- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
- Politics is one reason for the love/dislike.
- The amount of trickle down is very slight - people are taking on debt (some that they might not have done) which negates the trickle down.
- The way the project was sold had flawed requirements in terms of age & mpg requirements.
It was used politically to bail out the automotive companies.
If they want to get the clunkers off the road; then why not allow the used car dealers to participate.
The people that can not afford a new car that have the clunkers are being shut out of the program.
How about this - 4) This gov't is bleeding money like a stuck pig, and I for one am reluctant to spend borrowed money on a program of dubious value.
#2 is too vague and you'll need to explain how it's even remotely like #3, since Mursilis explained his position rather succinctly. Oh, and please, refrain from your standard pejoratives.
This seems like it was an attempt at a nonpartisan discussion. Try to play along.
Trickle down economics has nothing to do with the Cash for Clunkers program.
Our country is in a deficit right now so every dollar we spend is money that was borrowed from another country. We have to pay this back eventually thru taxing U.S citizens.
Cons don't like it because the U.S is spending money it doesn't have.
This recession was caused by people spending money they don't have (ie. buying houses they couldn't afford) so it doesn't make sense to continue making the same mistake.
They are against taxpayers subsizing people buying new cars.
Dems like it because it gets inefficient cars off the road and it helps out people who may not be able to afford new cars without the $4500.
Our country is in a deficit right now so every dollar we spend is money that was borrowed from another country. We have to pay this back eventually thru taxing U.S citizens.
Cons don't like it because the U.S is spending money it doesn't have.
This recession was caused by people spending money they don't have (ie. buying houses they couldn't afford) so it doesn't make sense to continue making the same mistake.
They are against taxpayers subsizing people buying new cars.
Dems like it because it gets inefficient cars off the road and it helps out people who may not be able to afford new cars without the $4500.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,705
- 6,261
- 126
#2 isn't vague at all. It's constantly the reason why some post what they do. The reason I said "#2 or #3" is because his point falls within those 2 points. My 3 Points were purposely made to be General headers comprising many Sub Points. His was a Sub Point. Should be quite obvious.
Bush didn't have a stimulus package. He had TARP, which I opposed. Which was almost a trillion bucks vs CARS is what like ~$3 billion?
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
#2 is most certainly vague. "Philosophical differences." That encompasses the gamut and then some. Instead of trying to cover all of these "sub points" from a partisan point of view, let's deal with a specific or two objectively (like Mursilis did).
The economy was hurt in the first place from over-spending.
Now it's being hurt from under-spending.
CARS just might be the right thing to stimulate spending and regain consumer confidence. Or it could just be a one-off of more debt as people go back to saving money, dooming the economy.
Anyhow, Democrats want to repeat the mistakes of the Republicans, and the Republicans realize they're unpopular now and want to distance themselves from the policies viewed as failing the country.
Now it's being hurt from under-spending.
CARS just might be the right thing to stimulate spending and regain consumer confidence. Or it could just be a one-off of more debt as people go back to saving money, dooming the economy.
Anyhow, Democrats want to repeat the mistakes of the Republicans, and the Republicans realize they're unpopular now and want to distance themselves from the policies viewed as failing the country.
bamacre
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2004
- 21,029
- 2
- 61
He most certainly did.
Everything that was done to get us out of the recession resulting from the "dot com bubble," which he inherited, was "stimulus." And it "fixed" the economy in the short term, and very much led us to the disaster we are in now. Obama is doing everything Bush did, just in a proportionate manner. We just better hope, or rather pray, the longer-term result isn't just as proportionate.
I am just glad the Republican's didn't think of this. Their program would have been to turn in your new Prius for 5000 off a Hummer.
I am against it because it is not a "tax cut" or "trickle-down economics". It is my tax payer dollars subsidizing someone else buying a car. If it was truly a "tax cut" or "trickle-down economics", there would have been a tax cut across the board for everyone, or at the very least, some sort of tax cut/tax exemptions for buying an "environmentally friendly" car.
It is also taking (for the most part) perfectly functioning cars and destroying them for the dubious reason of "improving the environment". What is this going to do to charities? To after-market parts suppliers? To the poor who need these cheap "clunkers"? To the used-car market? How is it environmentally friendly to take something which can be re-used/recycled and just destroying and crushing it?
It is also taking (for the most part) perfectly functioning cars and destroying them for the dubious reason of "improving the environment". What is this going to do to charities? To after-market parts suppliers? To the poor who need these cheap "clunkers"? To the used-car market? How is it environmentally friendly to take something which can be re-used/recycled and just destroying and crushing it?
blackangst1
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 22,902
- 2,359
- 126
The benefits are a bit intangible, like the benefits that would accrue to us if you were to stop posting, as if you had been crushed. It would be like the thunderclap of silence that would occur if all the world's idiots disappeared. People would sit up in bed in the middle of the night shouting, 'what the fuck was that?'
SpunkyJones
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2004
- 5,090
- 1
- 81
Originally posted by: tk149
What makes you think I'm not a communist and anti-American? :evil:
I had to look up the definition of "somnambulant."
Dam, I had to look it up too, at least I learned something today.
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter