Posted on 11/04/2013 5:15:28 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike
Just in time to act as an illuminating footnote to the ObamaCare disaster, a study has been released revealing that one of Obama's early "triumphs," Cash for Clunkers, was actually a badly-run flop that accomplished nothing worthwhile at very high cost.
The Brookings Institution study by Ted Gayer and Emily Parker finds that the 2009 program, which offered $3,500 to $4,500 for drivers to trade in their old "clunkers" for newer, more fuel-stingy models, fit the standard Obama practice of dropping vast amounts of cash for minor or ephemeral gains. Cash for Clunkers cost over $3 billion. It resulted in 677,482 trade-ins, with an average increase in fuel economy from 15.7 miles per gallon to 24.9 mpg.
And the end result? A savings of roughly 884 million gallons -- less than that used in a single week's driving.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The study article I read agreed that very little was accomplished by the billions spent, but that any reduction in greenhouse gasses was a good investment. (I stop reading when the author signals his liberal political bias.)
What I saw from cash for clunkers was my wealthiest friends, neighbors, and relatives trading in good used cars that could have been affordable for those without money to buy new cars.
No kidding. My two college bound daughters had to pay a lot more for their cars because decent used cars were crushed, and sucked out of the market.
Cash for Clunkers is a great lesson in Democrat short-term fixes that cause long-term destruction.
Yes, the mpg average went up a bit, but used cars became needlessly expensive and out of the reach of the poor or young that wanted to buy them.
We owe China tons of money.
They wanted payment.
They didn’t want ‘money’.
They needed STEEL to use to build new cars.
So... we paid them in junk cars (scrap metal).
“Unemployment, immigration, race relations, crime, and now health care, have all been subject to the Obama treatment and are all slipping inexorably from disaster to catastrophe. “
That is the problem with the mindset of the poor that any problem can be solved by throwing money at it. They don’t get that money is a tool, not a fix.
totally agree
it was a destructive evil idea and the twisted bastards that thought it up ought to be driven out of town on a rail
Precisely. The back up of 'clunkers' taking up valuable real estate at a nearby yard, which couldn't be crushed without gubmint okay, and not so much as a lug nut salvaged, eventually shut down the nearest salvage yard. I have a seldom used utility pickup from the clunker era, and recently bought a windshield wiper motor for it. First time I ever paid a core charge on a wiper motor--which means the parts places are rebuilding them, no new old stock left.
aside from a huge boost to the Korean economy...
Yep. That was the primary goal: remove as many vehicles as possible from society. (The program required the destruction of all ‘traded in’ vehicles’ engines, to permanently disable them.) Hundreds of thousands of perfectly good, running cars and light pickup trucks were thus removed from circulation. The folks who could have afforded to purchase them? Get thee to mass transit, and bow to the greater good!!!
“I will remember to my dying day the clip of “workers” dumping some caustic solution into fuel tanks of RUNNING automobiles,....”
I wonder how many of these ‘clunkers’ actually made it to the crusher. Seems like a great business for the black market.
If they were really interested in an environment they could have allowed European-style high-performance diesels offering supercharged small block horsepower at gas-hybrid mpg.
Surprisingly, It has never happened because said engines are somehow turned to be not green enough for regulators despite numerous scientific researches.
A real idea behind cash for a clunkers is to remove an entire pool of quality used cars from market.
It fits into their communist agenda as far as freedom of affordable transportation is essential for a free society.
Anyone realizes that United States is now not only out of top ten nations in terms of economic freedom and wealth per capita but also out of a top twenty nations in terms of car ownership?
Good old America, a nation on wheels is now slightly ahead of Bulgaria and Estonia in a number of automobiles used by individuals and behind Czech Republic and Greece or way behind Japan, Germany and Italy.
I heard a caller on the Wilkow show who worked for a car dealership.
He said that Kash-4-Klunkers was great for them (but bad for the country) because they were able to clear their lot, and every car they sold under that program was sold at the sticker price, rather than with the usual discount. And many of the cars they sold were eventually repossessed because people bought cars they really couldn’t afford.
“If they were really interested in an environment they could have allowed European-style high-performance diesels offering supercharged small block horsepower at gas-hybrid mpg.”
I have a Jetta TDI (turbo-diesel) Sportwagen. It’s an awesome car. When I bought it there were 9 new ones within 250 miles. According to the salesman VW brings in the maximum allowed number. If they bring in more they have to get it certified in all 50 states. It gets a good solid all-around 40 mpg and the top speed is electronically limited to 133 mph. Acceleration with the 6 speed DSG transmission is faster than many V8 gas car’s I’ve driven.
I agree with you 100%. The Left wants to take our cars. I’ve several times seen crowing articles stating today’s youth prefers public transportation. Bullsh*t! Between insurance and the purchase price they can’t afford to drive. (On the other hand, I offered my Mom’s pristine ‘97 Sable wagon with 20,000 miles on it for $3k to all my friends driving aged kids.’ Everything worked on it and they’d rather walk than be seen in a wagon. So the problem is bigger than just grabby liberals.)
Oh not only that, it was to be a long term capital asset for those that bought them, as they were for those that owned them if they didn't send them to the crusher. And they were probably payed for. Now debt was incurred. In Econ 201 their is the concept of keeping an asset in manufacturing running for as long as possible to eek out additional margins. These cars were doing the exact same thing to "our" balance sheets, it was a wise and prudent move financially, but as with everything with these Utopian New Way Crowd, even the laws of Econ get thrown out the window...
I first tried VW TDI in late 1990s in Europe. It was a 1993 Audi 100 beater with who knows how many miles on it. I’ve used it along with a Russian-built Chevy Blazer and I think it took four or five times to refuel Chevy given the same mileage. And it was a full-size sedan, not some gay Prius, doing just well on Autobahn there cruising at 100 MPH makes you a laughing stock for truckers and elderly Sunday drivers.
It has improved big time in a couple decades. A 2010 BMW 7-series TD full-size sedan toasts Corvette in cruise speed and acceleration. And it is only 3 liter 6 cylinders running on about 33-36 MPG. You won’t ever tell it from a gas car in both noise and odor as well.
My daughter’s boyfriend bought a little VW with a turbo diesel. That thing is sweet. I would love to see a few American cars like that. He goes from Boston to western mass at a mpg similar to my motorcycle. Well, almost.
“A 2010 BMW 7-series TD full-size sedan toasts Corvette in cruise speed and acceleration.”
Zero to sixty in 6.2 seconds doesn’t even beat a stock Mustang GT! The Corvette ZR1 is less than 4 seconds.
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.