Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
07-31-2009, 01:43 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
Moderate your Moderation.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919
Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi 90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
|
Left a comment. Seriously.
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"
|
|
|
07-31-2009, 07:51 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
Pokémoderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,864
Thanks: 439
Thanked 531 Times in 357 Posts
|
SVOboy -
More dough may be forthcoming :
House Votes to Add $2 Billion to "Cash for Clunkers" (Update1) - Bloomberg.com
Quote:
The U.S. House approved an emergency measure to add $2 billion to the “cash for clunkers” automobile purchase program after a burst of demand exhausted most of the initial $1 billion in less than a week.
|
CarloSW2
|
|
|
08-01-2009, 01:55 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: May 2008
Location: N. Saskatchewan, CA
Posts: 1,805
Thanks: 91
Thanked 460 Times in 328 Posts
|
I wonder if this program is really aimed at companies with fleets of SUVs. One time, I was off my route and noticed some guys carrying in office furniture for a new government program. The sign looked promising to me, so I went in to enquire. The guy I buttonholed let slip that all the money was already spoken for - they were only setting up the office for show.
|
|
|
08-01-2009, 02:13 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mid TN
Posts: 152
Thanks: 4
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
I didn't like the sounds of this program when they were considering it and I still don't.
Taking my hard earned money to bail out companies that should have gone belly up was a total waste of my tax dollars. Then to double subsidize these vehicles with this program is a total slap in the face(seems like double taxation to me!?!?!).
SVOboy...if you want to remove this semi-political rant, I'm ok with it, just had to get this out of my brain.....
__________________
|
|
|
08-07-2009, 03:22 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West
Posts: 145
Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
|
I am very against the whole bailout thing(in fact we have casual fridays at work and I wear my "wheres my bailout?" shirt every friday), but this is probably the only part I like. Cash for clunkers is working and they estimate over 500,000 vehicle sales will result, along with the improved mileage for the owner.
IMO the american companies won't see a whole lot of sales, it will be Honda Nissan and Toyota that will see the bulk of the clunker cash.
As usual because we were responsible we both have 1990's era Civic's already that won't qualify nor would I trade them in anyway, so this part of the bailout is still for others, but a good thing if you ask me. If the wife was stuck with an 80's minivan or something we'd be into one of those Yari's sedans in a heartbeat...
I think in general it is a 180* degree swing from Bushoil trying to put everyone in an SUV and not allow smaller efficent cars on the market under the "emissions and safety" excuse.
|
|
|
08-07-2009, 04:12 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490
Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6 90 day: 31.12 mpg (US) Red - '00 Honda Insight Prius - '05 Toyota Prius 3 - '18 Tesla Model 3 90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 122 Times in 80 Posts
|
I can't say the program is ideal, but given the trade in mileage compared to the new vehicle mileage, the owners of the new vehicles will spend about seven grand less on gas during the vehicle's lifetime, and that means about $4500 is staying in the local economy and not going to foreign countries for their oil.
There's also the savings due to Carbon reduction, which was about a grand or so IIRC, and pollution reduction, although that depends largely on the area the vehicle is located. Not to mention the shot in the arm to the economy. I've read a lot of complaints about this program being at the cost of future auto sales, but unless you're set to make money off of the recession, that isn't exactly something I would complain about.
Generally speaking, it's better to spend during a recession even at the cost of a more tepid recovery because it's the bust cycles that can really cause trouble to an economy. A flight to liquidity and all that will depress prices more than they would w/o intervention, and seeing as how the only upside, if we can call it that, to greater than normal economic growth when we aren't in a recession tends to be bubbles, it's overall, a lot better for employment and a stable economy to insure recessions aren't too bad even if it's at the expense of a slower economy. Arguably, slowing a recovery can also mitigate the formation of bubbles and prevent exacerbation of the boom/bust cycle.
|
|
|
|