Cash For Clunkers

[thomas12]

Unlike vast majority of the people here on LOC my LS400 was very rundown. Although the engine and transmission were strong, everything else on the car failed or was beginning to fail. It was just not worth the hassle and money to fix everything on that car. I work 60hrs/week and I needed a reliable vehicle. For a single recent college graduate, the LS was a huge car so that’s why I went for a fuel efficient Civic over an Accord.

The Honda's a great choice, I have a '99 Accord that has a lot of miles on it and many more to go. It doesn't shine as it did ten years ago but it's as reliable as any car can be. No repairs beyond routine maintenance since new. One can't go wrong with a Honda.

[LexLuthor400]

Reading through the last 6 pages it is clear that everyone has some valid points. BUT the main thing to think about is WHAT IS ITS PURPOSE?

The government CLAIMS that it is to get polluting cars off the road and cleaner ones on the road. Now IF this was true then all they had to do was offer it exclusively to those who had ACTUAL clunkers (i.e. the ones that ARE NOT required to get smogged, really old cars) From what I have seen at my local dealers and the pics on the last 6 pages, it is clear that most, not all, of these cars are not "Clunkers". Plus recycling old "clunkers" is NOT pollution free, so it really defeats the purpose.

If the CFC program was meant to jump start the auto industry, specifically USA manufactures, then the program has been an absolute failure. Look at some of the sales figures. Toyota and Honda are benefiting from this more than American manufactures are.

Now I understand that this program cannot make everyone happy, but I am tired of having my tax money SPENT FOR ME. The only way our economy is going to recover is if everyone is taxed less, so that they may spend more. This IDEA that our country can borrow over a trillion dollars to get out of this situation is just ridiculous. All these programs are not helping our country, especially CFC.

I would compare it to the housing market. Now obviously not everyone that used CFC is going to default on their loan, BUT the majority of these people using this program are not in a financially sound position to buy a $15,000+ car, because if they were, they would not be driving a "Clunker" in the first place. Just like what caused the housing crisis, incentives, CFC is a way to create incentives on something you could not afford in the first place until a little incentive was put out. That incentive really does not do much for you anyways, because once you have the new car; insurance WILL be higher, taxes WILL be higher and no matter how fuel efficient your car is that is not going to offset those new costs.

I call B.S. on this whole CFC program. All it was, was a way for congress to get immediate positive results on at least one industry, even if it won't last longer than a few months, so that they can say they have done something. This "blip" in sales is just another balloon like the housing balloon, and we ALL know what happened with that one.

HONESTLY I am tired of our elected officials finding ways to spend my money and your money, in an effort to "rebuild" our economy. Over the past 25 years our government has almost become completely detached from the American people. At this point I DONT TRUST ANYONE on both sides of the aisle!

Here is my stimulus plan that would not have required additional programs to make it work:

EVERYONE who filed a 2008 tax return regardless of income, but part of the workforce, would receive $5,000 dollars cash.

This could work because although America has about 360,000,000 people living here, only about 140,000,000 are in the workforce.

So $5,000 X 140,000,000 is $700 billion, which coincidentally is about HALF of what congress has approved in all these bailouts, programs etc. (So by now my plan could have given $10,000 to everyone)

Once everyone had $5,000 dollars they could spend it on goods and services which EVERYONE needs, not money to these programs that help only those who could benefit from it at that particular time. Plus these programs funnel the money into certain industries. We need money that spreads quickly around into different industries and giving money to EVERYONE is a very effective way of doing so.

Sorry for my rant, but I just felt like I needed to get that off my chest. Now I am going to for a drive in my quiet, refined and luxurious LS so that I can calm down. ;)

[Lucky13]

The govornment does not claim that it is to get polluting cars off the road. It is to help the economy. not the enviroment.

[nc211]

First: TexusLexus, great call on the Honda! You'll love it! My wife's family have been Honda Civic fans for years, with an aggregate mileage count on four civics of over a million miles! They live in the country, and work in the city. Lots of driving..

Three positive elements of benefit from the CFC program have been generated. First, a STRONG sign of pent-up demand exists out there from the buying community to spend some dollars, as evidenced by a program that was meant to last through the end of November on a $1b allocation, but lasted no more than 10 days. Second, ever been sitting at the stop light with a 1985 Oldsmobile Delta 88 spewing blue smoke in your face? Well, got some of those off the road. Third, less burden being placed upon the oil and gas supplies via more effecient vehicles replacing less effecient ones. I understand the negativety of destroying what some deem to be a perfectly good car. But you have to ask yourself "what's wrong with that Volvo they're destroying to make the owner accept only $4,500 for it?" Maybe it had 300k miles on it and was starting burn oil? Maybe that classic Landcruiser could not stop leaking oil all over the pavement from it's transfer case, and required a $4,000 repair? Do I think some abuse has occurred? Oh hell yes, you'd have to live in la-la land to think it wouldn't. But, do I think the vast majority of the transactions that occured under the CFC program were legit? Yep, absolutely. Get that stinkin' Delta 88 out of my face and replace it with a Civic.

The American car makers not making a profit from this: That's their own stinkin' fault! Hey, you think I give a rip if Chevy is sitting there, crying because that dude who's making his ends meet is taking his 1999 Tahoe with 110k miles on it(with it's 7th alternator, 3rd transmission, 6th power steering pump, leaking door seals, busted switches, blown a/c motor) to a Honda dealership and not back to another Chevy dealership? Those boys have no one, and I mean no one, to blame but themselves for putting out crap products for sooooo many years. Like hell if I'd sign up for another round of that kind of build quality again, especially when I've just been given a ticket to get out of the maintenance hell I've been in for so long! I don't have a say if they get my tax dollars on a loan from the government. But i do have a say what gets to sleep in my garage at night. And, it ain't gonna be something that does nothing but nag nag nag me for attention that I don't have to give! AND I personally love Tahoes, and would probably have one if my common sense would get drunk enough to let me!

Do I think that some folks have bitten off more then they could chew financially with this program? Probably. But that's no different than any other time in history. Banks will always have repo'd cars sitting out back, no matter what the economy. Comparing this to the housing bust is apples and oranges. The housing bust was caused by an over supply of new homes hitting the market and a rampid price escalation that couldn't be sustained. Eventually, the buying public couldn't ignore the fact that they could either buy that 15 year old home for $200k, or that brand spankin' new one across the street for $215k (and declining). Too many homes were built, which contributed to the already artificially inflated values (thanks to cheap and easy money) to pop.

To conclude my activity on this thread: I say to those who used the program, excellent job, you made the right choice. To those opposed to it due to cost: What's $3b in a pond of $7 trillion. We're all going to be speaking Chinese soon anyway, might as well get a new car out of it!

[90LS400Lexus]

As a Mercedes owner, this is hard for me to watch! This identical to my Mercedes!!!

[PilotguyPA28]

Why am I paying for you to get a $4500 credit??????????!!!!!!!!!!!

Cash for clunkers? Drive a clunker, keep your cash! Only fools buy new vehicles.

[SW03ES]

I can't really add anything to what NC said, he and I see eye to eye on this.

All I will say though is I know MANY people who are very sound financially who drive older cars, not because they can't afford to upgrade them, but because they don't see a benefit to replacing something that is functionally valuable that has no monetary value with something that will do what their old car does but cost them money to purchase. Cars are just utility to these people. The CARS program got MANY of these people to buy new vehicles injecting a lot of money into the economy. The statement "the majority of the people who used the program can't afford the cars they bought" just has no basis in anything but speculation. Believe me, its a lot harder for people who cannot afford things like cars and homes to get financing to make these purchases if they cannot pay cash than it used to be.

And why are you paying to get someone a $4500 credit? Because you want to see our economy come out of this recession, thats why.

[90LS400Lexus]

Me too. I like the concept of the program, but hate to see the "good cars" like the Mercedes like mine in the link below intentionally destroyed and my feelings are very strong on this... stronger than anything I have been sure of in a very long time. I think the cars should have been allowed to be parted out completely.... not just those five parts and the engine destroyed and car crushed. Could have even been sold and the money given to childrens charities. A HUGE waste in my opinion.

:(

As a Mercedes owner, this is hard for me to watch! This identical to my Mercedes!!!

I can't really add anything to what NC said, he and I see eye to eye on this.

All I will say though is I know MANY people who are very sound financially who drive older cars, not because they can't afford to upgrade them, but because they don't see a benefit to replacing something that is functionally valuable that has no monetary value with something that will do what their old car does but cost them money to purchase. Cars are just utility to these people. The CARS program got MANY of these people to buy new vehicles injecting a lot of money into the economy. The statement "the majority of the people who used the program can't afford the cars they bought" just has no basis in anything but speculation. Believe me, its a lot harder for people who cannot afford things like cars and homes to get financing to make these purchases if they cannot pay cash than it used to be.

And why are you paying to get someone a $4500 credit? Because you want to see our economy come out of this recession, thats why.

[SW03ES]

Yeah I hate to see that too. Lots of people would have liked to have purchased those cars.

However they will be able to again...plenty of older cars still out there.

For the record, they do allow extensive parting of the car. Only the engine and transmission cannot be removed.