Cash for Clunkers -- Just Say No

[aliza250]

I'm glad Cash for Clunkers is dying -- if you want to give a boost to the car industry, there's got to be a fairer way to do it than by handing $4500 to a semi-random group of people to buy new cars. Why not hand out transferrable vouchers by lottery? That would be fairer

Comments

[plymouth]

So he's being punished for buying an efficient car to begin with.

Actually, he was rewarded for 10 years by having lower gas costs. "no special bonus" != punishment.

My main complaint about Cash for Clunkers was that they didn't stiffen the requirements after it was obvious it was so successful - make the minimum MPG increase 6 instead of 4 for the additional $2b they authorized.

[jbsegal]

Yeah, this. The point was to combine promised ecological gains with benefits to the auto industry (and thus its employees who get to, y'know, stay employed), not just to sell any new car to anyone who wanted one.
I saw reports that the vast majority of traded in vehicles were trucks and I, for one, am totally satisfied by that result.

[some_other_dave]

Adding to the agreement chorus, here, but...

What constitutes an "American" car these days anyway? The Toyotas made at the NUMMI plant in Fremont CA? The GM cars made at that same plant? The Honda Accords made in Marysville OH? The GM cars made in Canada? It's a tricky question, without a really simple and straightforward answer.

If the point of the project is to support the "Big 2.5", then it's not doing so well. If the point is to replace gas-guzzlers with cars that guzzle slightly less gas, then I think it's doing pretty well. And I bet that Ford isn't too unhappy about having two vehicles in the top 10.

GM and the Mopar brands don't seem to have efficient cars that people want. Too bad for them; maybe they should try designing some.

[dcseain]

I heard someone on the radio that wanted to trade a van for a Civic under the program, but was told he had to get a truck to qualify, as he needed a vehicle in the same 'class' as defined by the program. Badly designed program on the whole, it seems.

[mhnicholson]

I didn't see anything at all about same-class in the bill. This may be an unreliable report.

[aliza250]

... or a reliable report of an incorrect implementation of the program on the part of the dealer, or a reliable report of a false statement by a dealer trying to sell a high-profit truck.

[mhnicholson]

Agreed. The story of the false statement by a dealer who wanted to turn a larger profit sounds likely. I find it sad that the designer of the bill was such an easy target here. It hard enough getting blamed for things they actually screwed up without having to get blamed for rumors.

[cellio]

Yeah, I'm with you. Not only was the implementation flawed (4MPG? sheesh), but the idea itself is flawed. Why should people who choose poorly get handouts while those who choose well get squat? It seems to be the way our government operates, alas.

[aliza250]

You mean like mortgage help for people who managed their finances poorly but not those who gave up luxuries to buy houses within their means? Hm, I do detect a trend.

I can empathize with Obama's statement a few months back that the economy was so desperately in need of help that we didn't have the luxury of limiting ourselves to fair methods, but "fair" has to come back into it at some point, or supporters will start to defect (faster)...

[cellio]

Bingo. But it's not just Obama; the attitude of taking from the careful to give to the careless goes back decades -- arguably back to FDR, though he was dealing with a real crisis so maybe the blame falls to his successors

[mhnicholson]

The number one clunker turned in was the Ford Explorer (at least for the first report I saw, I haven't followed the updates).