 |
 |
||
|
|
|
 Hold On to Your Clunkers, the Cash Is ComingPosted on Aug 5, 2009
The Senate is finally getting around to approving more money for the wildly successful “cash for clunkers” program, which seems to have saved the auto industry from the forces of recession and bankruptcy. With an additional $2 billion on the way, the administration hopes to transform 500,000 more clunkers into cleaner, smaller, more efficient vehicles.
Advertisement Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
Wall Street Wants a Refund
Email
Print
Share
Digg
Facebook
TwitThis
StumbleUpon
Reddit
YahooBuzz
Email
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MyShare
NewsVine
Propeller
SphereIt
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
Become a Fan
Follow Us
Subscribe
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation
Copyright © 2010 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
By william, September 13, 2009 at 11:15 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
As a result of the governments various schemes my little family of three is now $90,000 deeper in debt, Borrowed in our name by the federal government.Thats on top of the taxes that Iv’e already paid. I don’t mind doing my part but I feel that Iv’e not benifited at all from any of these targeted programs. The only debt I have is a mortgage for a house, the value of wich has dropped in large part because of another targeted scheme, that bush and john mcain tried to warn barney frank about back in 2001 and the demacrats loved, the communty reinvestment act. In my opinion all these stimulus plans do is take money from hard working,tax payers and give it to select groups. I doubt that each of the clunkers cost the tax payers only $4,500 and most of that went to japanese auto makers. Of course the program was popular, but, is that a good reason to believe it was a success? Successful for whom? Was it realy a very good deal for those of us who can’t afford a new car even at 25% off? I think not, given that every dollar they print makes the dollars that I do have in my pocket worth less. It’s all debt, and the borrower is a slave to the lender. we’re all going to be paying for these targeted scemes for a long time.
Report thisBy Bob, August 6, 2009 at 4:42 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I wish someone would explain why clunkers built before 1984 do not qualify. It would make more sense to get rid of the oldest and most polluting cars first. This program is destroying
Report thiscars that are many years newer than the highest polluting vehicles which had little or no smog equipment on them.
It makes no sense.
By bogi666, August 6, 2009 at 3:52 pm #
I meant 10,000,000 million cars, not 10 billion on my comment at 6:48 am.
Report thisBy rfidler, August 6, 2009 at 2:13 pm #
Fat Freddy: “I think it sets up a pretty good model for stimulating the economy in a targeted, cost effective way.”
Ah, but therein lies the rub: “Targeted”. Is it a good idea for the government to be picking and choosing targets? Why not plasma TVs, why not preventive medical exams?
Report thisBy Thomas Molitor, August 6, 2009 at 12:47 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Check out this link to an article on “Cash for Drunkards” program: http://www.dukecityfix.com/profiles/blogs/cash-for-drunkards
Report thisBy bogi666, August 6, 2009 at 8:48 am #
As usual Congress has it ass backward. 1st the $40,000,000,000 billion bailout before bankruptcy so that the corruption that goes with bankruptcy is ensured. Had this $40,000,000,000 billion gone to the “cash for clunkers” some 10,000,000 billion cars for consumers would result, along with cleaner air. There is less corruption involved, however, for the business and political communities. The proper way to provide an effective and efficient stimulus is to stimulate consumers which in turn draws the resources needed all the way through the production and marketing systems. Also, the 10,000,000 cars would stimulate lending as the cars would likely require financing.
Report thisBy Mike789, August 6, 2009 at 7:40 am #
Naturally the clunker program is a success. 25% off is quite an incentive. I believe they’d have gotten the same result for a couple of G’s.
Report thisBy Fat Freddy, August 6, 2009 at 7:03 am #
Ya know… Back when the hearings and debates were going on about the bail out money for Chrysler and GM, Republicans said “these manufacturers need to sell more cars”. Well , now that the government has actually created a program, however accidental, that actually sells cars, well, here’s what the Republicans have to say:
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) is the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25833.html
There’s just no pleasing some people. I can sit here and argue each of his “points”, but at the end of the day, the program helps manufacturers, helps small business dealerships, and helps the environment, now. The plan is not without its faults, mainly because it was not intended to do what it has done. But I think it sets up a pretty good model for stimulating the economy in a targeted, cost effective way.
See also:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/08/july_auto_sales_us_makers_up_f.html
Report this