Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Ryan in Maine on July 01, 2009, 04:15:18 AM
-
To qualify for $4500 voucher:
- 10mpg increase in cars/minivans
- 5mpg increase in small trucks/SUV's/vans
- 2mpg increase in large trucks/SUV's/vans (6000-8500 lbs)
- New work trucks do not qualify for $4500 voucher (8500-10,000 lbs)
To qualify for $3500 voucher:
- 4mpg increase in cars/minivans
- 2mpg increase in small trucks/SUV's/vans
- 1mpg increase in large trucks/SUV's/vans (6000-8500 lbs)
- New work truck in same or smaller weight class (8500-10,000 lbs)
The new catch:
- New car must be new
- New car must be worth less than $45,000
- New car must get at least 22mpg
- New small truck must get at least 18mpg
- New large truck must get at least 18mpg
The old catch:
- Old car must not be new
- Old car must not have historic value
- Old car must be drivable
- Old car must be less than 25 years old
- Old car must be insured/registered to you for the past year
- Old car must get 18mpg or less
- Old truck must be a pre-2002 model
- Old truck must get 18mpg or less for small truck/SUV/van or 15mpg or less for large truck/SUV/van
So the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act should never be called Cash For Clunkers... It's actually a feel good bill that's about gas mileage/pollution and not a more comprehensive bill that's about gas mileage/pollution as well as safety/stimulating the economy... Right?
So my '97 Pontiac Sunfire 4-door that gets at least 24-26mpg does not qualify, even though it has terrible crash test ratings and needs $400-600 put into it every year. Even if I were to get a new Volkswagen TDI, or a Toyota Prius, or Honda Insight. This cut-off is based on 2-4mpg.
Now don't get me wrong, my Sunfire ain't a bad car (it would be in much better shape if I hadn't bought it used a few years ago and found out the hard way the previous owner(s) didn't do regular maintenance), but it really highlights the disadvantages and possible worthlessness of this bill.
This program will not be successful enough to significantly reduce pollution. This bill will change the landscape of the used car business somewhat, and a lot of cars getting 18mpg that would serve someone just fine will now be destroyed. Some popular models might see their used car market prices going up (a lot of pick-ups, Jeeps, and Land Cruisers, and 4 Runners come to mind where I live) which might screw a lot of rural buyers who are looking for a good price on utility.
Knowing that Obama plans to use TARP money to fund this thing, how the heck did it make it this far?
I know we talked about this a couple weeks ago*, but I really wanted to highlight the erroneous use of the "cash for clunkers" moniker. It has next-to-nothing to do with the clunkerness of your vehicle. It's almost entirely mpg-based. And here I am in the market for a new vehicle. Yeesh.
*Click to see Bob's kick ass van - http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=19830.0 (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=19830.0)
-
Who pays the dealer for destroying his used car ( the non-clunker you just traded in)?
-
"It's actually a feel good bill that's about gas mileage/pollution and not a more comprehensive bill that's about gas mileage/pollution as well as safety/stimulating the economy... Right?"
What ever gave you the idea that it was about getting people into safer cars?
-
There is also an "unintended consequence" (might be intentional) that Ryan touched on. It has the potential to remove many thousands of used vehicles from the market place. Used vehicles that lower income folks like younger people just starting out, can afford to buy and drive. That could limit the mobility of a huge percent of the population forceing them to live in ever more densly packed population centers where government subsidized public transportation is available. which increases the number of people dependant on government.
-
Used vehicles that lower income folks like younger people just starting out, can afford to buy and drive.
This.
I'm going to guess that a large percentage of the people who use this program will be just like the people that bought too much house. They're going to go to the dealer with their $4500 voucher, and the salesman is going to tell them, " Well, without the voucher I could put you in the Government Motors Biden Special. WITH your voucher, I can put you in the Obama Supreme with leather seats and premium sound!"
And old cars must be less than 25 years old? Why?
-
I suspect that the number of 25 year old and older cars is actually pretty low, and that a good portion of them are either classics or antiques and not daily drivers.
-
Guess this doesn't apply to me and my salvage-titled Toyota either, since it gets more than 18mpg.
-
Not to mention getting parts for my truck is going to be harder. Couldn't just take them to the junkyard, no, gotta crush and shred them. Son of a...
-
Mike being the one to answer (from back East) on the "25 years" question actually raised another point. Back East you guys probably don't see that many older cars that haven't either been well taken care of or restored, the rest having been wasted away by Winter road salt, etc.
Here in CA, I daily see cars from the 70's and 80's that have definitely not been restored or well cared for. They just haven't been rusted through from road salt and the elements after 10 years or so.
-
Who pays the dealer for destroying his used car ( the non-clunker you just traded in)?
Don't worry, the ChiComs will buy the steel.
-
Don't worry, the ChiComs will buy the steel.
And use it for apartment construction...
-
That could limit the mobility of a huge percent of the population forceing them to live in ever more densly packed population centers where government subsidized public transportation is available. which increases the number of people dependant on government.
I've always had a suspicion that one of the reasons liberals are so enamored of public transportation is that it gives them yet more control over people. A mobile citizenry, just like an armed citizenry, is harder to control.
-
I've always had a suspicion that one of the reasons liberals are so enamored of public transportation is that it gives them yet more control over people. A mobile citizenry, just like an armed citizenry, is harder to control.
Makes sense, a mobile citizenry is independent but citizens who only have public transportation are totally dependent on the government if they don't want to walk miles. Don't need a gun because the police will protect you. Don't need a car because the county bus will take you where you need to go (unless hurricane Katrina is coming, then the drivers are taking care of numero uno first). What's next, public housing for all? Makes sense, when you change jobs or the number of persons in your family changes you are moved closer to work or into a larger or smaller apartment as it's more "efficient". :| :rolleyes: :mad:
Tim
-
This voucher is going to screw up car shopping. All the dealers are going to do is reduce the list price, you guessed it, by the amount of your voucher.....no deals here.....chris3
-
This program is retarded. People who drive a clinker out of necessity will not be able to afford a new car, voucher or not. People who drive some huge truck to show off aren't going to care.
Buying a new car to save on gas is silly, anyway. The price difference would be greater than any savings.
-
This voucher is going to screw up car shopping. All the dealers are going to do is reduce the list price, you guessed it, by the amount of your voucher.....no deals here.....chris3
GM is already whining that the cash for clunkers thing hurt their Q2 sales numbers. Sez them, people are postponing their purchases until after the program takes effect.
-
I wonder how much pollution is created to manufacture a new car, and how long it would take for its higher mpg to make up the difference vs keeping the old one?
My wife and I just bought a new minivan, a 2009 Kia Sedona. I compared it to our old minivan at http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm and found out our new one gets 1mpg (combined) better than our old Plymouth Voyager, despite having a substantially larger engine and 110 more hp.
Thus, we would not have qualified even if we waited for the program to take effect.
-
GM is already whining that the cash for clunkers thing hurt their Q2 sales numbers. Sez them, people are postponning their purchases until after the program takes effect.
GM can piss up a rope.
Buying a new car to save on gas is silly, anyway. The price difference would be greater than any savings.
That's using logic. How often do you see the average idiot person using logic?
I remember the idiots trading in perfectly good vehicles back during the last gas crunch for new hybrids and econoboxes, when the money they would have saved by not buying new would pay for a lot of gas. At least back when that happened, the trade-ins went to the used lots instead of the car crusher.