Cash for Clunkers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like the questions - are we afraid of the answers?

Not afraid of the answers...write your Congressman not DCUM. It just sounds like this poster wants those of us who used the program to answer to them...and we don't have to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like the questions - are we afraid of the answers?

MOst of these questions cannot really be answered. Not in the way the poster would like. I get the intent though.

[Anonymous]

I do not think the intent was emissions, really. I think the intent was to give a jump start to auto sales. A very clever idea and great boost to the auto industy; however the execution is horrible, with these struggling dealers swimming in paperwork waiting a long time for their refunds. Poor administration.

What a shame destroying all of the cars, especially while Americans are struggling right now. Many of us know people, single moms, elderly, and the laid off who are just one car problem away from losing their job or getting behind in their mortgage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not think the intent was emissions, really. I think the intent was to give a jump start to auto sales. A very clever idea and great boost to the auto industy; however the execution is horrible, with these struggling dealers swimming in paperwork waiting a long time for their refunds. Poor administration.

The government is being extremely careful because of fraud issues. You can't have a high level of oversight and a lightning fast process at the same time. There were thousands of dealers participating and all the applications had to be looked at by a person to make sure it was legitimate. They didn't anticipate how popular the program was going to be and didn't have enough workers to go through the applications. That problem has been addressed and the dealers will get their money. A lot of the applications that were sent back were not completed. Missing signatures and such. I'm not extremely sympathetic to the dealers considering how much business it brought them. They all had the option whether or not to participate in the program and chose to do so to help boost their sales.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I do not think the intent was emissions, really. I think the intent was to give a jump start to auto sales. A very clever idea and great boost to the auto industy; however the execution is horrible, with these struggling dealers swimming in paperwork waiting a long time for their refunds. Poor administration.

What a shame destroying all of the cars, especially while Americans are struggling right now. Many of us know people, single moms, elderly, and the laid off who are just one car problem away from losing their job or getting behind in their mortgage.

As the PP noted, the paperwork is taking time due to the necessity to prevent fraud. But, the paperwork requirements are really not that bad. A customer needs to show registration and insurance for one year, plus a gas mileage comparison. These need to be scanned and emailed in by the dealer. Insurance agents can easily provide proof of insurance for a year. Registration can be tricky given a current annual registration may have started less than a year ago. But that's not an insurmountable obstacle. The dealers complaining about "swimming in paperwork" are probably pissed they can't cheat very easily.

I'm personally pretty happy to see clunker gas guzzlers go to an early grave. There will still be plenty of clunkers that get good gas mileage available for the single moms and elderly.

I have been keeping an eye on anecdotal reports from dealers. Across the board they say that the vast majority of C4C buyers are people with good credit who are very frugal and would not generally be in the market for a new car. That means that this program has succeeded in putting money into the economy that would not otherwise be there, has spurred new car sales (and not simply moved them forward), and has also removed some buyers from the used car market (meaning more used vehicles for the single moms).

I will refrain from giving my opinion about dealers who were crying for sales until C4C, but are now crying that they aren't getting their (our) money quick enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After this is said and done, I do hope an extensive analysis is performed that answers some fundamental questions:

1) Were the people who took advantage of this program looking to buy a replacement vehicle anyway?

2) If so, if this program were not around, would they have ended up buying a used car instead?

3) What is the gas mileage of the car ultimately purchased compared to the gas mileage of the vehicle they would have bought if cash for clunkers were not available?

4) Was the vehicle purchased made in America? Was it made by an American company? What percentage U.S. parts/steel/etc?

5) What impact has this program had on total emissions for the U.S.? What was the unit cost?

6) What percent of the transactions are fraudulent? Vehicles not really destroyed, non-owner trading-in, etc.

7) Taking into account only those people who would not have purchased a new car except for cash for clunkers, what was the net gain for U.S. automotive workers?

8) What is the net impact on U.S. auto dealers? There are hidden costs to them for running the program.

9) What impact did the program have on the salvage market? Did the price of spare parts go down?

9) What was the age and income of the people who took advantage of this program? How many vehicles were purchased jointly by parents/children and/or grandparents/grandchildren?

And are we reporting this back to you??????

Yes, the gov't owes this report back to all taxpayers. They spent billions of our tax dollars on this program and I think taxpayers deserve to understand what impact these tax dollars had. I'd like to see similar analysis done on the stimulus package, but that is harder to track.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Here are the lists of the 10 most traded-in and purchased vehicles under C4C (thanks to Jalopnik.com"

The Ten Most Traded-In Vehicles
1. Ford Explorer 4WD
2. Ford F150 Pickup 2WD
3. Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD
4. Jeep Cherokee 4WD
5. Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 2WD
6. Ford Explorer 2WD
7. Chevrolet Blazer 4WD
8. Ford F150 Pickup 4WD
9. Chevrolet C1500 Pickup 2WD
10. Ford Windstar FWD Van

The Ten Most Purchased Vehicles
1. Toyota Corolla
2. Ford Focus FWD
3. Honda Civic
4. Toyota Prius
5. Toyota Camry
6. Hyundai Elantra
7. Ford Escape FWD
8. Dodge Caliber
9. Honda Fit
10. Chevrolet Cobalt

As you can see, gas guzzling polluters are being traded for econo-boxes. As an environmentalist, you know that such an exchange will have environmental benefits that will improve things for all of us. Also, there are a lot fewer behemoths on the road attempting to run over you and me.

Yes, some poor decision-makers are getting a nice rebate while the frugal aren't. However, the end result benefits us all.

I'm betting that many of the new vehicles being purchased are for college age kids or are parents helping out their 20-somethings. The demographics of the trade in versus purchased just do not align for the most part. Minivan for a Camry -- yes. Explorer or Cherokee for a Corolla -- no. The only person I know who took advantage of this program is a grandma who traded in her car for her granddaughter who is attending med school.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, the gov't owes this report back to all taxpayers. They spent billions of our tax dollars on this program and I think taxpayers deserve to understand what impact these tax dollars had. I'd like to see similar analysis done on the stimulus package, but that is harder to track.

This program cost $3 billion and show obvious signs of success. Before that long list of questions in the earlier post is answered, I'd like to see answers to these two questions:

1) why did we invade Iraq?
2) did we accomplish that goal?

[Anonymous]

"Clunkers: Good for Detroit, better for Japan

Under the Cash for Clunker rebate, foreign car sales beat domestic brands. . . . [But] [e]ven if foreign automakers saw a somewhat bigger lift in sales, domestic automakers still got significant benefits from the program."

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/26/autos/clunker_stats_check/index.htm?postversion=2009082713

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Clunkers: Good for Detroit, better for Japan

Under the Cash for Clunker rebate, foreign car sales beat domestic brands. . . . [But] [e]ven if foreign automakers saw a somewhat bigger lift in sales, domestic automakers still got significant benefits from the program."

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/26/autos/clunker_stats_check/index.htm?postversion=2009082713

There were a lot of reasons the foreign car sales were higher. I wanted either a Jeep or a Toyota. I tried every dealership within a 50 mile radius. The biggest problems with the American car dealerships is they were out of inventory. But unlike the foreign car dealerships they weren't getting any new inventory in. Because of all the financial problems they were going through they weren't producing cars to replace ones that were bring sold. They sold the inventory they had and that was it. I ended up with the Toyota.