Clunkers =BIG BUCKS
- Thread starter Wolfrun
- Start date
Rob Peter 50 grand to pay Paul 20 bucks
October 29, 2009
Least surprising headline: Cash for Clunkers a boondoggle
Ethel C. Fenig
So, all the clunkerless car owners think they got a good cash for clunkers deal? Think again. Following on Randy Fardal's analysis yesterday in AT, comes a study by edmunds.com, as reported by Mark Trumbull in Christian Science Monitor
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.
Therefore, despite the trumpeted claims and pictures of crowds in previously deserted auto showrooms
"The economic claims have been rendered quite weak," David Tompkins, one of the researchers, said in Edmunds' AutoObserver.com, an online publication. Still, the clunker program did help stimulate some car sales at a very weak moment for automakers.
The program also may have some environmental benefits.
Meanwhile auto showrooms are deserted once again--and there are reports of clunkers, which were to be destroyed to decrease supposed harmful auto emissions, back on the market. But those who couldn't afford a new car, clunker carrot or not, are now priced out of the used car--uhm pre-owned--market as there are fewer available.
A clunker of a program. So maybe the government will repeat it for another industry.
Hey, I know--clunker health care.
Least surprising headline: Cash for Clunkers a boondoggle
Ethel C. Fenig
So, all the clunkerless car owners think they got a good cash for clunkers deal? Think again. Following on Randy Fardal's analysis yesterday in AT, comes a study by edmunds.com, as reported by Mark Trumbull in Christian Science Monitor
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.
Therefore, despite the trumpeted claims and pictures of crowds in previously deserted auto showrooms
"The economic claims have been rendered quite weak," David Tompkins, one of the researchers, said in Edmunds' AutoObserver.com, an online publication. Still, the clunker program did help stimulate some car sales at a very weak moment for automakers.
The program also may have some environmental benefits.
Meanwhile auto showrooms are deserted once again--and there are reports of clunkers, which were to be destroyed to decrease supposed harmful auto emissions, back on the market. But those who couldn't afford a new car, clunker carrot or not, are now priced out of the used car--uhm pre-owned--market as there are fewer available.
A clunker of a program. So maybe the government will repeat it for another industry.
Hey, I know--clunker health care.
$24,000 per clunker...that's nothing. How about $787,000,000,000 stimulus for 25,000 jobs. That's a cool $31,000,000 per employee. And the story came from the AP.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091029/D9BKMVMG0.html
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091029/D9BKMVMG0.html
Health care should be a f-ing nightmare
O
Ollie
ACCOUNT CLOSED
There's a reason the dems released it behind closed doors with no one allowed in to see it including the republicans.
Another person pisses of BO and the WH wonks.
White House fights back on Cash for Clunkers
The Obama administration on Thursday lashed out at a prominent critic of its Cash for Clunkers program, arguing that the popular trade-in initiative helped give the auto industry and the economy a much needed boost in the past few months.
In a blog post on whitehouse.gov, the administration argued that a report on Clunkers by automotive Web site Edmunds.com "doesn't withstand even basic scrutiny" and is based on "implausible assumptions."
On Wednesday, Edmunds.com released a study that argued Cash for Clunkers did not have a great impact on the auto industry. The report said that 690,000 new vehicles were sold under the program last summer, but that only 125,000 of them would not have been sold without the Clunkers rebates.
White House fights back on Cash for Clunkers
The Obama administration on Thursday lashed out at a prominent critic of its Cash for Clunkers program, arguing that the popular trade-in initiative helped give the auto industry and the economy a much needed boost in the past few months.
In a blog post on whitehouse.gov, the administration argued that a report on Clunkers by automotive Web site Edmunds.com "doesn't withstand even basic scrutiny" and is based on "implausible assumptions."
On Wednesday, Edmunds.com released a study that argued Cash for Clunkers did not have a great impact on the auto industry. The report said that 690,000 new vehicles were sold under the program last summer, but that only 125,000 of them would not have been sold without the Clunkers rebates.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091104/ap_on_bi_ge/us_cash_for_clunkers
"If we're looking for the environmental story here, we're going to be disappointed," said Jeremy Anwyl, chief executive at Edmunds.com, an analyst firm. "It might have started out from the perspective of improving the environment, but it got detoured as a way to stimulate the economy."
"If we're looking for the environmental story here, we're going to be disappointed," said Jeremy Anwyl, chief executive at Edmunds.com, an analyst firm. "It might have started out from the perspective of improving the environment, but it got detoured as a way to stimulate the economy."
Last edited:
Similar threads
