"Cash for Clunkers" program suspended

[Epod]

The government is suspending the C4C program until it can figure out whether they might have already spent the billion dollars that was allocated.

http://online.wsj.com/article/....html

They are likely to allocate more money...(if the Red Chinese will lend it).

[Q45tech]

Unfortunately you will have to replace 20 Million vehicles before you can even see a difference in oil imports and that will only be a 3% reduction.

That will cost 80 BILLION in sibsidies.

It will take 20 years to solve the problem but by then the oil will be too high to use for gasoline.

[miata007]

I for myself have used the program 3 weeks ago for a new Nissan.

On the other hand, I think C4C program should only been applied to purchase of a new domestic cars. The big 3s need more help than the imports. With this limitation, it would help the US economy even more.

I would consider getting a Fusion or Dodge Caliber. Don't think the Prius need any extra incentive nowaday.

007

[DrewQ45]

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/3...x.htm

[maxnix]

The big 3s need more help than the imports. With this limitation, it would help the US economy even more.

You mean like the Focus made in Mexico rather than the Accord make in Ohio?

$2B going back in as we speak if Congress acts. Reports of depletion seem to have been premature.

[miata007]

Yes!!! Even on some domestic cars made outside US.Definately would be better if jobs are kept in the US but we have to accept the economy is going global. Goods will continue to be made where cheapest.

Atleast majority of the big 3 plants are in the US. We need them to stay alive and provide millions of jobs to America.

Camry and Accord are made in US. Without incentives, they will have no issue selling.

007

[elwesso]

IMO where we lose out big time is the components being made overseas... Where the car is assembled and where a majority of the components are made are 2 very different things...

no such thing as an "american" or "japanease" car anymore...

[Jesda]

In this rare case, I agree that it would make more sense to apply the CARS program exclusively to domestic automakers. Why? One reason -- we the public already own them and need a return on our risky investment.

I'D LIKE TO THANK THE PRESIDENT, HIS PREDECESSOR, THE HOUSE, AND THE SENATE FOR WASTING MY MONEY.

[tmak26b]

Here we go, the racist/nationalist with their agendas again. Toyota employed nearly as many US citizens as Ford in 2009. Under the restructure, GM are closing 1/4 of their plants in the US. Also let's not forget one of GM's most profitable division is their Buick brand in Asia and Ford's Euro division. So it's okay to sell things overseas and not okay for others to come in? I am sorry, this is 2009, survival the fittest. The product will determine the result. We saw how well the nationalists did in the two World Wars 100 years ago.....

[Infinitiguy19]

You know of all the people I have talked to. You are the only one complaing about owning a Q45 and it not living up to your expectations.

I do wonder what do you drive that is better than a Q?

And please compare apples to apples.

[BadQ45t]

You know the other countries in the world are racist/nationalist. Our auto industry is in the toilet, these should only count for the big 3 IMHO. we own GM for crying out loud!!

[Q451990]

Here we go, the racist/nationalist with their agendas again.

Although I don't like how this starts out...

Quote »I am sorry, this is 2009, survival the fittest. The product will determine the result.[/quote]I couldn't agree more with this part. Which is why this whole CARS program is a crock to begin with. The only thing this government is doing by trying to prop up the economy is prolonging the agony and financing it for a couple of generations. The market is very efficient picking winners and loosers - maybe it's time to let it run it's course.

I seem to recall there being some discussion about the program being for just domestic automakers in the beginning. I wonder if they decided it would be too difficult to figure out which cars would have the domestic part content to do something like that. Either that or the pool of fuel efficient domestic vehicles was deemed too small to accomplish the stated goal of fuel efficiency improvment...

Heath
Modified by Q451990 at 12:05 AM 8/4/2009

[breaksr]

Just traded my Q for a 2009 Honda Civic. $4500 reduction on the cost of the new car was too good to pass up. 225,667 miles and she was still going strong but the transmission was slipping, the A/C and alternator were original and I think the some of the remaining four fuel injectors were going bad. Running the car over the last ten years only cost me about four cents per mile which I thought was very cheap. Total cost of the car was roughly $16,000 (not deducting the $4500) including all the repairs. I do appreciate all of the help I received from this forum and I'm sure I could never have done all of the repairs without the advise I received. Thanks again.

[tmak26b]

Oh stop with the whole future crap, there wouldn't be a future if we can't get past today. As I said before, chances are that half of the $4500 goes back to the government through one way or another within the next 6 months! If you buy a $30K car in California, you would have to pay nearly half of the $4500 back into the state government. This doesn't include the property taxes, tax on dealerships, corporations and all the other fun taxes you have to pay. It's a simple game of giving a little now and earn everything back in the long run.

This is definitely an economy stimulus first, environmental second bill. You can argue all day long about if they should do it, but at the end of the day, it is definitely reviving the auto industry somewhat.

Although I don't like how this starts out...

I couldn't agree more with this part. Which is why this whole CARS program is a crock to begin with. The only thing this government is doing by trying to prop up the economy is prolonging the agony and financing it for a couple of generations. The market is very efficient picking winners and loosers - maybe it's time to let it run it's course.

I seem to recall there being some discussion about the program being for just domestic automakers in the beginning. I wonder if they decided it would be too difficult to figure out which cars would have the domestic part content to do something like that. Either that or the pool of fuel efficient domestic vehicles was deemed too small to accomplish the stated goal of fuel efficiency improvment...

Heath

Modified by Q451990 at 12:05 AM 8/4/2009

[Victor]

If one intent of this ill advised program was to help American car maker why are they applying it to foreign made cars. There was a picture today in the newspaper of 100 clunkers lined up in front of a Kia dealership. American tax payers bailing out foreign car makers.Second, according to this article an unintended or maybe intended consequence of this program will be that the price of used engines will soar, hurting poor people who can't afford new cars still under warranty.

http://online.wsj.com/article/....html

Thankfully the senate may kill the program according to another article I read.

[Infinitiguy19]

At least they don't have a loony toony government (As far as I know) in Japan. So we can continue to buy JDM engines from there and replace ours if needed.

I still think it would be better that the people just sell there Q45's to people who would respect them enough to fix them.

Can't wait for your pissed off response tmak26b.

[tmak26b]

If you can afford to put in a replacement engine in a Q45, chances are that you can afford to buy another used car. If prices is what you are concerned about, Q45 is probably not the car you want to drive. I am still pi$$ed that I paid $300 for the Q45 radiator last July!

As far as your domestic/foreign company rant, tons of foreign automakers have plants in the US. Toyota has huge plants in Texas and California, would you like to pay for their unemployment? BMW builds car in either Alabama or South Carolina, let's lay them off too. This is 2009, stop with your narrow mind of thinking. We are all in a highly diverse economy. If you want to get technical, let's let Mazda go under so Ford can lose their stake in them. Also GM owns a small part of Subaru, let's screw them too. Oh yeah, let's put them 1000+ dealers out of business in America. Are they not American because they sell Toyota or Nissan?

4 out of the 10 best selling models in July came from the big 3. What else do you want? Most of the clunkers were American made SUVs, do you want to trade them in for more piece of $hit?

[aces805]

Looks like Cash for Clunkers is back on. From nytimes.com:

"The Senate approved providing another $2 billion for the “cash for clunkers” program on Thursday night, keeping it alive through the month of August.

Senators voted 60 to 37 to continue the auto-purchase program, which quickly spent the previously allocated $1 billion. President Obama is expected to sign the bill as soon as possible.

The House approved an additional $2 billion last Friday, before its summer recess. That left the Senate with a take-it-or-leave-it proposition, because if it made any changes, the House would have to take up the Senate version in September.

The Senate spent much of the afternoon and evening slogging through seven proposed amendments, all of which were defeated.

“We all know that if we change the bill it will die,” said Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader. The Senate is scheduled to begin its August recess on Friday. In the end, the bill passed largely along party lines, with 51 Democrats, 2 independents and 7 Republicans voting for it.

The “cash for clunkers” program offers rebates of $3,500 to $4,500 for trade-ins of vehicles with low fuel economy, if the buyer picks a more efficient replacement. The precise rules to qualify vary by category of vehicle.

The additional money is borrowed from another stimulus program, a loan program for green energy projects. But lawmakers want to replenish that, so the cash-for-clunkers extension spending will probably add to the federal deficit.

One amendment, offered by Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, would require that the program not place a burden on future generations.

The Obama administration has been arguing that the savings on gas spending would offset costs, and that the stimulus to the economy would be another benefit. Still, based on the popularity of the program, government officials expect that the additional $2 billion will be spent by Labor Day.

Dealers say they have made about a quarter-million new car sales incorporating the rebate, but entering the applications into the government computer system has been slowed by computer problems. The Transportation Department said Wednesday that more than 180,000 deals had been submitted, with a rebate value of $775.2 million.

About 45 percent of the cars bought under the program are from American manufacturers, about the same share as the overall car market. And many of the other new vehicles bought are made in America by foreign automakers, the department said.

A crucial question is how much Americans will actually save on gasoline. The Transportation Department said shoppers had been turning in the bigger vehicles and buying small sedans, with an average improvement of 9.6 miles a gallon.

But some industry experts pointed out that the “clunkers” being traded in tended to be the older vehicles kept as spare cars in multicar households, and driven very few miles every year.

“The new car doesn’t replace the clunker, it replaces the previous first car in the family,” said Lee Schipper, a transportation expert and researcher at the University of California, Berkeley, and at Stanford University.

A question not addressed by the Senate was how long the clunkers would have been on the road anyway, absent the government payments.

Another question was how long the $2 billion would last and what would happen after that.

Even R. L. Polk, the auto market consulting firm, predicted in July that the program would handle only 200,000 cars in 2009, but it appears to have done 250,000 in July alone.

The program technically began on July 1, and some dealers began accepting trade-ins then. But the Transportation Department did not have the regulations written and the computers set up to accept applications until July 27, a Monday.

By that Thursday, although only a few thousand applications had been entered, the National Automobile Dealers Association told the Transportation Department that probably all the money had been committed.

The program caught public attention in a way that the Senate’s other recent concerns like health care legislation have not."

The more I think about this, the more I believe we should take the big 3 out back and put em out of their misery. Old Yeller style. There will bloodshed. We are prolonging the agony of the inevitable. The chickens are coming home to roost for the labor unions.

If you cannot run a profitable company, then don't.

[Victor]

I read an article in Sunday's newspaper that said contrary to what I had heard that the cars had to be shredded , that in truth only the engine has to be seized using sodium silicate. It said that junk car dealers are paying about $250 for the clunkers with the seized engines, and that about 30% of the value of a junker is the engine. So I guess they can still salvage stuff like MAFS and alternators and starters and transmissions if the article was correct.I wonder if they know that sodium silicate, also known as water glass, dissolves in water. Seems the engines could be disassembled and soaked in water to remove the sodium silicate and be brought back to life. When I was a kid I made something called a chemical garden using water, sodium silicate, and various pieces of metal I dropped in the solution. Beautiful colored stalagmite looking things grow from the metal. Sodium silicate also used to be used for preserving fresh eggs back in the days before refrigeration became widespread.