Cash for clunkers

[lleeder]

you can turn in a shit car and get up to 4500 twards a new car. i really want to do this. has anyone tried it yet? seems too good to be true.

Cash 4 Clunkers (http://www.gm.com/cash-for-clunkers/)

[OGC]

looks like another spammer has hit ronfez.net

[Dude!]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dK5LOjlN3kw&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dK5LOjlN3kw&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[TooLowBrow]

or you can sell your kids


1 877 cash 4 kids!

1 877 cash 4 kids!

[hanso]

It must be a ploy to get folks on the lot.
I think the trade in has to get 20 mpg or less.(and the lot will test this).
Also the car you buy has to get more mpg then the trade in.

[Kevin]

or you can sell your kids


1 877 cash 4 kids!

1 877 cash 4 kids!

I hate you.

[Fallon]

I hate you.

I can't listen to sports radio without hearing that.

[Hottub]

Wayne Mazda is offering double cash. According to their newspaper ad, I can bring in my piece of crap, President Obama will give me $4500, and they will match it!
$9,000 down on a $13,000 car?
Sounds like a no brainer. I just requested my online quote.

[lleeder]

And people doubted this threads legitamacy.

[mikeyboy]

I hate you.

You're ripping me off.

[Hottub]

You're ripping me off.

Knock it off.

[Fez4PrezN2008]

this is not going to end well.

[Gvac]

Wayne Mazda is offering double cash. According to their newspaper ad, I can bring in my piece of crap, President Obama will give me $4500, and they will match it!
$9,000 down on a $13,000 car?
Sounds like a no brainer. I just requested my online quote.

Does the car you're trading in average 18 miles MPG or less overall?

[Charlie_Don't_Surf]

you can turn in a shit car and get up to 4500 twards a new car. i really want to do this. has anyone tried it yet? seems too good to be true.

Cash 4 Clunkers (http://www.gm.com/cash-for-clunkers/)

Fuck that. Depending on what car you have you can find a car enthusiast who would probably pay more for it or you can be a man and do a restoration. In any case before you do look for an owner's club for that model and you might just find that something better can come of your car than being made into sheet metal.

[Hottub]

Does the car you're trading in average 18 miles MPG or less overall?

Yes it does.
The saleman already called me back.
I HATE CAR DEALERS!!! They advertise a Mazda 3 in the paper for a $59 a month lease. When I talked with Jordan they are more than likely not doubling. Maybe throw in a couple hundred more. That Mazda 3 is $$229 for 42 months. Bottom line.

I'm going back to Hawthorne Chevy. They did me solid last time.
FUCK HIGHWAY CAR DEALERS!!

[fezwick420]

my neighbor traded a busted ass dodge truck and got 4500 trade in

[Charlie_Don't_Surf]

It must be a ploy to get folks on the lot.
I think the trade in has to get 20 mpg or less.(and the lot will test this).
Also the car you buy has to get more mpg then the trade in.

Just put on some aftermarket injectors. Some 720cc SARDs would do with a walbro fuel pump. Just run that fucker rich.

[epo]

Its a cool program and a nice way to get gas guzzlers off the highway.

[TooLowBrow]

whats to stop people from going out and buying a bunch of crappy cars for $4000. a lot of people dont know about this program and it seems really easy to take advantage of them

[lleeder]

whats to stop people from going out and buying a bunch of crappy cars for $4000. a lot of people dont know about this program and it seems really easy to take advantage of them

you need to own the car for at least a year prior to using it for the program

[Fez4PrezN2008]

This seems too easily influenced by sleazy dealer shenanigans. I don't trust dealers one bit. They are going to bait and switch the hell out of this program. I think I saw an article saying only few people will qualify for it. (http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1345050-p2.html) Article says there are no instructions on how the dealer is to destroy the old cars... Betcha a lot wind up getting resold and plan rebate pocketed too.

[PapaBear]

you need to own the car for at least a year prior to using it for the program
And it has to have been licensed for that year, too.

[Stankfoot]

Does the car you're trading in average 18 miles MPG or less overall?

GVAC is right. You have to go to fueleconomy.gov and look up the official MPG. I just went through this and my trade-in was rated at a combined MPG of 19 ! So I didn't get the $$$

[beachbum]

I have an old '93 Ford Ranger pick up that I only use to go fishing or to the golf course.I've been eyeing up a new toyota Tacoma extra cab.I go to the web site and they rate my old piece of shit at 22mpg so it doesn't qualify.

There is talk of expanding the program in Nov.Until then I'll just keep my old pos.The ac still works so I'm good.

[ozzie]

To be eligible for CARS (Car Allowance Rebate System), the vehicle you are trading in must

1) Have been manufactured less than 25 years before the date you trade it in

2) Have a “new” combined city/highway fuel economy of 18 MPG or less

There's no "test" that the dealers do. You can go to the site, enter the year, make, model and engine type, and see if the vehicle you're thinking of trading in qualifies.

http://www.gm.com/cash-for-clunkers/

Mine doesn't.

[biggestmexi]

And it has to have been licensed for that year, too.

and if i remember correctly, insured for one full year as well.

[biggestmexi]

Finally a useful link..........


http://www.cars.gov/

[HBox]

I hope if this program interested you you already took advantage because...... (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32228179/ns/business-autos/)

Congressional officials say the government plans to suspend the popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases.

The Transportation Department called congressional offices late Thursday to alert them to the decision to halt the program, which offered owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle.

[TooLowBrow]

isnt this cash for clunkers really just a 2nd bailout for the auto companies?

is the cash for the clunkers coming from the budgeted auto bailout money or is it additional money that is being spent?

[epo]

isnt this cash for clunkers really just a 2nd bailout for the auto companies?

is the cash for the clunkers coming from the budgeted auto bailout money or is it additional money that is being spent?

I guess you could look at it as a bailout....but not necessarily. If it was truly a free bailout, the government would probably let the industry keep the trade-in vehicles.

I believe that the money is coming from the stimulus package, which would make perfect sense.

[TooLowBrow]

I guess you could look at it as a bailout....but not necessarily. If it was truly a free bailout, the government would probably let the industry keep the trade-in vehicles.

I believe that the money is coming from the stimulus package, which would make perfect sense.

who gets to keep the trade in vehicles?

[lleeder]

who gets to keep the trade in vehicles?

they kill the engines and scrap them

[HBox]

isnt this cash for clunkers really just a 2nd bailout for the auto companies?

is the cash for the clunkers coming from the budgeted auto bailout money or is it additional money that is being spent?

Cash for clunkers was originally designed to get old cars with shitty gas mileage off the road to lower carbon emissions. It wasn't designed to encourage auto sales even though that was obviously going to happen. It was more a positive side-effect of lowering emissions.

As for it popularity: of course if you are going to hand out free money it's going to be popular. It is additional money but this can't be considered more of an auto bailout. If you are going to encourage people to buy more gas efficient cars they are going to increase sales for Japanese auto-makers at a higher rate than those of domestic auto-makers and that's what happened. But everyone can use a sales boost at the moment and that's also happened.

[TooLowBrow]

they kill the engines and scrap them

wouldnt it be better to sell them back to the car companies who might be able to reuse some parts?
is this whole thing just a money loss for the govt?

[epo]

who gets to keep the trade in vehicles?

My understanding is that the cars are sent to salvage yards. However the engine and the drive-train are destroyed.

The idea is to get newer, more fuel-efficient cars on the road and to remove the clunkers from the current national fleet.

[biggestmexi]

I guess you could look at it as a bailout....but not necessarily. If it was truly a free bailout, the government would probably let the industry keep the trade-in vehicles.

I believe that the money is coming from the stimulus package, which would make perfect sense.

the cars traded in are destroyed. and not to be sold again.

the money came from some energy plan as well.

[TooLowBrow]

[color=navy][size=2]Cash for clunkers was originally designed to get old cars with shitty gas mileage off the road to lower carbon emissions. It wasn't designed to encourage auto sales even though that was obviously going to happen. It was more a positive side-effect of lowering emissions.

but the money you get HAS to go towards a new car. this is totally pro auto company. if it was just to get cars off the road, then youd be able to spend the money on whatever you wanted

[TooLowBrow]

The idea is to get newer, more fuel-efficient cars on the road and to remove the clunkers from the current national fleet.

i hope they start doing this with everything...

'got something old? want a newer version? the government will buy it from you! and you can buy a new one!'

i can use a new ipod. my old one has a shitty battery. id use less energy if i had a new one. i gotta write obama a letter about this

[epo]

but the money you get HAS to go towards a new car. this is totally pro auto company. if it was just to get cars off the road, then youd be able to spend the money on whatever you wanted

Generally those giving out free money set the rules. The rules in this case were new, fuel-efficient cars.

To the government using less foreign oil and reducing emissions were a priority.

[TooLowBrow]

Generally those giving out free money set the rules. The rules in this case were new, fuel-efficient cars.

To the government using less foreign oil and reducing emissions were a priority.

no way. cause then the govt would encourage you to sell your old car and use mass transportation. this was a way of giving poor people new cars and helping the car companies

[biggestmexi]

Generally those giving out free money set the rules. The rules in this case were new, fuel-efficient cars.

To the government using less foreign oil and reducing emissions were a priority.

and getting money to the auto industry.

they knew this to be a good deal to. a lot of auto makers are giving more money on top of this as well.

Audi you get an extra 1,000 for cash for clunkers.

[biggestmexi]

no way. cause then the govt would encourage you to sell your old car and use mass transportation. this was a way of giving poor people new cars and helping the car companies

poor people cant afford cars like this.

the cars you will be getting will be over 20,000 less you get a smart car.

poor people cant afford that. this was for more middle class people looking to upgrade but could due to the economic times.

[epo]

and getting money to the auto industry.

they knew this to be a good deal to. a lot of auto makers are giving more money on top of this as well.

Audi you get an extra 1,000 for cash for clunkers.

Absolutely and the sooner the auto industry is healthy, the sooner they can repay the government.

[lleeder]

poor people cant afford cars like this.

the cars you will be getting will be over 20,000 less you get a smart car.

poor people cant afford that. this was for more middle class people looking to upgrade but could due to the economic times.

not always (http://local.nissanusa.com/north/versa.html)

[biggestmexi]

Absolutely and the sooner the auto industry is healthy, the sooner they can repay the government.

now here its a bit different. I think being healty is a good thing but that not when they will start paying them back. they will want to make a certain amount over budget in order to do that. cause they are ass holes like that. unless there was a time limit set by them

[TooLowBrow]

poor people cant afford cars like this.

the cars you will be getting will be over 20,000 less you get a smart car.

poor people cant afford that. this was for more middle class people looking to upgrade but could due to the economic times.

how does it help someone who cant afford a 20000 car but has an old car, to take the old car and give them, lets say, up to 5000. wont they have to borrow money to afford the new car? wont that put them in debt?

i refuse to belive that this country is filled with people with old cars who want to buy $20000 cars, but they are 5000 short.

[biggestmexi]

not always (http://local.nissanusa.com/north/versa.html)

im throwing that in as smart car as well.

[HBox]

but the money you get HAS to go towards a new car. this is totally pro auto company. if it was just to get cars off the road, then youd be able to spend the money on whatever you wanted

That is a good point. It would be optimal to allow people to completely ditch their cars if they preferred. But that percentage of people would have been incredibly marginal. This is still a car-dominated country. To truly encourage people to ditch cars permanently would require massive investments in residential redevelopment and mass transit that isn't currently anywhere near politically feasible and would not have an affect for many, many years. So even if they allowed that the effect would have been incredibly minimal.

[epo]

now here its a bit different. I think being healty is a good thing but that not when they will start paying them back. they will want to make a certain amount over budget in order to do that. cause they are ass holes like that. unless there was a time limit set by them

I seem to remember the auto bailout having a provision that limited the size of executive bonuses until they pay off their debt. That's the ultimate time limit.

[biggestmexi]

not always (http://local.nissanusa.com/north/versa.html)

not to mention thats base model. most family wont want this car albeit a good idea.

[TooLowBrow]

Absolutely and the sooner the auto industry is healthy, the sooner they can repay the government.

is them paying back part of the plan?
do they have to pay back interest?
when do they have to pay it back by?

[biggestmexi]

I seem to remember the auto bailout having a provision that limited the size of executive bonuses until they pay off their debt. That's the ultimate time limit.

i just ment profit margin im sure at a certain part they will be healthy, but they will want to be over that in order to pay them back i would think.

so this way they will still be making there own money and be able to pay the gov back.

[lleeder]

heres another one (http://www.jeep.com/dma/501/index.html?zip=11758&family=patriot&year=2009&zip=11758#family=patriot&zip=11758)

[TooLowBrow]

That is a good point. It would be optimal to allow people to completely ditch their cars if they preferred. But that percentage of people would have been incredibly marginal. This is still a car-dominated country. To truly encourage people to ditch cars permanently would require massive investments in residential redevelopment and mass transit that isn't currently anywhere near politically feasible and would not have an affect for many, many years. So even if they allowed that the effect would have been incredibly minimal.

isnt that what we're trying to do with getting off foreign energy? its supposed to take a long time and be tough, but if everyone is still driving there own car and were are focusing on that rather than improving mass transit, i dont see how it can ever happen

[epo]

isnt that what we're trying to do with getting off foreign energy? its supposed to take a long time and be tough, but if everyone is still driving there own car and were are focusing on that rather than improving mass transit, i dont see how it can ever happen

There is also quite a bit of funds in the stimulus package for further development of mass transit, especially high-speed rail.

The thing that has delayed these programs has been that states have had to finish their annual budgets, then had to apply for the money.

[TooLowBrow]

There is also quite a bit of funds in the stimulus package for further development of mass transit, especially high-speed rail.

The thing that has delayed these programs has been that states have had to finish their annual budgets, then had to apply for the money.

car companies get treated better than the states


car exec : our budget? we're broke!

obama : heres money

state governor : we'd like to increase our mass transit to help the environment and give jobs and cheap transportation to our citizens

obama : not so fast! we dont just GIVE money away. show us your budgets and then you can apply for some money

[lleeder]

car companies get treated better than the states


car exec : our budget? we're broke!

obama : heres money

state governor : we'd like to increase our mass transit to help the environment and give jobs and cheap transportation to our citizens

obama : not so fast! we dont just GIVE money away. show us your budgets and then you can apply for some money

yeah but obama needs to wait and see what state govenors get arrested or involved in scandle before he can give them cash

[TooLowBrow]

yeah but obama needs to wait and see what state govenors get arrested or involved in scandle before he can give them cash

oh yeah. good thing people in the auto industry are morally upright fellows who'd never do anything wrong. thats why we trust them

[epo]

car companies get treated better than the states

car exec : our budget? we're broke!

obama : heres money

state governor : we'd like to increase our mass transit to help the environment and give jobs and cheap transportation to our citizens

obama : not so fast! we dont just GIVE money away. show us your budgets and then you can apply for some money

Ha. The two things were very different packages.

The bailout was direct to an industry. The stimulus dollars that are going to states are projects that the states are essentially acting as a middle man for.

For example, there is money in the stimulus for high-speed rail. Wisconsin/Illinois would like to do high-speed rail from Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison to help develop their regional economy. This means that two seperate government bodies have to have their shit together, so that they can work together to find a vendor to install the rail.

The complexity alone demanded a more difficult process.

[TooLowBrow]

Absolutely and the sooner the auto industry is healthy, the sooner they can repay the government.

Chrysler LLC will not repay U.S. taxpayers more than $7 billion in bailout money it received earlier this year and as part of its bankruptcy filing. (http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/05/news/companies/chrysler_loans/index.htm)
or not

[epo]

or not

Fuck Chrysler, that's bullshit.

Edit: This makes me feel a little better...but not a ton:

"The reality now is that the face value [of the $4 billion bridge loan] will be written off in the bankruptcy process," said the official, who added that the 8% equity stake that Treasury will be receiving as part of the company's reorganization is meant to compensate taxpayers for the lost money.

[HBox]

isnt that what we're trying to do with getting off foreign energy? its supposed to take a long time and be tough, but if everyone is still driving there own car and were are focusing on that rather than improving mass transit, i dont see how it can ever happen

That would certainly be the most helpful long term thing we can do to decrease out energy use. However this country would crucify the party that would either raise taxes enough to do it or take away from highway funds.

The country simply isn't ready for it.

[TooLowBrow]

That would certainly be the most helpful long term thing we can do to decrease out energy use. However this country would crucify the party that would either raise taxes enough to do it or take away from highway funds.

The country simply isn't ready for it.

im surprised were ready to be taxed to buy clunkers.

[HBox]

im surprised were ready to be taxed to buy clunkers.

We aren't. Much easier to hand out free money and then saddled us with bill later when there is no choice. But this is a drop in the bucket as far as what we have to pay back. And at least this is helpful on two fronts: giving a little kick start to a struggling industry and taking a small step to tackle global warming.

[PapaBear]

I just love small town letters the editor. This is what some guy wrote about CARS in my local paper today...

Am I thinking wrong, or are the car dealers going to be in all kinds of trouble around September? This clunker deal went over bigger than most thought it would. The only problem I see is that sales are way up, and just about everybody has bought a car who is going to.
What happens when the deal is over and no cars sold, and the dealers will list how much they have lost for the months they don’t sell? Looks like trouble is just around the corner.


First of all, what difference does it make if people who were already going to buy a car, buy it now, or later? Second, how will this have even the slightest effect on people who are planning to buy a car, and don't have a trade in that gets less than 18MPG?:wallbash: