Cash for Clunkers

[TheFranklinParty]

Cash for Clunkers was an interesting idea, but was it really cost effective? Did it really stimulate the economy? What was the net result?

• A vehicle getting 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of gasoline.
• A vehicle getting 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year.
• So, the average Clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year
• They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons per year.
• That equates to saving a bit over 5 million barrels of oil per year. I repeat---per YEAR.
• 5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day's US consumption.
• And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $75/bbl.
• Our Government "gave" each Clunker Trader $4,500 per car for 700,000 transactions which cost US Taxpayers $3,150,000,000--not including Washington's astounding administrative costs.
• So, we all contributed through our taxes to spend more than $3 billion to save $350 million.

On top of that you must understand that some dealers still haven't been paid. The delay has been an enormous burden on the dealers. Many ended up having to borrow money until the government decided to get on the stick and pay what they promised, but who loaned them the money? Banks sure wouldn't trust them, so they were forced to go to private financing at outrageous rates. So, let me know again how this helped?

Interesting idea that wasn't well thought out and was poorly implemented. No surprise!

 

[Zylstra]

It was never designed to help the economy or our fuel dependency, silly.


Voters love when you give them back a small fraction of their money. There are elections next year

 

[top gun]

Cash for Clunkers was an interesting idea, but was it really cost effective? Did it really stimulate the economy? What was the net result?

• A vehicle getting 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of gasoline.
• A vehicle getting 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year.
• So, the average Clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year
• They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons per year.
• That equates to saving a bit over 5 million barrels of oil per year. I repeat---per YEAR.
• 5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day's US consumption.
• And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $75/bbl.
• Our Government "gave" each Clunker Trader $4,500 per car for 700,000 transactions which cost US Taxpayers $3,150,000,000--not including Washington's astounding administrative costs.
• So, we all contributed through our taxes to spend more than $3 billion to save $350 million.

On top of that you must understand that some dealers still haven't been paid. The delay has been an enormous burden on the dealers. Many ended up having to borrow money until the government decided to get on the stick and pay what they promised, but who loaned them the money? Banks sure wouldn't trust them, so they were forced to go to private financing at outrageous rates. So, let me know again how this helped?

Interesting idea that wasn't well thought out and was poorly implemented. No surprise!

You must be great fun at a party because you'd throw a wet blanket on winning a new car because it wasn't winning the mega millions lottery.

First off cash for clunkers was a HUGE success. And run wonderfully. To say otherwise is to say that if Macys through what they thought would be a one week sale and everything sold out in a weekend... that because Macys didn't have more employees on duty the sale was a terrible failure.

WAKE UP!!!!!!!! THEY STILL SOLD OUT IN TWO DAYS!!! HUGE SUCCESSFUL SALE!!!

Secondly the dealers are very happy now about the way the rebate payments quickness skyrocketed as the program ended.

Add to that the delay was because if the government didn't review these transactions and there was any fraud you'd be dragging out that wet blanket yet again this time crying... look at that, they didn't even check!

We all know this in a tiny way got some of the worst gas guzzlers off the road and the mpg and environmental aspect of that in a positive way as small as that may be... but still in a good direction.

But the other main goal was THE ECONOMIC STIMULUS to give a shot in the arm to the struggling auto industry and all the thousands of trickle down employers that relate to that field. The money brought into the game (JUST IN CAR SALES ALONE) that was sitting on the sidelines was like 9 billion dollars besides the government rebate of 3 billion.

Also remembering that there's a big stake in GM & Chrysler making a profit, stabilizing and paying back on the bailout as well as being an attractive investment for other privet interest to buy the government out of a situation they would much rather not be part of.

If everything the government did was this much of a success we'd be in seriously great shape!

 

[TheFranklinParty]

You must be great fun at a party because you'd throw a wet blanket on winning a new car because it wasn't winning the mega millions lottery.

First off cash for clunkers was a HUGE success. And run wonderfully. To say otherwise is to say that if Macys through what they thought would be a one week sale and everything sold out in a weekend... that because Macys didn't have more employees on duty the sale was a terrible failure.

WAKE UP!!!!!!!! THEY STILL SOLD OUT IN TWO DAYS!!! HUGE SUCCESSFUL SALE!!!

Secondly the dealers are very happy now about the way the rebate payments quickness skyrocketed as the program ended.

Add to that the delay was because if the government didn't review these transactions and there was any fraud you'd be dragging out that wet blanket yet again this time crying... look at that, they didn't even check!

We all know this in a tiny way got some of the worst gas guzzlers off the road and the mpg and environmental aspect of that in a positive way as small as that may be... but still in a good direction.

But the other main goal was THE ECONOMIC STIMULUS to give a shot in the arm to the struggling auto industry and all the thousands of trickle down employers that relate to that field. The money brought into the game (JUST IN CAR SALES ALONE) that was sitting on the sidelines was like 9 billion dollars besides the government rebate of 3 billion.

Also remembering that there's a big stake in GM & Chrysler making a profit, stabilizing and paying back on the bailout as well as being an attractive investment for other privet interest to buy the government out of a situation they would much rather not be part of.

If everything the government did was this much of a success we'd be in seriously great shape!

You are right, I'm the one who is the designated driver while everyone else gets hammered. that is mostly because I can have fun without having my mind altered. this world is pretty good without the rose colored glasses.

The $9B you reference was not in cash. It is once again borrowed money. So, no money was really brought back into the system. Instead, the money was borrowed. Isn't that how we got here in the first place. Also, GM - Ford - Chrysler did the worst of all of the car manufacturers in this deal. Lastly, I have quite a few friends that are in the car business and they liked the idea of the cash flow, but they didn't think that the cash flow from the government was going to be so slow. It literally ate up their profits while they had to float loans. Their margins were crushed by this shell game. Did it keep a few dealers in business? Yes, but what happens 6 months from now? There were better options and it shouldn't have had anything to do with getting gas guzzlers off the road. The global warming monster once again found a way of reaching into the average citizens wallet for another hidden tax.

 

[Greco]

" Instead, the money was borrowed. Isn't that how we got here in the first place."

Well no it isn't. We got in this sorry mess because the Republicans thought it would be a swell idea to strip away regulations. They combined that by supporting a war born from 100% false claims that started sucking us dry. Then the Republicans went into high gear excusing away, rationalizing and justifying blunder after blunder for eight years.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

 

[GenSeneca]

Well no it isn't. We got in this sorry mess because the Republicans thought it would be a swell idea to strip away regulations.

Name them... the specific regulations that were stripped away. Then... Name the specific legislative bills that were passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president, which stripped away those regulations.

They combined that by supporting a war born from 100% false claims that started sucking us dry.

Six years in Iraq = $750 billion

The Tarp Bill = $700 billion in cash, plus 24 TRILLION in promissory notes.

Stimulus = $750 billion in cash.

Iraq, Tarp, Stimulus, all borrowed, printed, or promised money.

Then the Republicans went into high gear excusing away, rationalizing and justifying blunder after blunder for eight years.

Now its the Democrats in high gear, excusing away, rationalizing and justifying blunder after blunder and avoiding rational discussions by accusing any opposition as being racist.

 

[GenSeneca]

Cash for Clunkers was an interesting idea, but was it really cost effective? Did it really stimulate the economy? What was the net result?

• A vehicle getting 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of gasoline.
• A vehicle getting 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year.
• So, the average Clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year
• They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons per year.
• That equates to saving a bit over 5 million barrels of oil per year. I repeat---per YEAR.
• 5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day's US consumption.
• And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $75/bbl.
• Our Government "gave" each Clunker Trader $4,500 per car for 700,000 transactions which cost US Taxpayers $3,150,000,000--not including Washington's astounding administrative costs.
• So, we all contributed through our taxes to spend more than $3 billion to save $350 million.

On top of that you must understand that some dealers still haven't been paid. The delay has been an enormous burden on the dealers. Many ended up having to borrow money until the government decided to get on the stick and pay what they promised, but who loaned them the money? Banks sure wouldn't trust them, so they were forced to go to private financing at outrageous rates. So, let me know again how this helped?

Interesting idea that wasn't well thought out and was poorly implemented. No surprise!

Good stuff Brian.

 

[Zylstra]

How much Credit can we get with China? o.o;;

 

[Pidgey]

How much Credit can we get with China? o.o;;

None, now. China became a net-seller of US Treasuries recently. With the election in Japan that changed out the LDP to the DPJ, we'll also lose Japan as a Treasury customer. The City is in such bad shape that I expect we'll lose them soon, too. This concludes the three biggest US Treasury buyers.

 

[TVoffBrainOn]

Name them... the specific regulations that were stripped away. Then... Name the specific legislative bills that were passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president, which stripped away those regulations.

Here is an excellent read on the timeline of deregulation from the Reagan years through the current situation.

http://www.netrootsmass.net/selise/financial-regulation-timeline/

the full article is even better:

http://www.netrootsmass.net/2008/11/series-introduction/



Many of the deregulations in the banking industry were slow processes that were never passed as legislation until many years later. As soon as Allan "too big to fail" Greenspan took over for retiring Paul Volcker (who opposed ANY changes to Glass-Steagal) during the late Reagan years, the final push was made by the Greenspan, and the Bush I administration to finally get it repealed, and let banks begin to merge, and thus our dismal decent began.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/18/business/bank-barrier-resists-foes-glass-steagall-walls-may-just-be-replaced.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


The problem with the bi-partisan bull**** on this issue is that it was not a Republican or Democrat failure. It was a failure of ideology. It was a failure of Unregulated banking. It was a failure of "too big to fail". It was a failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism.

"Too big too fail" is the fundamental, core problem that led to our deep recession. The problem is so simple it can be seen simply in the title.

Clinton was hardly "Left" when it came to economics. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush all failed, on the heels of Allan Greenspan's epic failure. Too big to fail encourages the disaster we are facing. Revoking Glass-steagal was a process that took decades. It was not a Left or Right thing. It was the pressue of the elite banking entities, supporting the right candidates, and getting the right people into the right places. (House, Senate, Fed, FDIC, etc)

I only wish Paul Volcker had more influence in the Obama administration, He was right back then, and he's right now. Larry Sumners and Geithner are wrong.

If you are trying to sell Gramm-Leach-Bliley as a Clinton failure, or you are trying to put the blame on the Community Reinvestment Act, or you think Barney Frank/Freddie/Fannie is the primary cause...then you are either being intellectually dishonest because "your" party can't possibly be wrong or to blame.... Or you have are being historically naive.

 

[Zylstra]

None, now. China became a net-seller of US Treasuries recently. With the election in Japan that changed out the LDP to the DPJ, we'll also lose Japan as a Treasury customer. The City is in such bad shape that I expect we'll lose them soon, too. This concludes the three biggest US Treasury buyers.

3? You named 2? Who's the 3rd?

 

[Pidgey]

3? You named 2? Who's the 3rd?

The City. Never heard that one before? It means "City of London", and in this context refers to the commercial and financial district.

Most folks don't have a clue about that. Here's an example of the usage in a news article:

http://money.uk.msn.com/investing/news/article.aspx?cp-documentid=149709161

 

[TheFranklinParty]

" Instead, the money was borrowed. Isn't that how we got here in the first place."

Well no it isn't. We got in this sorry mess because the Republicans thought it would be a swell idea to strip away regulations. They combined that by supporting a war born from 100% false claims that started sucking us dry. Then the Republicans went into high gear excusing away, rationalizing and justifying blunder after blunder for eight years.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

I'm glad you are happy, but your understanding of this history is wrong, sorry. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were the ones who wrote and drove the bills that changed the limits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. they also were the ones who insisted on mark-to-market regulations that put current day prices on long-term assets. There is no questions that the SEC fell asleep and people should go to jail for that, but your desire to take sides is blurring your vision of the facts.

By the way, so that we are clear...I don't like either side.

 

[TheFranklinParty]

Here is an excellent read on the timeline of deregulation from the Reagan years through the current situation.

http://www.netrootsmass.net/selise/financial-regulation-timeline/

the full article is even better:

http://www.netrootsmass.net/2008/11/series-introduction/



Many of the deregulations in the banking industry were slow processes that were never passed as legislation until many years later. As soon as Allan "too big to fail" Greenspan took over for retiring Paul Volcker (who opposed ANY changes to Glass-Steagal) during the late Reagan years, the final push was made by the Greenspan, and the Bush I administration to finally get it repealed, and let banks begin to merge, and thus our dismal decent began.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/18/b...st-be-replaced.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


The problem with the bi-partisan bull**** on this issue is that it was not a Republican or Democrat failure. It was a failure of ideology. It was a failure of Unregulated banking. It was a failure of "too big to fail". It was a failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism.

"Too big too fail" is the fundamental, core problem that led to our deep recession. The problem is so simple it can be seen simply in the title.

Clinton was hardly "Left" when it came to economics. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush all failed, on the heels of Allan Greenspan's epic failure. Too big to fail encourages the disaster we are facing. Revoking Glass-steagal was a process that took decades. It was not a Left or Right thing. It was the pressue of the elite banking entities, supporting the right candidates, and getting the right people into the right places. (House, Senate, Fed, FDIC, etc)

I only wish Paul Volcker had more influence in the Obama administration, He was right back then, and he's right now. Larry Sumners and Geithner are wrong.

If you are trying to sell Gramm-Leach-Bliley as a Clinton failure, or you are trying to put the blame on the Community Reinvestment Act, or you think Barney Frank/Freddie/Fannie is the primary cause...then you are either being intellectually dishonest because "your" party can't possibly be wrong or to blame.... Or you have are being historically naive.

Very well said...it is an ideology problem...it came in stages and any one of those stages could be blamed for the collapse, but the reality is that the combination of them is what made it so disastrous.

 

[top gun]

You are right, I'm the one who is the designated driver while everyone else gets hammered. that is mostly because I can have fun without having my mind altered. this world is pretty good without the rose colored glasses.

The $9B you reference was not in cash. It is once again borrowed money. So, no money was really brought back into the system. Instead, the money was borrowed. Isn't that how we got here in the first place. Also, GM - Ford - Chrysler did the worst of all of the car manufacturers in this deal. Lastly, I have quite a few friends that are in the car business and they liked the idea of the cash flow, but they didn't think that the cash flow from the government was going to be so slow. It literally ate up their profits while they had to float loans. Their margins were crushed by this shell game. Did it keep a few dealers in business? Yes, but what happens 6 months from now? There were better options and it shouldn't have had anything to do with getting gas guzzlers off the road. The global warming monster once again found a way of reaching into the average citizens wallet for another hidden tax.

As I said you are the scared "never has any fun guy" because you're so constipated with your conspiracy theories that even great things look bad to you.

First off there was not only new down payment money immediately put on the table and into our system that needed it but with financing tightened up like it is these buyers are much more qualified to get loans.

And as I remember that's another industry that needed a STIMULUS... the banking industry. We all have a stake in them doing better as well. Thanks for reminding us of that.

Now the new cars are coming out and much better fuel efficiency will be enforced with rising CAFE standards. What does that mean? That means the next time gas prices spike because of some issue in the middle east many Americans won't be nearly as devastated just trying to make it back & forth to work as has happened over and over again.

But go ahead poo poo the progress and be the guy that just complains about everything.

Some day you'll wake up and realize that the problem with ALWAYS being designated driver is... you never enjoyed ANY of the parties. No matter how good they really were.