Just a reminder: Cash for Clunkers requires destroying perfectly usable cars

posted at 2:35 pm on August 1, 2009 by Allahpundit

Rarely do you encounter a wealth-destroying green measure that literally destroys wealth but this is an exception and therefore a sweet, sweet metaphor for Obamanomics. I think some people are under the impression that C4C is just a trade-in program, where the dealer gets to keep the buyer’s old ride and sell it for parts or to a used-car dealer, etc. Not so. The whole point is to get fuel-inefficient vehicles off the road, which means the engines — the most valuable part — have to be destroyed. The Examiner’s Bill Dupray is horrified at the sheer inefficiency of it all:

The Cash for Clunkers program is stupid for a lot of reasons. Not only is it just another tax-payer bailout of the unions automakers, who can sell more cars at artificially depressed prices so they can keep the doors open. It also screws with the free-market (big surprise there) by pulling forward demand that isn’t there now, only to kill demand over the next 1-2 years. Killing off the clunkers also hurts the used car market, the spare parts market, and the auto repair business. If there aren’t any old cars to buy or fix, those guys are all out of a job.

But one of the most asinine parts of the plan is that they take old cars, many of which were being used as functional day-to-day transportation the day before, and destroy them. A perfectly good and useful machine destroyed for political reasons…

I know people will say that some of these cars were maintenance disasters to own and if the blue book is less that what someone will pay you for it, then there is no point in keeping it. But the Cash for Clunkers program requires that a working vehicle be destroyed. What about giving it to charity, or to your teenager, or to whomever deems the thing more useful than a $4,500 credit on a new car.

Via Dupray, here’s video of a Volvo in its death throes for the sake of Mother Gaia, but if you only have a few minutes to spare, skip it. Spend it instead on the Times’s must-read about the last hours of a clunker and watch the (sadly non-embeddable) video at the link. Not only is the program inefficient in the macro sense, but the feds’ underbudgeting and rickety Internet interface have made it inefficient at the micro level too by leaving dealers uncertain about whether they’ll ever be reimbursed for the rebates they’re paying out. Sample quote: “There is absolute frustration across the board.” No wonder a majority of the public is against the program.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

actually, there’s also a little bit of Wall-E at play here, as we talk about the junkyard population increase that is guaranteed to happen in the wake of this program.

Obama needs to turn in his fancy degrees and spend an afternoon watching some kids’ movies. He might actually learn something.

Also worth digesting, via the Incredibles: “when everyone is special. . .no one is”

johnny alpha on August 1, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Monica on August 1, 2009 at 3:00 PM

I haven’t been able to find the link, but I saw some pretty solid analysis of maintaining a used car vs. building a new one: a decent running used car is better for the environment than building a brand new one.

It definitely makes more sense from a green perspective to keep your old car running and well-maintained as long as you can—especially if it’s getting such good mileage. There are significant environmental costs to both manufacturing a new automobile and adding your old car to the ever-growing collective junk heap.

A 2004 analysis by Toyota found that as much as 28 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions generated during the lifecycle of a typical gasoline-powered car can occur during its manufacture and its transportation to the dealer; the remaining emissions occur during driving once its new owner takes possession. An earlier study by Seikei University in Japan put the pre-purchase number at 12 percent.

Regardless of which conclusion is closer to the truth, your current car has already passed its manufacture and transport stage, so going forward the relevant comparison has only to do with its remaining footprint against that of a new car’s manufacture/transport and driver’s footprint—not to mention the environmental impact of either disposing of your old car or selling it to a new owner who will continue to drive it. There are environmental impacts, too, even if your old car is junked, dismantled and sold for parts.

And don’t forget that the new hybrids—despite lower emissions and better gas mileage—actually have a much larger environmental impact in their manufacture, compared to non-hybrids. The batteries that store energy for the drive train are no friend to the environment—and having two engines under one hood increases manufacturing emissions. And all-electric vehicles are only emission-free if the outlet providing the juice is connected to a renewable energy source, not a coal-burning power plant, as is more likely.

Firmworm on August 1, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Suckers, aren’t we all?

Neo on August 1, 2009 at 3:40 PM

This bugs me as much as watching a rock guitarist smash his guitar. A LOT!

shick on August 1, 2009 at 3:42 PM

We are living in an age of madness. If this passes for sound government policy what lies ahead for us in the future.

shick on August 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM

This what is called “The Broken Window Theory.” Didn’t work 200 years ago. Didn’t work 100 years ago. Won’t work now.

jukin on August 1, 2009 at 3:44 PM

Every time the Congress makes a law its a joke; and every time the Congress makes a joke its a law.

Inescapable.

johnsteele on August 1, 2009 at 3:44 PM

If, in the dystopian future that seems to be getting closer every day, you’re running through a used car lot or scrap yard trying to find a vehicle that can get you 20 miles down the road to a fortified settlement before the marauding hordes of S&M fetishists on motorcycles overtake you, you might want to go with a Volvo.

Dukeboy01 on August 1, 2009 at 3:18 PM

Also, the Volvo is rated very high in crash tests. Something you need to know in case you have to run one of those S&M bikers off the road to save your last 5 gal. jug of gas.

mizflame98 on August 1, 2009 at 3:46 PM

Cash for Cripples. Bring in granny and gramps and walk away with nine thousand governmnt backed IOUs to put down on that loaf of bread
a capella on August 1, 2009 at 3:29 PM

Awesome.

Tom_OC on August 1, 2009 at 3:47 PM

The absolute idiocy of this whole program is mind-blowing.

That it has not been turned into a raging scandal is a display of the Republican’s absolute inability to take a stand on anything or point out that a nudist…who isn’t even claiming to be clothed…is nude, let alone stand before a naked fool of an emperor who THINKS he’s clothed and called him bare-butt.

This has got insanity at all levels.

Create more national debt for a program that encourages a people already in debt to go deeper into debt. Then destroy a huge amount of capital while you are at it. Insane.

flyfishingdad on August 1, 2009 at 3:47 PM

We [NYT] spent a couple of days earlier this week following the whole complex program, from dealer to scrap heap, and found twists and turns in it that are making it a nightmare now for everyone involved.

If the NYTimes calls this a nightmare. Can you imagine what Obamacare will be!!!

Christian Conservative on August 1, 2009 at 3:48 PM

…then donned a silky blue protective suit, goggles and gloves and poured a sodium silicate solution into the engine patient’s veins. He revved the car allowed it to drip from the IV, and within a few seconds, the solution hardened into a glass-like substance, the engine heart seized up and the car patient was dead.

This sounds like Obamacare.

tru2tx on August 1, 2009 at 3:48 PM

Why don’t they donate them to the poor? A crappy car is better than no car.

DanStark on August 1, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Being a car guy….this makes me very sad & angry.

[portlandon on August 1, 2009 at 2:49 PM]

Ditto. But it’s not just that. This brainchild has all sorts of unintended effects and wasteful requirements. In a lot of respects this is only damaging to those in the used car business. One will still be able to get newly manufactured parts for the cars and, to an extent it will increase the demand for businesses making new parts for older cars. So, the the ability to participate in the hobby of old cars and antiques will still be open to those who can afford it. But it will be closed to the poorer people in society, and that means disproportionately the hobby will be closed to minorities.

It will be closed to me, and I realized that, which is why I just bought an early 90′s model I love and went last week to get a truck full of used parts, most of which aren’t needed short term, all in excellent condition, just because I know the used part market will dry up and used parts become scarcer and more expensive, in short order.

Worse is the fact, I haven’t seen any indication the clowns in Congress have even acknowledged, much less addressed the fact that the system can’t prevent someone from upgrading from an old gas guzzling SUV to a new gas guzzling SUV in a two step sale and making a small voucher profit in the bargain.

It’s too bad short-sighted ignormauses are the ones that so frequently take up careers as politicians.

Dusty on August 1, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Payback for the unions.

Hmmm If you take a used truck in that could resell for 6500 do you think the car dealer is going to junk it?????

Rick007 on August 1, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Why don’t they donate them to the poor? A crappy car is better than no car.

DanStark on August 1, 2009 at 3:50 PM

That’s what I did with my old car, but Democrats don’t want to help the poor, so crushing them is better.

forest on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Story in the WaPost today demontrates how three different consumers used thousands of dollars in C4C cash in the past few days to buy: 2 Toyotas and a Honda. Yet Detroit and Michigan are the big supporters of this. Of course, not even Congress is dumb enough to design a car-buying program that excludes foreign brands, and then trigger a trade war with Europe and Japan.

So why should taxpayers subsidize their neighbors in buying expensive consumer products, especially foreign-made ones.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/31/AR2009073101173.html

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Why don’t they donate them to the poor?

DanStark on August 1, 2009 at 3:50 PM

For the same reason they want to drive elecricity rates through the roof, bankrupt the coal industry, not build nuclear power plants, raise capital gains taxes … Because they don’t care about the poor. All they care about is killing the American economy and inflicting as much pain on the successful as possible.

The poor can eat cake. And walk.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Just as a little background info…From details within that YouTube thread (given by the original video uploader*) this car is a 2001 Volvo S80 with just over 90,000 miles on the odometer. It is a California car in pristine condition, loaded to the gills with all the options, including leather, navigation, etc. MSRP new on this car was likely in the neighborhood of $39,500 and could bring around $7500 – $8000 private party value right now as a very nice, clean used car. This is my estimate. Taking this type of car off the road is ridiculous on its face.

*The original uploader stated that the Ford Explorer next to it was just as clean and well-maintained.

Dave Johnston on August 1, 2009 at 4:00 PM

They keep talking about shovel-ready projects: This is the equivalent of paying people to dig holes and then paying others to fill them in again.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Obama starts a new program to pay GM to build new cars, and then immediately haul them to the wreckers for disposal. That way you keep the UAW working, keep GM in business, and also drive up the price for cars. And think of all the gas it would save by keeping cars off the highways! Brilliant, eh?

ZenDraken on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

but Democrats don’t want to help the poor, so crushing them is better.

forest on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

Crushing the cars and the poor is a stroke of genius.

thomasaur on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

So why should taxpayers subsidize their neighbors in buying expensive consumer products, especially foreign-made ones.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/31/AR2009073101173.html

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

The numbers, it shows “increased consumer spending” as if the recession is o’va.

the_nile on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

The numbers, it shows “increased consumer spending” as if the recession is o’va.

the_nile on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

The recession will be over…for Japanese automakers and their stockholders, anyway.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 4:04 PM

They keep talking about shovel-ready projects: This is the equivalent of paying people to dig holes and then paying others to fill them in again.

ZenDraken on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

The birlliance of Keynesian theory, except that Keynes recommended the government bury jars of money and let people dig it up and spend it. Voila! Economic activity!

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 4:05 PM

But, but… it saves energy! Surely you don’t think that energy actually goes into producing a car, do you?

Dig those ditches and fill them up again….

calbear on August 1, 2009 at 4:06 PM

The question is how much we’ll get for turning Grannie in. I figure something around $12,000.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Only if you put it towards a smaller Asian chick.

I’m going to hell.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

This bugs me as much as watching a rock guitarist smash his guitar. A LOT!

shick on August 1, 2009 at 3:42 PM

That may be because the irrational mindset is the same in both cases

DarkCurrent on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

They keep talking about shovel-ready projects: This is the equivalent of paying people to dig holes[, find something of value and put it in the hole] and then paying others to fill them in again.

ZenDraken on August 1, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Now, it’s perfect.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 4:09 PM

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

You MADE me laugh!

spacewife on August 1, 2009 at 4:10 PM

The question is how much we’ll get for turning Grannie in. I figure something around $12,000.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Only if you put it towards a smaller Asian chick.

I’m going to hell.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

What, No Russian or Ukraine hotties for you?

mizflame98 on August 1, 2009 at 4:10 PM

Only if you put it towards a smaller Asian chick.

I’m going to hell.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

Hmmm. There’s going to be a big black market in stray Grannies.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 4:11 PM

My parents actually stand to get a hybrid from this program…or they did until it ran out of money.

Yes, it’s a waste…but continue it until they get a car, okay?

Black Yoshi on August 1, 2009 at 4:12 PM

Volvos are built good. To go that long without smoking — I’d have loved to own it. I would have taken far better care of it than the yuppie liberal who sent it to this kind of death…

When you add in all the environmental costs of building a new car and sending the old one to its final resting place, I’m sure that the cost to society is far more than the $4,500) the yuppie got.

By the way — that polluting smoke — did they buy the necessary environmental credits for that?

unclesmrgol on August 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM

It definitely makes more sense from a green perspective to keep your old car running and well-maintained as long as you can—especially if it’s getting such good mileage.

My 15 year old car has 90k miles on it and gets fair mileage. But what makes even better sense is that I pay the bills. I’m not going to get rid of it so I can buy a hybrid which is not cheap when I pay nothing now. I’m not going to triple my car insurance premiums by buying a new car. I’m not going to pay 10% state tax plus another 2% car tax. IOW, I will pay about $100 a year vs. 30k in order to get a few bucks back from the government and save a few dollars in gas. Donks are really stupid.

Blake on August 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM

My parents actually stand to get a hybrid from this program…or they did until it ran out of money.

Yes, it’s a waste…but continue it until they get a car, okay?

Black Yoshi on August 1, 2009 at 4:12 PM

If this program survives the next few weeks, it’ll be on its wasy to becoming “an entitlement” – i.e., a government spending program that will never die.

So your folks could very well be using the Cash for Clunker program in 2045 to turn in their car for jet packs.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 4:17 PM

Its time to organize and move all these destroyed cars to the front lawn of congress and the white house

Conservative Voice on August 1, 2009 at 4:17 PM

All they care about is killing the American economy and inflicting as much pain on the successful as possible.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 3:58 PM

No. These are merely steps toward the ultimate goal, Control.

ROCnPhilly on August 1, 2009 at 4:18 PM

Yes, it’s a waste…but continue it until they get a car, okay?

Black Yoshi on August 1, 2009 at 4:12 PM

What you get should be America’s highest priority. Obama voter?

DarkCurrent on August 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM

What, No Russian or Ukraine hotties for you?

mizflame98 on August 1, 2009 at 4:10 PM

I’m afraid of their carbon-belching emissions.

I keed. I keed.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM

Hot Russian/Ukrainian babe immigration is a program I could really get behind.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I think some people are under the impression that C4C is just a trade-in program, where the dealer gets to keep the buyer’s old ride and sell it for parts or to a used-car dealer, etc. Not so

Actaully, the junkyard is allowed to sell the parts off the car. That just can’t inclide the engine, which has to be destroyed

LordDaMan on August 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM

No. These are merely steps toward the ultimate goal, Control.

ROCnPhilly on August 1, 2009 at 4:18 PM

Your average Western, lunatic liberal is into control. The Precedent is not such a Western-type liberal. He hails from a tribalism/shame/revenge culture and upbringing, as you will find in Indonesia. He doesn’t want to control people; he wants to inflict pain and exact revenge on whites, the successful, and the West.

progressoverpeace on August 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Actaully, the junkyard is allowed to sell the parts off the car. That just can’t inclide the engine, which has to be destroyed

LordDaMan on August 1, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I have heard that junk yards rely on the engines for 60 percent of their sales

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Its time to organize and move all these destroyed cars to the front lawn of congress and the white house

Conservative Voice on August 1, 2009 at 4:17 PM

The crushed autos are going to China to serve as raw materials for manufactured items we can import.

More expensive cars for us, more oil and exports for China.
It’s a win-win!

ROCnPhilly on August 1, 2009 at 4:26 PM

I’d like to see a list of all the cars and their mileage before I criticize getting them off the road and crushed. These cars could be complete pieces of crap that nobody would buy. I was lucky to get $500 for a perfectly good car in my first trade-in, why wouldn’t I want to get $4000 more? And the rules about car donations now being what they go for at auction instead of blue book makes it a hastle to donate them if you want the tax write-off and the people who would be taking advantage of this program probably would need that break.

Also, unless used cars are scarce right now and they are junking popular models that have high resale value then who cares about this aspect. Argue all you want about this being a waste of money but it seems silly to me to cry about POS cars being trashed a few years early.

cadams on August 1, 2009 at 4:31 PM

How long will it take for car manufacturers to slowly increase the prices of their cars (or stop offering rebates an incentives) to the tune of $4,500 per car? Before or after the government expands this entitlement to include cars that get 35 mpg?

By the way, the government does not buy the car from you for $4,500; you even get to trade in your car. If your car is worth $5,000, and you get a $4,500 credit, that’s almost $10,000 off the price of a new car.

What really gets me, aside from that, is that these “credits” can be used to buy a $45,000 car. I spent less than that on any one year of my law school tuition. So now I’ll be driving my (lovely, but old) Volvo, paying off my huge student loans, and paying taxes to support someone else’s $40,000 car.

Bastards.

Roxeanne de Luca on August 1, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Also, unless used cars are scarce right now and they are junking popular models that have high resale value then who cares about this aspect. Argue all you want about this being a waste of money but it seems silly to me to cry about POS cars being trashed a few years early.

Note to cadams: the people who are driving POS cars probably don’t have the money for a brand-new car, the higher insurance, excise taxes, and the like – even with a $4,500 credit. If they were to get into an accident tomorrow, they wouldn’t buy a brand-new car; they would probably buy something that is five or ten years old.

But go ahead and let yourself think that lower-middle class people are getting their smoke-spewing jalopies off the road and buying new hybrids….

Roxeanne de Luca on August 1, 2009 at 4:38 PM

This is a waste. A friend of mine happens to own a small salvage yard and he sells cars like this for a few bucks to people who can not afford payments. He also drives on himself.

Waste. And for what? A reprieve for a few months?

It reminds of the old FDR policy during the Depression that ordered farmers to kill baby pigs. They could be fined as much as a thousand dollars for giving that pig to someone to feed out for food. People were going hungry and they were destroying food.

Terrye on August 1, 2009 at 4:39 PM

The horror if poor people had the mobility to get, and keep, better jobs, get an education, or help them feel independent. Them Dems got entitlement to sell, people!

kagai on August 1, 2009 at 4:41 PM

Roxeanne:

Ain’t that the truth! Poor people can not afford the insurance and plates on new cars. They would still be financing a lot of money and a lot of them could not afford the monthly payment.

Terrye on August 1, 2009 at 4:41 PM

Only if you put it towards a smaller Asian chick.

I’m going to hell.

Rhinoboy on August 1, 2009 at 4:07 PM

No, you won’t go to hell for that but you do need go sit in the corner for ten minute “time out.”

While you’re there you sharpen that horn of yours or saw it off and trade it in on a trunk. /s

Americannodash on August 1, 2009 at 4:46 PM

I drive a 1999 Mercury Sable with 223,000 miles….. it gets 24 highway and 20 local….. for 2,500 I could make it run for another 8 years…. but, no…… give the money to idiots who think they need the cars because they assume the world is going to change and they will need those new FOREIGN cars they buy under this program. Screw the body shops, transmission and oil places that employ more people than anyone. If you take take advantage of the Cash for Clunkers program… you ARE the problem.

MNDavenotPC on August 1, 2009 at 4:46 PM

These cars could be complete pieces of crap that nobody would buy.

And yet people still own them and drive them, right? And drive them onto the lot right? You overestimate how clunky the clunkers are – a new car that gets as little as 4 mpg more than the “clunker” traded in gets a $3,500 rebate courtesy of the taxpayers. $4,000 if it gets a 10 mph difference.

On behalf of the actual American taxpayers who have to give you that $4,000, you are welcome.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM

The actual literal destruction of wealth, and during a recession. It’s hard to belive I’m seeing this.

exception on August 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM

These cars could be complete pieces of crap that nobody would buy. I was lucky to get $500 for a perfectly good car in my first trade-in, why wouldn’t I want to get $4000 more?

cadams on August 1, 2009 at 4:31 PM

Where do you think that extra $4000 is coming from, you dumb-ass? You think the government get $4000 from the little tree fairies up in candy rock mountain?

PackerBronco on August 1, 2009 at 4:48 PM

cadams on August 1, 2009 at 4:31 PM

The government disincentivises charity while using tax-payer money to incentivise the destruction of working autos so that we can help “save the planet” from a false disaster and eventually uses the greater car sales as proof the payoff-to-supporter stimulus worked to save the economy.
Nothing wrong in there, even if the cars are “crap”?

ROCnPhilly on August 1, 2009 at 4:48 PM

We are living in an age of madness. If this passes for sound government policy what lies ahead for us in the future.

shick on August 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM

I couldn’t agree with you more… complete madness!

Hobbes on August 1, 2009 at 4:49 PM

The actual literal destruction of wealth, and during a recession. It’s hard to belive I’m seeing this.

exception on August 1, 2009 at 4:47 PM

Phase 2: The government gives GM money not to build cars …

PackerBronco on August 1, 2009 at 4:49 PM

They just blew up a better car then the one I drive.

gooddad on August 1, 2009 at 4:52 PM

What an absolute f++++++ waste of good cars.

But, on a positive note the metal won’t go to waste, it will be recycled and shipped to China to help build the bombs and chains of our enslavement when they call our debt and we can’t pay.

RobertInLexington on August 1, 2009 at 4:52 PM

By the way, the government does not buy the car from you for $4,500; you even get to trade in your car. If your car is worth $5,000, and you get a $4,500 credit, that’s almost $10,000 off the price of a new car.

Roxeanne de Luca on August 1, 2009 at 4:35 PM

I’m afraid you are incorrect on this point. You get one or the other, not both.

Here is a link to the C.A.R.S. webpage that explains it.

You can still get whatever manufacturer incentives there are on top of the C4C money, such as rebates or 0% financing.

There’s plenty to be upset about this boondoggle. We should still try to be accurate.

Dukeboy01 on August 1, 2009 at 4:54 PM

From the C.A.R.S. FAQ page:

In addition to this credit, will I get the full value of my trade-in vehicle?

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.

Reading that a little more closely, it appears that a person does get the “scrap value” of the car added to the C4C money. That’s going to be way, way less than market value and probably no more than a few hundred dollars for most cars.

The dealers, it appears, are getting screwed on this through their taxes.

From the Autoblog article:

According to Automotive News, NHTSA – the government bureaucracy responsible for administering the CARS program – conducted a webinar for automobile dealers last Monday. During that session, retailers were reportedly told that the federal rebate cash they’d be receiving would be non-taxable. Now, for the buyers trading in so-called clunkers, this is indeed the case. Unfortunately for car dealers, however, it appears that NHTSA got the explanation wrong. In fact, AN reports that the IRS issued an advisory bulletin yesterday confirming that yes, the federal rebates dealerships receive for CARS trades count as taxable gross income.

Wow. The unintended consequences of this thing keep multiplying.

Dukeboy01 on August 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM

There are also the Unintended Consequences of this Cash for Clunker program. The deal requires the dealer to destroy the trade in, a trade in that requires the vehicle to be in good running condition. Not being able to resell the vehicle means several things; 1) Someone who needs reliable but inexpensive transportation has had there choices reduced, 2) A reduced supply of used cars means higher prices for the available vehicles., 3) by destroying the vehicles, a ready supply of used parts for cars is also drying up., 4) A billion or three billion in cash for clunkers means 1-3 billion in lost revenue if those vehicles were to be resold. 5) Taxpayers are again on the hook for more billions of dollars to subsidize people with means to buy a new car. Why?

Dasher on August 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM

This makes perfect sense when you realize that one of the goals of the Obamanation is destroying the wealth of the United States.

Laurence on August 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM

Why?

Dasher on August 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM

He won

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 5:24 PM

How can anyone consider this “cash for clunkers” an honorable law in the first place. It only applies to those Americans who qualify for this deal. Those who don’t are shat out of luck but that’s okay because it looks good in the newspapers. So here we are again spending taxpayer money on a program to boost the sales of cars that nobody really would have bought from a government owned car company. This law is at best a temporary & expensive bandaid that is being used to get people to buy something that would not normally purchase. This law made by congress is allowing for more governmnent control by mandating that trade-in vehicles be to destroyed or even worse denying dealerships the option of cannibalizing good running cars that don’t meet that latest cafe standards. It is just another example of our existing big government Keynesian mindset that you can achieve solvency by trying to spend our way out of debt. Where is the fun in that?

Americannodash on August 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM

…and this is exactly why I won’t partake of this “sweet deal”. I have a 2003 Ford Expedition that gets 14 mpg – but it runs great, it’s in great condition, and if I wanted rid of it that badly, I could just as easily sell it for $4500 and use the money as a down payment. I shudder at the thought of wasting a perfectly good vehicle for the sake of someone else’s idea of a “clunker”.

uncivilized on August 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM

Why not at least sell all the still-decent vehicles to India for $100 each?

They need cars, and it would build up a local mechanics field for future U.S. imports.

profitsbeard on August 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM

I don’t even know if I want my husband to see this…He loves Volvos and cars in general…LOVES old makes/models…this is atrocious.

I cannot stand these people for much longer…

Mommypundit on August 1, 2009 at 5:34 PM

All I can say is “WHY BE YOU WHEN YOU CAN BE NEW”.
ROBOTS Obama is Ratchet. We have a pres that watches to many movies.

tengger on August 1, 2009 at 5:34 PM

Why not give me $4500 a tax credit if I buy a new car? No web site. No engines detracted. No paperwork. Just allow me to take $4500 off my taxes.

Nahh. Too simple. This would create 0 new bureaucrats and give the government 0 more control over my life. Totally unacceptable for an Obama program.

angryed on August 1, 2009 at 5:37 PM

Tis GREEN

Upstater85 on August 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Just curious, does a 1970 Plymouth Road Runner Superbird 426 Hemi qualify?

Jeff from WI on August 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM

Why not at least sell all the still-decent vehicles to India for $100 each?

They need cars, and it would build up a local mechanics field for future U.S. imports.

profitsbeard on August 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM

Many in the “Western” Green movement would be happy if India banned cars…

Keep up the “Colonialism,” Lefties.

Upstater85 on August 1, 2009 at 5:39 PM

How is that Volvo a clunker?

angryed on August 1, 2009 at 5:41 PM

That isn’t a Volvo in the video – that’s America.

Squiggy on August 1, 2009 at 5:42 PM

Just curious, does a 1970 Plymouth Road Runner Superbird 426 Hemi qualify?

Jeff from WI on August 1, 2009 at 5:38 PM

NYET. Cars older than 25 years don’t qualify.

angryed on August 1, 2009 at 5:42 PM

What we are going to get out of this program is people buying cars that can’t make their payments. I guess Congress will bail them out when the time comes.

SC.Charlie on August 1, 2009 at 5:45 PM

I guess Congress will bail them out when the time comes.

SC.Charlie on August 1, 2009 at 5:45 PM

I need a roll of duct tape quick

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 5:48 PM

The ugly truth about the so called “Cash for Clunkers” program is that it has very little to do with improving our energy problems, increasing fuel efficiency, or protecting the environment.

The mandated “engine destruction procedure” is dangerous – spewing hot oil and coolant into the air around the engine compartment – and in some cases starting fires in the engine compartment. Wait until someone is maimed for life from a steam explosion during this procedure.

The mandated “engine destruction procedure” is filthy – causing a maximum about of emissions from the engine during the procedure. High temperatures also cause engine coolant (a poison) to boil and sometimes explode from the engine with an uncontrolled low-pressure steam explosion.

The mandated “engine destruction procedure” is wasteful – all internal engine parts need not be destroyed to render the car “un-sellable”. All that is needed is a simple annotation in the state’s vehicle VIN record that the car is “scrap”, and you can not get a title for that car – no one will buy a car they can not title. You can then recycle those car parts into the used-car-parts market.

The CARS program effectively buys and destroys your old oil-addicted vehicle, and helps you replace it with a moderately more fuel efficient oil-addicted vehicle – prolonging the overall lifespan of our oil-addicted fleet of vehicles in American garages!

They jumped too soon… we don’t have viable alternative-fuels established yet to usher in the much anticipated post-petroleum era in transportation… If you are truly trying to fix our problems, you’d have waited to incentivize a change to whatever is “next” – instead of prolonging the history of 100% oil-dependency.

(Of course we could have had at least some choice with FlexFuel, had Congress not failed to mandate be built-in to new cars many times over the last few years.)

Even worse, Congress is so enamoured with the “success” of CARS that they are going to fund it up some more by taking money out for real energy efficiency research programs!

It boggles my mind really – and I’m a fuel-efficiency nut who spends much of his “free” time promoting fuel efficiency! You’d think I’d love this program… instead I can’t get beyond what and an ugly display of excess it is to needlessly destroy working vehicles that still have value.

My brain is about to have an uncontrolled low-pressure steam explosion of it’s own.

fwj on August 1, 2009 at 5:48 PM

This is sick. I would have bought that car for 4500! This is just sickening. You can not be a man, a red blooded American and enjoy destroying perfectly good cars just to appease a bunch of stinking filthy libs!
This is insane. Give the cars to the poor. Don’t destroy them. Use them for parts! Don’t destroy them!
It’s like the mass slaughter of innocents!
This is what Marxists do! They do not create! They destroy! They destroy and kill! They destroy lives, property, economies and nations!

JellyToast on August 1, 2009 at 5:48 PM

No, of course we don’t want single mothers to drive these “clunkers” to take their kids to school and themselves to work…and of course college students shouldn’t buy the “clunkers” for a price they can afford and drive them to school and work till they quit…That’s what the trains and busses are for, right? You can’t have the peasants able to go wherever they need to go all by themselves!

/sarc

Sheena_is_a_Conservative_Now on August 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM

That’s what the trains and busses are for, right? You can’t have the peasants able to go wherever they need to go all by themselves!

/sarc

Sheena_is_a_Conservative_Now on August 1, 2009 at 5:52 PM

Fify

That is it exactly

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 5:59 PM

you might want to go with a Volvo.

Dukeboy01 on August 1, 2009 at 3:18 PM

Do you post on turbo bricks? My husband is a gearhead, too…and he was just saying this about our old volvo. We love it.

Mommypundit on August 1, 2009 at 6:01 PM

Then there is this: [Glenn] Beck Exposes ‘Cash for Clunkers’ Language Giving Feds Authority to Take Control of Computers

http://businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090731195723.aspx

Dasher on August 1, 2009 at 6:02 PM

That isn’t a Volvo in the video – that’s America.

Squiggy on August 1, 2009 at 5:42 PM

It feels like that, doesn’t it? I am trying to figure out what, exactly, makes me feel so heartbroken about it. I think that is it.

This isn’t who we are.

Mommypundit on August 1, 2009 at 6:06 PM

Was Herbie a clunker?

Upstater85 on August 1, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Yeah, exactly how does trashing pefectly good cars make the planet greener? Couldn’t they sell that Volvo for more thatn 4,500? Let us not forget how many batteries are in the hybrid cars….and batteries aren’t too good for the environment.

Reminds me of the new light bulbs that they say are environmentally friendly. If you break one, you have to call a hazmat team in to clean it up because of the mercury. That is some crazy logic to me.

And yes, I knew there was something in the cash for clunkers for the government, you don’t get something for nothing. Beck shines some light on them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNhMP9NjH2o

njpat on August 1, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Our present governing bodies and the occupants of the WH give new depth of meaning to the word ‘idiots.’

jeanie on August 1, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Do you post on turbo bricks? My husband is a gearhead, too…and he was just saying this about our old volvo. We love it.

Mommypundit on August 1, 2009 at 6:01 PM

Never been there. I’m all over The Truth About Cars, GMInside news, and forums that are all about the new Camaro like 5thgen.org and Camaro5.com.

Dukeboy01 on August 1, 2009 at 6:17 PM

Suicidal society. We sacrifice our identity as Americans…

…we sacrifice our concept of melting pot in favor of kowtowing to whoever comes here…

…we sacrifice our safety in favor of not offending people who belong to the same religion that has determined us to be an enemy…

…we sacrifice cheap, plentiful resources in favor of methods that cost more than they generate, and are horribly inefficient…

…we forgo innovation because we feel guilty about getting too far ahead of other countries…

…we destroy valuable assets because we feel guilty about having it too easy…

…when the hell did we start feeling so bad about having a good life?

Society is committing suicide, which means I’m moving closer to the idea of joining it.

MadisonConservative on August 1, 2009 at 6:18 PM

MommyPundit: is your husband on brickboards (i.e. swedishbricks.net)?!? (I am, sometimes.) Great, great cars.

The last three de Luca Volvos have almost a combined million miles. :)

Roxeanne de Luca on August 1, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Was Herbie a clunker?

Upstater85 on August 1, 2009 at 6:08 PM

Upstater85:

(I stare at ceiling,with heavy sigh) Yes!

US85,I hope somebody out there isn’t bring in a muscle car,
from the 60′s and 70′s,because even if some of these cars
barely run,and need work,my fear is that they will get the
death sentence,as a car lover,its possible!

And,all these trade-ins,the parts,should be sold to auto parts yards,and what can’t be salvaged should be sent to
scrap yards to be recylced,that way,capitalism gets spread
around instead of being killed off in shot!!:)

canopfor on August 1, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Wait, are they killing it by draining the oil out and then running it until it freezes up?

Count to 10 on August 1, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Roxeanne de Luca on August 1, 2009 at 6:20 PM

He is on turbobricks for sure, but, I think he frequents other sites.

Volvos might be hippy cars, but, they are seriously the single most reliable cars, imo. I used to love going to Whole Foods in it with my McCain/Palin stickers.

Mommypundit on August 1, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4