Cash for Clunkers: A COMPLETE FAILURE

ATLskier

ATLskier

Active member


If you know what the program is, skip this paragraph.

For those of you not familiar with the new government program, Cash for Clunkers, it is a program allowing people to trade in their used vehicles that have under something like 25 m/gal and receive $3,500-$4,500 toward their new fuel efficient cars. Sounds great right?

No. This program is not great.

The cars traded in to the program were basically destroyed.

The old cars are crushed. If not, a compound was put into the engine to make it stop working. People that usually get to buy car parts, cant. If they are allowed to take any parts, they are only available to be sold for 6 months.

What about people who need auto parts?

what about the people that need to buy cheap used cars? The supply of these cars has greatly been decreased and will continue to be decreased if more funding is given to this program and it is restarted. 250,000 working cars are being destroyed.

This also decreases the demand in 2 or 3 years when the people that naturally would have sold or gotten rid of these cars are all doing it now, instead of later, further fucking up the market in the future.

Government trying to fix markets only creates more problems. Look at FDR in the Depression when he tried to raise prices by destroying prices of crops and other commodities. He killed 6 million pigs because pork prices were too low. This was during the great depression.

The Budgeted what was supposed to last for 4 months....and it lasted 4 days. (These are the same people that are saying that 1.5 trillion dollars is enough for health care). Its obvious they did not account for such a large increase in demand. But seriously, they https://newschoolers.com/web/forums/createthread/cat_id/2/are giving away free money, what did they expect. My guess is that they wont expect the increase in demand on the government health care system when so many people are brought into that market, and so many people switch from private insurance (around 83 million will), while the supply of doctors will stay the same, but likely decrease.

Edward Markey, the author of the program said it was the most successful stimulus program of 2009.

Horray Markey. You gave away free money faster than you thought!!!!

Dealerships short term business plans are fucked. All of those ads you see and everything they have done to use this program are done. In 4 days the program is done, destroying the dealers short term plans.

You say this sort of thing works in Germany. This program is pretty much permanent there.

LISTEN TO THIS. do not try this. dont. If you have to, look for a vid on youtube or something.

If you go to cars.gov (the site for cash for clunkers) and try to submit your car, and once you agree to the terms, a warning box comes up saying:

"This application provides access to the DOT CARS system. When logged onto the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the US Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DOT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign."

Did you read that!!!!????

It is legal for them to do everything up there. They can retrieve all of your information while you are logged on, possibly even after. Dont try to go to the website. If you dont believe me, then research other places, or just dont beleive me. theres a reason I was vague about how to get to it.

There are too many regulations and too much bureaucracy with this. The EPA keeps changing the gas mileage that qualifies you from getting the money.

There is a statement in the contracts that says that if the government cant pay the $4000 or so, then you do. I think this is just to cover their asses, and not much will cover it. They said they would honor any deals that were in progress. They have already spent $150 billion. and they have $800-850 billion in obligations already.

If you learn one thing about this, it is that it was essentially a tax cut. Not a tax cut for all, just for the people who happened to have qualified. But what it shows is the amount of spending and demand that it created. Look at how busy car dealerships were. Imagine if the stimulus plan had just been tax cuts. The same price of the stimulus plan would have equaled a six month complete tax holiday. You could engineer it different than that, but think of the spending it created, and think about the spending that would be created by putting money into the pockets of americans, instead of pork spent by the government to spend in districts to get reelected in 2010.

The government got into a simple thing: Auto trade ins. This is something that has been done for many many years. This is something that used car dealers do everyday and make a profit. They budgeted this 1 billion or so to last for 4 months and it lasted 4 days. These are the same people estimating the costs for government run healthcare. If they cant operate an auto trade in, a small 1 billion dollar program(small for the government) how can they run healthcare?

 
but dude,

nah actually i never thoguht about some of the points u made.. and i find myself agreeing with you
 
why dont they just give everyone a $3500-$4500 tax break so we can spend it on whatever we want not just cars. That would help the economy too
 
Before I even read this I knew it was a retarded idea. People don't need new things! They need to learn value and that not everything is replaceable. I plan to use my car until it dies. My plan is to save up enough cash in the time I have my car to pay for the next one, which will be used. I will never buy a new car.
 
Only if they decide to spend that saved money instead of save it. Me being the most jewish person I know I would spend 360 on afterbangs and save the rest in my jew cave.

 
Uh...

The point was to get people to a) stimulate consumer spending on domestic goods (make people buy new cars), and b) get rid of old cars from an era with poor emissions standards. The fact that the budget was overtaken so quickly does not mean that it was a failure, it means that it succeeded beyond everyone's wildest imaginings. Moreover as a test balloon, the results can be judged to see if a larger scale, longer term program (perhaps with a few tweaks) can be implemented.

Serious question: did you write the first post, or did you copy and paste it? Be honest.
 
I am going to agree with you on this. I hold many of the same conservative values ATLskier does. I feel that this is a majorly good thing. 250,000 new cars and all that cash that's being infused into the local economies is just bawss. You can't even deny that this is a major success.
 
This application provides access to the DOT CARS system. When logged

onto the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer

system and is the property of the US Government. Any or all uses of

this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored,

recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS,

DOT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of

other agencies, both domestic and foreign."

Well if that is true, that is bogus.
 
I can see it now, in four years...

Government "single payer" medical coverage takes effect. Instantly, hospitals and services are overrun, and within weeks the government deems the estimated ~$1 trillion budget insufficient, and decides with haste to pump another ~$2 trillion in spending in the coming decade, exacerbating the broke country faster than you can say "social securi..." Meanwhile, all sorts of restrictions get implemented on med practices to seem fiscally responsible, bring in a shitload of docs to fill the staggering need four years too late, and somehow I lose my insurance and break my leg then am forced to hobble around like a goon forever cause some govt dipshit fucked it alllllll up, forcin me to sell meth and bitches on the streets of seattle, which will legalize prostitution cause the city is that fucked up politcally.
 
mannn. This was a bad idea from the start. The guys running our country (I don't even beleive in calling them a government because they are just so bad at it) are having trouble handling a 2 billion dollar "stimulus" for people buying cars. I mean for christ sake! How the HELL are they going to handle a multi-trillion dollar healthcare program (that should never pass, but that discussion will stay in another post)?
 
I think the major concern is that the "budgeting" for this was a total failure, and considering the budgeting our government is doing for health care, this kind of disparity is a huge cause for concern.
 
So, your thinking is, when the government subsidized the purchase of new cars, everyone rushed to buy new cars because of what a great deal it was. Therefore, if the government subsidizes health care, everyone is going to rush to get sick and injure themselves to take advantage of what a great deal it is?
 
haha

And it was definitely a success. I just saw the owner of a local dealership on the news and he said they were just about cleaned out by Cash for Clunkers.
 
My sister got $4,500 for her 95 Jeep Grand Cherokee that has a pretty good amount of body damage, when she traded it in for a new Mazda 3. So it was not a failure for our family.
 
No, once again you are talking gibberish to fill white space....

If the government puts aside money for 4 months, and it last 4 days, how do you think I feel about a multi-trillion dollar project? I'm not very assured that their estimates are accurate, and it could be extremely costly to those of us who pay US taxes.
 
You do realize that the two things you are trying to compare have absolutely nothing in common except the fact that they are both gov't funded, right?
 
Of course it's going to take "clunkers" off the resale market. That's one of the goals of the program..

The original posts boils down to "This program achieved the goals it was designed to, but I don't like those goals. Therefore it is a failure".
 
if you had a shit ass car that wasnt gonna run much longer and got to trade it in for 4500 off of a brand new car you would probably do it because thats a fucking deal. the car i traded was worth no more than 500 bones, barely fucking ran, got 4500 for it. now i have a brand new civic. whats wrong with that? you dont want the parts from my old van, its a piece of shit.
 
isn't it also valuable to point out that the government has been funding health care since the 60s, while the cash for clunkers was something unprecedented... i'm pretty certain we've got massive amounts of data about the costs of health care as well as accurate predictions of the trends and costs (detailing both action and inaction)

if the comparison is to say that health care reform is just as blind as this program, you ought to admit, it is a bullshit comparison
 
you fuckin watch that cock face glen beck. didnt you he pulled the same shit about FDR. FUCK GLEN BECK!!! HE MAKES ME WANT TO KILL HIM AND HIS FAMILY VERY PAINFULLY AND SLOWLY

?rant
 
The idea was to get old, environmentally unfriendly cars off the road and replace them with more technologically advanced and environmentally friendly vehicles, which is why they are being crushed and not resold.

But yeah, it failed extra hard.
 
lol its been a week since the cash for clunkers started and people are already deeming it a failure.

yeah I dont agree with stimulus' and destroying old cars, but all the cars I saw at the dealer ship were like 1980s mini vans, they wont be missed
 
a. yes it to stimulate spending. I think this provides a great example of how to stimulate the economy if the government has to be involved. It shows that people spend. It makes me think that if the stimulus package was tax cuts to give people money in their hands instead of the government that people will spend.

b. This is the problem I have. Does it even help the environment really? Hold on and think for a second. Sure getting old cars that have bad gas mileage is good, but destroying old cars and parts is a waste of resources. The cars arent limited to "old cars from an era with poor emissions standards." You can take a new f-150 or even a sports car and trade it in. they are not limited by age, only gas mileage.

504x_Cash_For_Clunker_Chart2.jpg


They are taking a bunch of cheaper used cars out of the market than run fine and are destroying them. Many of these cars would prob stop working in a few years anyway, but until then, they still have value. They can still be cars for people that can barely afford them. And thats where car companies produce more cars to meet demand and more energy is used to make new cars. Its like replacing a 4 year old refrigerator. The new ones are more efficient, but the energy required to make the new refrigerator likely exceeds any saving you have from the more efficient product day by day. I mean, looking at that chart, does it really help to destroy a truck that gets 18 m/gal and buy a new one that gets 19 or 20? 10 m/gal for the cars is acceptable. But if the goal of the program was to get more fuel efficient cars on the road, then 1 m/gal improvements is pathetic. That's likely less than the amount of improvement in gas mileage that someone would get in 5 years when they replace their car without this program.

"The fact that the budget was overtaken so quickly does not mean that it was a failure, it means that it succeeded beyond everyone's wildest imaginings."

They find out people will spend free money faster than they thought. congratulations government. It doesnt mean it was a success, other than to get people spending(but they are borrowing money again. do we learn from our mistakes???). It shows they are unable to properly budget a simple trade in program. They couldnt account for a sharp increase in demand. Who in their right mind wouldnt think that would happen.

Your test balloon comment further proves my point. "the results can be judged to see if a larger scale, longer term program (perhaps with a few tweaks) can be implemented. "

Yes I know you are thinking of an extended car trade in program. This was supposed to last 4 months. It lasted 3% of the time it was supposed to. Their inability to account for increases in demand in the budget directly relate to budgeting government run health care. They are to completely separate things, yes, but I am just talking about budgets and estimates of costs here. They are not even close to making it to 4 months. What about when government run health care starts and 83 million people no longer have private insurance and have to use the government option...I mean government obligation. if health care passes. there will be a strong increase in demand for the government plan. it may not be as quick as c4c, but the costs will be far higher.

If you want honesty...I got the quote of the computer stuff from glenn beck's show. (I know its glenn beck and you guys hate him, but it doesnt mean the computer stuff is made up). Most of everything else I had been thinking about for the entire day or I got from articles.

No copying and pasting was done.

 
no. people will drop their insurance and go with the government plan. Businesses will take advantage of not having to pay health insurance for their employees. They are also gonna be taxed on that. People will be taxed for their private plans too. No new insurance policies will be written. New policies are rewritten each year. 83 million americans will lose their private insurance and forced to use government healthcare. Of course, the government wont estimate for this, because they have to keep up the lies that it wont cost much and that you get to keep your doctor and insurance.

 
no, well your right I dont agree on essentially a second bail out of auto companies and I dont agree with fixing markeets. But you cant say a program designed to last 4 months and lasts 4 days is a success. Im an architecture student and if I design a building that is supposed to last 100 years and lasts 100 days, then its a failure. One of the goals was to last 4 months. It failed.

Yes it succeeded at boosting spending on cars. Thats the best example from this. Had the stimulus plan been major tax cuts for corporations, businesses, and american families, spending and investment would have increased.

Yes, it got a few clunkers off the market. They would have been off the market in a few years naturally anyway. a 1 m/ gal increase on a truck isnt helping the environment much.
 
you guys just keep making my points better and better. You act like the government funding healthcare since the 60s has been a success. Ok, a bunch of people get health care. thats good, dont get me wrong. But medicare and medicaid are way in the red. All of these government programs, medicare, medicaid, social security are all running out of money.

$107,000,000,000,000

107 trillion dollars. This is the shortfall of the medicare and social security programs.

Cash for clunkers is unprecedented in program itself with auto trades by the government. But fixing markets has failed before. And many government programs are cost far beyond estimates. In that respect, this program was just a continuation of failed government programs.
 
stop hating so much. I never get this mad about obama, barney frank, msnbc, etc. way to want to kill his family man. That will help americas problems. stop being so emotional and focus at the problems our country faces.
 
thank you for understandin.

and to you atl. no i dont really want to kill his famliy but while at work last night where we are forced to watch fucking fox news, i had to listen to that ass wipe bash FDR and go on about all this views which imo are complete bullshit
 
so fdr burning crops and killing pigs was a good thing for the country while in a depression? FDR is possibly the worst president weve ever had. Behind this barack guy and jimmy carter.
 
i never once said he was a good or bad president. but really who the fuck does glenn beck think he is and who gave him the right to bash everyone
 
All right ATL, I know you're some conservative, more govt. is bad, quit taxing me so much, I hate minorities, ignorant, regurgitator of fox news, but in the case of health care, more govt. is probably the answer.

you know why the united states spends soooo much more on health care than any other country, and yet doesn't match up quality wise (U.S. spending: 16% of GDP; most developed countries: ~8-10%)? It's because of all the PRIVATELY owned hospitals and outpatient services using all the medicare and medicaid money for procedures that will maximize their profit, but the procedures aren't necessarily needed. The amount of MRIs the U.S. prescribes compared to other countries is outrageous. If you look at the health care spending numbers, you'll see that the u.s. has been spending more and more, but that spending is in no way linked to an improvement in quality.

so ya, maybe this car thing failed. i don't know much about it, but there is nooo way that you can compare this failure to the health care spending mess. in fact it's almost opposite. health care is such a complicated thing that it's probably best that the government takes care of a big portion of it. sorry to burst your small government bubble.
 
I think the kid was saying that Glenn Beck said the same thing and that the op is saying this because he watches Glenn Beck. Idk if he's right or not though.
 
All right you want to go ad hominen on this shit? What do minorities have anything to do with this? I have never hated minorities. Stop playing into stereotypes that are not even close to the truth. Ignorant...its your favorite word. Use it to describe all conservatives and no liberals could ever be ignorant. ooooh regurgitator of fox news....you watch mscnbc which is owned by GE, or CNN. I dont know what news station you watch. I dont give a shit. These are stupid arguments that have nothing to do with this shit. Focus on the issue and not these lies and stereotypes. YOu dont know what news station I watch. Less government is the answer for health care.

First off, we have the best health care. Look at the cancer death rates in the US vs Canada or Great Britain. The US is at 60%, canada at 55% and europe at 48%. thats right. lets be more like europe and canada. 81% survive prostate cancer in the US vs 43% under the British health services.

OOOOH PRIVATE HOSPITALS. I guess when the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they forgot that little part where hospitals should be government run and that right to health care part. There is no health care. There isnt even a right to vote in the Constitution. The supreme court upheld that statement too. That's up to the states.

anyways...

Do you realize how medicare and medicaid works? they get paid far less for procedures done on medicare than they would otherwise get. Guess what that does? Raises the price of everyone else's insurance. They dont have unnecessary tests to make more money. they do it to cover their ass from being sued. We have out of control trial lawyers. $3.6 billion is taken from health care for malpractice cases.

SO you dont want people to get MRI's? Well you will have your way with nationalized health care.

We spend a lot. Yes. There are ways to stop spending so much. Government is not the answer. TORT reform needs to happen. All of these ridiculous law suits need to stop, both in health care and the rest of the country (snow. pass wash. paralyzed guy is a perfect example). Insurance should be able to be bought over state lines. That would insure more compeition. Not making a government run option (OBLIGATION) to unfairly "compete" with 1300 other insurance companies. Heath care savings accounts...theres another one to save money.

Right now, government involvement increases prices through unnecessary mandates. In some states, every plan must include coverage for mamograms. If you own a construction company that does not employ any women, you still have to cover all of your employees so they can have mamograms. That is not using common sense. there are millions of similar mandates like this that drive costs up.

everyone just keeps helping me out and making my points. You just stated that health care is very complicated. My point is that the government can hardly manage a small, simple program doing something that people that live in trailers have done for about 100 years. If they can hardly manage a 1 billion dollar program and miss the estimates by 116 of 120 days, then how can they even try to manage 1/5 or 1/6 of the economy by running health care.

Well, according to your logic, the economy is very complex. All these other industries are complex too. Government has already taken over auto companies. If things are too complex to work on their own and the government has to take care of them and run them, things like health care, the economy, then the government should just take care of all of that right? Well, welcome to Cuba. Welcome to North Korea. Welcome to the United Socialist States of America. Sorry to burst your big government, socialist, and communist bubble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top