"Cash for Clunkers" Bill Passes!

[Bill Gauch #23121]

Sadly, this isn't going to result in more big-3 cars being sold. This is going to result in people who drive a $1500 POS and trading it in for a brand new Hyundai, Kia or, possibly, a Toyota. They will end up with a 7 year loan for $5000.

Me? I'll keep driving my 4 cyl. Ford Ranger and working on restoring my '38 Cadillac. Government handouts like this are a sure path to death and decay of a thriving and prosperous society. Why do for yourself if someone else will do it for you?

[Wayne Womble 12210]

if you can buy a GN for 4500 then do it.... I doubt anyone would be stupid enough to trade one in for a new car.... I think they are safe....

I REST MY CASE

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

I think the quote could read something like this "Call the Police, someone stole the Rails".

Bruce.

[Wayne Womble 12210]

Six weeks later someone was  flying that Duesenberg over Germany.

[Otto Skorzeny]

Where did you get that photo? Do you know the story behind it? Is that in Alaska?

[Wayne Womble 12210]

Frank Yount`s Deusenburg.  His wife donated it for scrap in the war. The scrap yard tried to save it, but she found out and made them scrap it. She was quite obviously a bit goofy. 

  http://forums.acdclub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=1409&sid=22bdfd27e02ebe55126e651c414ace92

[Otto Skorzeny]

That makes me sick to my stomach.

[Kevin Wiles]

I suspect that any post-'84 car worth less than $4500 at this point does not have much chance of ever being a classic.

you're wrong for that my friend.   How many chevelles, novas, belairs, etc. used to sit on a lot and not sell at a 2,000 - 1500.00   or even 500.00 asking price?   A LOT
Clearly anyone who thinks a post 84 car worth less than a whopping 4500 will NEVER be considered a classic is living in a delusional world.

[Otto Skorzeny]

Name one. Let's say collectible instead of classic. That word has no real meaning. There haven't been many stunners made in the last 25 years.

[DinoBob]

OK, OK. There are some cars now that have a chance of being collectible. I have to admit that I was being shortsighted. Someday we will look back at when a clean IROC-Z was easy to find. But they are not worth $4500 right now, and if they are, they are not being scrapped. And this program will not go on forever. So I doubt that very many decent cars will be going to the crusher. The ones that will are already junk.

[RobW]

Yeah but there's usually a lot of good parts on cars that are already junk.

[The Tassie Devil(le)]

I'll drink to that.

Bruce.

[DinoBob]

Good points all. 

[John Tozer #7946]

Folks,

I wouldn't be too concerned about the effects this will have on the old car or parts availability. I believe the system will die on the vine. Like the vast majority of half-baked, unresolved environmental "feel good" programs, this one will even fail the "green" test. All you have to do is consider what the government will do with all these junkers when they have collected them and have a guess at what happens when:

1.   The US car market is about 10 million new cars per year;

2.   That means about 10 million are removed from the road per year. To date most of these that are not wrecks have ended up in junk yards where the parts have remained salvageable for many years;

3.   Imagine a heap of 10 million aged cars and car wrecks. That's a lot of cars;

4.   In recent times the price of steel has made crushing these junkers attractive. Scrap in my country headed over $1,000 per tonne when the Chinese were at the peak of their "buying everything steel in sight" phase;

5.   Environmental law in virtually all western countries now won't let you just crush the junker and burn off all the nasty bits in a furnace. the green lobby has insisted that all those bits have to be removed before they go in the furnace to reduce toxic emissions. There is currently no viable destination for about 15% by weight of a car and the bits left over include car tyres, plastics and foam components from the interior as well as some other really nasty bits that include heavy metals etc.

6.   The high price of the steel in the body made it worthwhile for the recyclers to subsidise the cost of removing all these nasties under controlled conditions and paying to take them all to landfill.

7.   BHP Billiton, the largest producer of iron ore in the world, has just copped a 40% reduction in price for all sales to China and Korea;

8.   China is now stockpiling iron ore and steel at these reduced prices;

9.   The price of steel will not return to the heady pre-September 2008 heights for a long time to come;

10.  The government, who will have just paid out $4,500 to junk a car, will now have to hand out another $1,000 to subsidise the junking so that all the nasties don't end up back in the environment!

11.   Someone will shortly calculate how much fossil fuel will be burnt to collect all those junkers now that they are spread all over the country in car dealerships rather than concentrated in junk yards (every car dealer is now effectively a junk yard).

Sweat not! Just let things run their course.....


John Tozer
#7946

[Otto Skorzeny]

You may be right in some respects, but the dealers supposedly must show proof that the trade in car is crushed and not re-sold. The vehicle may end up ina scrap yard but it won't be salvageable.

As for the cost? Money is no object here in Obamatopia.

[David #19063]

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1014/five-reasons-cash-for-clunkers-is-a-joke/;_ylc=X3oDMTE5dnBhMTNuBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXRvZGF5BHNsawNjbHVua2Vycy1qb2tl

Five Reasons “Cash for Clunkers” is a Joke

Why Cash for Clunkers is more a political maneuver than substantive help for the U.S. auto industryâ€"or the environment.

By Steve Siler • Illustration by Patrick Hoey

With news that Congress has passed its ballyhooed $1 billion “Cash for Clunkers” bill, we feel compelled to voice our skepticism about the program. Here’s the bill in a nutshell: Buyers of new vehicles between July 1 and November 1 will be given a voucher for $3500 if they forfeit a post-1984 car or truck that has been registered for at least one year and has a combined fuel economy rating at least 4 mpg lower than their new vehicle. The voucher grows to $4500 if the increase in fuel economy is 10 mpg or higher. The old car or truck is then crushed and recycled.

Here are five reasons we don’t think this program is worth the time it took to draft it, let alone a billion dollars:

1. The voucher replaces the trade-in deal you might otherwise get from the dealership; it’s not in addition to the car’s private sale or trade-in value. In other words, if you’re trading in a car that’s worth $3000, your net gain is only $500. Although if your car is worth $100, CFC couldn’t come at a better time.

2. We’re not sure how many folks driving cars worth $3500 or less are in the market for a new car in the first place. Sure, there’s the occasional fresh-out-of-college new-hire (we’re not sure who’s hiring right now, but we’ll play make-believe) that might still be ready to move from a Dodge Omni to a shiny new Honda Insight, but people driving cheap old beaters are probably doing so because they can’t afford a new car. And $3500 doesn’t go far when the average transaction price of new cars hovers around $24K. The vouchers don’t apply toward the purchase of used cars, for which the majority of old beaters are traded in.

3. People driving large, gas-gulping old cars and trucks often do so because they need the utility those vehicles provide. Old station wagons, for example, have few modern counterparts that are as versatile while achieving better fuel economy. Ditto pickups, which have gotten bigger and more capable but not much more fuel-efficient. And if the government thinks that someone is going to step out of a 1994 Dodge Ram into a Honda Fit, they need to get out of D.C. a little more often.

4. Naturally, we have some reservations about any bill designed to facilitate wiping outâ€"we’re sorry, recyclingâ€"any automotive species. And let’s face it, while there are a lot of bona fide clunkers out there, we’re afraid that a bunch of future classics will get caught in this roundup. We propose, then, that a certified auto enthusiast (paid, of course) be placed at all certified CFC dealerships to screen the cars that are brought in, returning the cool carsâ€"including anything with T-topsâ€"to the streets.

5. Besides cleansing the U.S. of gas-guzzling pigs, the other supposed benefit of the CFC program is to provide a short-term boost to the starving auto business. However, we hope these legislators don’t expect it to meaningfully help the domestic automakers. Many of the automobiles with fuel-economy ratings high enough to qualify for the vouchers come from Japan and Korea.

On the bright side, the cost to taxpayers will be minimal when no one actually participates.



More at Car and Driver

Obama's CAFE Fuel Economy Standards to Create Fleet of Tiny, Expensive Vehicles

What You Need to Know About the GM Bankruptcy

[Ted in Olympia WA]

So if I was buying a new car I should go over and buy the 1991 Dodge Pick-up across the street for 2K and trade it in for 4.5K?

Also I think they have to send the car to the wrecker and destroy the engine/transmission (what do they have against transmissions) but the rest of the parts can be sold to keep other cars of the same type on the road.

This is a joke and a waste of taxpayer's money.

TED

[Otto Skorzeny]

Exactly right. It's much less damaging to the environment to keep a car that's already made on the road as long as possible than it is to manufacture a new vehicle to take its place.

There's nothing environmental about it. My Cadillac which is currently used as regular transportation has had much less impact on the environment over the last 53 years than a new CTS has right out of the box. This, of course, takes into consideration the amount of time the vehicle has been on the road. If the new CTS is used for 50 years, then it would probably win the"green" competition.

[Ted in Olympia WA]

But it would never win for Class, Style or Looks.

TED

[Ted in Olympia WA]

I have been thinking about this and if I was a dealer I would be buying up all the old beat up SUV's I could find at the auction.  They could buy them for a few hundred dollars and then when someone comes in they could say "have I got a deal for you".  You can buy this beat up SUV I got over here for $2,500 and then you can trade it in for $4,500 on the new car.  They make $2,000 or so on the sale of the beat up SUV, they get $4,500 from the Government, and they make a sale on a new car.  What a deal.

TED