Cash for clunkers?

SNIP

Then you wouldn't mind paying for something you personally would totally object to on whatever grounds you might have?

True. Taxes are supposed tio be for the common good. However, they are supposed to be used wisely, in much the same way a home budget would be.

As for the figures quoted, those were taken from several different sourcers (both left and right - but excluding people like Rush Limbaugh). Ford was number one, but there were at least 4 Toyota vehickles, of which only 1 was not imported.

You don't think people would buy a car beyond their financial means under this program? Isn't that the same thing people did with homes? The government made it easier to buy a home for those in the lower incomes.... and they DID. We are now paying for that.

Strangely, a Hummer H3 is on the approved list.

SNIP

Programs like this invite fraud and waste. California has had such a program for quite a while. You can turn in a clunker worth less than $100, as long as it has seats, and can reach the station under it's own power. For that, the individual gets $1000.

You're an OK guy, Brent, but I think you are overlooking the reality of hunman nature... as well as the nature of government programs.

I already pay plenty for a lot of things I object to. On the other hand, I would gladly pay a bit more, if the money were used for something I approve. In this particular instance, no, I don't mind a bit.

My figures came from the NHTSA. Took about 15 seconds of Googlin'.

Absolutely, I do not dispute that SOME buyers really should not take advantage of this, but I don't assume that they are the majority. I usually figure that most folks out there are just as bright as I am, and not drooling morons who need the guidance of we select few. Of course, if I did trade in my 16-year-olds today, I'd probably get lumped in with the rest of the drooling morons, so that's one more reason I'm glad I didn't.

That's funny. At a combined mpg rating of 15 (and that's probably fudged), it must just make the cut-off. Can't imagine what didn't...

dwight

Let's see...

The government is spending money (like there's no tomorrow) because consumer spending was in the toilet. Consumer spending normally drives the economy, but there was no spending.

The automakers (worldwide) were facing serious financial troubles. Inventory on dealer lots was not moving. Well, it seems that at least THAT problem has been addressed. Now the automakers will have to scramble to repopulate those dealer lots - a contrived shortage, perhaps, but a damn good reason to get productive.

What about all of those other businesses that are suffering because consumers are not spending? I'm doing MY part, that's for damn sure. Are you doing yours? In these troubled economic times, I'm spending thousand and thousands of dollars on products and services I would not normally buy. That's just the luck of timing, though - I'd have to spend this money in good times or bad. So I pay my taxes and spend my money on the things that I want. Other than that, I can't help you.

Like I said, the government annually takes from THIS productive citizen and does god-knows-what with it. In THIS particular case, in THIS particular program, I approve.

dwight

"Consumer Bob" on local tv "news" just did a little feature where he showed several of the traded-in clunkers (that word has been used so much this month, no longer needs scare-quote marks, don't you think?) being dismantled, parts chosen and sold to parts-hunters, and the remainder ground up into large-gravel-sized stuff. He said the only part of the clunkers that the recycler could not sell is the engine.

So, if you need clunker parts, get thee to a recyclery. Soon.

I'm not even going to get into the fraud and waste in the program, but the reality and nature of government is that it does things that would have a person in prison if he did it priviately. Ask Mr. Maddoff how his vesrion of social security worked out.

Yes, that's destructive keyensian nonsense that it has practiced since it created the great depression in the 1930s upon the bust after a federal reserve induced boom. Ever hear of the depression of 1921? Most everyone hasn't. Why? it was worse than the crash of 1929, but the federal government didn't do anything about it. It was sorted out in a few months.

No. it has not been addressed. It will get worse. It only briefly appears better, but there has been no production, no creation, nothing to back up that additional money. It was created out of thin air. It's just another bubble. Another distortion in the market brought to us by the federal reserve and the federal government. This how the great depression became great.

Oh, yes, here's where I'm a bad person for being a responsible saver. Another falsehood of the krugman school. Savings is needed to create the capital that is then loaned to build businesses. The government and federal reserve short circuit this by creating vast quanitites of new dollars. This is where inflation comes from, the increase in the money supply.

I'm sorry to hear that you believe those things. I am spending more than I normally do but it is because I am buying things I defered previously and now will buy while the dollars I hold still have value. The inflation being created by the government is going to be massive once the gates open up. Bernake simply doesn't have a way to put the genie back in the bottle.

I think all I can do is refer you here:

Interesting bit:

brent: So a bunch of people get new cars. Now what about the businesses that suffered because people's money was diverted into buying other people new cars? What of the money that people would have spent on something else had there not been this program to encourage them to buy a new car instead?

dwight: What about all of those other businesses that are suffering because consumers are not spending? I'm doing MY part, that's for damn sure. Are you doing yours?

brent: Oh, yes, here's where I'm a bad person for being a responsible saver.

heh...

:()

I guees you've not read krugman and the other Keynesians. The Keynesians call it "The Paradox of Thrift". It's nonsense, but it basically says that people who aren't spending every penny they have and borrowing more are bad for the economy. This is one of the reasons they like inflation so much, it's to get people to spend more and more by destroying the value of savings.

I think covers where you were taking this.

This country once considered taxation without representation a sufficiently grave offense that we overthrew our government for doing it. There is no more pervasive form of taxation without representation on this planet today than the Obama administration's obscene deficit spending. We are literally burning down the future wealth of everyone under age 18, and the next two generations not yet born, with this fiscal profligacy. We have given our victims no voice in the matter. The disbursement of every single deficit dollar should make us wince with pain and remorse, not celebration.

180 Out

FEAR! How strong an emotion. We were told another Great Depression was looming, and seems to Me it scared some people into doing pretty drastic things. Here we are nearly a year later from the time things really came apart, due to the housing bust, and the gubermernt has WASTED ONLY 10% of future taxes we will need to pay back, and it looks like the recession has bottomed out. The big O is now saying He SAVED us ALL!

I say lets get back to some Reaganomics.

Why raise taxes in times like these? I'm in Oregon and the Dems are raising taxes here and making up some kind of state insurance for poor people. We have the second worst unemployment rate here, gee, does anyone see a pattern here. Look at us America! This will be You too! Make it easier for businesses and stop raising the minimum pay!

We used to have GREAT health insurance in the USA, but (in my opinion) the Pharmaceutical companies have the Doctors in their pockets (who doesn't know someone that's on drugs for something like, restless leg syndrome or twitchy eye) and insurance companies can't do anything or they get sued!

DAMN!

Nah, I was just pointing out that we can talk in circles, loops, and go off in a thousand different directions when talking about fiscal policies. You and I are not going to solve the problems here in ramfm.

dwight

No. But every person who learns there is something beyond (and better) than the new-deal keyensian economics that government school teaches the better.

Don't blame OB. Bush is the one who got the ball rolling. And none of it could happen without congress passing the laws.

The fact is that higher taxes have produced a better economy and lower taxes have produced a worse economy.

You won't find any brand of economics that can't pull data to "prove" that it works.

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:52:49 -0700, Ashton Crusher rearranged some electrons to say:

Please back your opinion with a citation of fact.

Less we forget, with a Democratically controlled Congress for the last two years of his term...

You can spin it any way you like, but in this bad recession the truth is right in front of our noses. This is a list of the worst areas hit by small business bankruptcies.

see a pattern of tax and spend types not doing so well.