RIP Cash for Clunkers...

know1

....you will not be missed.

I'm just wondering how long before we'll be bailing out the people who we incentivized to trade in sensible, paid-for cars for large car payments. Bet it won't be long.

Would be nice if the government decided to offer discounts to the customers of the business I work for to help us out in these "tough economic conditions".

soulsinging

know1 wrote:

....you will not be missed.

I'm just wondering how long before we'll be bailing out the people who we incentivized to trade in sensible, paid-for cars for large car payments. Bet it won't be long.

Would be nice if the government decided to offer discounts to the customers of the business I work for to help us out in these "tough economic conditions".

I'm thinking most of the cars traded in were far from sensible and paid for. I think a lot of people ditched SUV's they could never afford and got out of a bad deal and into something more economic for them.

I understand people that say our government spending is out of control and the stimulus stuff is a bad idea, but this program is the ONE thing congress has done since the crisis started that has actually helped a lot of citizens and our economy, and made positive steps towards reducing our energy/oil dependence. If you're going to rant about bad government policies, this program does not qualify. It's a drop in the bucket compared to most bailout programs and this one actually works. I don't get why people don't blink an eye when we give $700 billion to banks to loan more money to people and get us further in debt, but you give the actual citizens of this country a couple thousand dollar break on swapping their car out for one that is cheaper for them in the long run and people throw a fit. It makes no sense.

What business do you work for? Is it as problematic for us in the long term as the auto industry is via increasing dependence on oil exports from terrorist states and environmental damage/costs? If it is, I'm all for working out a way to incentivize your customers to make better choices.

know1

soulsinging wrote:

know1 wrote:

....you will not be missed.

I'm just wondering how long before we'll be bailing out the people who we incentivized to trade in sensible, paid-for cars for large car payments. Bet it won't be long.

Would be nice if the government decided to offer discounts to the customers of the business I work for to help us out in these "tough economic conditions".

I'm thinking most of the cars traded in were far from sensible and paid for. I think a lot of people ditched SUV's they could never afford and got out of a bad deal and into something more economic for them.

I understand people that say our government spending is out of control and the stimulus stuff is a bad idea, but this program is the ONE thing congress has done since the crisis started that has actually helped a lot of citizens and our economy, and made positive steps towards reducing our energy/oil dependence. If you're going to rant about bad government policies, this program does not qualify. It's a drop in the bucket compared to most bailout programs and this one actually works. I don't get why people don't blink an eye when we give $700 billion to banks to loan more money to people and get us further in debt, but you give the actual citizens of this country a couple thousand dollar break on swapping their car out for one that is cheaper for them in the long run and people throw a fit. It makes no sense.

What business do you work for? Is it as problematic for us in the long term as the auto industry is via increasing dependence on oil exports from terrorist states and environmental damage/costs? If it is, I'm all for working out a way to incentivize your customers to make better choices.

I'll agree that it SEEMS like this is the one program that works, but it's only been in place for a few weeks and people only seem to think in the very short term with tunnel vision. I'll bet there will be big ramifications from it down the line.

For example:

Didn't the cars have to be several years old to be eligible? Likely that means they were paid for and now these people are likely taking on payments. So....if you have 700,000 people who suddenly have a car payment where they didn't have one before, what does that do to stimulating the rest of the economy? They'll likely have EVEN LESS money for spending in other areas of the economy that might need help.

And I did have a big problem with the government bailing out the banks and the auto industry.

evenflow

Also something not mentioned, check the stats for the dealerships nationwide who have been reimbursed for the clunkers program. I want to say it was less than 2%. I know I've been hearing about dealerships down here having to let people go or hold off on paying the salesmen who brokered clunker deals until the gov. pays them back.

In the end this program could do a lot more harm than good if the payments don't start flowing quickly.

soulsinging

know1 wrote:

I'll agree that it SEEMS like this is the one program that works, but it's only been in place for a few weeks and people only seem to think in the very short term with tunnel vision. I'll bet there will be big ramifications from it down the line.

For example:

Didn't the cars have to be several years old to be eligible? Likely that means they were paid for and now these people are likely taking on payments. So....if you have 700,000 people who suddenly have a car payment where they didn't have one before, what does that do to stimulating the rest of the economy? They'll likely have EVEN LESS money for spending in other areas of the economy that might need help.

And I did have a big problem with the government bailing out the banks and the auto industry.

I don't believe there were any requirements that a car be a certain age. My parents did a cash for clunkers trade and they traded in a 3-4 year old minivan for a nice, cheap sedan that gets twice the gas mileage. Only thing I recall being considered is what kind of mileage the car you turned in got. I don't think a lot of people are trading in nice, solid, safe, and reliable cars for some glitzy new gizmo. People are getting rid of cars that have been dead weight to them... high payments for luxury SUV's, crappy old minivans that spent more time in the shop than on the road and killed them in weekly gas payments. In addition, the combo of car dealerships being desperate to make sales and people finally opting for a car the runs cheap rather than a pimped out Hummer with dvd players installed means that the cars people are getting through cash for clunkers are pretty damn cheap at the end of the day. I know we scored a sweet deal on ours. If I hadn't just bought a secondhand car from my uncle (which is a shit Ford and will probably be dead within a year or two, or cost me as much to repair as to buy new) I'd be buying a car now even without cash for clunkers.

But then, you're the guy that argues we should never, ever take a loan for anything, never ever buy a new car because of the depreciation (they're cars, not baseball cards), etc etc. So I don't know why I'd expect you to have an open mind on this. This is a good program, maybe the first intelligent and effective response to a real problem to come out of congress in 25 years (other than freedom fries of course). I'm all for supporting this one. Take it out of the blank check we gave the banks if you have to.

soulsinging

evenflow wrote:

Also something not mentioned, check the stats for the dealerships nationwide who have been reimbursed for the clunkers program. I want to say it was less than 2%. I know I've been hearing about dealerships down here having to let people go or hold off on paying the salesmen who brokered clunker deals until the gov. pays them back.

In the end this program could do a lot more harm than good if the payments don't start flowing quickly.

That is a problem, but I expect it will be fixed before long. And let's face it... would these people still have jobs if not for cash for clunkers? Prior to this deal, who the hell was buying a new car in this country in this economy? Nobody. Maybe people are being let go or having to wait for paychecks, but I think without cash for clunkers it would be far, far worse. They would have had twice as many people let go outright rather than telling them to wait on the payment. The problem is nobody anticipated how successful this program would be.

VINNY GOOMBA

My question is, how many other people are going to wait for another government handout to buy their next car? What kind of effect will this have on car sales in the near and not-so-near future? My guess is that although Cash for Clunkers boosted sales for all of a few weeks, that it will ultimately be detrimental to the auto sales business and the economy in general. No one is going to rush out and buy cars anytime in the near future as we will all wait with baited breath for another government incentive program to buy cars. With dealers already leveraged to the max while waiting for their government reimbursement, this could lead to quite a few layoffs while sales drop below pre-C4C levels. Again, it's another case of the government getting us drunk with easy money-- we enjoy the temporary euphoria of government intervention in the economy, but it never comes without the guaranteed hangover.

decides2dream

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

. Again, it's another case of the government getting us drunk with easy money-- we enjoy the temporary euphoria of government intervention in the economy, but it never comes without the guaranteed hangover.

man, i have apparently been missing out. i have never gotten drunk on easy money, and i most certainly have not felt ny euphoria derived from such, ever....temporarily or otherwise.


and sure, we bought our new car in 2007.....two years too early. c'est la vie.
i do still have an old clunker, but i drive so infrequently nowadays, i see no need to get a newer car.

soulsinging

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

My question is, how many other people are going to wait for another government handout to buy their next car? What kind of effect will this have on car sales in the near and not-so-near future? My guess is that although Cash for Clunkers boosted sales for all of a few weeks, that it will ultimately be detrimental to the auto sales business and the economy in general. No one is going to rush out and buy cars anytime in the near future as we will all wait with baited breath for another government incentive program to buy cars. With dealers already leveraged to the max while waiting for their government reimbursement, this could lead to quite a few layoffs while sales drop below pre-C4C levels. Again, it's another case of the government getting us drunk with easy money-- we enjoy the temporary euphoria of government intervention in the economy, but it never comes without the guaranteed hangover.

I don't think I buy this argument. People know this is a one-shot deal and people buy new cars by necessity or desire. It's not like getting a cool new stereo where you can just live with an older model and hope you get a sweet deal on the pimped system. You get a car when you need it... your current one broke down or is running poorly or causing you problems. People aren't going to be pondering buying a Lexus and decide not to in the hopes the government will offer a luxury car rebate someday. This is to encourage people to get rid of gas guzzlers in favor of more economical cars. The people interested in this will jump on it now, the ones that don't will operate the same way they always have.

And it's not like they're giving free cars... they're giving you a bit of money off the top while people are strapped. If the economy rebounds, that little rebate isn't going to seem like such a big deal. Hell, car dealers offered better deals of their own volition as often as not.

VINNY GOOMBA

soulsinging wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

My question is, how many other people are going to wait for another government handout to buy their next car? What kind of effect will this have on car sales in the near and not-so-near future? My guess is that although Cash for Clunkers boosted sales for all of a few weeks, that it will ultimately be detrimental to the auto sales business and the economy in general. No one is going to rush out and buy cars anytime in the near future as we will all wait with baited breath for another government incentive program to buy cars. With dealers already leveraged to the max while waiting for their government reimbursement, this could lead to quite a few layoffs while sales drop below pre-C4C levels. Again, it's another case of the government getting us drunk with easy money-- we enjoy the temporary euphoria of government intervention in the economy, but it never comes without the guaranteed hangover.

I don't think I buy this argument. People know this is a one-shot deal and people buy new cars by necessity or desire. It's not like getting a cool new stereo where you can just live with an older model and hope you get a sweet deal on the pimped system. You get a car when you need it... your current one broke down or is running poorly or causing you problems. People aren't going to be pondering buying a Lexus and decide not to in the hopes the government will offer a luxury car rebate someday. This is to encourage people to get rid of gas guzzlers in favor of more economical cars. The people interested in this will jump on it now, the ones that don't will operate the same way they always have.

And it's not like they're giving free cars... they're giving you a bit of money off the top while people are strapped. If the economy rebounds, that little rebate isn't going to seem like such a big deal. Hell, car dealers offered better deals of their own volition as often as not.

1 shot deal? Maybe. But I think that remains to be seen, especially since this idea "worked." Wasn't it just a few weeks ago that they were talking about resurrecting this idea? I think we're only getting our feet wet in terms of these 1 shot deals coming our way courtesy of Uncle Sam.

I wouldn't say that people necessarily get cars when they absolutely need it... Nor houses. That's what YOU would do, because you're smart. You need look no further than the last 8 years of people buying HUGE stuff they couldn't afford simply because money itself was cheap, and credit was far too easy. The real question is, has anyone learned their lesson that if something is too good to be true that it probably is?

The amount of money going towards each car purchased in this program was worth probably up to 25% of some of the less expensive cars bought, so it was a pretty significant incentive to participate. In the end, what has it brought us but more debt with new car payments? Dealers waiting on that government check with money out of their pockets that they've fronted? Sure, maybe there will be some slight environmental impact-- as if we'd actually be able to tell. Dependence on foreign oil lifted at all? I doubt it. I doubt we'll see gas prices go down either buy having however many more efficient vehicles added to the road as a result of C4C.

know1

soulsinging wrote:

I don't believe there were any requirements that a car be a certain age. My parents did a cash for clunkers trade and they traded in a 3-4 year old minivan for a nice, cheap sedan that gets twice the gas mileage. Only thing I recall being considered is what kind of mileage the car you turned in got. I don't think a lot of people are trading in nice, solid, safe, and reliable cars for some glitzy new gizmo. People are getting rid of cars that have been dead weight to them... high payments for luxury SUV's, crappy old minivans that spent more time in the shop than on the road and killed them in weekly gas payments. In addition, the combo of car dealerships being desperate to make sales and people finally opting for a car the runs cheap rather than a pimped out Hummer with dvd players installed means that the cars people are getting through cash for clunkers are pretty damn cheap at the end of the day. I know we scored a sweet deal on ours. If I hadn't just bought a secondhand car from my uncle (which is a shit Ford and will probably be dead within a year or two, or cost me as much to repair as to buy new) I'd be buying a car now even without cash for clunkers.

But then, you're the guy that argues we should never, ever take a loan for anything, never ever buy a new car because of the depreciation (they're cars, not baseball cards), etc etc. So I don't know why I'd expect you to have an open mind on this. This is a good program, maybe the first intelligent and effective response to a real problem to come out of congress in 25 years (other than freedom fries of course). I'm all for supporting this one. Take it out of the blank check we gave the banks if you have to.

OK - I'll put it this way. It had to be a car worth less than $4500 for it to make sense economically. What's the cheapest new car that qualified - $12K or so. So you definitely have people taking out loans where they likely didn't have one before. That really isn't going to help the economy in the long run.

I guess what I'm saying is that not only is it not even a very good deal for the consumer, I believe it could have a long term NEGATIVE effect on the economy in general. That has nothing to do with whether I believe someone should take out a loan or not.

Cosmo

know1 wrote:

....you will not be missed.

I'm just wondering how long before we'll be bailing out the people who we incentivized to trade in sensible, paid-for cars for large car payments. Bet it won't be long.

Would be nice if the government decided to offer discounts to the customers of the business I work for to help us out in these "tough economic conditions".

...
No one is getting bailed out for a bad car loan... but, that is a nice pessimistic view and scare tactic to employ.
Here's why...
If you get a car repossessed because you aren't making payments... you and your family are not thrown into the streets... unless, you live in the car you just bought. The worst trhat can happpen is you lose your new car.
Also, the value of your house does not go down if there are a lot of cars being repossessed in your neighborhood. Empty houses in your neighborhood will do that.. but not a 2008 Toyota Carolla that is behind in payments.
Finally... no one is taking out or lending $325,000.00 on a Corolla, like they did on the houses in 2007. What's a new Corolla going for these days... 20something thousand (minus 4,500)? Not enough to threaten to bring down the Global Economy.

know1

Cosmo wrote:

...
No one is getting bailed out for a bad car loan... but, that is a nice pessimistic view and scare tactic to employ.
Here's why...
If you get a car repossessed because you aren't making payments... you and your family are not thrown into the streets... unless, you live in the car you just bought. The worst trhat can happpen is you lose your new car.
Also, the value of your house does not go down if there are a lot of cars being repossessed in your neighborhood. Empty houses in your neighborhood will do that.. but not a 2008 Toyota Carolla that is behind in payments.
Finally... no one is taking out or lending $325,000.00 on a Corolla, like they did on the houses in 2007. What's a new Corolla going for these days... 20something thousand (minus 4,500)? Not enough to threaten to bring down the Global Economy.

I'm saying that if 700K people now have a $350/month car payment where they didn't have one before, they have less income available to spend on other areas of the economy.

Cosmo

know1 wrote:

I'm saying that if 700K people now have a $350/month car payment where they didn't have one before, they have less income available to spend on other areas of the economy.

...
So?
I mean, the 350 bucks is 350 bucks... what difference does it make if they spent it on a new car or other stuff?
If they needed the 350 bucks on Pampers and groceries... that's one thing and they shouldn't have gotten the car and the loan company should not have authorized the loan, right?
It's wasn't just poor people getting in on this... I work with people who are making 6 figure salaries that traded in junky 1994 Explorers for 2009 Camrys. They will be just fine.

soulsinging

Cosmo wrote:

know1 wrote:

I'm saying that if 700K people now have a $350/month car payment where they didn't have one before, they have less income available to spend on other areas of the economy.

...
So?
I mean, the 350 bucks is 350 bucks... what difference does it make if they spent it on a new car or other stuff?
If they needed the 350 bucks on Pampers and groceries... that's one thing and they shouldn't have gotten the car and the loan company should not have authorized the loan, right?
It's wasn't just poor people getting in on this... I work with people who are making 6 figure salaries that traded in junky 1994 Explorers for 2009 Camrys. They will be just fine.

Like my parents, who traded in TWO gas guzzlers for two more economical cars.

Thorns2010

Today I read in the Star Tribune (Minneapolis) in their short 'Have you heard' section that apparently energy efficient appliances are next on the list for rebates/'free' money.

It was only a 2-3 sentence mention of it, with no source, but just wondering if anyone else has heard about this? I'm off to google to see if I can find an actual article on it.

EDIT:

Ok, found this

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_ ... 0821304909

From Article wrote:

A $300 million cash-for-clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy-efficient home appliances provides a glimmer of hope for beleaguered makers of washing machines and dishwashers, but it's probably not enough to lift companies such as Whirlpool (NYSE:WHR - News) and Electrolux out of the worst down cycle in the sector's history.

Beginning late this fall, the program authorizes rebates of $50 to $200 for purchases of high-efficiency household appliances. The money is part of the broader economic stimulus bill passed earlier this year. Program details will vary by state, and the Energy Dept. has set a deadline of Oct. 15 for states to file formal applications. The Energy Dept. expects the bulk of the $300 million to be awarded by the end of November. (Unlike the clunkers auto program, consumers won't have to trade in their old appliances.)

Cosmo

Thorns2010 wrote:

Today I read in the Star Tribune (Minneapolis) in their short 'Have you heard' section that apparently energy efficient appliances are next on the list for rebates/'free' money.

It was only a 2-3 sentence mention of it, with no source, but just wondering if anyone else has heard about this? I'm off to google to see if I can find an actual article on it.

EDIT:

Ok, found this

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090824/bs_ ... 0821304909

From Article wrote:

A $300 million cash-for-clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy-efficient home appliances provides a glimmer of hope for beleaguered makers of washing machines and dishwashers, but it's probably not enough to lift companies such as Whirlpool (NYSE:WHR - News) and Electrolux out of the worst down cycle in the sector's history.

Beginning late this fall, the program authorizes rebates of $50 to $200 for purchases of high-efficiency household appliances. The money is part of the broader economic stimulus bill passed earlier this year. Program details will vary by state, and the Energy Dept. has set a deadline of Oct. 15 for states to file formal applications. The Energy Dept. expects the bulk of the $300 million to be awarded by the end of November. (Unlike the clunkers auto program, consumers won't have to trade in their old appliances.)

...
I saw this and am probably going to participate in it. I have a circa 1992 Frigidaire that is making a buzzing sound from the compressor. I could use a new refridgerator.
But.. not a Maytag...
http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/55033737.html