Quote:
Originally Posted by Iexpedite
I don't think so. I believe it was more to help out the auto industry with a little fuel economy/economy improvement mixed in. It is neither irresponsible nor a bad decision that leads one to owning an aging vehicle. If you think about it people that drive clunkers do so because they either can't afford a new car (making bad decisions) or they refuse to buy (a good decision). This program motivated good decision makers to upgrade. It didn't subsidize to the point that irresponsible people could make that leap.
As for me, when it came out my aging vehicles were still worth more than the government's offer. I kept driving them, still have 1 of the 2.
|
I don't think anyone was claiming that owning an aging vehicle is "irresponsible" or "a bad decision", but rather the whole Cash for Clunkers program is.
The people that can't afford new cars were harmed by this program, as it drove up prices in the used car markets by reducing the supply of used cars.
The people that could afford to buy a new car likely didn't drive true "Clunkers" anyways. The people I personally know that used the program had decent, perfectly functional vehicles that had trade in values a little lower than the payout. They could have sold private party for more than they got out of the program.
In the end, it was just an auto industry subsidy done in such a way as to make it more palatable to the general public.