Cash for Clunkers...

[SteamWake]

Someone please explain this 'program' to me.

If I understand it right if I own a vehical that gets crappy fuel milage the goverment will give me money to trade it in.

The phrase "Good money after bad" comes to mind but lets belay that.

I realize that the idea is to stimulate sales of automobiles.... but by the goverment?

IF I owned a fuel hog first thing I would do is unload it and go buy a ford.

Where did this money come from (never mind I know "we' paid for it).

Why the hell are 'we' paying for Joe Blow who hung on to his Cadillac for 12 years to unload it?

I dont know the whole program doesent make sense to me. In another 2 to 4 years all those 'clunkers' are going to be in the junkyard regardless of goverment incentives.

At best it will be a short spurt on trad ins. A flash in the pan in auto sales "hey look auto sales are up !!!"

I'm sorry it just doesent seem like a good idea to me.

[AVGWarhawk]

I looked into it. My 02 Lincoln qualifies for this program. The car has 93000 miles on the odometer. It runs and looks great. I drive it a total of 15 miles a day. It sit on the driveway Saturdays and Sundays. I went to the government site for CARS and filled in the application to see if my car qualified. It did. After all it is coming up to 8 years old and it has a V8 engine. OK, fine. The program gets old gas guzzlers off the road. Now here is the strange part....go to a new car website and see what new cars you can purchase qualify under this program. I went to the Dodge site and found just about every vehicle qualifies under the program. I selected the Dodge Nitro that is a mid-sized SUV. It gets no better gas mileage than my Lincoln. I suspect the emissions are not any cleaner either. :hmmm: So, really, what is it about? To be honest and as you stated, I believe it is to stimulate car purchasing. Will it pull some really nasty vehicles off the road? Yes, I believe it will. At any rate, just for sh!ts and giggles, I set up an appointment today to test drive the Nitro and see how the deal works. Really, with the incentives offered by the manufacturers and the government is paying $4500.00 also why not take a look? The 2009 Nitro I looked showed a sticker price of $25000.00. The two models the dealer showed online had an incentive of $5000.00 off the sticker price. If I'm thinking correctly here I can take off another $4500.00 from the CARS program. The way I read this is it is taken right off the top at the dealer as if it was a down payment. So, if I'm correct I can purchase a $25000.00 automobile for around $15000.00. Not bad really and it should leave me a 5 year payment of around $300.00/month. I will let you know what happens.

[SteamWake]

The two models the dealer showed online had an incentive of $5000.00 off the sticker price.

Part of that incentive may be the 'gift' from the fed's.

In the meantime I want my money back ;)

[AVGWarhawk]

Part of that incentive may be the 'gift' from the fed's.

In the meantime I want my money back ;)

I had thought perhaps the incentive was part of the government programs however, not all vehicles show a reduction in cost incentives on the site plus it stated 'manufacturer's incentive'. In other words, they have two Nitros left for 2009 and want them off the lot. The only thing websites show ( I went to all of them with exception of imported vehicles) is a small portion dedicated to the CARS program. The program is not a sure thing as not all cars turned in qualify for the program.

As far as money back to you, well, I paid quite a bit in taxes myself since I started paying them at the tender age of 14. I think I'm due back some of my money:O::03:

[AVGWarhawk]

As it turns out, dealer incentive and government incentive are separate. However, the government program works in such a way that it basically forces the buyer into a 4 cylinder type car. Not always a bad thing. So, my Lincoln did qualify for the program but not if I where making a purchase of the Dodge Nitro. If I made the purchase of the 4 cylinder Jeep Liberty 2x4 then I would have qualified. The Nitro is a 4x4 and 6 cylinder. No go. Hmmmmm...I wonder if the Hemi Challenger or Charger would qualify? Nope!

Anyway, the dealer incentive took a $25000.00 truck and reduced it to $20777.00. Not bad I guess.

[SteamWake]

As it turns out, dealer incentive and government incentive are separate. However, the government program works in such a way that it basically forces the buyer into a 4 cylinder type car. Not always a bad thing. So, my Lincoln did qualify for the program but not if I where making a purchase of the Dodge Nitro. If I made the purchase of the 4 cylinder Jeep Liberty 2x4 then I would have qualified. The Nitro is a 4x4 and 6 cylinder. No go. Hmmmmm...I wonder if the Hemi Challenger or Charger would qualify? Nope!

Anyway, the dealer incentive took a $25000.00 truck and reduced it to $20777.00. Not bad I guess.

See thats one of the things that bugs me.

The program is geared to puddle jumpers that pepole just dont want.

Well most pepole that is.

When push comes to shove... "Do you want to keep your big roomy SUV or trade it in on a enconobox" alot of pepole are going to say "are you kidding".

[mookiemookie]

When push comes to shove... "Do you want to keep your big roomy SUV or trade it in on a enconobox" alot of pepole are going to say "are you kidding".

And that is why most of America is retarded. OPEC thanks you.

[Buddahaid]

My "real" clunker, a 1964 VW Beetle would not qualify as it already gets 30MPG and has 4cyl. This whole program is stupid as it doesn't make people buy cars or trucks with any real economy for the benefit. I hope it fails!

Buddahaid

[SteamWake]

Meh... its just a sideshow.

As I said it may generate a quick burst of auto sales to which they can point and say "hey look auto sales are up, things are turning around".

Frankly I find the concept of the federal goverment getting into the used car buisness disturbing.

[SteamWake]

And that is why most of America is retarded. OPEC thanks you.

Retarded ? That may be a bit strong.

OPEC yes indeed they may be thankfull and why?

Because we 'depend' on them for the oil and why?

Because we are hot tied and unable to develop our own resources.

I have to admit when I pull along side a huge duely that has probably hauled nothing more than a bag of groceries I think to myself ... foolish.

But it is their choice.

Personally I like choice.

[AVGWarhawk]

Well, it is two fold gents. It stimulates people to go take a look. That was the first job of the program. It worked on me. I went and had taken a look. Second job is to get gas sucking emissions belching V8's off the road. Does this work? In many cases it can. To get my Lincoln off the road I would have to get a Jeep 4 cylinder 4x2 Liberty. Why? My Lincoln shows 18 miles/gallon average. The Jeep does better. The Nitro I was looking at shows 18 miles/gallon per the government. It was an even trade off. So, no money offered. This did not preclude me looking at V6 cars that get better gas mileage or even 4 cylinder cars that get better gas mileage than my Lincoln. These I would certainly qualify for. Needless to say, there was a waiting list for the Jeep Liberty at this dealership as a result of this program. I saw the list. He has one on the lot that was out getting test driven. People are looking, utilizing the program and are buying.

I guess I just might be retarded because I think I'm trading in my Lincoln for the Dodge Nitro. :har: I'm getting one heck of a deal off the original sticker price. How can I walk away?

http://www.dpccars.com/photos/02-07-06-01-2007DodgeNitro.jpg

[FIREWALL]

I'm going to go out and trade in my Hummer for a new one. :D

[AVGWarhawk]

http://ai.pricegrabber.com/pi/70/04/04/700404774_160.jpg

[FIREWALL]

http://ai.pricegrabber.com/pi/70/04/04/700404774_160.jpg


Just what I was looking for. :haha:

[AVGWarhawk]

Strange program indeed. Yesterday I looked at a Mitsubishi Lancer. My car qualified for $3500.00 with the CARS program. If the car is turned in under this program the car is scrap. The dealer is required to pour a substance in the motor so it will seize and never run again. Not even for parts out of the motor. Completely destroyed. Funny part is, this dealer thinks clunkers are beat up old cars and trucks. Clunkers to the government are old cars and trucks but these vehicles get poor gas mileage and emissions control are poor but the car can look and ride great. Very strange situation because the Mitsubishi dealer said they do not have a good used car inventory. Everything coming in is a beater at best. This is their money maker...used cars :hmmm: At any rate, the sales manager said he would pay for my Lincoln out right at $3500.00 and he would sell it used. It is in good shape even at 93000 miles. So, this part of the program did not get a gas burner off the road but could potentially stimulate a car purchase from me.

[FIREWALL]

If the Government would stick to running the government and do that well and stay out of running other business's which they eventually fail at the USA would be a better place.

[AVGWarhawk]

Thing is SW is this program is working. Yesterday evening 2 very much clunkers were turned in for new 4 cylinder cars. One was a Ford mini van...one of the original really ugly 10 year old+ bastards. I think it was Ford first version of the mini van with V6. It was just beat to death. The next runner up was a Chevy 1500 pickup. That truck was a 1996 model. Just a tired filth belching truck. A lady jumped out and said here is my clunker. She got a 4 cylinder car.

here is the one I'm thinking of getting:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/buyers-guide/2009/mitsubishi/images/09lancer_1-1.jpg

[SteamWake]

Thing is SW is this program is working. Yesterday evening 2 very much clunkers were turned in for new 4 cylinder cars. One was a Ford mini van...one of the original really ugly 10 year old+ bastards. I think it was Ford first version of the mini van with V6. It was just beat to death. The next runner up was a Chevy 1500 pickup. That truck was a 1996 model. Just a tired filth belching truck. A lady jumped out and said here is my clunker. She got a 4 cylinder car.

here is the one I'm thinking of getting:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/buyers-guide/2009/mitsubishi/images/09lancer_1-1.jpg

Well thats all well and good but tell me, how does the federal goverment helping you buy a car stimulate the economy? There basically buying a car that is going to be scrapped.

Again at best it will be a quick 'spurt' in car sales perhaps and then what?

[AVGWarhawk]

True, a quick spurt in sales. In just one week records show 8000 have been turned in. Not so bad. No matter how you cut it, people will need cars sooner or latter. We can not sit on our cars forever because the do not run forever. Eventually, you and I will need a vehicle. It has been that way for a long time. I might not take advantage of this program this time but eventually my Lincoln will pull her last gasp into the intake. Then I will need a new car. So, this has stimulated some to go buy. It does not mean others are not buying without this program. Really, if the truck I was looking at was not over budget for me and I could not use this program for, I would have purchased. It is getting people into the showrooms whether they get the program or not. So, for the 'then what' you asked...people will buy cars eventually. Right now there is some belts getting tight. For others their old cars are breaking down for good.

As far as stimulate the economy...for starters the salesman get his commission and this is his spendable cash. The banks are making loans and this gets money moving. The automakers are selling cars. They keep their doors open.

The thing is the government is going to spend this billion dollars anyway so why get upset over it? Should this billion just be a hand out or should it attempt to do some good for someone such as prespective car buyers who are productive members of society? Lets face it, no job no car loan. These are not bums rolling up to the car dealer and getting another freebie. These are those at put into the systems and just might get something out of it for a change other than a road repaired or the trash picked up on Mondays.

Here is another issue. As soon as you sign for that new vehicle the actual value drops close to half or more. So, are you really making a good deal here by getting around $5000.00 off with incentives and CARS money or is it better to buy used? Most times these vehicles are way below the original cost. For instance, my wife Mountianeer was originally $41000.00. We purchased for $17000.00 with extended warranty. Out the door fully loaded. Power all, DVD player, $1800.00 navigation system/radio. There is no reason for this truck not to run great up to 150000 miles or more. It had 49000 on it when we got it. So, we got a two year old vehicle that cost $41000.00 for $17000.00. Hmmmmm....much better deal in my book.

[Platapus]

The CARS program is voluntary. If you don't want to participate, you don't have to. If you want to participate you can if you follow the rules.

Not a whole lot to get spun up about. :nope:

[AVGWarhawk]

The CARS program is voluntary. If you don't want to participate, you don't have to. If you want to participate you can if you follow the rules.

Not a whole lot to get spun up about. :nope:

Very true. I do not have to particpate. If I was in dire need of a vehicle then hell yeah I would use it. The two vehicles I witnessed getting turned in were so bad it was pitiful. However, these two people fit the bill for the program. These two people had jobs and got loans. It is not like a freebie. They are tax paying workers. Not a hand out by any means. So, these two got a new efficient vehicles with a nice downpayment via the government. The world got less emission added with these new cars. The salesman made a few bucks. The bank moved some money. The automakers keep their doors open. For once, I see this program as productive for those are are productive members of society. The program is very strict in qualifying.

[SteamWake]

The CARS program is voluntary. If you don't want to participate, you don't have to. If you want to participate you can if you follow the rules.

Not a whole lot to get spun up about. :nope:

Well it is MY money after all. I have no choice but to participate.

[FIREWALL]

Such a simple work around.

Go buy a $50.00 clunker. Use it to get the $4500.00 incentive on a 4 banger new car.

Sell your serviceable V-8 car to someone who can't afford payments on top of their other bills and needs a dependable USED car.

[AVGWarhawk]

Such a simple work around.

Go buy a $50.00 clunker. Use it to get the $4500.00 incentive on a 4 banger new car.

Sell your serviceable V-8 car to someone who can't afford payments on top of their other bills and needs a dependable USED car.



No so easy. Needs to run. Needs to have been insured for the past year. Just that alone assures the owner of said clunker is not from a junkyard. This disqualifies quite a few right off the bat. The cut off is either $3500.00 to $4500.00. 18 mpg cars get the $3500.00. 17 mpg or less gets you the $4500.00.

[AVGWarhawk]

Well it is MY money after all. I have no choice but to participate.

SW, it ain't a free hand out. These people have jobs and pay into the system. They have to because no bank give a loan to a jobless individual. Period. It is there money also after all as well. Is there any reason that some of it should not be given back to those that did pay into it? Sure beats just handing over cash to the professional bums supported month after month. That support money usually goes to Lotto, booze and cigarettes. Like I stated a few posts back. The momey would be spent anyway. Nice to see it going to back to those that contributed in this instance.

[CastleBravo]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Congressional officials say the government plans to suspend the popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99P2U9G1&show_article=1

And when the same thing happens with ObamaCare? What then?

[SteamWake]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Congressional officials say the government plans to suspend the popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99P2U9G1&show_article=1

And when the same thing happens with ObamaCare? What then?

Stubbed there toe again did they?

[Aramike]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Congressional officials say the government plans to suspend the popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99P2U9G1&show_article=1

And when the same thing happens with ObamaCare? What then?Hmm, let's dangle a bunch of "free" money out there and see if people actually take it...

:doh:

[AVGWarhawk]

Stubbed there toe again did they?

How so?

[FIREWALL]

Just saw this on the morn news. The newscaster reported that the 1 billion $ got used up in 4 days but Obama said he would find more money to keep the program going.

[SteamWake]

How so?

Unintended consiquences... it seems like they just dont think things through.

"Find more money" in other words "Hey China would you like a little more leverage?"

[AVGWarhawk]

Unintended consiquences... it seems like they just dont think things through.

"Find more money" in other words "Hey China would you like a little more leverage?"

Well, it begs the question....how will health care under the Obama admin run? :hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

Just saw this on the morn news. The newscaster reported that the 1 billion $ got used up in 4 days but Obama said he would find more money to keep the program going.

I read this also. For energy independence it needs to start somewhere. From what I understand they will need 4 billion to get 1 million guzzlers off the road. I think the rules will get tighter if more money is alotted. In other words, the real dogs that get 10 mpg or less according to the goverment. We will see.

[SteamWake]

Well, it begs the question....how will health care under the Obama admin run? :hmmm:

If they cant find enough 'cash' to pay for some used cars how in the hell are they going to finance health care. :doh:

[AVGWarhawk]

If they cant find enough 'cash' to pay for some used cars how in the hell are they going to finance health care. :doh:

Exactly my friend:03:

[Tchocky]

Well, the situations are exactly the same, so....yeah

[AVGWarhawk]

Well, the situations are exactly the same, so....yeah

In a sense, yes, but on a lesser scale. Imagine the flood gates opened for healthcare without a real plan or idea how it will be initiated. Much like this plan. The healthcare plan will be 10 fold worse. I think that is evident after witnessing this program. But yeah, you keep the faith.

[Tchocky]

Much like this plan.

There isn't a healthcare plan at the minute, there are several competing bills trying to get through committee.

[FIREWALL]

With no LOOT !!!

Obama's healthcare plan will get the BOOT !!! :haha:

[SteamWake]

LOL a caller on Glen Beck had a hilarous line...

Obama Care = "Cash for Cripples" :rotfl::har:

[AVGWarhawk]

There isn't a healthcare plan at the minute, there are several competing bills trying to get through committee.

Look Tchocky, the idea behind my statement is this program is apparently not initiated correctly. Either they hoped for the best and or did not realize the turnout would be so great. Probably both. Whatever the case, the healthcare program will be run the same way....if and when it comes to pass. Furthermore, there is a healthcare plan....my old parents call it medicare and medicade....both are run poorly at best. What, a universal healthcare plan will correct all the problems with the current system? Highly unlikely. :03:

[AVGWarhawk]

2 billion added to the program


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/31/democrats-house-plans-pass-billion-boost-cash-clunkers-program/

[SteamWake]

2 billion added to the program


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/31/democrats-house-plans-pass-billion-boost-cash-clunkers-program/

That should last at least another couple of days :doh:

[AVGWarhawk]

That should last at least another couple of days :doh:

Now that the word is out. They named this program incorrectly. Clunkers was a poor choice of word. When you say clunker people invision something the Beverly Hill Billies drive. What the government meant was gas guzzlers as clunkers. People are rolling up in old beat up 4 cylinder cars. Does not matter if they get poor gas mileage because of poor maintence. If the government says your 4 cylinder does 25 mpg then that is what it does no matter what condition it is. It should have been called gas guzzlers program or something to that effect. Hell, my wife's aunt is thinking of turning in her beat up old POS of a Dodge that is a 4 cylinder. Sorry, goverment says it does 24 mpg. They do not care that it is completely beat to death and has not been washed since 2003. It does not qualify.

[em2nought]

My 1999 Dodge Caravan misses being a clunker by one mpg according to the gooberment. Too bad, I'd trade for something like a Yaris.

[SteamWake]

Now that the word is out. They named this program incorrectly. Clunkers was a poor choice of word. When you say clunker people invision something the Beverly Hill Billies drive. What the government meant was gas guzzlers as clunkers. People are rolling up in old beat up 4 cylinder cars. Does not matter if they get poor gas mileage because of poor maintence. If the government says your 4 cylinder does 25 mpg then that is what it does no matter what condition it is. It should have been called gas guzzlers program or something to that effect. Hell, my wife's aunt is thinking of turning in her beat up old POS of a Dodge that is a 4 cylinder. Sorry, goverment says it does 24 mpg. They do not care that it is completely beat to death and has not been washed since 2003. It does not qualify.

But "Cash for Clunkers" is so catchy and the current administration is all about catchy phrases. You know "yes we can" and "Change" and all that.

I own two cars neither of which qualify I checked.

[Platapus]

Always amusing when Republicans are suddenly "Fiscally conservative" on bills they don't like (aka democratic introduced bills), but spend like drunken sailors on bills they do like (aka republican introduced bills). :nope:

More political kabuki dancing. The only thing that changes is the band. :nope:

Frankly I am getting tired of the tune. :damn:

I don't think there are any fiscal conservatives in congress. A dying breed.

[AVGWarhawk]

But "Cash for Clunkers" is so catchy and the current administration is all about catchy phrases. You know "yes we can" and "Change" and all that.

I own two cars neither of which qualify I checked.

It is catchy but it is catching the wrong cars and they are turned away.

[SmithN23]

Be careful about going to the cars.gov website. Apparently the government owns your computer when you log on.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8

[Platapus]

Well if Glen Beck from Fox News says it is true, it must be. That is one reliable source we can all rely on.

[Thomen]

http://www.cars.gov/files/user-guide/CARS_Quick_Guide_To_Registration.pdf

(Adobe Reader)Page 19

[SteamWake]

Well if Glen Beck from Fox News says it is true, it must be. That is one reliable source we can all rely on.

I know 'Kim' is hot :yeah:

But good god did you read that disclosure "Authrozied Agents" WTF does that mean. :o

I think this warning should be stickied with BIG BOLD font.

Good lord.

[SteamWake]

Well it looks like the cars.gov have removed that scary warning...

Anyhow heres an article regarding the relative enviromental impact of the 'cash for clunkers' program. It expresses some of my inital reactions to the whole thing.

But some environmental and national security watchdogs are now arguing that the harm caused by destroying the used vehicles -- required by the government trade-in program -- may outweigh the benefits of exchanging pollution-spewing gas guzzlers for new, more efficient cars.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/04/clunkers-programs-environmental-impact-debate/?test=latestnews

[AVGWarhawk]

Christ.........ya just can't win sometimes. Someone is always pissing and moaning about this and that. The crap is eventually going to be scrap sooner or later. Might as well be sooner in this case. :doh:

[FIREWALL]

The bottom line is..... Aw Who Cares. :haha::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[AVGWarhawk]

Has PETA chimed in yet? Perhaps there are coach roaches in some of the cars being turned in that might get it under the auto-crusher.

[SteamWake]

We discussed briefly the goverment take over of your computer and their later retraction of the scary language.

Now this pops up on the wire...


The White House's senior aide on cybersecurity has decided to resign following delays in the appointment of a coordinator to spearhead the government's efforts to protect the nation's computer networks.

Melissa E. Hathaway, who also served as a cybersecurity aide during the Bush administration, had been a contender for the position of cybersecurity coordinator. But in an interview Monday, she said she had withdrawn her application.

"I wasn't willing to continue to wait any longer, because I'm not empowered right now to continue to drive the change," she said. "I've concluded that I can do more now from a different role," most likely in the private sector.


Aside from the point of another goverment agency being run poorly I cant help but believe these two storys may be related.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/03/AR2009080302697_pf.html

[FIREWALL]

And I saw a butterfly today and......:yawn:

[SteamWake]

And I saw a butterfly today and......:yawn:

You stepped on it and crushed it. Its guts got into the water system causing a pandemic and wipes out the human race.

Whats your point?

[FIREWALL]

Trade in your gas Hog for this : http://www.scootcoupe.com/

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[SteamWake]

Or how about a nice

2009 HUMMER H3T3.7L 5cyl 5M 4WDCategory 2 Truck

Yes it qualifies ! :o

http://www.edmunds.com/cash-for-clunkers/new-car-candidates.html#h

[FIREWALL]

Hummer gets in a head on with Scoot Coupe.

And the winner is.....:rotfl:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://www.ocpaddler.com/files/SmartCar.jpg

[FIREWALL]

http://www.ocpaddler.com/files/SmartCar.jpg

Poor Mans R.V. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[VipertheSniper]

Trade in your gas Hog for this : http://www.scootcoupe.com/

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

The slogan alone is enough to make me vomit, the road is no playground. You know we got such vehicles here too, they go a measly 45/50 km/h and you don't need a driving license for them. Not even theory lessons are required (although I think that has changed, there was at least talk about mandatory theory lessons, effectively requiring a moped license to drive these), I tell you those people driving these "things" are a danger to themselves and everyone else on the road.

[SteamWake]

The slogan alone is enough to make me vomit, the road is no playground. You know we got such vehicles here too, they go a measly 45/50 km/h and you don't need a driving license for them. Not even theory lessons are required (although I think that has changed, there was at least talk about mandatory theory lessons, effectively requiring a moped license to drive these), I tell you those people driving these "things" are a danger to themselves and everyone else on the road.

Got to ask ... what the heck is a 'theory lesson' ?

[Thomen]

Got to ask ... what the heck is a 'theory lesson' ?

The class room part of the Drivers Ed.

[Captain Vlad]

The car we're buying was surprisingly fuel efficient given what it has under the hood. Our old Pontiac we're looking to get rid of almost qualified. If only it'd been slightly less efficient!:DL

If this gets more SUVs off the road, good. I hate the things, mostly from a taste perspective.

[SteamWake]

The class room part of the Drivers Ed.

LOL my 'classroom' part of drivers ed consisted of movies like "Blood on the streets" and "hesitate decapitate". :rotfl:

No seriously a guy would walk in put a grisly tape in say something like "Take Notes' and walk back out. Half hour later class over.

I wish I still had those notes.. "Hey the Redheaded Mom is kinda hot.... till she punched her face through the windscreen" :doh:

[Thomen]

LOL my 'classroom' part of drivers ed consisted of movies like "Blood on the streets" and "hesitate decapitate". :rotfl:

No seriously a guy would walk in put a grisly tape in say something like "Take Notes' and walk back out. Half hour later class over.

I wish I still had those notes.. "Hey the Redheaded Mom is kinda hot.... till she punched her face through the windscreen" :doh:

lol yea
But rules and regulations are somewhat stricter in Germany. When I got my license i had to sit for weeks, twice a week for a couple of hours in a damn class room at the driving school.

Imagine my amusement when I took my drivers test here in the states after I relocated. lol
Frikken damn joke that whole thing.

[SteamWake]

Hummer gets in a head on with Scoot Coupe.

And the winner is.....:rotfl:


http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh312/UlteriorModem/smartcarcrash.jpg

:o

[SteamWake]

The government's results showed small cars as the top choice for shoppers looking for Cash for Clunker deals. But an independent analysis by Edmunds.com disputed those results, and showed that two full-size trucks and a small crossover SUV were actually among the top-ten buys.


:rotfl::rotfl:

So Edmunds has better accounting that the Fed's go figure !

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/07/autos/cash_for_clunkers_sales/index.htm?cnn=yes

Oh yea.... go Ford !

[FIREWALL]

The Fed's figures are always right. IF you don't count, This, That or the other thing like they do. :haha:

[AVGWarhawk]

:rotfl::rotfl:

So Edmunds has better accounting that the Fed's go figure !

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/07/autos/cash_for_clunkers_sales/index.htm?cnn=yes

Oh yea.... go Ford !

Yes, that is Edmunds business. Watching trends and test driving the cars available. The SUV they speak of is the 4 cylinder models or the hybrids. A dealer was attempting to get me to buy a 4 cylinder Jeep Liberty and my car qualifed for this new SUV. It is all about what gas your current vehicle sucks up and what the new vehicle does for average gas mileage.

[FIREWALL]

My Hummer gets 6-8 mpg depending how rude I drive it. 10 if there's alot of downhill coasting.

I love the way it looks and drives and don't have to worry about mpg.

Unless somebody pisses off the Arabs, I got plenty of gas to burn. :haha:

[donut]

DO NOT, EVER, EVER, go to cars.gov (http://cars.gov/) until you watch this video from FOX news. This is the scariest takeover of our lives the government has ever tried. The Obama "Car Czar" is at work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8)

[AVGWarhawk]

Hmmmm.......been to that site a few times. Did not experience computer take over on my desk top at home or work :hmmm:

[CastleBravo]

Hmmmm.......been to that site a few times. Did not experience computer take over on my desk top at home or work :hmmm:

So you didn't see it.........must not have happened then.??:woot:

But if you give the White House information regarding anti-healthcare info that isn't recorded either, even though the laws require all correspondence with the white house be saved. Something isn't quite right...is it?

[Thomen]

Hmmmm.......been to that site a few times. Did not experience computer take over on my desk top at home or work :hmmm:

It will effect dealers, since they have to register and log into the system. See post #51 for a link to the registration guide, which shows the disclaimer they are talking about on page 19, 20 and 21, AFAIR.

[SteamWake]

DO NOT, EVER, EVER, go to cars.gov (http://cars.gov/) until you watch this video from FOX news. This is the scariest takeover of our lives the government has ever tried. The Obama "Car Czar" is at work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8)

This has been er... taken down since the public outcry.

There still feeding you cookies so toss your cookies now and then ;)

[AVGWarhawk]

So, there I was contemplating this CARS program and I was really looking for a new set of wheels. I was not ready to give up V8 power and the CARS program kind of forces you into a 4 cylinder. So, I opted for the VW Passat 2.0 Turbo rated at 200 horses.

http://www.volkswagen.de/vwcms_publish/etc/medialib/vwcms/showroom2/Deutschland/modelle/passat/passat_limousine/gallery_popup.Par.0002.Image.jpg

One problem....drove it home and a wire harness melted on the head. WTF over? Now it gets towed back to the dealer for warranty repair. Hmmmm...glad I got the extended certified warranty. **** it, take it back. But really, I only drove the thing 10 miles. German engineering? :shifty:

[Zachstar]

Nope. Its just a random event that happens in cars. Just like sometimes your new computer boots a few times then fries randomly.

[AVGWarhawk]

Nope. Its just a random event that happens in cars. Just like sometimes your new computer boots a few times then fries randomly.

New computers do not catch on fire while your kids are in the back seat nor do they leave you on the side of the road looking like a very expensive paperweight. No comparison mate. Electronics burn out or short out sure. Catching fire they should not do, specifically in a vehicle. Under my consumer protection/rights the vehicle is being returned.

[SteamWake]

Could have warned you about VW's couple of guys at work had / have some.

When there running okay there a blast to drive but when they break down break out the pocketbook.

Oh and whatever you do do NOT lose the key to that thing. A new one will run you in the hundreds of dollars :o

[AVGWarhawk]

I warrantied the thing to the hilt. Attempting mechanical technical jargon does not work with me. I was a ASE certified technician. Cert ran out but I still know how they work and the theory behind emissions control. So, if my pre-frontal orbital illuminator goes out and the dealer says it cost $150.00 and can go get the part commonly known as a headlight for around $20.00. It is not so much the fact of expensive repairs at all. All repairs on vehicles are expensive. Some a bit more and some a bit less. It is the amount of times you have to go in for repairs that makes the difference. If I'm becoming good buddies with the service manager then there is a problem. Reading some reviews some are completely horrified by the car. Others would sell their kids before they see it go. Same as most cars. Hell, I purchased a new 88 Monte Carlo back in the day. What a piece of crap since day one. It was the safest car on the road because it was always in the shop. I would never buy another GM product again. Some swear by them until their last dying breath. Thanks for the tip thought!

[Tribesman]

DO NOT, EVER, EVER, go to cars.gov (http://cars.gov/) until you watch this video from FOX news. This is the scariest takeover of our lives the government has ever tried. The Obama "Car Czar" is at work.

Another conspiracy theory wingnut chain mail.
I can't believe people actually swallowed that tripe from Beck.

[SteamWake]

Okay so Beck is full of tripe we get it. Even though it was valid concearns the fact it was a "nut job mass mailing" it should be overlooked.

Anyhow moving on... Now the dealers are NOT getting re-imbursed by the feds as promised.


The general manager at Toyota of Bowie said the dealership stopped participating earlier this week because it cannot afford to advance the money for more rebates while waiting on the government to pay. And about half of the 425 members in the Greater New York Automobile Dealers Association have also left the program, according to the group's president.

"We're sitting with $1 million out," said Jim Bee, general manager of the Toyota of Bowie dealership. He said he has taken in between 150 and 160 clunkers and has not been paid a dime from the government.


Yea... great... and they want to run our health care ?:oops:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/19/AR2009081903929.html?hpid=sec-business

[Thomen]

I just heard that the Cash for Clunkers program will end on Monday.

[Platapus]

Well the dealers should know that the government won't send any money until the destruction facility sends in the paperwork.

The dealer is just the first step in the process.

You think that the government will be sending money just because a car salesman "says" they have turned in a car? :har::har:

[CastleBravo]

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has announced that the “cash for clunkers” program will end on Monday at 8 p.m., reports Reuters, one month after the government-funded trade-in program got off the ground.


In the days leading up to Thursday’s announcement, dealers and dealer groups said that uncertainties about the program’s ultimate conclusion were creating financial hardships and confusion.

Yet another gov't program that is all f>ck3d- up. And you want them involved in your health? CRAZY!!!

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/cash-for-clunkers-to-end-monday/

[Platapus]

I don't agree. It sounds like the CARS program accomplished its objectives and has been run according to the rules.

There are several things I like about the way the CARS program was run

1. Fixed duration. Stimulus programs need to be of a fixed duration. Far too many government stimulus programs have no end. I don't think the government should have extended the CARS program.

2. Participation completely under the control of the citizens. This alone made the CARS program worth studying.

3. Government pays last. Too many stimulus programs have the government (taxpayers) front funding the program in hopes that in the future "something" good might happen. In CARS, the government only pays after the citizen chooses to participate in the program. I like programs where the government spends my money last.

4. Reasonable terms. It is not like the CARS program only applies to hybrids getting 40+ mpg. There was a wide range of cars and an even wider selection of trucks that the citizen could choose from. I would have preferred the program to be limited to US manufactures but there are a lot of "foreign" cars made here in the US also. Freedom of choice. Freedom to choose whether to participate in the program. Freedom to choose, from a pretty sizable group, the car or truck you want.

There were people bitchin about how CARS allowed people to buy new cars that got "only" 22mpg. To some this is a problem, to me this means freedom to choose. Different ways of looking at the same coin. Honestly, if I had a car that was paid off and got 18 MPG, I would not trade it in for a car that got 22MPG. And evidently few citizens choose to, but choose to select a car with higher than the minimum. In any program government or commercial, there are maximums and minimum limits. I believe the CARS limits were reasonable and a good start.

I feel that people can legitimately question the overall goals of the CARS program. I am not a big fan of it, but once those goals are accepted, I feel that the CARS program can serve as a good benchmark for how future stimulus programs should be run.

CARS is a lot better than just giving cubic-buttloads of money to your banking friends with no limitations or accountability.:nope:

[FIREWALL]

Some of those Clunkers look better than some of the cars I see on the road.

And probably Safer. :O:

[Platapus]

I never liked the term "clunkers" I guess it was more important to have alliteration than accuracy.

Such is politics, gotta have a cooleo name for your program. :03:

[FIREWALL]

I never liked the term "clunkers" I guess it was more important to have alliteration than accuracy.

Such is politics, gotta have a cooleo name for your program. :03:


Look where the idea came from. :har:

[Platapus]

Came from congress. :har:

[FIREWALL]

Came from congress. :har:

If that bunch ain't a pile of clunkers I don't know what is. :haha:

[Platapus]

Cash for Clunker Congresshumans?

I like it!!:yeah:

States and districts can trade in their old congresshuman for a new one. There will be a proviso that the traded in congresshuman can never be used for any political office ever again.

The new congresshuman must have an IQ at least 30 points higher than the old congresshuman (can't be all that hard)

THIS COULD WORK!!

[SteamWake]

Well that went well... :har:

Way to think things through Washington :doh:


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Japanese and South Korean automakers registered the biggest market share gains in the U.S. government's "cash for clunkers" program that ended this week with bankruptcy related inventory shortages hurting General Motors Co GM.UL and Chrysler.


http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Autos/idUSTRE57P5C220090826

[KG_Jag]

So here's the plan. We'll take money from about 40% of the people (those who pay income tax) and then give $3,500 to $4,500 to anyone who wants to buy a specific sub-type of product in a very limited window. What we can't get from the 40%, we'll borrow from China.

Most of the eligible products will be made by foreign companies and even some of those from "domestic" companies will have less than 50% North American content (Canada is just like the U.S. anyway--except none of its citizens is paying for this program).

We will then take the many perfectly good vehicles (some of which get 18 mpg) and destroy them!

The saddest truth of all is that this is one of the best initiatives of the so-called stimulus package.

Disclosure: being no fool and also being the owner of a perfectly good (at least for the moment) 15 year old 17 mpg vehicle, I took the "free" (except for the part I paid in taxes) money.

Can't wait until the cash for appliances initiative coming this fall, as I have a 27 + year old refrigerator.

[AVGWarhawk]

KG, it was and is a good idea however the name of the program and what qualifed a car were screwy to be honest. First, it should not have been call clunkers. Say clunkers and people think any old car is a clunker because it is old and beat up. Not the case for the program. It should have been called 'gas guzzlers'. The program went off what the government rated each vehicles MPG averaged between city and highway. Then, if your car qualified first as a guzzler you then had to qualify for the new car as improved mpg. In short, an 18 mpg car could not be turned in for another new 18 mpg car. Basically, you are getting a 4 cylinder car. Save gas, save the planet, save a auto maker. At any rate, the government could not exclude all car manufacturers from the deal. The world would be up in arms and screaming isolationism. The American automakers accounted for 38% of the sales. The major Asian automakers accounted for 41%. The rest were 'other'. It did stimulate car sales. It did get some gas guzzlers off the road. Is a flash in the pan? I think so.

[CastleBravo]

I've been told now a cash for appliances is in effect. Let's destroy more assets.

[Tribesman]

I've been told now a cash for appliances is in effect. Let's destroy more assets.
I thought that wasn't starting for another couple of weeks.
Then again the $8000 for a new home is running out in december so you had better get on that deal, though of course a republican being a careful carer of tax money has proposed to extend that for another year and increase it to $15000.

[SteamWake]

No way.. you guys are joking right?

[Tribesman]

No way.. you guys are joking right?
No, in an effort to encourage people to reduce their power consumption there will be a short term discount for people buying white goods with a decent energy efficiency rating. The other option would be just to make electricity more expensive with tax to encourage people to use less.
Oh and the push to increase the $8000 to $15000 and extend it for another year past dec.1 comes from a Republican down Georgia way.

[AVGWarhawk]

I've been told now a cash for appliances is in effect. Let's destroy more assets.

Yep, that is just around the bend.

[SteamWake]

No, in an effort to encourage people to reduce their power consumption there will be a short term discount for people buying white goods with a decent energy efficiency rating. The other option would be just to make electricity more expensive with tax to encourage people to use less.
Oh and the push to increase the $8000 to $15000 and extend it for another year past dec.1 comes from a Republican down Georgia way.


When will they realize that increasing taxes on goods ultimatly results in less revenue.

We have seen it time and time again. You know the definition of insanity and all that.

I have heard estimates of up to 90% increase in utility bills possible due to fuel costs and cap and trade.

I can see a big future in generator sales :haha:

[Tribesman]

I can see a big future in generator sales
Which will avoid the tax on fuel how exactly?

[AVGWarhawk]

BTW and I'm not sure if this is true... I understand the money the government give towards the new car purchase is considered income and taxable. Anyone hear this?

[SteamWake]

Which will avoid the tax on fuel how exactly?

If they raise utility rates by 90% it will be cheaper to get your own fuel and generate your own electicity. Yes the fuel costs will rais with cap and tax but there wont be all those lame ass 'carbon credits' fees.

[SteamWake]

BTW and I'm not sure if this is true... I understand the money the government give towards the new car purchase is considered income and taxable. Anyone hear this?

No but it makes perfect sense to me.

[Tribesman]

BTW and I'm not sure if this is true... I understand the money the government give towards the new car purchase is considered income and taxable. Anyone hear this?
Yes I heard it , it isn't true. It expressly says in the Act that the credit for customers shall not be considered as income or be taxable by the federal government as such, though some states will include the whole price of the purchase including that which the credit covers as a state sales tax and some locations also have their own local sales tax as well as the State sales tax so if you are in one of those places you pay that too .

The important question though is ...if you are buying a new vehicle and are able to usually claim the cost as a tax write off can you this time round claim the credit as a write off as well as your own money?

[AVGWarhawk]

The important question though is ...if you are buying a new vehicle and are able to usually claim the cost as a tax write off can you this time round claim the credit as a write off as well as your own money?

Well, I read through the tax code and to be quite honest...who the hell knows. Even the authors of the tax code do not have a clue. But, I have not seen anyone write off the cost of car on taxes. Perhaps 25 years ago I remember my dad writing it off as a business expense like suits and shoes were written off as business expenses. Not anymore though. :hmmm:

[Platapus]

BTW and I'm not sure if this is true... I understand the money the government give towards the new car purchase is considered income and taxable. Anyone hear this?

Well you could always go to WWWcars.gov and find out instead of asking on an internet forum. :)

It is in the FAQ. :|\\

Always better to get the information from the source whenever possible

[SteamWake]

Well you could always go to WWWcars.gov and find out

I'm scared of that place. :cool:

[KG_Jag]

KG, it was and is a good idea however the name of the program and what qualifed a car were screwy to be honest. First, it should not have been call clunkers. Say clunkers and people think any old car is a clunker because it is old and beat up. Not the case for the program. It should have been called 'gas guzzlers'. The program went off what the government rated each vehicles MPG averaged between city and highway. Then, if your car qualified first as a guzzler you then had to qualify for the new car as improved mpg. In short, an 18 mpg car could not be turned in for another new 18 mpg car. Basically, you are getting a 4 cylinder car. Save gas, save the planet, save a auto maker. At any rate, the government could not exclude all car manufacturers from the deal. The world would be up in arms and screaming isolationism. The American automakers accounted for 38% of the sales. The major Asian automakers accounted for 41%. The rest were 'other'. It did stimulate car sales. It did get some gas guzzlers off the road. Is a flash in the pan? I think so.

Here in the (often snowy) western mountains, a 4WD vehicle that will haul passengers and/or a trailer and do it with V-6 stick, like the one I traded in as a "clunker", is a valuable and reasonable vehicle that someone else could have and should have used.

This program cost the taxpayers a great deal of money and did almost nothing with regard to the mpg of the total vehicles in the U.S. How much environmental damage, much of which is both unecessary and wasteful, will be done junking and all the "clunkers"? Thanks to those of you who fronted me 20% to 25% of my new vehicle with your hard earned tax dollars (or should I thank China for lending the money?).

More importantly it is more dangerous political social engineering based on political issues and interest groups. How much have the taxpayers' already spent baling out the auto companies? They are about the last group who should get even more taxpayer subsidies. The federal government has no business subsidizing businesses and picking winners and losers--those favored and those not favored by politicians. Moreover they do an awful job when they try--as they did here.

This program, which you call a success, most benefited (adopting your own numbers--which are probably low because not all the clunker transactions have been processed and accounted for)--foreign auto companies. The feds wanted it to benefit the two U.S. auto companies they just "invested" our tax money in and the powerful best paid union workers in the industry (key interest group) and the rust belt (votes). But the foreign auto companies have most of their plants in the south (for those models even built domestically). These foreign owned plants feature fewer union workers and workers who are less well paid and who receive fewer benefit dollars than say a GM worker in Detroit.

Further--have you taken a close look at the domestic content informations on the stickers of many classic U.S. brand vehicles lately? I found one where almost all the car was made in Mexico. I have seen others with only 40% to 60% North American content--which includes more than the U.S.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

What exactly constitutes an "econobox" in America?

[SteamWake]

What exactly constitutes an "econobox" in America?

Prius (http://automobiles.honda.com/insight-hybrid/?ef_id=1097:3:s_387ab2c5ed6a71ec85a21a305365c728_3 269050964:SpifM9BkAk8AAHym8n0AAACA:20090829032331)

Please dont let the mind hive speak disturb you... well it did me.

[SteamWake]

Dealers still waiting for re-imbursement.

http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm?Id=89419

Now Im hearing storys of people whom got a car through this program are unable to drive them as the dealer will not issue a title untill they get re-imbursed. No title, no tag.

So they traded in their old car which was their trasportation, got a new car, which they cant drive.

Think of the enviromental savings though went from high emissions to zero :D

[Tribesman]

Now Im hearing storys of people whom got a car through this program are unable to drive them as the dealer will not issue a title untill they get re-imbursed. No title, no tag.
In which case the dealers are breaking the law if the story you hear is true (it isn't another story via chain e-mail is it?)
They entered a deal with the customer and a deal with the government , both can sue the dealer for breach of contract.

[SteamWake]

Honestly its heresay. I dont get chain emails but I did find this.

http://answers.edmunds.com/question-Cash-Clunkers-No-title-Can-I-turn-form-I-paid-lien-instead-66686.aspx

[Tribesman]

Honestly its heresay. I dont get chain emails but I did find this.

Ah thats different , thats selling a car that you don't yet own or selling a car that you cannot prove you own

[SteamWake]

Still the program as a whole is just another abject failure.

A cheap party trick at best.

[KG_Jag]

From an AP story by Martin Crutsinger that appeared in yesterday's newspaper.

Headline: Post-Clunkers slump in auto sales offsets retail's gains in September.

From the article: "Retail sales declined in September by the largest amount this years as car sales plummeted after the end of the government's Cash for Clunkers rebate program."

"Car sales plunged 10.4 percent,..."

[AVGWarhawk]

From an AP story by Martin Crutsinger that appeared in yesterday's newspaper.

Headline: Post-Clunkers slump in auto sales offsets retail's gains in September.

From the article: "Retail sales declined in September by the largest amount this years as car sales plummeted after the end of the government's Cash for Clunkers rebate program."

"Car sales plunged 10.4 percent,..."

Kind of knew that would happen. It is like getting the care makers some business and in the meantime (overnight :doh:) the economy turns around and all is well. Basically, just carried the automakers another month until it gets better. Problem is they can only be carried for so long before doors are shut. The economy is improving somewhat and it is just a hope that the automakers can keep going.

[Platapus]

The question is: Did more people buy automobiles under the CARS program than would have normally purchased automobiles without the CARS program?

Unfortunately, that would be difficult to answer accurately as there are many external factors that would affect the answer.

[AVGWarhawk]

Perhaps not. There should be a running record of how each was sold and under the CARS program or not. I did not use the CARS program and purchased a new vehicle. I would venture to guess each automaker made records.