$4500 subsidies for everyone

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jreeves, Aug 4, 2009.

  1. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    Cash For Clunker Policy Is Crackpot Economics - WSJ.com
    Americans are streaming back into auto showrooms, and one reason is the “cash for clunkers” subsidy. Democrats are naturally claiming this is a great success, while Republicans are claiming that because the program has run out of clunker cash so quickly, this proves government can’t run the health-care system. How do we elect these people? What the clunker policy really proves is that Americans aren’t stupid and will let some other taxpayer buy them a free lunch if given the chance.

    The buying spree is good for the car companies, if only for the short term and for certain car models. It’s good, too, for folks who’ve been sitting on an older car or truck but weren’t sure they had the cash to trade it in for something new. Now they get a taxpayer subsidy of up to $4,500, which on some models can be 25% of the purchase price. It’s hardly surprising that Peter is willing to use a donation from his neighbor Paul, midwifed by Uncle Sugar, to class up his driveway.

    On the other hand, this is crackpot economics. The subsidy won’t add to net national wealth, since it merely transfers money to one taxpayer’s pocket from someone else’s, and merely pays that taxpayer to destroy a perfectly serviceable asset in return for something he might have bought anyway. By this logic, everyone should burn the sofa and dining room set and refurnish the homestead every couple of years.

    It isn’t clear this will even lead to more auto production over time, since the clunker cash may simply cause buyers to move their purchases forward. GDP will get a fillip in the third and perhaps fourth quarters, which will please the Obama Administration. But the test will be if auto sales hold up next year and into the future once the clunker checks go away. The debate over the subsidy may even have prolonged this year’s auto slump as buyers delayed their purchases waiting for the free lunch.

    All of Washington professes to be surprised that the $1 billion allocated to the subsidy has been used up so quickly, but giving away money is one thing government knows how to do. The Clunkers who are in Congress are now patting themselves on the back for their great success, and the House quickly voted to pass out another $2 billion in clunker coupons. With a $1.8 trillion budget deficit, who’s going to notice this pocket change?[/B]

    Clearly, we spoilsports need an attitude adjustment to Washington’s new economics. And since money is no object, let’s give everyone a $4,500 voucher for other consumer goods. Let’s have taxpayers subsidize the purchase of kitchen appliances, women’s clothing, the latest Big Bertha driver—our Taylor-made is certainly a clunker—and new fishing boats. These are hardly less deserving of subsidies than cars, and as long as everyone thinks we can conjure wealth out of $4,500 giveaways, let’s go all the way.

    What a bunch of yahoos we have in Congress and the White House...

    OMFG...people snatched up $4500 handouts....:eek:

    The government is willing to take on $4500 of debt per car and destroy thousands of dollars of merchandise....no wonder we have a 1.8 trillion dollar budget deficit, these morons are unbelievable.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,619
    Thanks Received:
    15,617
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,920
    the cash for clunkers is one of the major failures of the obama administration....i am so upset over the fact that because i elected to get a car with good gas mileage from jump....i get nothing....*putting hand out*....but joe blow who was an idiot to begin with...gets $4500...for his low gas mileage toy...
    now i am aware that taking on a car payment during a period of "funemployment"..(i am still not sure why its fun...but i will go with the party line) would be stupid...now are yall aware that you can triple dip here.....the rebate...4500....a credit for a hybrid...if you go that avenue...and then a sales tax credit...the destruction of the trade ins ....will gut the used car market...if obama had really wanted to make an energy statement he would have made the gov bailout ....conditional on producing hydrids or coming up with better gas mileage cars...i see this as a way to get rid of inventory...of cars that are already outdated....a consumer fraud on so many levels...and yet people rushed out to do it.
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,540
    Thanks Received:
    5,899
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,947
    Since not one penny has actually been paid to ANY dealer yet, how do they know they are out of money to begin with? Boondoogle is definitely what this is. Are you aware Obama proposed that certain parts like engines and such not be available for sale anymore, especially used parts.

    As was pointed out by several prominent people already this whole program is simply a pay back to the Auto workers Union.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,619
    Thanks Received:
    15,617
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,920
    the gov is making salvage yards run silcone in the engines till they sieze up...major hit for the salvage people who make a lot of money on reselling engines and transmissions...
     
  5. strollingbones
    Online

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,619
    Thanks Received:
    15,617
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,920
    which again hits the consumer with higher prices for used car parts...
     
  6. Soaring
    Offline

    Soaring Active Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    502
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +91
    Nothing older than a 1984 vehicle can qualify. And the new car must get more than 10MPG better than the trade-in. My 1981 Ford F-150 that gets 14 MPG doesn't qualify under these rules. I think I'll just keep the old girl. :razz:
     
  7. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    To OP: Not to everyone, only motorists, and us non-motorists are paying for it to, which is unfair.
     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617

    Your F-150 would qualify for any vehicle that gets 24 MPG wouldn't it?

    FYI my Ranger gets 25 MPG in the city and about 30 MPG on the highway.

    Not as big, perhaps, as what you need, but it is a truck that qualifies for that largess.

    2009 Rangers are going for about $15,000 fully equipped, I think.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2009
  9. Bill O'Olberman
    Offline

    Bill O'Olberman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    818
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +124
    Well, there is some public benefit such as less demand for petrol, less of a dependence on "foreign oil," and better air quality/ less pollution.
     
  10. chanel
    Offline

    chanel Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Messages:
    12,130
    Thanks Received:
    2,746
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    People's Republic of NJ
    Ratings:
    +2,749
    I'd like to see some stats on that. Less gas perhaps; pollution - insignificant.
     

Share This Page