Posted on 07/31/2009 6:35:53 PM PDT by Ge0ffrey
Many NY Times readers seem to be bashing Congress's cash for clunker program. That's surprising because comments posted to NY Times articles usually run 9-1 (rough guess) in support of wacky left-wing causes.
Here's an example:
This is classic American legislation:
1. Reward the wrongdoers (i.e., those who bought and drive gas hogs). For this crowd: Drive a polluting, climate-changing, Al Qaeda-supporting pick-up or SUV for a few years, then get a $4,500 credit toward a new car.
2. Punish the responsible citizens (i.e., those who made frugal choices, but are enlisted to help pay for the free ride given to the wrongdoers). For this crowd: nothing but driving their well-made but certainly not immortal Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans toward the 200,000 mile mark, and crossing fingers that they will make it.
3. Fail to account for the true cost of the program.
What we should have in place of this boondoggle for the undeserving is a surtax on all vehicles with under 18 MPG, with all proceeds of the surtax going to renewable energy, energy conservation and mass transit projects. Rather than reward these slobs, make them pay.
(Excerpt) Read more at thelede.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Another thing to recall about the “Cash for Clunkers” program is how it hurts the poor. The program will take these “clunkers” off the street and give them to the government to destroy. But these are precisely the kinds of cars that poor or fixed-income people tend to purchase. Most of these “clunkers” are of course in fine shape, but they are not “green” enough according to government determinations. So poor people who cannot afford to purchase new, government-approved (and thus artificially expensive) automobiles will be told to “go take a hike” – literally!
The government having melted down these “clunkers,” the market in low priced used cars will dry up, thus driving up cost and further hurting poor and working people as well as seniors and others on fixed income. Grandma who just needs a cheap old car to get down to the pharmacy for her prescriptions will thus be forced to walk or hire a cab, as the finance companies will take a look at her social security income and say “next!”
Cash for clunkers is an attack on the poor for the benefit of government-connected Big Auto big-wigs and GMAC-style bankster/moneylenders. As with most government programs, the poor get the short end of the stick.
Aside from the fact that this is intended to:
1. Subsidize the pensions of the UAW
2. Artificially prop the auto sales of Government Motors so that everyone is deceived into believing that the government can run businesses better than citizens.
3. Push people out of the cars they choose to drive and into the cars the Leftists are going to force us to drive
Is this really the best time to spend $2 billion on junk?
Supposedly people need medical care very badly in this country, and they’re buying junk.
As a guy who has always bought used cars, this is absolutely correct.
Lots of Republicans voted for cash for clunkers.
Friends of mine, a husband and wife, work for a dealership and I was talking to them last night about this program. The wife is in accounting and she said that the program has brought in LOTS of customers. She also said that she brought home the government program packet to familiarize herself with the program and found that it was 109 pages of legal jargon.
She submitted six deals to the government on Thursday and was waiting to see if they would be accepted or rejected. Her co-worker submitted the dealer’s first “cash for clunkers” deal to the government and it was rejected. Apparently there was an error or errors in the submission. She’s trying to figure out where in all the paperwork there might be a typo.
One customer came in for the deal and discovered that his “clunker”, a 2000 Pontiac Bonneville, was not eligible for the program because the factory specs said that that car got 19 MPG and the “clunker” must have a rating of 18 MPG or less. It’s amazing that mileage and age are not taken into account by the program. No way that car still gets 19 MPG.
Actually, it's nothing but a pass-through to the UAW.
Additionally, the dealer has to “make the sale” before submitting the paperwork and take the title of the clunker. Then liquid glass is to be poured into the motor. If the paperwork is rejected the buyer is on the hook for the $3,500 or $4,500 dollars. The seller is not to write up the contract as dependant on acceptance but if he did and the car was destroyed and the application for clunker money was rejected, the buyer would only be reimbursed $100 for the destroyed car.
Most NYC residents don’t have cars, and don’t see any reason why their tax dollars should be used to fund other people’s car ownership.
I have to agree. Knowing the facts, I have to say that this was “handled stupidly”
Absolutely right. The poor are the ones hurt by this.
If one is to participate buy Ford.
or Toyota,Honda,Hyundai,Volkswagen etc...
don’t forget that those big old gas guzzling land yachts and vans are much roomier for those who live in their cars. i mean really, how does the gov’t expect a family of 4 to cram themselves into a subaru? there is just no place for the t.v. or the clothes line.
Time to trade in our clunker politicians.
The biggest ‘clunker’ is the one in the White House.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.