Cash for clunkers

[KittenKoder]

If the program gets people

1. to buy cars they might otherwise not have purchased, then it stimulates the economy

2. buys more fuel efficient cars? Then it helps to reduce our dependence on petro.

Will it be worth what it costs?

Don't know, but I do know that the two above positive effects are fairly obvious.

Aaah ... buying Government Motors is a good thing I guess, maybe some century we can make them pay that money back.

 

[caela]

If the program gets people

1. to buy cars they might otherwise not have purchased, then it stimulates the economy

2. buys more fuel efficient cars? Then it helps to reduce our dependence on petro.

Will it be worth what it costs?

Don't know, but I do know that the two above positive effects are fairly obvious.

Aaah ... buying Government Motors is a good thing I guess, maybe some century we can make them pay that money back.

Pffffffffft...will never buy a GM car again. Unlike the gov't I don't think ANY company is too big to fail and I won't buy from them on principle. I already own a Ford and my next car will either be from them or foreign.

 

[KittenKoder]

If the program gets people

1. to buy cars they might otherwise not have purchased, then it stimulates the economy

2. buys more fuel efficient cars? Then it helps to reduce our dependence on petro.

Will it be worth what it costs?

Don't know, but I do know that the two above positive effects are fairly obvious.

Aaah ... buying Government Motors is a good thing I guess, maybe some century we can make them pay that money back.

Pffffffffft...will never buy a GM car again. Unlike the gov't I don't think ANY company is too big to fail and I won't buy from them on principle. I already own a Ford and my next car will either be from them or foreign.

Ford I have heard is good, my father loved that company at least and he was a mechanic.

 

[caela]

Aaah ... buying Government Motors is a good thing I guess, maybe some century we can make them pay that money back.

Pffffffffft...will never buy a GM car again. Unlike the gov't I don't think ANY company is too big to fail and I won't buy from them on principle. I already own a Ford and my next car will either be from them or foreign.

Ford I have heard is good, my father loved that company at least and he was a mechanic.

It catches a lot of crap (I get lots of F-lipped O-ver R-emodeled D-odge jokes) but I have honestly had no problems with my little Ranger other than normal wear and tear for a vehicle that has over 100,000 miles on it. I'd be more than willing to buy from them again but when it comes time to get a new car I'll have to do some research because, much as I LOVE my truck, I have a kid now and will have to consider hauling her stuff around as well things like price and gas mileage.

 

[pete]

Reminds me of when we paid farmers to kill their livestock during the depression even though people were standing in bread lines.

Fucking brilliant huh?

The problem is that people think our government still cares about us, the reality is far from that. They stopped caring when people stopped learning, they realized that since people prefer to be naive they can do whatever they want as long as they keep saying "we just want to help".

The only thing our government cares about is protecting it's investments.

Its own personal investments not anything to do with us

 

[KittenKoder]

Pffffffffft...will never buy a GM car again. Unlike the gov't I don't think ANY company is too big to fail and I won't buy from them on principle. I already own a Ford and my next car will either be from them or foreign.

Ford I have heard is good, my father loved that company at least and he was a mechanic.

It catches a lot of crap (I get lots of F-lipped O-ver R-emodeled D-odge jokes) but I have honestly had no problems with my little Ranger other than normal wear and tear for a vehicle that has over 100,000 miles on it. I'd be more than willing to buy from them again but when it comes time to get a new car I'll have to do some research because, much as I LOVE my truck, I have a kid now and will have to consider hauling her stuff around as well things like price and gas mileage.

Toss this back at them:

Dodge, the only car that tells you what to do when you see one.

 

[KittenKoder]

Reminds me of when we paid farmers to kill their livestock during the depression even though people were standing in bread lines.

Fucking brilliant huh?

The problem is that people think our government still cares about us, the reality is far from that. They stopped caring when people stopped learning, they realized that since people prefer to be naive they can do whatever they want as long as they keep saying "we just want to help".

The only thing our government cares about is protecting it's investments.

Its own personal investments not anything to do with us

I thought I implied that, but yeah.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Hello. I'm from the government and I'm here to help you! Sort of makes you laugh, huh? Just like so many other things here of late, the government has absolutely no business in the car biz... New ones or clunkers.

That program had two goals--give a boost to auto dealers who have overburdened lots full of new cars they can't sell and to get old gas hogs off the road. Not to worry, the program ends in December anyway.

ROFLMNAO....

BRILLIANT!

Two cheers for Maggie!

She's here to applaud the subsidy which leaves SOMEONE with A ZILLION USED CARS WHICH WERE BOUGHT AT TOP DOLLAR, thus can't be exchanged for less without encurring a LOSS... OKA: A POISONED ASSET!

Sound familiar kids?

Now for those who've been paying attention, this is what THE SAME PEOPLE DID with Mortgages not too terribly long ago and I think we can all agree that THAT didn't work out so well...

The list of potential 'UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES' OF THIS THING IS ENDLESS!

ROFL...

Leftists...

 

[MaggieMae]

IF i was looking to get a new vehicle I would have taken advantage of this.

I guess the dealers are making people sign wavers now saying "If the govt doesn't pay up you must return the vehicle or pay the difference"

If I owned a gas guzzler, I DEFINITELY would have.

You don't even know what they're calling a "gas guzzler." Have you studied this program, O misinformed one?

Have you? If so, then why didn't you post the accurate information? Is this wrong, or what?

I do realize that the gas performance isn't the only qualification, but that's specifically what I referred to.

 

[MaggieMae]

It's even worse than that.

The dealers taking the trade-in are required to crush them, rather than fixing them up or liquidating them for parts.

If ya kinda-sorta didn't know better, it looks like those geniuses in the District of Crooks are trying to inflate a used car bubble.

For which they pocket the cash paid by the scrap metal dealer.

Parts are worth more than scrap.

Engage brain before whacking keys.

And smart dealers will remove said parts. Duh. Smart mechanics will also remove all the copper. More duh.

 

[MaggieMae]

That's the same normal discount you would get by a reputible dealer when trading in any old car for a new one. What is the big deal here? MSRP prices are way more than the 4500 above what the dealer actually pays for the car. You guys and the American public as a whole are idiots when it comes to trading an old car in for a new one. The government hasn't paid any auto dealer any money for the program. I wonder why? It's a scam, that's why.

Surely you jest. You mean a rusted out 1988 Chevy Malibu for example would get $4500 in trade? Yeah, right...

 

[MaggieMae]

nah....that was basicly mccains plan....

Well then McCain had a good plan, as evidenced by the success of cash for clunkers.

McCain is threatening a filibuster for the added funding, and said he was against the original funding.

White House Keeps Pushing Depleted 'Clunkers' Program as Senate Vote Awaits - Political News - FOXNews.com


But Senate Republicans are threatening to use delay tactics to kill the bill.
A spokeswoman for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told FOX News that he will object to the bill next week, even mounting a filibuster.
"I not only wouldn't vote for the extra $2 billion, I was opposed to the initial billion," McCain told FOX News Radio.

With seven cars of his own, why would he care? Remember, this is the same clown who voted against expansion of the GI Bill for Iraqi/Afghanistan veterans to get higher education once they become inactive.

 

[MaggieMae]

How long did it take to get where we are? How fast do you think it should recover? Do you "black hole" naysayers EVER pay attention to anything on a daily basis?

CNNMoney.com Market Report - Jul. 31, 2009

"There's a constant bid in the market, you can't knock it down," said Joseph Saluzzi, co-head of equity trading at Themis Trading.

In the last three weeks, the major gauges have all gained around 12% as investors have breathed a sigh of relief that the pace of the economic slowdown has eased and corporate profits are closer to recovering.

GDP: The pace of economic decline slowed in the second quarter, in the clearest indicator yet that the recession is winding down.

GDP, the broadest measure of U.S. economic activity, shrank at a 1% annual rate in the April-through-June period. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com thought GDP would shrink at a faster 1.5% rate.

GDP isn't an accurate measure of recovery. I think we would be well on our way to recovery had we allowed the market to correct itself. Everything the government has done has simply delayed the inevitable and made it worse in the long run.

AMEN! Our economy has been up and down for a few hundred years, and history has shown that the recovery has taken less time to recover given its' own course than with government intervention. It took WWII for the FDR years to recover. It may take another WW for ours to recover under Osama.

So how would recovery have happened if we simply did nothing and allowed the market to correct itself when "the market" had tanked and needed to start from scratch? Where would "the market" have gotten the finances to correct itself? Maybe it would have happened slowly over ten years or so, but how many businesses, large and small, would have gone completely under in the meantime?

And oh, I shall be sure to remind you guys who think that GDP isn't an accurate measure of recovery (or economics?) the next time the numbers start declining and you start blaming the Democrats.

 

[MaggieMae]

GDP isn't an accurate measure of recovery. I think we would be well on our way to recovery had we allowed the market to correct itself. Everything the government has done has simply delayed the inevitable and made it worse in the long run.

AMEN! Our economy has been up and down for a few hundred years, and history has shown that the recovery has taken less time to recover given its' own course than with government intervention. It took WWII for the FDR years to recover. It may take another WW for ours to recover under Osama.

Well WW2 didn't help us recover in the least. If we accept that FDR's spending didn't help why would we assume that more government spending would help? Makes no sense. Wars don't help the economy, they hurt it. It was the reduction in spending and government control over the economy after WW2 that finally got us out of the Great Depression.

You're nuts.

EH.Net Encyclopedia: The American Economy during World War II

 

[MaggieMae]

Why is it hypocritical? No, it's certainly not 100% Obama's fault. He can't be blamed for creating the bubble in the first place. He's certainly responsible for everything he's done, however. Voting for the bailouts, the stimulus package, etc...

Aaah ... but according to your "the economy didn't right itself until after the war" logic, then everything that happens economically is a direct result of that days actions. So yes, either the war helped the economy limp back over time, which showed to be upright at the same time the war ended, or it was because of the war ending ... those are the only two possibilities, if it was because the war ended then Obama is to blame for all our current problems as well, unless you are a hypocrite.

I am completely lost.

That's good. Now I want you to start your history lessons over.

 

[MaggieMae]

I've never been for this government giveaway

I just learned that a car traded in on this program is destroyed or rendered inoperable'

How fucking stupid is that?

The next thing you know the fucking government will pay people to buy a new house and bulldoze their old one to the ground.

Obama has already mentioned the house idea.

Some of the foreclosures that have been sitting for a long time have become dilapidated and a blight on the entire neighborhood, which also brings down adjacent property values. The ones that would be too costly to repair in a timely manner should be bulldozed.

 

[MaggieMae]

kk are you referring to his proposal to destroy urban wastelands?

Yes, much of which could be reused to house homeless with minimal cost. A project was planned here once for such a place, it would have cost less to turn into a homeless shelter than to demolish ... that was until a condo bought it out.

Yeah, I can see that happening--a graffiti-covered, broken-windowed house with a FORECLOSURE sign outside sitting on a nice street in Middle America and the neighbors are going to agree to turning it into a homeless shelter? Surrrrrrre.

 

[MaggieMae]

If the program gets people

1. to buy cars they might otherwise not have purchased, then it stimulates the economy

2. buys more fuel efficient cars? Then it helps to reduce our dependence on petro.

Will it be worth what it costs?

Don't know, but I do know that the two above positive effects are fairly obvious.

No point in using logic, my friend. This is an Obama plan; therefore, it's bad in the minds of our 'conservative' friends.

 

[MaggieMae]

The problem is that people think our government still cares about us, the reality is far from that. They stopped caring when people stopped learning, they realized that since people prefer to be naive they can do whatever they want as long as they keep saying "we just want to help".

The only thing our government cares about is protecting it's investments.

Its own personal investments not anything to do with us

I thought I implied that, but yeah.

I hate to break it to all you new revolutionaries, but you live in the most abundantly prosperous nation on earth because our people are resilient. You would NOT be enjoying even the time you spend playing at politics on your computer if we didn't have a government that attempts to protect and serve its citizens by any number of means. Is it too big? Yes. Is it perfect even when it's smaller? No. As Churchill once said "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." And ours works best.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

GDP isn't an accurate measure of recovery. I think we would be well on our way to recovery had we allowed the market to correct itself. Everything the government has done has simply delayed the inevitable and made it worse in the long run.

AMEN! Our economy has been up and down for a few hundred years, and history has shown that the recovery has taken less time to recover given its' own course than with government intervention. It took WWII for the FDR years to recover. It may take another WW for ours to recover under Osama.

So how would recovery have happened if we simply did nothing and allowed the market to correct itself when "the market" had tanked and needed to start from scratch? Where would "the market" have gotten the finances to correct itself? Maybe it would have happened slowly over ten years or so, but how many businesses, large and small, would have gone completely under in the meantime?

And oh, I shall be sure to remind you guys who think that GDP isn't an accurate measure of recovery (or economics?) the next time the numbers start declining and you start blaming the Democrats.

The recession or bust-period is the correction. That's the time when the market liquidates itself of any bad investments spurred by artificially low credit. Companies will go under and people will lose their jobs, but this has to happen. If you keep propping up a faulty system your busts are going to simply get worse and worse.

Well it was me that said the GDP wasn't an accurate measure and I don't blame the Democrats. I blame the Federal Reserve.