Originally Posted by The Great Fumar

Now Greedy where did you ever read this ???????
It certainly wasn't in the news media that I've read...... and I read a lot ,especially things concerning the Michigan auto Ind....


fumar

...Heard it from many sources...none that pops to my mind now....

parting in the program were the big three....all the rest were foreign makes.
So much for helping the American auto industry.

There will be no chance for any language to focus on American made/intense products. Don't want the foreign makers crying fowl. And they contribute what to the needs of America?

It is understandably a complex tight rope but one of these days we will show the rest of the world....we the people come first.

btk

"The White House says 47% of all vehicles sold through the bill so far come from US automakers; 2% higher than the domestics' 45% overall share. Four of the top 10 vehicles purchased under the program come from domestic automakers, and over half of all vehicles were built in the States."
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/03/r...rs-car-nearly/

"Jim Cramer of Mad Money fame (or, if you're a Daily Show fan, infamy) thinks Cash For Clunkers is a great idea."
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/04/j...-for-clunkers/

Originally Posted by SteveZ

...This is one time I think the Administration and Congress (Finally!) got it right...

I agree, Steve. The shame of it all is that they may have gotten it right by accident.

Originally Posted by JimJoe

1. This is clearly another bailout program.. bailout people who own older cars and want a new one.
2. It puts operational cars in the junk yard prematurely.. is this really environmentally smart? A 2 mile per gallon increase is not enough gas savings to justify filling landfills with working cars.
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY: Most people drove clunkers because of their financial situation. It is NOT smart to use taxpayer money to encourage clunker owners to buy a new car on CREDIT. I predict there will be a large number of repossessions of these new cars within the next year. How does someone who can afford only a clunker suddenly afford a new car? They don't. This is another financial crisis in the making.

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

I think those who oppose stimulus programs which provide an extra benefit to a specific group of citizens, like people who bought a gas guzzler many years ago, or because the stimulus comes from "my tax money!", completely miss the point.

The point is, stimulus programs can work, to the degree that they put the money back into the economy. The best stimulus starts an economic ball rolling which results in that money being spent over and over. The clunker concept is that the money gets to the folks to buy the car which helps the industry which employs more workers who spend virtually every dollar they make at stores and businesses which order more goods and hire more staff who spend... etc. It's the middle-class American machine which has made our economy the strongest in the world, despite our colossal mistakes and wasteful practices.
The Germans, who rely even more than we on a healthy auto industry, invented the clunker concept, and it has worked very well for them. Our program is pretty good, way better than AIG bailout funds by comparison, but it has one flaw - that some of the dollars are being siphoned off by car dealers who are tricking customers into paying higher prices while mesmerized by the clunker rebate. To the degree that those crooks take that ill-gotten money and salt it away off-shore or vacation in Tahiti, the program is failure. Overall, as angry as I get that those abuses certainly occur, I recognize the relative merits of a stimulus like the clunker program.

For those of you who just get angry at the government for any stimulus program, or at those who are earlier in line for benefits than you, why not direct your venom at those who deserve it, the individuals and companies who redirect or steal the money before it has it's ripple effect.

Another good reason for the government NOT to try to change the course of Capitalism. Watch "Free to choose" as it explains how the government , with the most noble intent, turns citizens into money grabbing abusers of the system.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

My concern with cash for clunkers is that it does not require the the car be assemble in the US/NAFTA with a minimum of 75% US/NAFTA components including drive train. I'm really not interested in stimulating other countries around the world with US tax dollars.

Gust another example of how the government is incapable of initiating a program that is not in the best interest of the American people. They've bailed out the US car companies only to give cash for clunker money to Honda, Toyota, Nissan, whats that all about.

Do we trust them with health care?

Originally Posted by SteveZ

I'm not thrilled with the entire auto bailout, and the main reason is that nothing was done up front to make cars more sellable. The good coming out of this is that the cost for the clunkers is still less than paying unemployment and welfare to even more folk.

Additional good point is in any state (like Florida) which does not have periodic vehicle inspections, it will get a large number of vehicles off the road which shouldn't be out there anyway.

Also, Let's say the person is buying a 25,000 car and getting a $4,500 C4C credit to use towards the purchase. If the person kicks in $500 cash, that's 80% of the vehicle price, so the person just needs to qualify for a car loan of $20,000, and the vehicle value makes the deal for the finance company/bank a better deal. Money is moving!

And, let's not forget that because of the first bailout, "we, the people" now have a big investment stake in the auto industry, and participating in a "sales incentive" to prime the sales pump makes the potential of recovering the bailout moneys downstream more feasible.

Cars get sold, banks give credit, jobs are maintained, money actually gets circulated in communities which results in more jobs, more people keep their health care coverage (giving another reason why HR 3200 is "wrong time now"), maybe even more jobs come back in the auto industry and that would spawn ancillary support and service jobs, and the economy perks.

Yeah, I'm for anything that actually causes money to circulate, rather than just be paid in big bonuses or squirreled into offshore accounts. The $300-600 incentive checks did nothing. This has enough bite to really make a difference since it allows credit to be given, high-end products sold, and the circular effect spawns more jobs.

This would have been a better idea 6-12 months ago than the original auto bailout plan, because it would have been an economic boost rather than debt relief at the top corporate levels.

This is one time I think the Administration and Congress (Finally!) got it right.

Circulating money sounds great if the country was awash in greenbacks, but it's spending money like a drunken sailor. Where is the CASH coming from for this program, China? Why not just give everyone in America a check for $4500, to spend as they wish? Spread the wealth around for future generations to pay back! When sane peoples budget is in distress they don't go on a spending spree. NO country has ever spent it's way to wealth.

no country has ever spent it's way to wealth.

bingo

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Kinda makes you wonder why such language wasn't included in the bill, doesn't it? If it's so logical to us, why not those in Congress who created and passed the bill?

This is a bit like the legislation which is being considered by Congress--actually it may already have been passed--that exempts vehicle models whose sales are less than 400,000 per year from inclusion in the "average fleet mileage" calculation required in the new CAFE standards bill passed a number of months ago. The bill is known as "the German Provision" among the lobbyists in Washington. The practical effect of this amendment is that Mercedes and BMW can sell all the 13 mpg sedans they would like; Porsche, Maserati and the other sports car makers can sell all the 500 horsepower speedsters that get only 10 miles per gallon that they'd like; even the new owner of Hummer can sell all of those beasts they'd like--all so long as they don't sell more than 400,000 of them. None of those models need be included in the calculation of average fleet mileage prescribed by the CAFE standards law. Read the maddening blog posting describing the bill at http://www.autoextremist.com/

Those who follow these things in Detroit know that this week's legislation was the product of a couple of lobbyists for the foreign car companies and their U.S. dealers "getting to" enough Congress members to get the new bill passed.

Just per chance--do you think there might be some lobbyists might have gotten inside the language of the cash for clunkers bill so that their foreign OEM clients could benefit, just like their U.S. competitors, even though the money comes out of the pockets of U.S. taxpayers?

Just wondering.

From your previous post it seemed that you were for the clunker program and now you to point out obvious faults of an unthinking, rush to pass a bill, Congress. Did Congress do the right job or not?

Originally Posted by billethkid

parting in the program were the big three....all the rest were foreign makes.
So much for helping the American auto industry.

There will be no chance for any language to focus on American made/intense products. Don't want the foreign makers crying fowl. And they contribute what to the needs of America?

It is understandably a complex tight rope but one of these days we will show the rest of the world....we the people come first.

btk

Originally Posted by gnu

From your previous post it seemed that you were for the clunker program and now you to point out obvious faults of an unthinking, rush to pass a bill, Congress. Did Congress do the right job or not?

To answer in one word -NO! We do not need to be stimulating Korean sales of Kia and Hundais, nor Japanese sales of Lexus. As I pointed out before, we need to stimulate the sales of automobiles made here in North America that contain more that 75% North American parts including no less than 75% of the drive train. As K pointed out, we need to eliminate the "German' exception as well. Right now, BMW is helping itself to the cash for clunkers program while continuing to sell the V-12 700 series under the protection of the German Exception.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

To answer in one word -NO! We do not need to be stimulating Korean sales of Kia and Hundais, nor Japanese sales of Lexus. As I pointed out before, we need to stimulate the sales of automobiles made here in North America that contain more that 75% North American parts including no less than 75% of the drive train. As K pointed out, we need to eliminate the "German' exception as well. Right now, BMW is helping itself to the cash for clunkers program while continuing to sell the V-12 700 series under the protection of the German Exception.

According to Cars.com that would still include some Toyota and Honda vehicles.
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...02/467984.html
And the best seller of the C4C program, the Ford Focus, only has a 50% DPC (Domestic Parts Content).
http://ask.cars.com/2009/07/is-the-f...n-america.html

Hmmmmm

It gets complicated when the vehicle's parts are from all over the planet. I just have this feeling that when you buy a vehicle with a foreign made sticker (label) the money from the purchase will still go back to that country.
Manufacturers sub their work frequently. The parts go out for bid and usually the lowest bidder receives the contract to make the parts. Sears is a good example. Sears does not make their own power tools.
Bottom line? It would take someone more savvy then me to explain the economic impact. While the parts made in the USA will keep some Americans working, which is good, the real money will still do to a foreign country.

Originally Posted by KayakerNC

According to Cars.com that would still include some Toyota and Honda vehicles.
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...02/467984.html
And the best seller of the C4C program, the Ford Focus, only has a 50% DPC (Domestic Parts Content).
http://ask.cars.com/2009/07/is-the-f...n-america.html

I'd seen that report before. Interesting that there are 4 Toyota's and one Honda on the list. It's been that way for a while now. Granted, a lot of the profit dollars go back to Japan, but there is some beneift to the U.S. for the manufacture and sales of them.