cash for clunkers good or bad idea?
- Thread starter drychlick
- Start date
All I know is I saw a big rig hauling a huge flatbed full of flattened automobile corpses. I could only assume they were casualties of C4C. It was quite sad, really. Once proud vehicles reduced to twisted metal and crushed souls.
I've been working mad overtime for the last few weeks, after being laid off for most of the year. I know a lot of shops in the area are in similar straits, since we're sending them business as well.
No matter what, there's quite a few businesses that are off the chopping block this year.
No matter what, there's quite a few businesses that are off the chopping block this year.
R
Rocketman
Guest
I'm sort of reminded of the story of Baron Munchausen pulling himself out of the water by his bootstraps.
I mean, if the government gets into further debt, encourages private individuals to take on more debt, surely things can only end well?
I mean, if the government gets into further debt, encourages private individuals to take on more debt, surely things can only end well?
I think it was a good plan for the first couple weeks, but all the good cars are gone now.
My parents wanted to use it to trade in their van, but the only cars left on the lots are either really small and crappy or way too expensive (even with extra cash for the trade-in). The actual practical cars were sold right away, and the dealerships have no idea when/if they'll be able to restock them.
My parents wanted to use it to trade in their van, but the only cars left on the lots are either really small and crappy or way too expensive (even with extra cash for the trade-in). The actual practical cars were sold right away, and the dealerships have no idea when/if they'll be able to restock them.
I think it's a great idea.
Yeah, I'm glad I bought my car when I did. I guarantee it would have been snatched up pretty quickly once this program started, since it's an I-4 with a 26-30 MPG rating.
Yeah i know what you mean. I drive an 04 Sentra. Gets 31 mpg on the highway. Would have gone right quick.
Yeah, but that was kind of the point. It didn't stop being a "good plan" because it succeeded way beyond what everyone had hoped. It boosted auto sales and got a lot of people to downsize from SUVs to much more fuel efficient and cleaner emitting cars.
Considering it ends today and a lot of car dealerships stopped taking trade-ins for it a couple of days ago in order to give them time to process the reimbursements, this timing of this topic seems outdated and odd. But then again, being odd is not unusual with drychlick.
Yeah yeah, Mr. Nitpicky.
R
Rocketman
Guest
That's not a success yet. That's a potential success in the future, maybe. Unless you define 'success' by the degree people took advantage of the programme, which, considering the product on offer was essentially "free money", isn't too surprising.
Explain how the trade-in of gas guzzling and higher polluting SUVs and trucks (83% of trade-ins) in favor of much more fuel efficient and lower emissions cars (60% of new purchases) that are also safer is not an immediate improvement?
Explain how US automakers increasing their market share (though not by much) and having the lowest remaining inventories they've had in years is not an immediate improvement?
Good thing for the short term, possibly very bad long term.
In the short term people's jobs are secure (at least in the pricing range that's affected by C4C) but once the funds dry up and everything returns to normal no one will buy cars because they already have a new one.
The thinking i believe is to save car producers in the short run hoping that the recession ends soon so people have more cash to spend. Problem is that cars are one of the bigger investments now and it is unlikely that someone who's just gotten a job again will buy a new car and those who've had the money are already set.
Analysts predict a big sales slump next year.. possibly a desastrous one however without such programmes the economy would be far worse off.
In the short term people's jobs are secure (at least in the pricing range that's affected by C4C) but once the funds dry up and everything returns to normal no one will buy cars because they already have a new one.
The thinking i believe is to save car producers in the short run hoping that the recession ends soon so people have more cash to spend. Problem is that cars are one of the bigger investments now and it is unlikely that someone who's just gotten a job again will buy a new car and those who've had the money are already set.
Analysts predict a big sales slump next year.. possibly a desastrous one however without such programmes the economy would be far worse off.
R
Rocketman
Guest
Because those lower emissions haven't yet materialised, and might not even offset the costs of the production of these new vehicles.
I'll grant that the safety improvement is immediate.
Because the economic growth that's supposed to result from it hasn't yet materialised, and may not materialise at all. The programme is essentially using government money to subsidize the automotive industry--albeit not directly--and let's face it, that's throwing good money after bad.
I think it's generally a bad idea. It is causing people to incur more debt in a troubled economy when the threat of being laid off is higher than usual. And I think the type of people who jump at this idea are the implulse spenders who already spend beyond their means.
I paid my car off earlier this year and was thrilled to own it outright. Why would I want to take on 5 more years of payments at this time?
I paid my car off earlier this year and was thrilled to own it outright. Why would I want to take on 5 more years of payments at this time?
This doesn't make any sense. Impulse spenders living above their means wouldn't have very good credit by now. And you have to have good credit in order to get a car loan--certainly now, after everything we've gone through with home loans. The people buying cars right now generally will have good credit and some degree of financial security.
I only ever buy vehicles outright, myself. But people buying brand-new cars is a considerable economic force, and it has vast ripple effects in other industries, which is why it's so important we support it.
I thought it was a great idea.
It's good for the auto industry, and for those who had the ability to trade in a "clunker" for a new car. The benefit to everyone else is pretty small, if any. Especially since the government just spent more money we don't have...
Similar threads
