You are correct: apples are not oranges. Excellent observation. In this example, the apple is an extremely simplistic model of the orange, yet the apple went still went sideways.
Stop being shortsighted.
You are correct: apples are not oranges. Excellent observation. In this example, the apple is an extremely simplistic model of the orange, yet the apple went still went sideways.
Stop being shortsighted.
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
1. Stimulate the economy...at what cost? This program still cost $1 billion. The economy wasn't "stimulated" for free...it cost us money in the form of tax dollars; tax dollars that were taken from individuals and companies.
2. This point is dubious at best...due to numerous examples like the one I pointed out and many others. Smart people turned out in droves to take advantage of this poorly thought-out and implemented program.
I agree about it being better than giving more bailout money to GM/Chrysler, though I would argue that the government shouldn't be giving out any money and should stay the heck out of the free market.
I also totally agree about it being better than the "stimulus" plan. $787 billion dollars worth of "cash-for-clunkers" programs would have been better than the pet-project, lobbyist-payoff "stimulus" plan.
Though I still contend that no "stimulus" plan and no "cash-for-clunkers" would still be the best course of action.
And are you for the bank bailouts (including bonuses from said bailouts)?
No, I strongly opposed the TARP program, since it is evidently obvious that the Wall St. fat-cats are getting rich off of taxpayer dollars while the middle class and the general economy are languishing.
But I don't see what that has to do with cash-for-clunkers? I was just comparing it to nationalized health care because if the government can't even properly predict the cost and demand for a small program such as cash-for-clunkers, why the heck would anyone believe they could properly manage something as gigantic and complex as health care?
KK
Lifer
- Jan 2, 2001
- 15,903
- 4
- 81
Well to be fair, the republicans have their fair share of fuck ups. Just so happens this was done by democrats, had this been done by republicans I'd feel the same way. So hows that make me blind partisan again? Once you guys realize that its government run amuck that fucking up this country, maybe you'll vote a little smarter.
While I will agree with you this is a better "idea" than most of the stimulus. I still think in the end it will ammount to very little actual wealth generation and gdp growth. And will end up being a 1 billion sinkhole that let a few hundred thousand people get a new car at the expense of taxpayers.
/shrug
While I too think that this entire program was ill-conceived and wrong from the start, I must say that whoever was raising their used car prices because of it is a complete idiot. The program requires buyers to have a registration and insurance on their vehicle for at least one year prior to the trade.
The program itself was nothing more than a taxpayer-sponsored lottery win for roughly 300k used car owners. Swell. :roll:
Engineer
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 39,230
- 701
- 126
Maybe so, but psychology has quite a bit to do with economic conditions. If you can get a few things rolling and they snowball (from the consumer, dealer, suppliers, auto manufacturers, scrap yards, insurance companies, etc), the economy might show enough improvement and the sentiment may swing (just like the stock market). Something has to trigger the stop and turn it around and this is a "relatively" cheap (and seems to be effective) way of doing so. Again, much better "stimulus" than much of the other pork (esentially a tax break to those that buy new cars with older trade ins).
The funny thing is, many people who are against it would probably be for it had it been called a tax credit for buying cars (or something along those lines) even though it would have been exactly the same dollar amount back to the consumer.
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
thats what i tried to tell the guy. but he said the dealers were doing it anyway.
i drove by last night and the car was gone. wouldnt surpise me to find out some idiot paid $2k to trade it in..
ohwell. give it another week or so and the prices will come back down where they are sopposed to be.
Stop building straw men?
This is a brand new program, had to be implemented from the ground up. Dealers were selling these cars since July 1st, even though program didn't go into effect until July 24th. Many of us knew the bill passed months ago and were waiting to jump on it.
Compare that to health care, where the government has a bit of experience handling things (medicare, medicaid, tri-care, ect.) The comparison isn't valid, in fact, it's totally idiotic.
Trying to extrapolate how these two completely different issues may end up is just ridiculous. If Obama was pushing Cap and Trade harder right now, you'd probably be trying to use that as an example of "bad" government instead of Healthcare.
It was also a huge boost to the economy and was by far worth it, no matter how stupid it started out to be. I agree, the government has no business buying up used cars. At the same time, the government has no business propping up the economy with its own money. So if it's going to do the latter, and the former will do far more than the latter to boost the economy, I don't see why not.
In the end the program was a huge success. The economy needed that money to be spent.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
A billion is not a huge boost to this economy. It represents .0000714% of the GDP. It is a tiny fraction of a single day of economic activity for the country!
EDIT: Based on last post, if they've allowed it to triple in size it's actually .00021% of the GDP now.
I think your avatar suits you well. Blindfolded and cannot see the actual truth.
If a clunker was positioned for a car over 10 years, you'd be bitching to no end about how classic cars are being killed.
It's not the 1bn that was spent on the economy. It was the many, many of other billions that were spent buying the cars. Someone earlier said that the people who used the program were mostly the ones who could afford to buy them in the first place. That person was right, it took money from people who could afford it and gave it to a rather large and failing industry, the auto industry. In every way was it a success and a boost to the economy. Also numbers can be misleading. Industries are all linked in some way, so believe me, let's pretend that the auto industry represents 1% of our GDP. Let's pretend that tomorrow it all goes to hell. The whole stock market would feel that for months, years, and the drop in stocks would be much more than 1%. I'm sure there's a technical explanation for this but I just don't know it.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
Let's pretend that none of these people were going to buy a car otherwise. Let's also assume that the average new car's price was $25k, or 5X that billion. So now we have 5X the $3 Billion or .00105 GDP Even if we continue to extrapolate out in almost impossible to quantify ways about other benefits to the economy it's really quite impossible to pretend this is anything but piss on a bonfire; it will have no significant impact on the economy as a whole because the economy is too big to care about it.
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
yeah i tried to tell him that. he was going off like i was trying to rip him off.
but no big deal we are not in a hurry to get the car yet. we go to court for custody on monday. so won't/can't do anything before that.
but to be fair do you guys really think the dealerships are going to fallow the letter of the law? that they won't care how long you had it and that the "clunkers" won't end up on the used car lot?
i pretty much grew up on car lots. i really wouldnt amaze me to see them "washed" and put out for sale latte.r
If the whole stimulus was this effective we might actually be somewhere. But no, the government opted to spend most of the money right around the next election. Typical...
Engineer
Elite Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 39,230
- 701
- 126
I had a co-worker who just bought a $49,000+ Buick Enclave on this program. Traded his old truck (extended cab, extended bed, full time 4x4 Dodge V8 - 11 mpg actual average with 450,000+ miles on it). Sure, he received $4,500 in stimulus from the program, but he still spent $39,000+ out of his own pocket (after discounts). Looks like "trickle UP" to me.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,858
- 6,394
- 126
You're thinking too small. There are a lot of People who won't Buy anything right now, this Program has pushed some of those People into making a Purchase. It doesn't really matter if they could "Afford" it without the Program, they were not going to Buy out of Fear/Caution. Which is quite common during a Recession.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter