Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cash for Clunkers - Good or Bad Idea?
4110 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 11:42 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
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?"
|
Replying to: hpmctorque (Jul 09, 2009 6:05 pm) I had the same opinion last fall before the depths of the crisis hit, that demand and jobs would simply move to the survivors. Then I saw how really bad it was. To kill off GM and Chrysler at that time would have created an economic crater in the midwest because the other survivors, primarily Ford-Toyota-Honda, were in no condition to absorb the shift. It was too much too suddenly. It would have been truly horrendous at the local levels where every GM and Chrysler store in N America would have been effectively put out of business on Jan 1...BLAM!. If this had happened over a period of a couple of years where first one then the other went belly up - in a stronger market situation - then I'd agree that the job losses could have been managed. But not in Dec/Jan/Feb in the depths of our dark winter of economic collapse. The way it's working out is actually a brilliant and effective solution given the short timeframe. Both may survive and actually be stronger with a minimal loss in jobs in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 6:59 pm) ////////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\- \\\\ The liberal media have been feeding us that line for over three months now and it's pure propaganda. There is no credible evidence that anything has "turned around or gotten better" in this year. The credit markets and the economy as a whole is still are in a state of crisis and will likely remain there for the foreseeable future. Think 2011 and then we'll START to things really getting better. In the second half of '09 (likely by September) we'll see how big a hole we're really in. It's an enormous, $5 trillion dollar plus, hole that will take years to recover from. A robust economy is years away. Sorry.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 7:13 pm) Supplier Lear Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Deadline Set for Delphi Bidders; Auction Scheduled Reorganizing should be an easier pill than liquidation though. |
|
|
Replying to: british_rover (Jul 09, 2009 4:48 pm) He did say during the campaign it should be changed. He did circumvent the 5th amendment with his bullying the bond holders in the GM & C faux bankruptcy. You like him that is your choice. I think he is bad for the USA. Difference of opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 7:13 pm) On this we agree. "The way it's working out is actually a brilliant and effective solution given the short time frame. Both may survive and actually be stronger with a minimal loss in jobs in the country." Now that we've spent all this money to save these companies, I hope you're right. However, I think it's way to early to say that it's working our brilliantly. Let's see if the $60 billion + and interest is repaid. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 09, 2009 7:32 pm) As for the topic of this thread though, Yo! Obama & Co! I'm NOT the "rightful owner" of the $4500 you are about to GIVE me on this clunker program in the midst of this present "crisis" but thanks anyway. Just my humble opinion of course...or is that illegal yet? Disagreeing with the current group of propagandists and distortionists? Reeducation camp here I come!!! |
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 4:18 pm) I don't know about maryh3, but I will. Well, maybe not forever, but it'll take a while for me to get over the blackmail that GM and the UAW forced upon the taxpayers. I was against the bailout, and I still feel that the existing UAW workers (those that drove GM and Chrysler to the brink) gave up very little in return for the $30 billion+ that the taxpayers have given them. I think your "successful IPO next year" for GM is just a pipe dream. It's taken me 30 years to forget and move on with Ford after the pos '78 Ford Fairmont they made. and I was fool enough to buy. Though I do not own a Ford product, I may consider one. I had the CTS on my short list of vehicles I was considering, but it's off if it now. Nothing from GM for me.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 3:47 pm) But when your corporations name is Haliburton or Exxon/Mobil the money isn't supposed to carry more weight, but if your name is GM it is --- right? And those 2 companies are sooooooooo darn profitable, and contribute so much in revenues --- whereas GM doesn't. Funny how that works. This has always been our history from the very beginning. Ever heard of Trust-Buster Teddy Roosevelt, Sherman Anti-trust Act, Clayton Anti-Trust Act etc. These acts enforced by US law are supposed to make competition fair so the big guys can't shut out the little guys from competing. Except that in this case the government itself is doing the enabling for the unfair competition. You focus on the UAW an easy whipping boy. Except that in Chicago the exact opposite is happening BECAUSE the Unions are not involved. They won't let big boy Walmart in to compete with the Mom and Pops. And they use the strong arm of the government to discriminate against Walmart and block them from opening stores. And could that possibly be because they won't unionize? The government SELECTIVELY follows the money and the big boy IF they grease the proper pockets only. For a government supposedly founded on the principles that men were equal and should have equal rights to compete -- there is something rotten in the State. There are all the suppliers to the B2 and all their jobs. Make the B2 disappear and all those jobs are gone too....at least at this time in these economic conditions. Not necessarily. People will still need cars. The suppliers will simply start selling more to Honda, Ford and Toyota instead of GM. Someone will have to pick up the slack. Why should they fail? Because they ran out of money, their creditors got sick of waiting for them to turn it around and the government has no business getting involved with the private sector and showing favoritism.
|
|
|
|
|
My father is about to "trade-in" an old pickup and buy a new Prius. I'm trying to help him with the process and am wondering if anyone can help me figure out how much I should be able to expect to get the dealer to pay me for the scrap value of the vehicle. I know that the vehicle has to be destroyed, but on the Cars.gov website it says: "No. The law requires your trade-in vehicle to be destroyed. Therefore, the value you negotiate with the dealer for your trade-in vehicle is not likely to exceed its scrap value. The law requires the dealer to disclose to you an estimate of the scrap value of your trade-in vehicle." Surely the scrap value is worth something. I just don't want to hand that to the dealer. Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jul 09, 2009 6:59 pm) While polls can be made to say what the pollster desires. I think you are in the minority as of today. 37% disapprove of the President's handling of the job and only 32% approve. Guess which group I am in. You have already stated which group you are in. And it has been over 4 months since the stimulus was signed. BO's statement was the money would go first to shovel ready projects. When in fact 90% of the money spent according to USA Today is for Medicaid to the states and other social services. So tell me again about these jobs that are being created? Handing out welfare money is NOT creating jobs. Or how a C4C $billion will help more than a few car salesmen get rid of excess inventory. The stimulus package Obama signed in February includes about $499 billion in new spending, and to date, the Obama administration has allocated about $158 billion to specific projects and programs. Most of that money has gone directly to state governments, which then disperse the money to prevent school layoffs, repair roads and fund social services. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Cash for Clunkers - Good or Bad Idea?
