Cash for Clunkers

[genlock]

Dealers up the price on applicable models.
You show up with clunker and desire.
You make deal of a lifetime.
Chrysler has $4500 cash for clunkers plus $4500 off.
You get new car, It's a Chrysler product.
You paid cash for a clunker.
Dealers profit. Unions profit.
Taxpayers lose.

[Jet Black]

We'll spend more money this week in Iraq than we spend on entire Clunkers program.
We sure don't want anybody buying new cars.
Or using less gas.
Or injecting money into the economy.
No good will come of that!

How about beautify the countryside? All great excuses to rob the taxpayer out of $4500 more, Comrade.

Again, not new money. Part of original bailout. And if you buy a car under the program, it actually GIVES you 4500(max) in credit to new car. Try to keep up.

What's your point? Because this tax money has already been earmarked for waste, wasting it on car crushing doesn't count as direct waste? Wow, you really do think like a Democrat. Bottom line, it's my money, the government confiscated it, now they are using it to prop up businesses and unions in a way that can hardly be justified Constitutionaly. Regulating interstate commerce? Promoting the general welfare? Sorry, can't see it. It's just more Obama payoff money.

[Bob Campbell]

And your grand solution to re-ignite the economy is?
Bottom line, the first bailout, TARP for banks, is working. The government (that's you and me) is turning a profit from the banks who have already paid the money back. 23% from Goldman Sachs alone. That's over a quarter billion dollars in profit on Goldman Sachs.
My main concern with Obama so far is that he didn't make the stimulus big enough. History shows us (check Paul Krugman, ubereconomist) that stimulus packages need to be very large.

[CoolBreeze]

Here's my problem with the deal:

WHEN DID AMERICANS ASSUME THAT THEY WOULD HAVE MONTHLY CAR PAYMENTS FOR THEIR ENTIRE LIVES?

When I was young, most people I know paid cash, or got a SMALL loan for a used car. I myself only had a few used cars financed for a year... no more. I didnt purchase a new car until I was 53 years old... KNOWING that I was about to lose thousands as I drove it off the lot. But as I felt both the ability to own a new car by then (paid cash!) and deserved at least one before I died, I took the plunge.

Nothing can hold you back in life more than making 30 or 40 years worth of car payments, and yet people do it as though they have no other choice. It's mostly ego of course, and then talking yourself into believing that you MUST have a "dependable" car. (biggest excuse used by females). Fact is, good used cars will save you a TON of money over a lifetime if you play your cards right and look for a car when you DONT need it as opposed to needing it NOW.

This government program will continue to convince people that they need car payments in their lives forever.

[genlock]

Saw a F-350 today, $4000, 93 model 275000 miles, dually, long bed.
The one I mentioned yesterday was newer but has a repair manual in the floor and a VOM too.
Both were diesel.

[cgarison]

Saw a F-350 today, $4000, 93 model 275000 miles, dually, long bed.

For a diesel Ford, that is just getting broke in. That is part of the reason why I am going south to purchase my next vehicle if FoMoCo discontinues the Panther because it will be a 2wd SuperDuty extended cab SWB Diesel that will have a power train that will last as long as two bodies/frames in the snow belt states.

[genlock]

Parked at Medicap Pharmacy in Lavalette.

[AmpedNow]

I'm afraid I don't see why this is such a contentious issue. Nobody is forcing anybody to participate. After all, you don't have to trade in your Pleistocene-sized Brougham de Chrome if you don't want to, right?

No, but a sizable number of people who might be interested in the program will not qualify for it because their current vehicle is too fuel-efficient, basically. An older 32 MPG Corolla, for example, is already "Earth friendly", therefore does not qualify -- even though the wheels might be falling off of it.

Yet one could qualify, at least in part, by trading a 13 MPG Hummer for a "more efficient" 19 MPG Durango. Still a gashog, IMO. But, not according to the government.

The irony is that Chrysler will be a huge beneficiary of this program, yet they're really not even in the compact, fuel-efficient market, after discontinuing the Neon. If we're being really honest about the supposed reason for it, then the bulk of this money should go to Japan. Double irony.

As for the program itself, I don't care for the government getting this involved in what people choose drive... But if they're gonna do it anyway, why exclude such a huge number of people from the start?

In case you're wondering, no, I would not qualify. And yes, I am bitter.

[The People's DJ]

You will by a new car. You will by a new car.

[Bob Campbell]

You will by a new car. You will by a new car.

I think that pretty much sums up Obama's opposition. Dems should win the next dozen elections. Spelling counts kids.

[Jet Black]

Saw a F-350 today, $4000, 93 model 275000 miles, dually, long bed.
The one I mentioned yesterday was newer but has a repair manual in the floor and a VOM too.
Both were diesel.

Watch out, there was a Ford diesel engine that was a piece of garbage, and they replaced it with one later that was pretty decent. I don't know which is which, but I know you don't want to get stuck with the bad one. DO yourself a favor, look for a Dodge with a Cummins if really need that kind of thing.

Bottom line, the first bailout, TARP for banks, is working. The government (that's you and me) is turning a profit from the banks who have already paid the money back. 23% from Goldman Sachs alone. That's over a quarter billion dollars in profit on Goldman Sachs.
My main concern with Obama so far is that he didn't make the stimulus big enough. History shows us (check Paul Krugman, ubereconomist) that stimulus packages need to be very large.

Ee gad, Nomad, you haven't had that head injury treated YET?

[genlock]

Bob Campbell is Nomad?

[Bob Campbell]

No, I'm me. I thought shockley was Nomad.

Jet, see Depression, Great; Japan, Lost Decade; Germany, 2008.

Bottom line on cash for clunkers. If you don't like it, don't participate.

[Jet Black]

I'd like to not participate, but the government is going to force me to, by confiscating my money to pay it out to new car buyers. Let me put it to you this way, so maybe you can understand: If I buy a new car, how much of the $4500 are you willing to pay me directly out of your pocket? Because you are, whether you understand it or not.

Furthermore, this program has nothing to do woth Porkulus, it is an energy policy program.

Goldman-Saches is not involved.

[Bob Campbell]

I'll tell you what. I'll pay you my share. Let's see, that's 4500 dollars (assuming you qualify for the max) divided by 330 million people. That's approximately, if I did the math correctly, .0136 cents.

You want that in cash or check?

[Lester]

Not all 330 million are tax payers... some are too young, others are hanger's on.

You'll need to adjust your numbers to 138 million.

[Bob Campbell]

Make that .03 cents then. Buy a hundred cars and it gets to 3 cents. I'll toss in my share.

Then, since we're playing the " I only want my tax dollars to pay for things I specifically approve of", I'd like my share of the more than one trillion spent in Iraq back.

[Jet Black]

Make that .03 cents then. Buy a hundred cars and it gets to 3 cents. I'll toss in my share.

It's even less, I make the estimate $0.003, three tenths of one penny per car, per person. But that's not the point, is it? The cost is a red herring in this argument.

Then, since we're playing the " I only want my tax dollars to pay for things I specifically approve of", I'd like my share of the more than one trillion spent in Iraq back.

Red herring. National Defense is a legimate Constitutional function of government, that benefits everybody. Wealth transfer through subsidization is not.

That's all I've got to say on the subject.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[The People's DJ]

I think that pretty much sums up Obama's opposition. Dems should win the next dozen elections. Spelling counts kids.

I'm just as educated as Obama. Oh wait. We don't know anything about O's education. Nothing has been released.

[Hoosier Daddy]

I think that pretty much sums up Obama's opposition. Dems should win the next dozen elections. Spelling counts kids.

I'm just as educated as Obama. Oh wait. We don't know anything about O's education. Nothing has been released.

Oh, fer Chrissakes ...

Barack Obama's educational background:

Obama entered Harvard Law School in late 1988 and at the end of his first
year was selected as an editor of the law review based on his grades and a
writing competition. In his second year he was elected president of the law
review, a full-time volunteer position functioning as editor-in-chief and
supervising the law review's staff of 80 editors. Obama's election in
February 1990 as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review was
widely reported and followed by several long, detailed profiles.
He graduated with a J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991 and
returned to Chicago where he had worked as a summer associate at the
law firms of Sidley & Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990.

Undergraduate
Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA
Undergraduate, 1981-1983

Columbia University
B.A. Political Science with specialization in international relations
Thesis topic: Soviet nuclear disarmament

Graduate
Harvard Law School
J.D. magna cum laude 1988-1991

President, Harvard Law Review
1993-2004 Visiting Law and Government Fellow, then Senior Lecturer,
in Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School. Taught
courses on the due process and equal protection areas of constitutional
law, on voting rights, and on racism and law. Helped develop a casebook
on voting rights.


This was #2 in at least 300 top Google searches. One click. There it is.
Careful, TPDJ. Your Republicanism is showing.