cash for clunkers death videos

[ranger240]

bump... post up more vids of your tax dollars getting spent to save the ozone

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by ranger240

ronmcdon you raise some great points. environmentally, sure theoretical fuel savings are a definite possibility. but whats not to say that drivers who have suddenly lowered their per/mile operating costs wont drive more because they can more easily afford it, you saw the reverse happen last year w/ 4.50 gas.

also, the fundimentals of why this this program was enacted are surely questionable. political motive is always in the politicans best interest first. checkout this acceptance speech on that noble prize winning concept.

Well, even the government in a democracy can do so much to influence consumer behavior.
They can only count on what they can change, which is better fuel economy & reduced emissions.
The process of creating new vehicles itself produces a good deal of pollution,
so it's questionable whether or not the gains truly offset the losses.
Personally, I'm inclined to think the environmental gains were more or less negligible.

However, as an economic stimulus to automakers & dealerships, it was an unquestionable success,
and imo, (agreed with Asianpoopy) it was money better spent than 'bailout' $$$ flushed down the toilet to help Chevy & Chrysler.


Yes, political motives are always present no doubt.
Kinda interesting was how the data for CARS rebate sales (by the US government) were compiled.
Edmunds compiled their data differently, & questioned the political motives as well.
It was obviously set up to look like most of the sales were for US cars,
when in fact Japanese cars were doing better than they were given credit for.
Maybe the US government wanted to give the public the impression that it was also helping out US automakers, idk.

Disagreement

According to an independent evaluation carried out by Edmunds two full-size trucks and a small crossover SUV were among the top ten sellers during the first week of the program, and the Ford Escape crossover SUV was the actual best seller while the Ford Focus ranked in second place according to Edmunds.[43][47] The differences in the ranking are due to differences in the methods used by the government and Edmunds analysts. The government uses the EPA's guidelines that subdivides models according to engine and transmission types, counting such versions as separate vehicles. For example two- and four-wheel drive, and hybrid version are considered as different vehicles, such it is the case of the Ford Escape, which is available in six versions, tallied by the government as six different models. In the other hand, Edmunds uses traditional sales measurements, counting sales by make and model.[43] John McElroy from Autoblog commented, "No one in the history of the auto industry has ever counted sales this way, and it's mighty peculiar why the government would choose to do so. Is there some other agenda at work?"[52] The following is the ranking as of August 6, 2009 according to Edmunds method:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_All..._Rebate_System

Originally Posted by aznpoopy

the problem with subprime lending was super lax lending standards.

the whole reason you need new debt creation/direct stimulus to consumers (which btw, is the only way out of a keyenesian liquidity trap) is because the credit markets are frozen with high lending standards; banks are tight with their money.

in short, the people who actually have the ability to take advantage of the program are going to be people who can qualify for loans under these conditions, and actually need a loan to buy a car.

i.e. the first qualification basically eliminates the super poor; these are not mexican farmhands being sold $500,000 dollar homes here with inane lending. the stimulus is going straight to the middle class.

Agreed with you there.
It's not like the 'Community Reinvestment Act' extends to car loans for the under qualified.
If that were the case, we'd all be scooting around in our GTR's/ZR-1's, etc.
(and having them repo'd 2 months later).

The government may issue the existing rebate(s).
But, it is still the banks still determine whether or not we qualify for car loans after the rebates.
You're essentially just financing approx $4,500 less as a result of CARS rebate.
If anything, it's probably more difficult to get a car loan (as with any other loan) today all things equal.

idk about being a middle class thing.
theoretically, it would really help a lower income person trade in their gas-guzzling junker for $5k Versa/10k Fit, etc.
The offset in gas savings might even reduce overall monthly expenditure even further.
It would cost peanuts to finance something that cheap.
Likewise, I doubt there's anything to stop some rich guy to get a $4,500 discount on a lambo.

[aznpoopy]

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

It was obviously set up to look like most of the sales were for US cars,
when in fact Japanese cars were doing better than they were given credit for.
Maybe the US government wanted to give the public the impression that it was also helping out US automakers, idk.

not sure why the gov thought that would make people mad. rewarding good manufacturers who are actually semi profitable, or solvent at the very least... sounds good to me.

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

idk about being a middle class thing.
theoretically, it would really help a lower income person trade in their gas-guzzling junker for $5k Versa/10k Fit, etc.
The offset in gas savings might even reduce overall monthly expenditure even further.
It would cost peanuts to finance something that cheap.
Likewise, I doubt there's anything to stop some rich guy to get a $4,500 discount on a lambo.

my main rationale for it not helping the rich is basically the requirements on the old junker. iirc you had to own it for a year and have it registered / titled / insured for the same period. that pretty much means you can't go out, buy a $500 pos and trade it in for a cool $4.5k. as a result, i don't think it helped the rich much, since i really doubt rich people owned cars worth under $4500 (and qualify) to begin with. the poor on the other hand, i imagine they might have trouble getting loans to cover the balance. i guess it depends on how poor you have to be to qualify as 'poor.'

[SexPanda]

those videos were... painful.

[ranger240]

Update

Bentley Destroyed in Cash for Clunkers Program

Bentley
A 1997 Bentley Continental R — a car that when new sold for $250,000 — was destroyed in the Cash for Clunkers program, according to data gathered by the federal government and discovered by the Detroit Free Press. Keep in mind that the Bentley’s owner only got a $4,500 credit at best.

This trade-in, obviously, makes absolutely no sense. According to the program’s rules, the vehicle had to be drivable, which means the Bentley was probably worth a lot more than $4,500. As Howard Krimko, a former chairman of a luxury car club, told the blog Wheels, “The seats for the car would be worth more than that.”

What’s even more mystifying is that dealers had the option of buying the car outright. Why wouldn’t they just take the car? The report listed no details on the condition of the car or where it was turned in, so curious parties will be maddened until someone steps forward and identifies the party responsible. Could this trade-in be illegitimate or even made up?

A few other vehicles of note that owners scrapped through the program include a 1997 Aston Martin DB7 Volante (that sold for $135,000 when new) and a 1987 Buick GNX (one of 547 ever built).

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...s-program.html

WOW, just WOW how could people that stupid have the money to afford those cars in the first place?

[ranger240]

Exotic clunkers also got the crunch under program | Detroit Free Press | Freep.com

Beyond car lovers’ grief over why anyone would destroy sweet rides like a 1999 Mercedes C43 AMG, the value of the junked jalopies plays a major role in deciding whether the $3 billion program helped the economy. Two economists at the University of Delaware said Tuesday that assuming the average clunker was worth just $1,000, the costs outweighed all benefits by $1.4 billion. ...Council of Economic Advisors estimated last month that the program saved or created 21,000 jobs and boosted the national economy in the third quarter...

each 'job created' was at a cost of $142,857.1429 tax dollars.. hemmm efficient government spending if there ever was such a thing

The 2008 model year vehicles deemed clunkers ranged from a Scion xD to 10 Mercury Grand Marquis sedans to two copies of special edition F-150 pickups, sporting 450-hp V8s and Chip Foose-designed paint jobs.

[ronmcdon]

I'd personally like to put a bullet through the head of that GNX owner.
You'd have to know at least a little about car appreciation to own something like that to begin with.
Either that, or the owner must have HATED his/her gnx.

About the Aston and the C43,
well let's just say not everyone who had $$$ necessarily is smart in all respects.
I still couldn't imagine the dealer not taking that as a trade-in.
They could make a killing off it, if it were in decent condition.

Give the owner 7k for it, sell it for 20k+

[iHeartTheTouge]

complete list of cars killed with Make, Model, Year, and number of how many

http://www.cars.gov/files/official-i...n-vehicles.pdf

[l2edken]

they say these were reported destroyed but no fuckng way, some dude at that dealership was like oh word bentley going to be destroyed, let it go, those cars i bet were never destroyed... everyone knows what a Bentley is.

[hardest240owner]

Originally Posted by iHeartTheTouge

complete list of cars killed with Make, Model, Year, and number of how many

http://www.cars.gov/files/official-i...n-vehicles.pdf

two 97 s14's ?!?!?!?! what is wrong with people