CARS--clunker buy back

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Chris Crew, Jul 31, 2009.

  1. Chris Crew

    Chris Crew Member

    Is it political to ask how you ladies and gents feel about the clunker rebate program?

  2. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    LOL... its a joke. If the government cant effectively manage this little $1 billion project, how are they going to manage the infinity more complex $1 trillion healthcare program? The CARS program failed in 4 days. Some people are driving off the lots in cars that are not even theirs yet... if they are not approved they have to give the cars back. What are the lots supposed to do with those cars?
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2009
  3. Skyliner70cc

    Skyliner70cc Active Member

    Yep, and these idiots are the same folks who want to run our health care system. God help us all if it passes!

    The CARS program is analgous to a tax cut/tax rebate and it seemed to work. If Congress can now apply this to the rest of the economy they will realize that tax cuts, not tax hikes, stimulate the economy.
  4. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    I agree, and the same goes for the tax credit for new home buyers. Note that new housing starts are up "more than expected". It is a direct result of the tax credit. To get out of this recession, all the government needs to do is lower taxes across the board, instead of meddling in select markets. (like autos and housing)

    The problem is that the Cash 4 Clunkers program burned through 1,000,000,000.00 within a week, and the funding was supposed to last through September. Is this how government defines success? Burning through a billion dollars waaay faster than anticipated is their definition of success? So when they estimate the cost of health care, we are supposed to trust these geniuses?

    Time will tell if these programs do indeed "jump start" the economy. Some news outlets are already declaring we are out of the recession because of the housing numbers. (even though unemployment continues to rise) Auto sales figures are going to look great too. The question is if these are sustainable or not. When the money runs out, will people still buy cars and houses? Or will they sit and wait to be "stimulated". What will happen to lower income people that primarly buy use cars? Since all these C4C trade-ins are destroyed, the price of used cars will naturally skyrocket. Did the govt. just help the rich buy new cars, and hurt the poor people who depend on pre-owned cars?
  5. Chris Crew

    Chris Crew Member


    So here's my take. Politics aside, because to paraphrase Charles De Gaul, in a nation with over 847 kinds of beer, how are we Amurakans every going to agree on the just and equitable distribution of our taxes? Some think it will stimulate the economy, some don't.

    Since some of us are at least partly attracted to the MB for economic reasons (hi, I'm Chris and I'm a cheap greenish *******) lets look at the costs and benefits in terms of an energy cycle.

    The program was sold to us an opportunity to replace old gas guzzlers with more efficient, newer, cleaner cars. The activities of driving, manufacturing and scrapping a motor vehicle (all components of the CARS program) all have one thing in common: they consume energy, which on this terrestrial orb, means oil.

    I my lovely wife and I own 4 automobiles between us. 1988 Chevy S-10 4 speed 4 cyl auto; 1993 Volvo 940 4 cyl auto, 1998 Subaru Legacy 4 cycle auto, 2000 Chrysler PT Cruiser 4 cyl five speed (a chick car if there ever was such a thing!) Oops, sorry, I was raised better than that. None were purchased new. Anyway, I went on the interwebs and found a calculator site courtesy of MSNBC and punched in all of the rides. NONE qualified for a rebate, nor did any vehicle my bride and I have owned in the last 30 years. Reason? Gas Mileage. These ostensible "Clunkers" get an average mpg of about 22. Low is about 20, high is about 24.

    Now remember, look over here at my waving hand so can I distract you.

    fine print: cars may not be more than 25 years old

    One of the key points of the CARS was to improve efficiency so we can use less energy.

    In order to qualify, you have to buy a new car and your old one gets junked. For show on the news last night there was video of a guy pouring something out of a gallon jug labeled CLUNKER BOMB into the top of the crankcase on a big old SUV like my retired college professor daddy uses to pull his comfy camper around this great nation of ours.

    Anyway, here are the requirements for the new vehicle from the Government's own website

    The new vehicle must have a manufacturer's suggested retail price of not more than $45,000. That price appears on the window sticker on new vehicles. The new vehicle must also achieve minimum combined fuel economy levels. For passenger automobiles, the new vehicle must have a combined fuel economy value of at least 22 miles per gallon. For category 1 trucks, the new vehicle must have a combined fuel economy value of at least 18 miles per gallon. For category 2 trucks, the new vehicle must have a combined fuel economy value of at least 15 miles per gallon. Category 3 trucks have no minimum fuel economy requirement; however, there are special requirements that apply to the purchase of category 3 vehicles.

    Everything I own is as fuel efficient as the govt. is willing to say it has to be. Congress, grow some stones. The manufacture of each of those vehicles consumed both resources and energy and if we really pick at the threads, we could calculate how much oil went into the production of the aluminum used on each car from the time it was just a speck of bauxite way down under a red earth hill in Jamaica, mon. We dug it up, trucked it to the smelter, zapped it with electrons produced most likely, and certainly at least in part, by burning some more oil, on an on until it became part of an alternator bracket for the Chevy that I purchased via my local dealer from a factory in Mexico. There is also plastic, pot metal, some brass, copper, traces of platinum and surprisingly, a little bit of steel on each car. The crude oil in the plastic may have come out of a five mile deep hole drilled in the bottom of the ocean two miles below the surface and loaded into an oil powered ship for the long voyage to the refinery.

    Building the ostensible replacements for my small fleet will trip that cycle again. Not only that, grinding my old ones to bits and melting the chunks down to recover metals and hydrocarbons will trip it again. Believe it or not, the stuff that floats to the top of the pot when the chunks are melted constitutes the big money in the recycle chain---bigger than the metals according my tour guide at a facility along a certain river here in NC.

    So. I plan to drive mine till they drop, then replace with slightly more efficient used ones which I plan to use less and less. During the remaining life of these machines, I will use a certain amount of gas and oil, I will buy some more replacement parts. I would use NOWHERE near as much gas in the remaining life these than I will use in the long life of the replacements. I will not suck on the teat of mother earth for more fuel and resources to replace what I have with something that in the grand scheme is no better, just new. I will not consume the energy, nor produce the fumes associated with scrapping the old ones until they are worn out.

    Since we are now up to $98 BILLION in the program, it's a little late, but I've got ask--why couldn't we have put some of that money to paying off Michigan's deficit AND helped retool the factories to make something so much better than the rest that the rest of the world would want to buy it and it wouldn't be bad for them or us.

    I know, I know. Time value of money. The shareholders must be served.

    Shareholders, we've got to stop chasing the short term gain and build riches, not just wealth.
  6. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    I was just talking to a friend of mine who just happens to be looking for a new car. He has a qualifying vehicle for the program, but has figured out that the C4C program won't save him any money.


    Because, he got a few price quotes on cars before the program started and the dealers WILL NOT HONOR THE PRICE minus the $3500 (he didn't qualify for the full $4500). The dealer basically took away any factory or dealer discounts/incentives.

    It's all a shell game folks!

    The billions of dollars are just being redistributed to the car companies and dealers, you're not getting any better a price than you would have a week ago!
  7. Chris Crew

    Chris Crew Member

    I misquoted the cost to date---should be $.98 billion, not 98 billion---still, a big chunk o' cheese. And cheap, greenish ******* rhymes with cheap, greenish PLASTERED
  8. KilroyCD

    KilroyCD Active Member

    Do Not Go On Website!!!!

    This is quite important, and I suggest everyone take a look at this
    and closely observe what you are hearing and seeing. [Glen Beck Video]

    A youtube video about total government access to your computer.

    This is frightening...very much George Orwell, 1984
  9. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    Kilroy, I saw that clip a few days ago, so I decided to check it out. Not being stupid, I went to the public library and used their computer to access - that EULA is a chilling read. I don't know if the government is using this as a data-mining tool, but the EULA is open-ended - if you agree to it to access their site, the computer used is the governments property by your consent - and remains their property in perpetuity.

    So, what happens if you trash the computer and get a new one - are you chargeable with destruction of government property? If you sell it have you committed fraud and unlawful conversion of government property to private gain?

    Valid questions, to my mind.
  10. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    What's a shame is that Glen Beck is a corporate puppet, so he wouldn't recommend that people switch to OS X or Ubuntu.

    PEOPLE, WAKE UP! Ubuntu does 95% of the stuff everybody needs to do, and you're completely secure!! You can go to *any* website and download *anything*, and you'll never have to worry about one THANG. Ubuntu provides peace of mind for more people everyday.
  11. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    For really, Sparky?

    Exactly what difference does the OS make here? The EULA confers ownership to the government, and I assure you that they employ persons fully conversant with every aspect of Ubuntu, or any other OS.

    If you think that Ubuntu provides you such security, you rest easy in your blissful blindness. It in fact confers no security at all when, having legally taken title to your system, the government can perfectly legally walk up to your door, demand surrender of ITS PROPERTY and you have zero recourse, having willing;y granted them ownership.
  12. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    I guess that's the Fed's way of getting us (MB'rs) to keep our mouths shut about our MPG rates. Maybe they'll approach Tom about putting a clause in our terms of usage! LOL! They'll give 'em a nice fat check!

    You guy's are a bunch of Conspiracy buff's. The Fed's have been representing our best interests since 1776.
  13. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    Only joking Tom!
  14. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    Yes for real.

    They aren't gonna be installing any spyware without my permission. And even if they could, it still wouldn't work.

    Sure they could come and take my property, but they could do that with anything of real value. They could take your child away when you REGISTER your child's birth. They could take your car and house away for similar reasons. You don't really own anything if you have to ask permission from the government to use it.

    Point is... I can go to and there will be no way for them to know that I agreed to anything. There will be no spyware. I have control over my computer. And even if they DID actually inject some super intelligent spyware [that works with both windows and unix-based OSes] thru some sneaky javascript code... and claimed the right to my property... they'd have to get ON my property first, which I wouldn't allow. And then they'd have a **** of a time trying to recover any data off of my hard drive. I'm sure the NSA could crack it in no time... but I can assure you, my security is top notch.
  15. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    Good luck with not allowing them on your property.
  16. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    I think they removed that language from the EULA when dealers log on to the website. Pretty scary stuff in the original EULA though.

    Sparky - get a job and stop yapping about things you know nothing about. You and every other person like you that uses Linux has the same elitist attitude even though all you did was pop in a CD and click "install".
  17. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    Well... if you know so much. Explain to me how the Gubmint would be capable of knowing whether I agreed to their EULA or not.

    And yes... all I did was put in a CD, but there were a few steps inbetween that and clicking Install. Not too terribly hard. Partitioning your hard drive is the only "hard" step, and it's not even that hard. I don't understand why people still choose to browse the web with Windows-based computers. If you must use Windows for gaming or Photoshop or something... OK. But browsing the web should be left up to a SECURE operating system.
  18. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    All property in America is the Gubmint's property. It is my understanding that nobody here owns an allodial title to their property.
  19. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    If you can't figure this one out, there is no hope for you.
  20. sparky

    sparky Active Member

    Believe me, I know a ton about network security.

    I'm asking you a serious question. In what way would the government know if I accepted their EULA... or even visited their site at all??