. ...And the price tag of the program is a mere $2 billion compared with the trillions of dollars Washington has been wasting. So, for once in our lives, Washington spending is giving us a good bang for the buck."


That from Supply Sider Larry Kudlow.

In retrospect, the definitive sign that it IS working is that CATO says it isn't, as they are counter-indicative of the truth.

But fyi, it seems it has been extended by only 1/2 of a day- and only because so many people bought cars at the last minute.
Pretty sure those countries restricted the program for domestic vehicles only didn't they?
Don't get me wrong I drive 2 Toyota's. But the point of the CFC was to help the big 3 rather than do a bailout wasn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 08:09 PM
 
48,505 posts, read 96,675,147 times
Reputation: 18304
In the end unlike so many programs like the farm bill and other subsidises and even the stimulus it actually did what they wanted. Now if the Obama administration can just get their act together and pay off the dealers ;so much the better.Probably saved more jobs than any of the other so called programs too.What they spent like 37 billions on other stimulus in the last 5 months with little to show for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 08:12 PM
 
1,043 posts, read 1,289,836 times
Reputation: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Pretty sure those countries restricted the program for domestic vehicles only didn't they?
Don't get me wrong I drive 2 Toyota's. But the point of the CFC was to help the big 3 rather than do a bailout wasn't it?

No, it was partially designed to do this and most importantly designed to increase production. Whether it increased production at a Toyota operated dealership in the United States or GM operated dealership the main goal was to sell cars, that were made in the US, which adds to this years GDP, and get a slight ramp up in productivity. The inventory purge that happened earlier this year, leaves many businesses significantly well positioned to increase hiring at a rapid rate, and greatly increase productivity this was meant to give a small boost to the end of the year GDP numbers. The big boost will come once the economy fully recovers in 2010 or early 2011.

It increases GDP

1. Consumers spending to buy the cars
2. Producers upping production and making new cars (value of new cars produced this year are added to GDP etc)

These two get added to GDP totals for 2009 and will help the numbers, so from a government standpoint it did exactly what it was designed to do, the GDP numbers will be much better than they other wise would have been without the program.

Used cars were produced new at some point in the past, so they were already counted in previous GDP numbers, so the government doesn't give two s$ts about the used car market. It does not help the numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2009, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,953 posts, read 22,057,225 times
Reputation: 13772
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdne View Post
The Three Billion Dollar Boondoggle is about to end. Now just what did it accomplish? Not much.....

A few billion dollars worth of wealth was destroyed.

Low income families were damaged

Taxpayers were ripped off

The federal bureaucracy added another 1100 people

The environment wasn't helped

The auto industry got a "sugar high",..nothing more

Cash for Clunkers: Dumbest Program Ever?
Agreed.

It was misconceived, and even more badly executed then FEMA with hurricane Katrina.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top