Cash for Clunkers - Good or Bad Idea?

4104 messages, Last post on Nov 22, 2009 at 4:27 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Legislation, Truck, Sedan, Wagon, SUV

For questions about how the program works or to discuss program details, please visit our discussion titled, "Cash for Clunkers - Does it Work for You?"

Outline

Messages Page 411 of 411: 1; ...; 405; 406; 407; 408; 409; 410; 411; Prev; Next; Last

#4095 of 4104 Re: Very interesting article. . . . [stephen987] by kdhspyder Nov 21, 2009 (6:06 pm)
Replying to: stephen987 (Nov 21, 2009 4:56 pm) True this^^^^ News, if you call it that, and guidance on how to live for the weak-minded....on both sides. Replies to this message: ateixeira (Nov 21, 2009 6:28 pm) houdini1 (Nov 21, 2009 7:22 pm)
#4096 of 4104 Re: Very interesting article. . . . [kdhspyder] by ateixeira Nov 21, 2009 (6:28 pm)
Replying to: kdhspyder (Nov 21, 2009 6:06 pm) OK but let's stop picking on him so he can go finish working on his 100mpg carburetor. Replies to this message: houdini1 (Nov 21, 2009 7:22 pm)
#4097 of 4104 Re: Very interesting article. . . . [ateixeira] by houdini1 Nov 21, 2009 (7:22 pm)
Replying to: ateixeira (Nov 21, 2009 6:28 pm) He is not totally wrong. He did not say Federal Income Tax, and while it is true you don't pay Fed. tax, in some states you will pay State Income tax. Also is some states you have to pay sales tax on that $4500.
#4099 of 4104 housekeeping by steve_ HOST Nov 21, 2009 (10:37 pm)
If y'all want to talk general politics instead of Clunker related issues, please visit the OTC area - try Forget Bushisms, Biden Gaffes, We have Obama blunders for example . Replies to this message: mickeyrom (Nov 22, 2009 7:05 am) gagrice (Nov 22, 2009 7:37 am) fintail (Nov 22, 2009 9:39 am) and 2 more...
#4100 of 4104 Re: housekeeping [steve_] by mickeyrom Nov 22, 2009 (7:05 am)
Replying to: steve_ (Nov 21, 2009 10:37 pm) Good idea Steve....hooray for you! I come here to get away from politics,not to hear more of the same.Lets talk cars Replies to this message: gagrice (Nov 22, 2009 7:37 am) fintail (Nov 22, 2009 9:39 am) dodgeman07 (Nov 22, 2009 3:10 pm) and 1 more...
#4101 of 4104 Re: housekeeping [mickeyrom] by gagrice Nov 22, 2009 (7:37 am)
Replying to: mickeyrom (Nov 22, 2009 7:05 am) My question. In the next C4C bill, will I be able to trade my gas guzzling V6 Ford Ranger for a PU truck that gets better mileage and has the power to pull my utility trailer up our steep hills? If not the plan is a bad idea. PS I am watching for a clean pre 1996 F250 with a Powerstroke diesel just in case the next C4C is as screwed up as the last one. Replies to this message: fintail (Nov 22, 2009 9:39 am) dodgeman07 (Nov 22, 2009 3:10 pm) stephen987 (Nov 22, 2009 4:27 pm)
#4102 of 4104 Re: housekeeping [gagrice] by fintail Nov 22, 2009 (9:39 am)
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 22, 2009 7:37 am) Or just buy some old clunker to keep around for a year to take advantage of the next scheme - and there will be another, I have absolutely no doubt. Replies to this message: dodgeman07 (Nov 22, 2009 3:10 pm) stephen987 (Nov 22, 2009 4:27 pm)
#4103 of 4104 Re: housekeeping [fintail] by dodgeman07 Nov 22, 2009 (3:10 pm)
Replying to: fintail (Nov 22, 2009 9:39 am) - and there will be another, I have absolutely no doubt. -------------------------------------------------------- I agree. The bailed out U.S. automakers (GM / Chrysler) will not make to 2011 without another C4C type program next year. It will be C4C II or hand GM billions more and hope they make money in 2011. GM lost $1.6 billion in the 3rd quarter '09 WITH C4C! Surely they would have lost OVER $2 billion without it. 4Q09 and 1Q10 will be a disaster for GM and by spring we'll be looking at C4C Round II. Replies to this message: stephen987 (Nov 22, 2009 4:27 pm)
#4104 of 4104 Re: housekeeping [dodgeman07] by stephen987 Nov 22, 2009 (4:27 pm)
Replying to: dodgeman07 (Nov 22, 2009 3:10 pm) Next year is an election year. I suspect there won't be a C4C-2 in 2010, because it's too easy to distort the program's effect, spread false information about it, and so on--plus, the biggest beneficiaries of the program (car dealers) aren't exactly seen in a positive light by the general public. But IF there's a C4C-2, I think a sliding scale will be used, on some sort of consumption based formula--gallons per ten thousand miles, not miles per gallon. There might also be additional incentives to buy ZEVs or PZEVs. The most politically popular proposed alteration--basing the rebate on where the new car is assembled--simply can't be implemented at all without violating at least half a dozen major trade agreements. Expect some political grandstanding on this issue, even though everyone involved knows it's not going to happen. GM is hemorrhaging money, it's true--but unlike Chrysler, there's enough of GM left to save. They have viable product in most sectors of the market, and more on the way, while Chrysler's R&D has been essentially shut down for the last two or three years.