Cash for clunkers

From your link.
Pretty good demonstration of the stimulus money stimulating the economy, isn't it?

It is a little scary thinking of all the dying people coming out of the wood work to be cured if they can actually afford health care in the near future.

This is not a fix ... its a freaking band aid.
If the free money from the gov err I mean us wasnt there these people wouldn't be purchasing a new vehicle. Id like to see WHO all purchased one ... that'd be interesting.

Free Money and they will come. lol funny to watch this happen. And think if health care is this way. A friend of mine went to Ford to buy his vehicle after the lease was up and said there was a 3 hour wait for paper work. Lets see,if there are 42 million Americans without healthcare and they all of a sudden have it. Wow I wouldn't want to be around a hospital or doctors office wow.
 
The plan worked to serve two purposes:

1 to stimulate new car sales; and

2. to get people out of gas guzzling clukers and into more efficient cars.

Is it working?

I don't know.

What do the car sales look like, and how many gas guzzlers have been traded in to take advantage of this program?

Anyone actually have any figures on this?

Absolutely right.

The theoretical aspect of the program worked correctly.

It was expected to do what it did: encourage the pruchases, and, essentially be a 'targeted tax refund.'

Now, I would have liked to see the Dems support an across the board cut, but Dems like to use the money to make sure that folks do what the Dems want them to do. It worked this time.

Even in times like these, there are approximately 1 million sales per month, so the cash-back was expected to stimulate about one weeks buys. It did.

Now, if I were in charge, I would have done this and the same for homes instead of the Stimulus Pkg, but at this point I would continue the program.

To what extent did the program increase overall new car sales as opposed to just influencing choices about which car to buy? To the extent it was the latter, when the program finally ends for good, will consumers make other choices and the factories have to retool, involving layoffs, in order to meet demand for these other choices? Will these layoffs and the cost of retooling mean the net economic effect of this program will be negative?

In a broader economic context, if this program did lead to increased new car sales, then the money spent on new cars was not spent elsewhere, as it would have been without the program, so when we balance the positive effect on the auto industry of increased new car sales against the negative effects on those segments of the economy consumer spending was diverted from by this program, was the net economic effect positive or negative?

The program is popular so it has political value, but it is unclear that it had a net positive effect on our economy. As for getting more efficient cars on the road, that would have happened anyway as people naturally traded in their older cars for newer ones, so this program may have speeded up this process, but by how much and at what cost? To the extent the purpose was to stimulate the economy, a tax rebate would have done at least as well and without distorting markets in ways that may lead to higher costs for retooling factories and more layoffs when the program ends.
 
The plan worked to serve two purposes:

1 to stimulate new car sales; and

2. to get people out of gas guzzling clukers and into more efficient cars.

Is it working?

I don't know.

What do the car sales look like, and how many gas guzzlers have been traded in to take advantage of this program?

Anyone actually have any figures on this?

Absolutely right.

The theoretical aspect of the program worked correctly.

It was expected to do what it did: encourage the pruchases, and, essentially be a 'targeted tax refund.'

Now, I would have liked to see the Dems support an across the board cut, but Dems like to use the money to make sure that folks do what the Dems want them to do. It worked this time.

Even in times like these, there are approximately 1 million sales per month, so the cash-back was expected to stimulate about one weeks buys. It did.

Now, if I were in charge, I would have done this and the same for homes instead of the Stimulus Pkg, but at this point I would continue the program.

To what extent did the program increase overall new car sales as opposed to just influencing choices about which car to buy? To the extent it was the latter, when the program finally ends for good, will consumers make other choices and the factories have to retool, involving layoffs, in order to meet demand for these other choices? Will these layoffs and the cost of retooling mean the net economic effect of this program will be negative?

In a broader economic context, if this program did lead to increased new car sales, then the money spent on new cars was not spent elsewhere, as it would have been without the program, so when we balance the positive effect on the auto industry of increased new car sales against the negative effects on those segments of the economy consumer spending was diverted from by this program, was the net economic effect positive or negative?

The program is popular so it has political value, but it is unclear that it had a net positive effect on our economy. As for getting more efficient cars on the road, that would have happened anyway as people naturally traded in their older cars for newer ones, so this program may have speeded up this process, but by how much and at what cost? To the extent the purpose was to stimulate the economy, a tax rebate would have done at least as well and without distorting markets in ways that may lead to higher costs for retooling factories and more layoffs when the program ends.

We have to give credit for an idea if it is good.

Partially the plan was to support the normal purchases, but also to push purchases in the direction the administration wished.

Further, it increased consumer confidence in that it brought attention to the fact that some folks were buying. Just look at all the press, and our interest here on the board.

"To what extent did the program increase overall new car sales as opposed to just influencing choices about which car to buy?" The latter over the former.

On a macro level, it was like a business owner putting up a sign that says "Sale!"

"To the extent the purpose was to stimulate the economy, a tax rebate would have done at least as well and without distorting markets in ways that may lead to higher costs for retooling factories and more layoffs when the program ends." Can't disagree, but the move was more stimulative than the so-called Stimulus Bill.

"The program is popular so it has political value..." Exactly what this administration requires at this time.

"As for getting more efficient cars on the road, that would have happened anyway as people naturally traded in their older cars for newer ones,..." Not necessarily true. Many would still opt for a bigger, safer car. Some for a more fuel efficient one. Liberals believe in 'one size fits all.' And they know what is good for you.

But, let not the good be the enemy of the perfect.
 
IF i was looking to get a new vehicle I would have taken advantage of this.

I guess the dealers are making people sign wavers now saying "If the govt doesn't pay up you must return the vehicle or pay the difference"
 
I feel a merge coming on!!

Hang on, everyone!!

choochoo.gif




LOL! Yeah, 3 threads on this topic into one. It's Magic! :D ~EZ
 
Here is what happened the government actually found a plan that worked. The benefit went right to the consumer and let the private sector work. But unlike all the other overpriced and ineffective government programs this one was under-funded! In 2 weeks in worked so well they spend all the money for it that set aside for 6 months! Amazing!
 
From your link.
Pretty good demonstration of the stimulus money stimulating the economy, isn't it?

It is a little scary thinking of all the dying people coming out of the wood work to be cured if they can actually afford health care in the near future.

This is not a fix ... its a freaking band aid.
If the free money from the gov err I mean us wasnt there these people wouldn't be purchasing a new vehicle. Id like to see WHO all purchased one ... that'd be interesting.

Not a fix, but a slight boast to hurt industry!
 
Here is what happened the government actually found a plan that worked. The benefit went right to the consumer and let the private sector work. But unlike all the other overpriced and ineffective government programs this one was under-funded! In 2 weeks in worked so well they spend all the money for it that set aside for 6 months! Amazing!

Exactly they didn't run this, they let the private sector run it and the people decide if they wanted to use it or not.

They should use cash for clunkers as a model for health care reform.
 
Here is what happened the government actually found a plan that worked. The benefit went right to the consumer and let the private sector work. But unlike all the other overpriced and ineffective government programs this one was under-funded! In 2 weeks in worked so well they spend all the money for it that set aside for 6 months! Amazing!

Exactly they didn't run this, they let the private sector run it and the people decide if they wanted to use it or not.

They should use cash for clunkers as a model for health care reform.

nah....that was basicly mccains plan....
 
Here is what happened the government actually found a plan that worked. The benefit went right to the consumer and let the private sector work. But unlike all the other overpriced and ineffective government programs this one was under-funded! In 2 weeks in worked so well they spend all the money for it that set aside for 6 months! Amazing!

Exactly they didn't run this, they let the private sector run it and the people decide if they wanted to use it or not.

They should use cash for clunkers as a model for health care reform.

nah....that was basicly mccains plan....

Well then McCain had a good plan, as evidenced by the success of cash for clunkers.
 
Cash for Clunkers clearly wasn't a success. How could anyone consider a foolish program that ran out of funding a success? Not to mention how it subverts market forces.

At any rate, the Clunkers program isn't going anywhere.

The House voted Friday to transfer $2 billion in emergency funding from the economic stimulus plan to the "cash for clunkers" program, ensuring it has sufficient funds to continue.

The move follows a scramble Thursday after it emerged that the initial $1 billion allocated to the clunkers program may have been close to exhausted after just one week. The legislation would shift $2 billion from the $787 billion stimulus plan to the program.

House Votes to Extend 'Clunkers' Program - WSJ.com
 
Cash for Clunkers clearly wasn't a success. How could anyone consider a foolish program that ran out of funding a success? Not to mention how it subverts market forces.

At any rate, the Clunkers program isn't going anywhere.

The House voted Friday to transfer $2 billion in emergency funding from the economic stimulus plan to the "cash for clunkers" program, ensuring it has sufficient funds to continue.

The move follows a scramble Thursday after it emerged that the initial $1 billion allocated to the clunkers program may have been close to exhausted after just one week. The legislation would shift $2 billion from the $787 billion stimulus plan to the program.

House Votes to Extend 'Clunkers' Program - WSJ.com

It was a success in popularity

It was a failure in Planning and funding.

Sounds typical for a govt created program ;)
 

Forum List

Back
Top