Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $24,000 per real sale

posted at 3:35 pm on October 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The Cash for Clunkers program provided federal subsidies of up to $4500 for those car owners willing to buy a more fuel-efficient vehicle in exchange for certain classes of gas guzzlers.  In all, the C4C program generated over 690,000 sales in the few weeks that it ran, with an average subsidy of $4,348 per sale.  How many of these, though, would have bought a new car in the near future anyway?  According to a new study by Edmonds, an industry analyst, only 125,000 of these sales would have not been made without C4C — which brings the subsidy to about $24,000 per actual successful incentive (via Snapped Shot):

What happened?

Well, it’s in how Edmunds crunched the numbers. A valid way to evaluate the program economically, it says, is to look at how many people purchased cars that otherwise wouldn’t have been bought. The firm says that number is about 125,000 cars. By that measure, the government spent $24,000 to generate each sale of a new car.

For comparison, the average price for a new vehicle in August 2009 was $26,915, minus an average cash rebate of $1,667.

In all, the government spent $3 billion on a program that provided cash toward 690,000 car purchases – about $4,348 per car. That makes 565,000 people who got as much as $4,500 to buy a car they would have bought anyway, according to the Edmunds analysis.

Of course, that may be chicken feed, considering the great press the Obama administration will get for its boost to GDP from the C4C program.  Estimates put that at 1.66% annualized for the third quarter, or close to half of the GDP growth.  The boost in new home sales and construction eat up a big chunk of what’s left in the 3.5% GDP growth figure, which is also expiring.

In the end, almost all C4C did was steal sales from the new model year.   Dealers unloaded last year’s models, and their new inventory will sit on the lots without the buyers they may have had otherwise.  The destruction of used cars will make it more difficult for lower-income earners to buy vehicles, thanks to a shortage of about 700,000 in the national inventory. That will impact employment and consumer spending indirectly, which will mean a drag on future GDP growth.

Meanwhile, we spent almost as much to buy an average new car to incentivize each legitimate new sale.  Is this smart economic management?  Or is this yet another data point that proves that this administration has no idea how a free-market economy works, and even less idea of how a top-down managed economy fails?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

without C4C we’d still be in a recession /s

ThackerAgency on October 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

You know, honestly. This headline sort of bugs me.

I’d rather see the auto industry get this kickback with sales than a direct bailout.

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Super Smart Power!

Monica on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Typical Enemy Party thing: abject failure.

Pick a Dem and he/she will F up his/her own funeral.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

I wonder how much ACORN got? Every piece of legislation written by the communist democrats has money siphoned off to ACORN in one form or another.

darwin on October 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

Treason, theft, tyranny

these people are criminals.

daesleeper on October 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Why, hon?

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:40 PM

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.
AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Monica on October 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Why not? It sucked. Not only did it cost taxpayers 3 billion dollars, but consumers weren’t told they have to pay taxes for the full price of the vehicle … and the resulting slump in sales is killing small auto-related businesses.

Most sales went to foreign cars anyway.

Bailout for Korea and Japan … Yea !!!

darwin on October 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

Another stone in the Obama mountain of corruption and incompetence.

And the mountain will not be made out of stone, it will be a 10,000 foot high pile of crap.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Big picture: Why spend our money on temporary jobs and one-off sales?

Wouldn’t it be better to invest money on permanent jobs?

faraway on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

darwin on October 29, 2009 at 3:41 PM

And Brazil!

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Way to go ahead and swallow the premise that it’s the government’s job to fix the auto industry whole, Ann.

Joe Caps on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

It’s a good thing for government to incentivize putting people into debt and making big corporations richer in the process?

lorien1973 on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

In the end, almost all C4C did was steal sales from the new model year. Dealers unloaded last year’s models, and their new inventory will sit on the lots without the buyers they may have had otherwise.

D’oh!

cmsinaz on October 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

faraway on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Uhhhh, the multiplier or something.

/libtard mode off

Joe Caps on October 29, 2009 at 3:44 PM

If you can’t dazzle ‘em with Brilliance; Baffle ‘em with Bull$hit!- Barackus Hubris Maximus *Hail Caesar!*

SilverStar830 on October 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

It’s better than beating on the people who thought up and implemented the progam, although that’s what they deserve.

It’s criminal that people work their asses off to earn money to provide for their families and then its confiscated to fund jackass ideas like “cash for clunkers”. Simply criminal and people should be jailed for it.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM

Way to go ahead and swallow the premise that it’s the government’s job to fix the auto industry whole, Ann.

Joe Caps on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

Not me. I don’t see why the car industry needed saving. We sure sold out the steele industry years ago.

And that really was what devastated the mid-west.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Just wait until the repos get started in earnest.

C4C is going to be the “gift” that keeps on “giving” for some time to come.

Dave R. on October 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Coming soon ………. $500 aspirin.

Pills 4 Peeps Program.

fogw on October 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:38 PM

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you must have missed the part that all but 125,000 of them would have been bought, anyway. It didn’t bail any body out, either directly or indirectly. It merely changed the time frame of the purchase.

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 3:49 PM

The Bush recession is over. The Obama recovery has begin.

Bleeds Blue on October 29, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Heh.

BadgerHawk on October 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Or is this yet another data point that proves that this administration has no idea how a free-market economy works, and even less idea of how a top-down managed economy fails?

Ed, do you really even have to ask?

jwolf on October 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM

Most sales went to foreign cars anyway.

Bailout for Korea and Japan … Yea !!!

Well they would. That was easy to foresee. Most US cars are utter garbage and no-one in their right might would buy a car from the government. Think Lada, Zil, Leyland, etc.

Anders on October 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Huh? You said we shouldn’t hate on C4C because it’s better than a bailout.

If a robber robbed a bank and beat the crap out of the tellers, would you say, “gee lets not denounce the robber for beating up the clerks, he could have killed them.” No, you would denounce the fact that they robbed the place to begin with, and you would acknowledge that the assault on the tellers was wrong. Get it?

Joe Caps on October 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

New program in the works from the White House !!!

Cash for Communists!

darwin on October 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

only 125,000 of these sales would have not been made without C4C

What percentage of these cars will go into default and have to be bailed out by Uncle Sam, raising the cost once again?

fourdeucer on October 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $24,000 per real sale

Gee, who could have predicted this? Duh.

publiuspen on October 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

We sure sold out the steele industry years ago.

In Soviet GOP, Steele Industry sells out YOU!!!

fiatboomer on October 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you must have missed the part that all but 125,000 of them would have been bought, anyway. It didn’t bail any body out, either directly or indirectly. It merely changed the time frame of the purchase.

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 3:49 PM

And basically doubled the cost of the vehicles.

I wonder if that $24K factors in interest on the debt it created…

Monica on October 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Cash for Communists!

darwin on October 29, 2009 at 3:51 PM

They will run out that money in less than a week…just counting those with whom Obama closely associates himself!

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Way to go ahead and swallow the premise that it’s the government’s job to fix the auto industry whole, Ann.

Joe Caps on October 29, 2009 at 3:43 PM

No, I don’t agree. Here’s what is crazy to me. OK, so CA is dying, right? The big story? The DMV can’t fund their training program for supervisors.

I’m not kidding you.

Now, I worked in a Top-100 company for my career. Let me state, without equivocation, these are frankly official “break” classes. By that I mean, you won’t gain a single skill, you will get a break from your daily grind, etc.

That is where CA is in downsizing?

I’m sorry. I’m just too, too hardcore for this nonsense.

I watched my company go from 8,000 to 0. I wrote the dang letters laying off myself.

I really was one who turned off the lights.

I cannot imagine that the state governments are still back in the 80′s with having to give up training programs that yield zero.

That’s completely different from a program that stimulated car sales.

I have real friends who are surviving because of this goofy program. They sold cars out the kazoo for years. The crash stopped it.

They are surviving because of that goofy program. I think the car sales industry got a breath of life. That’s all.

It’s not going back to “Hummer” time, for sure.

But it could go back to reasonable.

Otherwise, what do you suggest? Go to Mexico style? We all buy clunkers which are really clunkers?

I guess that’s true capitalism. But seriously, you ready for that?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

To quote the late, great Junior Samples:

I knew this was a bad idea. Junior’s Used Cars BR-549.

kingsjester on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM

You have a brain so let me engage it.

Any time government instills a program, (leaving out what gov’t forces on us), it’s usurpation of power it doesn’t have or ever should own.

C4C remains a mess. It’s based on the premise of global warming which is not ‘settled’ science. Government got in the way where it never should have. Those cars traded in were still usable, but the government plan was to destroy them.

Is that the government plan under Obama, to destroy? If DC gave a hoot, those cars traded could have been given to the poor so those people could find a new job. Instead, the Dems again left the poor abandoned.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

So, HALF of the GDP increase this quarter went to Japan to pay for Toyotas?

faraway on October 29, 2009 at 3:55 PM

Bleeds Blue on October 29, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Laughing at you…the Bush recession IS over. It’s now Obama’s!

Fix it!

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Hey, they never specified which way the cash was going.

Jim Treacher on October 29, 2009 at 3:56 PM

In the end, almost all C4C did was steal sales from the new model year. Dealers unloaded last year’s models, and their new inventory will sit on the lots without the buyers they may have had otherwise.

That’s ok, ’cause when the dealers go belly-up we can snatch up their inventory real cheap.

Akzed on October 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Wait..

Did no one else notice that in the article that if you did the C4C, you have to pay taxes on it?

Something is amiss.

upinak on October 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Something is amiss.
upinak on October 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Yeah. Ethics and morality.

kingsjester on October 29, 2009 at 3:59 PM

Not only did “Cash for Clunkers” cost taxpayers $24,000 a car but its initial ballyhooed “success” (our “successful” government in action) helped give impetus to far greater federal Ponzi schemes such as Cap and Trade, Health Care and corporate bailouts of Wall Street DNC contributors. Additionally, “Cash for Clunkers” helped boost market share of competitive Japanese and Korean cars.

This is what happens when we give the keys of the country to lawyers.

MaiDee on October 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

A little Liberal reality brought to you by the American voter.

Hening on October 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

Something is amiss set up by the Democrats.

upinak on October 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

FIFY

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

You have a brain so let me engage it.
……………..
Liam on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

I believe you are operating under a false premise there, sir.

LegendHasIt on October 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

I’m still waiting to see what the administration costs of that boondoggle turn out to be.

EconomicNeocon on October 29, 2009 at 4:02 PM

I guess that’s true capitalism. But seriously, you ready for that?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

In a word…Yes. Did you ever hear the term “Lost Decade?” It was a term used to describe Japan in the 90′s. Their economy languished amid many of the same government bailouts we are trying, until they decided to let the free market take it’s natural course. Once they did that, their economic prosperity returned. The market is a force that cannot be artificially controlled effectively. It’s like trying to stop a raging river. It just doesn’t work. If we are headed to the Mexico of which you speak, we will get there. It’s just a matter of time. Artificial stimulation isn’t going to stop it.

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM

LegendHasIt on October 29, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Ann has a brain, but she’s used to past personal references. Over weeks, I’ve seen her evolving. I rather encourage that than dismiss her. Please, friend, keep watching. Ann is moving Right.

And how I hope I didn’t just tip my hand.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:04 PM

FIFY

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

crud.. thanks!

upinak on October 29, 2009 at 4:05 PM

Glenn had a guy from Edmunds.com talking about this and Glenn jokingly said “Why didn’t they just give the cars away?” But like I said in another thread, if they did that, it would cost the taxpayers much much more that it cost now given the way the government wastes money.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

I guess that’s true capitalism. But seriously, you ready for that?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 3:54 PM

You are mixing definitions here. ‘True capitalism’ is of the liazze faire kind, of which reasonable people can’t support.

It’s not all/not-at-all.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:07 PM

crud.. thanks!

upinak on October 29, 2009 at 4:05 PM

I just couldn’t resist! LOL

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:08 PM

Did no one else notice that in the article that if you did the C4C, you have to pay taxes on it?

Something is amiss.

upinak on October 29, 2009 at 3:57 PM

Old news. You have to claim that C4C $4500 bucks as income on your taxes.

Not too many read the fine print.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:08 PM

My buddy made enough money to survive off of this Nutty program.

I’m liberal enough to back it. :)

And, no, I don’t care what you guys say. He’s my buddy.

But here are the real facts. He works for one of the biggest Ford dealers in the entire country. I guess they sell all kinds of other brands, too. It confuses me, frankly.

But anyway, his dealership wasn’t one of the sad stories. They definitely had the money to front this deal. They also weren’t the side-line guys who didn’t follow the rules.

Their sales will go through, did follow the guidelines, etc., and will generate some activity.

I do say, I think the program sort of “unfroze” car sales. I think those of us who weren’t involved did start reminding ourselves that we’ll have to buy a car eventually.

Seriously, don’t you think that this type of stimulus deal is OK?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM

Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $24,000 per real sale

“Spending IS stimulus!!!” — Traitor-in-Chief and head imbecile

Also, does that figure take into account the cost of taking perfectly good cars out of the market and rendering their carcasses almost totally useless?

progressoverpeace on October 29, 2009 at 4:11 PM

And remember, even this analysis doesn’t take into account how many GMAC car loans were given to people who are unlikely to repay.

BTW, is anybody double-checking the GDP numbers for last quarter? I mean, it’s GROSS domestic product, not NET. So I assume they’re counting every penny GM was “paid” in for the cars – whether it was credit or cash – and not counting the massive government “investment” that was paid out.

…And the same would be true for the home loan rebates, the simultaneous “loans” the Fed and the Treasury made to each other, and pretty much every other part of this bogus “stimulus” plan.

So, do they plan to double down again this quarter? Or is somebody, somewhere ever going to balance these books?

logis on October 29, 2009 at 4:12 PM

The whole “Cash for Clunkers” thing is a variation of:

“We’re selling below cost, but we’ll make it up in volume!!!”

NOTE TO LIBERALS: The above quote is a well-known JOKE!!!!

PS TO LIBERALS: If you don’t understand “JOKE” look it up.

landlines on October 29, 2009 at 4:12 PM

Seriously, don’t you think that this type of stimulus deal is OK?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM

No.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:12 PM

I guess I viewed as a kind of benign green, but more for stimulating a sector of the economy, kind of deal.

I had no problem with it. Actually, one friend actually got a fairly good deal with it.

I have only ONE friend who could take advantage of the mortgage bailout deal, by contrast.

Oy vey.

There was a true boondoggle.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Billions of Dollars to Be Burned Under New “Cash for Cash” Program http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/08/billions-of-dollars-to-be-burned-under.html

Mervis Winter on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

PS TO LIBERALS: If you don’t understand “JOKE” look it up look at John Kerry.

landlines on October 29, 2009 at 4:12 PM

FIFY

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

No.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:12 PM

I’m curious. Why not?

Are you some kind of hard-core type? I suspect some of you don’t care that there are no real jobs left in our country.

We’re suppose to all move to 3rd world countries to survive, eh?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

I had no problem with it. Actually, one friend actually got a fairly good deal with it.
AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Of course you had no problem with it. Moonbat liberals never have a problem spending other peoples money.

Oh yeah, and your good buddy will have to claim that $4500 bucks as income on his taxes. What a deal.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Let’s all start really watching House Hunter’s International!

Rather than being cajoled into moving from state to state, the game now?

Move from country to country.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:16 PM

We’re suppose to all move to 3rd world countries to survive, eh?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

We’re almost there anyway, moonbat.

Google up “the lost decade” and learn something before you continue posting idiotic stuff.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM

Of course you had no problem with it. Moonbat liberals never have a problem spending other peoples money.

Oh yeah, and your good buddy will have to claim that $4500 bucks as income on his taxes. What a deal.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM

No, just a friend who was on top of it, needed a car, and actually worked a good deal.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM

We’re almost there anyway, moonbat.

Google up “the lost decade” and learn something before you continue posting idiotic stuff.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM

So, tell us about your new place?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

I suspect some of you don’t care that there are no real jobs left in our country.

What, we don’t make t-shirts and the other crap China ships over here?

Who raises their kids to sew t-shirts in America?

We have more high tech manufacturing and construction than anywhere else in the world.

If the Democrats would get the hell out of the way, we would continue to lead the world in innovation.

Instead, the Democrats try to prop loser companies like GM and make believe jobs like the “green” jobs.

Our economy will improve when the Democrats are removed from power and not before. They are the problem, not the solution.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

Mervis Winter on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Administration sources say Americans aren’t spending enough to spur the economy. They’re saving instead. As a result, President Obama announced the new cash for cash program in which Americans can receive $10,000 in taxpayer subsidies if they destroy $4,500 of their own money.

“If Americans can get some extra cash from this program, they’ll have an incentive to spend more, and that will help the economy,” said Obama.

Critics, however, warned of the perverse effects of the cash for cash program, pointing out that the cash for clunkers program hurt the used car market, the spare parts market, and the auto repair business.

“Let me be clear,” said Obama, countering critics. “The government may have to print money in the future to pay for today’s massive federal spending, which will reduce the value of the money everyone has. So it only makes sense to take part in this program now, before inflation kicks in.”

When asked if the program was so great, why wasn’t it expanded to give people $60,000 in return for burning $4,500, Administration sources said “That would be stupid.”

Ha. That was one of the funnier ones.

BadgerHawk on October 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

and actually worked a good deal.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:17 PM

That the taxpayers are paying for. Did you even read the article?

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

I guess I viewed as a kind of benign green, but more for stimulating a sector of the economy, kind of deal.

At the taxpayers’ expense.

I had no problem with it. Actually, one friend actually got a fairly good deal with it.

Again, at the taxpayers expense. So, he’s someone to emulate, unlike people who work so hard on their own time and not on the taxpayers’ dimes to reach a better place?

I have only ONE friend who could take advantage of the mortgage bailout deal, by contrast.

There was a true boondoggle.

ANYTHING government does is a boondoggle.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:13 PM

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:19 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

There are jobs there, Ann. In the private sector. AS the boomers retire ever faster, more slots are opening up. The pay not be what YOU want, but there are paychecks to be had.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:22 PM

OK, Out of this thread.

You guys love to be ugly about other people’s problems.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Government healthcare preview.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

You guys love to be ugly about other people’s problems.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Stupid, wasteful, un-Constitutional government spending is all of our problem. The “other people” are the leeches who are the problem.

progressoverpeace on October 29, 2009 at 4:25 PM

You guys love to be ugly about other people’s problems.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

Sometimes reality is ugly.

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM

You guys love to be ugly about other people’s problems.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:23 PM

You got problems, then go talk to a shrink.

This is HotAir, not Dr. Phil.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

I suspect some of you don’t care that there are no real jobs left in our country.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

If there are ‘no real jobs left in our country’, it’s because of government making it that way.

I know you’re a little Left but, seriously, hon–when there’s less government there’s more room for liberty. An expanding business–let’s REAL hardcore capitalist–will need workers. There are protections for the workers, after a century of unionizing.

The lack of jobs, which is not really a lack even here in Buffalo, is a direct result of government interference. When government is absent, the people prosper.

Like you, I’m all about the people, my fellow Citizens.

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

You got problems, then go talk to a shrink.

This is HotAir, not Dr. Phil.

Knucklehead on October 29, 2009 at 4:27 PM

This. Is. SPARTA!

progressoverpeace on October 29, 2009 at 4:28 PM

I guess I viewed as a kind of benign green, but more for stimulating a sector of the economy, kind of deal.

This is a huge problem.

Too many people are just fine with the government spending money as long as it seems like kind of a good idea.

Tragic. People work hard to produce an income for their families and a high percentage of their money is confiscated for some clown politician’s bright idea like this.

And people are OK with it. After all, “they meant well”.

You never “mean well” when you have your hand in someone’s wallet.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:28 PM

Are you some kind of hard-core type? I suspect some of you don’t care that there are no real jobs left in our country.

We’re suppose to all move to 3rd world countries to survive, eh?

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

The plant that my son worked at in Kansas closed down, so he moved here to Texas and found a job. It does not pay as good as the job in Kansas, but the cost of living is lower here and we have got no personal property tax. You do what you have got to do to survive.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:32 PM

And people are OK with it. After all, “they meant well”.

You never “mean well” when you have your hand in someone’s wallet.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:28 PM

The road to h3ll is paved with good intentions.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:34 PM

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

Just so you know,. I’m going to give you a hard time but I’m not out to hurt you.

Tell me, please–how can you back the government doing things and inflicting policies that hurt us all?

Liam on October 29, 2009 at 4:35 PM

2+2=6 it’s obamanomics

rjoco1 on October 29, 2009 at 4:36 PM

AnninCA vomited:

You know, honestly. This headline sort of bugs me.

I’d rather see the auto industry get this kickback with sales than a direct bailout.

I don’t think I agree with beating up on this program.

Don’t agree or don’t understand? Try reading an economics book about free markets. Otherwise, you are just stuck on stupid.

Andy in Agoura Hills on October 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

It does not pay as good as the job in Kansas, but the cost of living is lower here

I took a 40% pay cut to move to Texas from Northern Virginia and it was the best move I ever made.

I bought a house here that would cost three times what I paid for it in Arlington.

The traffic here is NOTHING compared to DC.

What scares me is all of the libs here who want to import the idiotic, high tax, high cost, high congestion policies from the north, here, so they can ruin this state as well.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

Sometimes reality is ugly.

mwdiver on October 29, 2009 at 4:26 PM

My grandson’s most used phrase was “that’s not fair”. My response was that life is not fair.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

My buddy made enough money to survive off of this Nutty program.

I’m liberal enough to back it. :)

And, no, I don’t care what you guys say. He’s my buddy.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM

Which, really, is what it boils down to. Grats on your acceptance of the dole. Enjoy the government cheese.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

The destruction of used cars will make it more difficult for lower-income earners to buy vehicles, thanks to a shortage of about 700,000 in the national inventory.

I figured this out first-hand. My wife and I have always been responsible when it comes to buying a “new” car. We are a one car family with two small kids. We drive them until the wheels fall off. We always pay cash and limit our search to vehicles what are around 8 years old with a price of ~$3000. When our family car suddenly went out of commission last week we began the search to replace our only car. While at the mechanic, making sure our car couldn’t make it any longer, I asked if he had any customers that were looking to sell their vehicle in our price range. His answer was something that I already knew. He hasn’t seen nearly as many early 2000 models in his shop the last couple of months and Craigslist has dried up. It reminded me of something my wife and I noticed at the beginning of C4C. All of the cars that were in line to be crushed would have been perfectly fine for us. Minivans, large sedans even the exact car I was driving at the time. Now what’s left for us? A car loan and a forced new “American way of life”
-frustrated

conservativescientist on October 29, 2009 at 4:39 PM

AnninCa, think of it this way. You are broke, with no job and your mortgage and monthly household bills are due. You have no money but you still have reasonably good credit so you take out a cash advance from your Visa card to pay your mortgage and other bills. You now have a month of breathing room but your Visa bill is at the limit and now you’ve got to deal with that plus the 24% interest rate on the balance. You’re still broke with no job and another month of bills are looming, along with an even bigger Visa bill.

All they’ve done is artificially inflate auto sales to buy some time, which means the next quarter auto sales will be much lower than normal. You are only delaying the pain and accruing interest on the loans. Not to mention that people may have bought cars they didn’t need/couldn’t afford because it was such a sweet deal (in their shortsighted minds) and now they’re going to struggle to make those payments. Wait for the repos to start. It’s just a massive shell game.

You have to start looking beyond getting through the next month/quarter and look at the big picture long term.

Monica on October 29, 2009 at 4:39 PM

What scares me is all of the libs here who want to import the idiotic, high tax, high cost, high congestion policies from the north, here, so they can ruin this state as well.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:37 PM

They are doing just that in the Austin area and I was told that in New Braunfels, they have implemented a personal property tax.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:44 PM

My buddy made enough money to survive off of this Nutty program.

I’m liberal enough to back it. :)

And, no, I don’t care what you guys say. He’s my buddy.

AnninCA on October 29, 2009 at 4:10 PM

Yes, that wacky, nutty program that took money consfiscated from hard working people, in order to transfer it to people who didn’t need it in the first place.

You are exactly what’s wrong with this country.

“It’s all about ME, ME, ME, ME, ME!” is a good way to run a country – into the ground.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 4:44 PM

Enjoy the government cheese.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 29, 2009 at 4:38 PM

“Nacho cheese”.

Johan Klaus on October 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM

AnninCA,

Would you give me $24,000 so that I can buy a $12,000 car?

Star20 on October 29, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Glenn had a guy from Edmunds.com talking about this and Glenn jokingly said “Why didn’t they just give the cars away?” But like I said in another thread, if they did that, it would cost the taxpayers much much more that it cost now given the way the government wastes money.

MobileVideoEngineer on October 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

You mean, like the street-legal golf carts that qualify for the electric car rebate but cost less than the rebate amount?

unclesmrgol on October 29, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Well golly, that does stimulate me. I’m think these folks may have done well at polysci, but betting they all flunked math class.

MikeA on October 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM

AnninCA,

Would you give me $24,000 so that I can buy a $12,000 car?

Star20 on October 29, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Ann’s generous with other people’s money, not her own.

Just like Congressional Democrats.

NoDonkey on October 29, 2009 at 5:02 PM

…Or is this yet another data point that proves that this administration has no idea how a free-market economy works, and even less idea of how a top-down managed economy fails?

Or perhaps it simply illustrates that it doesn’t care much about either, so long as the end result is the self-appointed right people holding as much power as possible. What use have the Democrat elite for a middle class?

Blacklake on October 29, 2009 at 5:04 PM

math is sooo racist.

MikeA on October 29, 2009 at 5:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2