When this originally came out (last year?) it was called an Air-Check. Same rules, perhaps same program now - dunno.

I had an older car, POS, and thought what the hell. So I called and qualified and got my aircheck (more than $4500 tho, then).

With that guvmunt check in hand I looked around. It became apparant that this is a scam. Not intended to be a scam I'm sure, but like alot of government help programs it wasn't exactly well thought out.

See, if you use your aircheck you have to give the carlot your clunker for free to be crushed. They apply the $4500 against the price and aren't very interested in haggling down the price.
Or...
Just trade in your clunker which no respectable car lot wants and they crush it. They've inflated their price to cover your car and they'll give you (if you haggle) $4500 trade-in for your car.

Same same only one is free money to the car lot from taxpayers and one is old fashioned car business. You the poor consumer are still gong to pay the same for the car either way and your country's national debt continues to rise and rise....

I've heard zero reports that car dealerships are inflating their car prices $4500 to offset the CFC rebate. Why would they?

The good thing about a new car vs. a used car is that you are more likely to make it through the 5 year loan without spending very much on repairs and maintenance. If you look at Honda, Toyota, and Nissan there isn't a huge difference in retail price between a car that is two years old w/ 25k miles and a new car. You can save some more if you go another couple of years but there is definite risk in buying a car with more than 60k miles on it.

New cars are already inflated, so they can 'give YOU a deal' and 'let' you talk them down as well as covering the cost of buying the trade-in. It's a double tap, your trade-in is then sold and they recoup the money they lost when combined with the 'talked-down' inflated price.
The air-check takes that trade-in and 'talked down' price out of the equation and they make the air-check as complete profit on top of whatever profit they can talk you out of on the purchase price.

I've been thinking more about this program, and my question is if it works so well in this industry, then why not incorporate the program in other industries?

I work construction and have received a HUGE slowdown in work as of the last few months. Why not destroy perfectly good homes and commercial buildings (ie unefficient in the heating/cooling/insulating department) and allow the government to subsidize 1/4 of the cost of a new one like in the cash for clunkers program.

Wouldn't this really stimulate the economy as well? It would sure help out my industry...

that's a great point samcol. EVERYONE needs housing, not everyone needs a car. Since I see vehicles as luxury, I'm all for a Cash for Housing subsidy. Especially when it has to be also done in rich neighborhoods as well as poor.

What about the boating industry? It has really been hurt. Why don't we give everyone a yacht. Think of the reduction in stress that we would all have sailing each weekend. Undoubtedly, health would improve and healthcare expenses would decrease.

Ooo, Ooo, and the plane industry! If we all had our own plane, imagine the efficiency. Right now, we all have to take connector flights instead of flying directly to our destination. Oh, the pollution it causes! Direct flights are WAY greener! Let's make sure everyone has their own plane too!

...and I want a puppy too.

I think that planes and boats are luxuries. Housing is not, and in some areas of the nation, vehicles are not a luxury but quite needed, so a basic Trabant like vehicle is needed.

So let's list out the problems.

It takes away vehicles that the poor can afford.

The govt is subsidizing the purchase of vehicles and if someone buys GM, they benefit.

It rewards people who bought stupid low fuel efficiency vehicles in the first place. My Integra, 33-35 mpg. My Subaru, 25 mpg. I didn't buy crapola low efficiency vehicles so I don't get rewarded.

It encourages more financing and more lending.

Vehicles are a depreciable asset. They lose value.

Why only vehicles? My 10 year old Integra with 130k miles is in great shape. How about credit for a new washer/dryer, or a new tv. Shit, I have been looking at home speakers in the 1,000 to 1500 range for a year. I'll take a credit for that, and I will still be listening to them 20 years from now.

I love this kind of post.

To summarize: "Government hand outs are bad, and I'm pissed I didn't get one."

I shouldn't take this post seriously but it isn't necessary to demolish a house in order to improve efficiencies. Furthermore, there are already credits, tax breaks, etc. for upgrading insulation, HVAC, etc.

You can say the same thing for cars, you can get the same kind of efficiencies by buying a slightly used japanese engine to retrofit into any vehicle for much less than the $4,500.

Sometimes it is much more costly to upgrade the house than to tear it down. It's quite common in the Northeast and Southwest. Actually it's common in places where density is high and people want to live in desirable locations. Hingham, MA is an area where it was much more feasible for teardowns and still be in commuting distance to Boston. I know because the house my wife grew up in was one of those kinds of homes. It was definitely not worth doing all those upgrades as I was interested in the property at one point in time.

Many homes cannot just have HVAC systems installed since there is no crawlspaces in between floors.

In my area, a friend of mine just bought a Huyndai. He turned his car in and got $4500 off and the dealership matched that $4500. So he got $9000 off his car. That sure does sound like care dealerships are inflating their prices.

Here's another example of the unintended consequences when the government meddles in the free market.

You can read the rest of the article here

You, like 80% of people who participated in cash for clunkers, bought an import. The only difference between you and the 80% is that you traded in an import, not a domestic vehicle. Of the top five cars sold under the program, only the Ford Focus was a domestic. Great stimullus for the industry there. :rolleyes:


If you are a constitutional scholar, please point out to me the portions that describe how the federal government can choose to let Bear Stearns go down the tubes, but bail out AIG. Or where it specifies that the president chooses and fires CEOs. Oh, wait, that's all "promoting the general welfare," isn't it? By your definition, NOTHING is beyond the scope of his powers. George Bush was a different story, though. He allowed three people to have water poured up their noses, and although that saved lives, he should have been impeached.


They're way ahead of you, sort of. Just quit paying your mortgage--the government won't let your lender foreclose! I didn't see that one in the constitution, either.

I think Mitsubishi was 50% owned by Chrysler when we bought it. I live on a private country road with no snow removal and need a 4 wheel or all wheel drive car in the winter. When I looked at domestic SUVs I couldn't find one to qualify with my trade in (improve milleage by at least 5 mpg). My other car is a Dodge Ram (made in Mexico).

Even if the manufacturer is owned by a foreign company the car was still built in the US sold by a US dealer which created many jobs in the US. Sure some of the profits go to another country but the majority of the money spent goes right back int our economy.

I believe all Subarus (the car we bought) are built in Japan.

Subaru of Indiana Automotive, Inc. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Looks at least some of the Subaru's are manufactured in Indiana.

---------- Post added at 12:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 AM ----------

Honda Assembly plants:

List of Honda assembly plants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4 in the US

Toyota - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Toyota has 5 major plants in the US.


The fact is even if the company is not in the US much of the labor and parts are in the US.

---------- Post added at 12:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 AM ----------

And just because it is pertinent to the discussion here is a paper on vehicle production costs:

http://msl1.mit.edu/classes/esd123/vyas.pdf

I don't have time to go through this right now and see what % of a cars purchase price goes back into US hands but maybe someone else can.

I don't particularly care if the autos bought through this program were made in the US or abroad....that wasn't really the point....it was to get people to the dealerships and to get inefficient autos off the road. Besides, it would be pretty iffy if the program were for US auto companies only

Not to mention illegal according to our treaties.

This may have been a good idea four or five years ago, however now it's to late; The damage is done. This and many other thing are nothing more than a ploy to draw the American's attion away from the sad facts at hand. Anyone found our presidents birth certificate yet... No, yet we put the California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger through pure hell just to govern a state. WoW Arnoled has done more for America in way of helping people than Obama has or ever will. Let me stop right there or I will step on some toes here. Get the Facts people, oh thats the problem; That why there are so many people at these Town Hall meeting, we can't get the facts!!!!! Hummm, I thought that our goverment was there to protect and help us. Oh well, better luck next time around I guess.....

I agree with you that the worst economic downturn in more than 60 years was not Obama's fault.

Many economist believe Obama's overall stimulus program (ARRA, TARP... more than "cash for clunkers") has helped stabilize the economy and bring it out of recession more quickly than otherwise would have been likely:
Cash for Clunkers? A minor piece of the recovery puzzle that will certainly not help the US auto industry in the long-term.

Great another troll for us to have to debunk every other day... You should really read past posts before spouting of ignorant crap like this. Pretty much everything you have said has been debunked almost daily. I'm not going to waist my time debunking the same lies again.

So let me get this right, you expect me (another troll) to believe that you have read the bill on health care and are the foremost expert on it as well. ( Pretty much everything you have said has been debunked almost daily.) Arnold Swarchenegger has opened many inner city gyms, has made movie after movie, brought Mr. Olympia to the national level for the world to come togather and compete. I could go on an on about how Arnold Swarchenegger has helped the USA. Sad to say for Obama, all his efforts were put in the projects in one area that is no better of now than when he started it. Well there I go agin spouting of ignorant crap! Then enlighten me in the error in my knowledge of Obama, his health care plane, what he has done in his past to help the USA. Why it is hard for him to be open with the American public and stop flipfloping back and forth with what he believes. Stop lieing. (I'm not going to waist my time debunking the same lies again.) Please do not, I would hate for this Troll to have to list more facts. Now as for the us part of your rant, where are they? Oh and where is that birth certificate? After he was born in another country he was moved to the US. Ok forget the birth certificate, where is his green card?:orly: Well better luck next time. Your kind are sad, you would rather rant and rave and call people names than to help them to understand your point of view, if you even have one! I'm new to this site and I like to hear people's opinions and learn facts about different things. However only to find sad people like you and I'm guessing that he speaks for all of you because he used the term us in his statement. It leaves little to wounder about why we are where we are today with people like this. Keep up the good work.....

Take a deep breath......ok, now nobody was talking about the healthcare bill, they were referring to the numerous posts about things like Obama's birth certificate(which has been proven he is a citizen and born here). Your initial post seemed intentionally inflamatory, that was why you were called a troll. That may not have been your intention but it came off that way. Welcome to the site by the way!

You brought up a lot of things that have been thoroughly debunked and are not at all related to cash for clunkers. That is why you are a troll.

What does Arnold have to do with cash for clunkers? what does Obama's birth certificate have to do with cash for clunkers? What do the town hall meetings have to do with cash for clunkers?

You came into this thread and posted a bunch of unrelated talking points many of which are from the crazy wing of the conservative movement.

If you want to be a constructive member of this forum then you should really try to stay on topic and fact check what you post before you post it.

It's been touched on, and may not really belong in this thread, but in some areas of the country (one example being Detroit MI) they are knocking down homes in order to increase demand, and inflate the prices of other homes.

Similar to perfectly good cars being destroyed, perfectly good homes are being destroyed as well in the hunt for the elusive recovery...

I'm just curious how Arnold was put through "pure hell" when we elected him as our governor. The only focused criticism was the allegation he groped a woman and after he apologized it was over and done with.

Now that the dust has settled car dealerships are busy twiddling their thumbs again, and the net gas savings is only equal to a single day of US gas consumption. Also the net cost of the program was $1.4 billion. I'm not impressed.

It's too soon to tell anything. Automobile inventories are at a 24-year low. Right now dealers have fewer incentives to offer discounts so soon after the program and with inventories so low, and consumers have fewer options to choose from.

The dust hasn't settled yet. At least the country isn't sitting on a huge inventory. That in itself is a common indicator of a recession. When people need to replace their cars in the near future (it will happen), where will those cars come from? Oh, maybe Detroit, for one.

This isn't entirely true - the dealerships have certainly reduced their inventory through this program. However, the union contracts REQUIRE that X number of cars are produced a day/week/month. Thus, the program has simply moved the inventory from the dealers to the car company warehouses. I've seen images of OCEANS of new cars in parking lots waiting to be shipped to dealerships who aren't buying.

This program will go down in history as gallactically stupid (and unconstitutional).

They can downplay the significance of the environmental benefit all they want but a reduction equivalent to 1 day's use of gasoline is significant.

I know that I wouldn't have purchased a car to replace our 20 year old junker if it wasn't for the CforC money. We were going to junk it this year and just drive our truck which gets about 11 mpg. Our new car gets about 25 mpg. There must be others with a similar story so maybe things would be even worse without this program.