[excon]

Hello:

I don't know. Here's a plan from Washington that's working... So, the Republicans want to end it. It's kind of simple, really. You turn in an old car that get's BAD gas mileage, and you get around a $4,000 check towards the purchase of a new car...

Since the program has been going, car dealerships have been busy for the first time in months, the average milage increase between the cars turned in, and the ones going out is 9 miles per gallon... NINE MILES PER GALLON! And, the checks offer immediate stimulus.

Yet, the Republicans want to kill it...

excon

[speechlesstx]

You're going to have to offer us some quotes or something, ex. What did they say?

[excon]

You're going to have to offer us some quotes or something, ex. What did they say?

Hello Steve:

Happy to oblige. Because it's been such a hit, it's up for renewal. Speaking about that, Senator Jim Demint of South Carolina said, "This is CRAZY to rush this thing again... We gotta SLOW it down." John McCain remains "strongly opposed".

excon

[inthebox]

So should the taxpayor continue to subsidize the auto buying sector of the economy?

With tax revenue down, can taxpayors of this and future generations continue to subsidize increasing government spending?

Where does it end?

Is owning a vehicle now a "right?"



G&P

[Synnen]

To play devil's advocate here---I'd rather pay for someone to get a new car that saves on gas--which is beneficial for EVERYONE, including the environment--than on one more pregnant teenager, or bailing out banks that made stupid decisions regarding who got a mortgage to begin with.

[excon]

So should the taxpayor continue to subsidize the auto buying sector of the economy?

Hello in:

I don't think those are the right questions to ask. I could, of course, in reply, ask you should the tax payer continue to support the home buying public with a subsidy that allows them to deduct the interest?? Renters don't get squat! And, THAT subsidy, by the way, has been going on a lot longer than our present crisis.

The question is, in my view, as long as it's agreed that government should BE the spender of last resort, and I agree that it should, then shouldn't the money be spent in the most POSITIVE way possible?? I think it should, and I think this is a VERY positive way.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Ah, at least I now have somewhere to start...

DEMINT: This is another bill that congressman and senators didn’t even read. The federal government getting in the used car business -- and we think, “Hey, this is working great.” But my children and grandchildren are going to have to pay for these cars, and we’re helping auto dealers while there are thousands of other small businesses that aren’t getting the help. The role of the federal government is not to run the used car business. And it’s clear. You can look at Amtrak or the post office, and now “cash for clunkers.” The federal government went bankrupt in one week in the used car business, and now they want to run our health care system. I just think this is a great example of the stupidity that’s coming out of Washington right now, and I think Americans realize the numbers that we’re throwing around don’t work. We estimated this would cost $1 billion. Now they’re saying we need $2 billion more. Our children and grandchildren can’t afford to make these car dealers well right now.

WALLACE: Real quickly, because it sailed through the House in a day -- it’s going to come up to the Senate next week -- are you going to be able to block it?

DEMINT: Well, we’re definitely going to debate it. And I’ve heard John McCain is going to stand up and try to stop it. And I’m going to work with him every way I can, because...

WALLACE: That means a filibuster?

DEMINT:... it makes no sense. I don’t know what it means right now, Chris, but this is crazy to try to rush this thing through again while they’re trying to rush through health care, and they want to get on to cap and trade electricity tax. We’ve got to slow this thing down.

I think it's crazy, too. But maybe that's because I need a new truck and my old one doesn't qualify, it's not a "clunker" it's an "antique" according to their rules. Way I see it a few thousand pounds of scrap metal is worth about the same whether it's 25 years old or 30. And mine is probably WORSE for the environment than the ones that do qualify.

And so Demint and McCain think this is crazy, is it also crazy for them to fight for a few thousand car dealerships being cut loose by Government Motors and Chrysler?

[excon]

I think it's crazy, too. But maybe that's because I need a new truck and my old one doesn't qualify,

Hello again, Steve:

I think you're right... But, if it's CRAZY, and it does't work, why did you look into participating in it?

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello:

I dunno. Here's a plan from Washington that's working.... So, the Republicans want to end it. It's kinda simple, really. You turn in an old car that get's BAD gas mileage, and you get around a $4,000 check towards the purchase of a new car....

Since the program has been going, car dealerships have been busy for the first time in months, the average milage increase between the cars turned in, and the ones going out is 9 miles per gallon.... NINE MILES PER GALLON!! And, the checks offer immediate stimulus.

Yet, the Republicans want to kill it....

excon

First of all, according to the reports I have read, not one single deal has actually been approved by the program. All of the dealers are still waiting for their approvals and reimbursements and they say that it is really hard to get approval.

Second, twice now the project was underfunded. The government assumed that there would be enough money to last for several months... the first time the money lasted 5 days. The second time it lasted two weeks. Talk about mismanagement of a budget.

So exactly how are you defining this as a program that "works"?

It's funny... your definitions of "success" and "failure" are about as skewed as can possibly be. Iraq, in which pretty much every goal set by Bush has been met and which is experiencing relative peace, is a failure. But cash for clunkers, which has twice now had to shut down because of a lack of funding and in which no dealer has yet been paid for the program, you define this as a success.

As for the "9 miles per gallon"... pure BS. You are misinterpreting what one proponent (I forget who, but it might have been Boxer) said about the program... she said that on average the cars being purchased under the program have an IMPROVED EFFICIENCY of 9 mpg over the cars being traded in. She did not say that the clunkers were doing 9 mpg. There haven't been cars that get 9 mpg on the road since the 1920s. The worst cars on the road are getting better mileage than that. Anything that inefficient would never have been approved by an emmissions inspector.

One of the main problems of the program is that it's going to cause people who otherwise would not be buying a car to purchase one and have to borrow in order to buy it. People are going to borrow money that they can't afford to borrow. The program incentivizes unnecessary borrowing... the very thing that got us into the mortgage crisis. The result won't be as bad... the dollar amounts are much lower, for one thing. But I would think that you'd be upset by anything that causes people to be subjected to "predatory lenders" like auto lenders and their pet repo-men.

Elliot

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

I think you're right... But, if it's CRAZY, and it does't work, why did you look into participating in it?

Um, my momma didn't raise no fool. If someone wants to help pay for my new truck who am I to refuse? :D

[excon]

the average milage increase between the cars turned in, and the ones going out is 9 miles per gallon.... NINE MILES PER GALLON!!

she said that on average the cars being purchased under the program have an IMPROVED EFFICIENCY of 9 mpg over the cars being traded in. She did not say that the clunkers were doing 9 mpg. There haven't been cars that get 9 mpg on the road since the 1920s.

Hello again, El:

Like cutting boards, I suggest reading twice before commenting.

excon

[Wondergirl]

There haven't been cars that get 9 mpg on the road since the 1920s.

There's a 2002 GMC Safari sitting in my driveway that is used regularly and passes all tests but gets less than 9 mpg in the city (15 long-distance).

[ETWolverine]

excon,
I apologize. I misread your post.

[excon]

Um, my momma didn't raise no fool. If someone wants to help pay for my new truck who am I to refuse? :D

Hello again, Steve:

That "someone" would be ME! Why should I pay for your truck? I drive a Volvo, and I recycle. Why is it fair for me to buy your truck, when you don't want to pay for my kidney? What's up with that?

If the Republicans as a group really wanted to KILL these programs, when the government opened the cash window, they wouldn't be in line.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello again, Steve:

That "someone" would be ME! Why should I pay for your truck? I drive a Volvo, and I recycle. Why is it fair for me to buy your truck, when you don't wanna pay for my kidney? What's up with that?

If the Republicans as a group really wanted to KILL these programs, when the government opened the cash window, they wouldn't be in line.

excon

I agree. The same reasoning applies to both programs.

I happen to be against both of 'em... they both suck.

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

That "someone" would be ME! Why should I pay for your truck? I drive a Volvo, and I recycle. Why is it fair for me to buy your truck, when you don't wanna pay for my kidney? What's up with that?

If the Republicans as a group really wanted to KILL these programs, when the government opened the cash window, they wouldn't be in line.

And that's my complaint as well, I don't want to pay for your kidney or your new truck. But that's the problem with government entitlements... when they give away stuff everyone gets in line. This CARS thing was a done deal, if I need a new truck and don't have the money I'd be a fool to not get a few thousand bucks for a truck I couldn't sell for a thousand anywhere else.

[speechlesstx]

Here's a little something to think about. After 8 years - actually it's still continuing to this day - of posturing over the ruthlessness of Karl Rove, who can blame the Republicans for pushing back against the "fist to the nose" tactics of the Obama administration and Rahmbo?

Rep. Issa fired off a letter to Rahm pushing back at him today...

Following reports that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has been orchestrating an effort to intimidate members of Congress and Governors who raise legitimate concerns regarding the effectiveness of the stimulus, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent a letter to Emanuel saying “While this type of scare tactic may work In Chicago, it will not work to intimidate me or other Members of the United States Congress.”

“I and others have dared to bring these facts to the attention of President Obama, the Congress and the American people,” Issa wrote. “You’ve unfortunately reacted by once again resorting to the playbook of the Chicago political machine.”

Last month, Politico reported that Emanuel had “launched a coordinated effort to jam” Senator Kyl and other Administration critics… “[A]fter seeing Kyl and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) again paint the legislation as a failure on Sunday talk shows, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel directed that the letters from the Cabinet secretaries be sent to [Governor] Brewer, according to two administration officials.”

Issa noted, “The fact that the letters were coordinated by you to maximize the level of intimidation is supported by the timing, structure, and content of each letter. Not only were the four letters all sent the day following Senator Kyl’s remarks, but they were also remarkably similar in tone and sentence structure.”

Letter from Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation:

On Sunday, Arizona Senator Jon Kyl publicly questioned whether the stimulus is working and stated that he wants to cancel projects that aren’t presently underway. I believe the stimulus has been very effective in creating job opportunities throughout the country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to your state, as Senator Kyl suggests, please let me know [emphasis added].

Letter from Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior:

Some key Republican leaders in Congress have publicly questioned whether the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is working and suggested cancelling all projects that are not currently in progress. I believe they are wrong. The stimulus funds provided through the Recovery Act are a very effective way to create job opportunities throughout the Country. However, if you prefer to forfeit the money we are making available to Arizona, please let me know [emphasis added].

“At what point do you believe your practice of Chicago-style politics violates a public official’s right to speak out in favor of alternative policies,” Issa asks. “The American people have a right to know what role you played in developing the threatening letters to Governor Brewer and whether you intend to continue to engage in these tactics in the future.”

In order to assist the Committee with its investigation of this issue, please provide the following information by close of business on Tuesday, August 11, 2009:

1. Your response to Politico’s report that “White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel directed that the letters from the Cabinet secretaries be sent to [Governor] Brewer, according to two administration officials.”

2. A full and complete explanation of the development of the four July 13 letters from the cabinet secretaries to Governor Brewer, including but not limited to the role you or any other White House official played in writing the letters or encouraging the writing of the letters.

3. All records and communications between you and Secretary LaHood, Secretary Salazar, Secretary Donovan, and Secretary Vilsack referring or relating to the decision to send the July 13 letters to Governor Brewer.

4. A full and complete explanation of the role of the Democratic National Committee and the White House Office of Political Affairs in authoring, encouraging, facilitating, or directing the four July 13 letters from the cabinet secretaries to Governor Brewer.

You can view a copy of the full letter to Emanuel by clicking here.

I think I'd say no, too.

[inthebox]

Hello in:

I don't think those are the right questions to ask. I could, of course, in reply, ask you should the tax payer continue to support the home buying public with a subsidy that allows them to deduct the interest???? Renters don't get squat! And, THAT subsidy, by the way, has been going on a lot longer than our present crisis.

The question is, in my view, as long as it's agreed that government should BE the spender of last resort, and I agree that it should, then shouldn't the money be spent in the most POSITIVE way possible??? I think it should, and I think this is a VERY positive way.

excon

Apples to apples, cars to cars and houses to houses.

Renters don't pay [ direct porperty taxes ]
How many renters actually improve or maintain the place they live in compared to if one owns a home ?

Isn't the $8000 first time home buyer TAX CREDIT another new subsidy, and even with historically low interest rates, the housing market is barely improving.
Hey was it not the government's messing around with the housing market via things like CRA and Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac, a huge part of the current housing bubble and collapse?

In the short term [ 1 week , ha ha ] this is good, but what is the long term out look, a repeat with a car bubble and collapse ?





G&P

[earl237]

You Americans sure are lucky getting $4500 for old cars. There is a program called retire your ride in Canada and I only got $300 for getting rid of my old car. Rock On!

[N0help4u]

Republicans aren't saying no they are sitting back watching how it is a shamble with more vouchers out than money available.
If it works great but look at the fiasco now

Scrap yards aren't liking it
YouTube - Scrap yards not crazy about "Clunkers"

There are videos on YouTube to turn your vehicle into a clunket to get the money