Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Clunker math

Posted on 01/19/2011 4:27:47 PM PST by MNDude

The person who calculated this bit of information went to high school in Pittsburgh, Pa. He is now & has been a professor at The University of West Virginia in Morgantown, West Virginia for the last forty some years. I never looked at the clunker program in such depth. But he did.

Clunker Math

Think of it this way: A clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year. A vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons a year. So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year. They claim 700,000 vehicles so that's 224 million gallons saved per year. That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil. 5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption. More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars

So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million. We spent $8.57 for every dollar we saved. I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care, though.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: chainemail; chat; clunkers; vanity
(here's a FWD I just got. Seems like the math is right)
1 posted on 01/19/2011 4:27:49 PM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Even the Speed channel show “Rides” with Stacey David had a blurb about what a stupid program the “Cash for Clunkers” program was. It detailed every single economic ill effect it created, and there were a bunch of them, from junkyards deprived of income to mechanics and auto parts stores deprived of income, to people who couldn’t buy affordable used cars because of it.


2 posted on 01/19/2011 4:33:51 PM PST by Hardastarboard (Bringing children to America without immigration documents is child abuse. Let's end it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Bad math, but the program was still very flawed.


3 posted on 01/19/2011 4:35:43 PM PST by onona (1703rd Air Refueling Wing, Provisional)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onona

What I mean to say is, that the math is wrong. But we really didn’t need that math to understand that there is NFW that the government can run any program more efficiently than private businesses.

NFW


4 posted on 01/19/2011 4:37:24 PM PST by onona (1703rd Air Refueling Wing, Provisional)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

I’m sure the program also did something to increase the cost of used cars.


5 posted on 01/19/2011 4:37:46 PM PST by killermosquito (Buffalo (and eventually France) is what you get when liberalism runs its course.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

$3 billion one time cost for $350 million savings per year. How many years the savings will continue is unclear, however it will be more than one and could be as many as ten, which would be a $3.5 billion savings.


6 posted on 01/19/2011 4:39:48 PM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: killermosquito
The clunkers had to be destroyed. That reduced by that many the number of used cars that were available for sale. When supply goes down, cost goes up.

Worse still those clunkers had value for their parts. Every part not salvaged from a clunker is one less that can be used to keep another car going. Now you not only have the clunker that was sacrificed to the program you also have another car that doesn't run. You've taken two cars out of circulation, but only one is replaced.

IMHO it was one of these liberal rainbow stews. Sounded good, but it was not carefully, or otherwise, thought through before cranking it up to full speed.

Ethanol is another rainbow stew recipes that will come back to haunt us. Along with CFL’s.

Face it, government can do nothing correctly or inexpensively. A government solution or program to solve a problem means not only will the problem will not be solved, it will get worse, and a number of new problems will be created. Meanwhile government gotten bigger, more intrusive and more firmly entrenched as it creates new dependencies.

7 posted on 01/19/2011 5:03:12 PM PST by jwparkerjr (It's the Constitution, Stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

You do understand the purpose of the program was to payback the UAW for its support of Obama?


8 posted on 01/19/2011 5:04:14 PM PST by Kenny500c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
However, even if the program breaks even on fuel costs there is another factor that was missed. Those “clunkers” were the cars that would have been purchased by the poorest members of society to be used to get them to work.
Now there is a shortage of cheap used cars and those who can't afford more expensive car can't get to work.
9 posted on 01/19/2011 5:04:53 PM PST by ozdragon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

I’m just glad I drive an old Honda and they weren’t on the clunker list and therefore I have access to spare parts without artificially inflated (demand for parts)prices.


10 posted on 01/19/2011 5:08:22 PM PST by libertarian27 (Ingsoc: Department of Life, Department of Liberty, Department of Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozdragon
Now there is a shortage of cheap used cars and those who can't afford more expensive car can't get to work.

But with 20% unemployment, it all evens out.

11 posted on 01/19/2011 5:08:37 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jwparkerjr

How “Green” is a program that destroys the parts from 700,000 vehicles instead of allowing them to be recycled?

Especially when you consider that many older cars now being repaired will have to use new and rebuilt parts from foreign countries, driving repair prices up and negatively impacting the balance of trade as well as the ecology.


12 posted on 01/19/2011 5:23:07 PM PST by Iron Munro (When a society loses its memory, it descends inevitably into dementia - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
AVERAGE age of cars on the road is 9 years.

You'd also have to compare it to buying a car or house with a loan, and look at overall cost when loan is paid off. Since the government BORROWED the money in the first place, with interest on a 10 year loan at 6%, total cost $3.997 billion.

Also, the problem is the gas money saved IS NOT from the ones spending the money (tax payers) its from the owners of the new cars. The tax payers never see a return on investment. I paid money so someone else could save. Actually hundreds of people had to pay for each individual owner could save.

Imagine your neighbor coming over to your house and telling you that if YOU spent $10,000 for solar panels for HIS house he could save $200 a month on electricity, and that in 50 months he would have saved the amount of money you paid and everything after that is profit (for him).

Also, the 224 million gallons of gas saved, not only will the government spend $3 billion plus interest, they'll also lose tax revenues from the gas not sold. At $1 a gallon for tax (just a guess) thats $224 million a year in lost gas tax revenues. Over 10 years time thats $2.24 BILLION. Now over 10 years amount spent, plus interest, plus gas tax revenues lost, that would be about $6.2 billion

Now granted, somewhere in there, most of these cars, NEARLY all of them, would have made their way to the junk yard anyway, and probably been replaced by a more economical car. But also, some of these cars or trucks would not have been replaced by what the were replaced with. Some of these vehicles would have been replaced by vehicles getting less gas mileage than the new ones bought.

Economics is a funny thing. Its not simply a static thing. It moves and changes and has variables.

13 posted on 01/19/2011 5:29:09 PM PST by mountn man (The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: onona

“NFW”

Anachronym for Norfolk and Waypal.


14 posted on 01/20/2011 2:45:49 AM PST by Artie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: onona

Regardless of the “wrong math”, there’s no efficiency comparison to be made - the private sector would never “run” such a program.

BTW, what’s wrong with the math?


15 posted on 01/20/2011 2:52:33 AM PST by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Maybe it wasn’t sound economically, but have you noticed the temperatures lately?

Kash-4-Klunkers ended Global Warming forever!


16 posted on 01/20/2011 2:52:45 AM PST by Fresh Wind (TOTUS knows how to give a speech. Obama knows how to read.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson