Cash for clunkers bill

[RydiaLockheart]

link

Here's the general idea: up to a $4,500 voucher to trade in a car that gets less than 18 MPG for a more fuel-efficient model. Apparently this is already working in Europe. (Could any European users tell me how this works over there? I'm a bit confused.)

I can see this being a good thing in some regards, like weaning this country off foreign oil, but without something like a "buy American" clause in there, what would stop someone from buying something like a Toyota? I drive a 2002 Ford Focus and I love it, but given the state of American cars, that may be the exception rather than the rule. Though I suppose if someone really needs to get rid of the car sitting on blocks in the yard, they're not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth.

There are many other things that might not work about it. Take where I'm living now for instance. Sure, there are a lot of gas guzzlers, not to mention cars that should have gone to the junkyard 20 years ago. But I'm willing to bet that a lot of the people that may qualify for this program are the same ones who didn't even manage to make the deadline to get digital TV converter coupons, despite the date being all over the place.

There's also people like me. My car is a 2002 model. Sure, I could get a new one, but mine works fine and I don't need a new one. Why would I want to get rid of it if it still runs? (If my engine suddenly explodes, though, that's another story.)

[fli]

As someone who uses public transportation, I wish that the government gave more funding towards public transportation systems and thus bringing down the price of fares.

Every year, sometimes half years, the prices keep on going up and up. At the same time, they eliminate services, bus/train stops, hours, increase route distances, etc. It's like I'm being penalized for helping out the world.

And then people harass us public transportation users for voting measures such as extending the BART extend its tracks and mobilize the public in general... because they want the money going towards building new roads which, one day eventually, won't useful when gas is gone.

It needs to be a better world for us public transit users.

[morefngdbs]

At 6/11/09 06:16 AM, fli wrote: As someone who uses public transportation, I wish that the government gave more funding towards public transportation systems

;;;
Public transportation only works in large populated areas. In rural areas it just can't be sustained, without massive infusions of money . Which takes money away from other areas in the 'transit system' & causes fairs to become higher & higher.

And then people harass us public transportation users for voting measures such as extending the BART extend its tracks and mobilize the public in general... because they want the money going towards building new roads which, one day eventually, won't useful when gas is gone.

;;;
Roads will still be useful...they will allow the horse drawn carriages, mule teams & various other conveyances easy access to large metro areas from the countryside.

When I've been to large American Cities & some of our larger Canadian cities like Montreal & Toronto area, their systems work quite well, & they can afford them having in Toronto 1.6 million users each week day.
In New York over 5 million people on week days use the system, in Atlantic Canada our biggest city is Halifax out of 4 Provinces & it doesn't have 400,000 people in it !
We have no rail lines for transit, we have no subways, we have only super slow buses that fuckin' CRAWL around the city. Our biggest problem is WE DON"T HAVE THE POPULATION NEEDED TO PAY FOR A PROPER SYSTEM.
That's why personal vehicles are the way most people commute.
Another major problem is historical.
Our city streets in our major downtown core are almost exclusively 2 lanes !
Very narrow roads, many are 1 lane with parking one one side of the street,.To make them 2 lanes ,not only would there be no parking...there would be no stopping, because there would be no way around you on these narrow streets.

But I also believe seeing as new technology cars with electric motors & gas motors ,which get higher mileage, but are much more expensive to run, should be the reason where these rebates should be tiered.
By buying say an electric car, your making an effort to curb your gas usage & should get a higher payout than some one who buys a beter mileage vehicle. Or if you buy a small vehicle like a Smart Car, which gets approx. 83 miles per gallon you get a better 'deal'(higher payout for your clunker) than say a car with 35 miles per.

[Elfer]

If everyone used public transit, it could easily be supported, even in smaller communities.

Unfortunately, even if public transit was fast, comfortable, reliable, came every five minutes, and was free, people would still want to drive.

[fli]

At 6/11/09 01:49 PM, Elfer wrote: If everyone used public transit, it could easily be supported, even in smaller communities.

Unfortunately, even if public transit was fast, comfortable, reliable, came every five minutes, and was free, people would still want to drive.

Yes-- this is the only reason why tranportation isn't working and regular public transportation users are always ass fucked in the end with absurdly hefty fares.

Not because of the population (we have no problems in having a big population.)
But because people just want cars.

And public transportation systems do work, but only if they're cost effective.

Because we can see how public transportation works for the Japanese and Germans. People could live and die without owning a car.

[morefngdbs]

At 6/11/09 01:49 PM, Elfer wrote: If everyone used public transit, it could easily be supported, even in smaller communities.

Unfortunately, even if public transit was fast, comfortable, reliable, came every five minutes, and was free, people would still want to drive.

;;;;
I would take the bus to calls that didn't need a truck load of gear, if it was convienient.
It costs a minimum of $20.00 to park my truck in the City of Halifax...no exceptions, the venues in there do not have parking lot's not even tiny ones...they all have parking on the streets (metered) with ticket Nazi's patroling & reticketing every hour. Partcades are after a 4 hour call a 20.00 daily charge.
So yeah dude I would totally pay 2.50 for a trip in & 2.50 for a trip back...did I metion it's about $25.00 in gas for the trip in & out in my truck !
$5.00 charge or a $45.00 expense... unless you think I'm a complete moron, I believe you can figure out which is/would be the better deal.
But there is no bus service way out here.

[Al6200]

At 6/11/09 06:16 AM, fli wrote: As someone who uses public transportation, I wish that the government gave more funding towards public transportation systems and thus bringing down the price of fares.

The thing is that huge swaths of the country are simple not cut out for public transportation. In suburbia, people simply need cars. Adding metro lines to major towns might be able to cut out half of the commute for some people, but they still need a personal vehicle to get to the metro station.

Every year, sometimes half years, the prices keep on going up and up. At the same time, they eliminate services, bus/train stops, hours, increase route distances, etc. It's like I'm being penalized for helping out the world.

Yeah, that is pretty obnoxious. I appreciate public transportation just for the convenience (being able to read a book or take a nap during the commute).

And then people harass us public transportation users for voting measures such as extending the BART extend its tracks and mobilize the public in general... because they want the money going towards building new roads which, one day eventually, won't useful when gas is gone.

It needs to be a better world for us public transit users.

We have plenty of time to transition to electric or hybrid cars.

[Sajberhippien]

At 6/12/09 01:35 PM, Al6200 wrote:

At 6/11/09 06:16 AM, fli wrote: As someone who uses public transportation, I wish that the government gave more funding towards public transportation systems and thus bringing down the price of fares.

The thing is that huge swaths of the country are simple not cut out for public transportation. In suburbia, people simply need cars. Adding metro lines to major towns might be able to cut out half of the commute for some people, but they still need a personal vehicle to get to the metro station.

I live outside a city with ~500k inhabitants, which is also unusually flat (we don't have many high houses at all, so it's geographically a big city), and we have working public transportation. I live OUTSIDE of town and have like 400 meters to one bus, 1300 to two other. That's walking distance, at least here in europe :)

[zephiran]

At 6/10/09 08:42 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: link

Here's the general idea: up to a $4,500 voucher to trade in a car that gets less than 18 MPG for a more fuel-efficient model. Apparently this is already working in Europe. (Could any European users tell me how this works over there? I'm a bit confused.)

Perhaps this is relevant?

Where´s Der-Lowe? This sounds like it could be near the neighbourhood of his expertise...

[Christopherr]

If I wanted to sell my car, I could just tool with it to give it shitty mileage... then get free money. Lower the air pressure in my tires, tune the engine poorly, add weight to the car, make the electric appliances use more juice, etc.

How would the law work around that?

[Elfer]

At 6/12/09 09:09 AM, morefngdbs wrote: But there is no bus service way out here.

There would be if everyone took the friggin' bus.

[Elfer]

At 6/17/09 05:57 PM, Christopherr wrote: If I wanted to sell my car, I could just tool with it to give it shitty mileage... then get free money. Lower the air pressure in my tires, tune the engine poorly, add weight to the car, make the electric appliances use more juice, etc.

How would the law work around that?

It's for a trade-in. You could get $4500 in credit towards a more fuel-efficient car, but if you were getting decent mileage in the first place, your car was probably worth more anyway.

[Christopherr]

At 6/18/09 01:16 PM, Elfer wrote:

At 6/17/09 05:57 PM, Christopherr wrote: If I wanted to sell my car, I could just tool with it to give it shitty mileage... then get free money. Lower the air pressure in my tires, tune the engine poorly, add weight to the car, make the electric appliances use more juice, etc.

How would the law work around that?

It's for a trade-in. You could get $4500 in credit towards a more fuel-efficient car, but if you were getting decent mileage in the first place, your car was probably worth more anyway.

HAH! Lots of crappy cars get good mileage. That's not very relevant though, I'm just noting that the idea leaves a LOT of room for abuse.

[zendahl]

This relly shouldn't be a surprise. If I remember correctly the US government owns GM. So basicly they are just giving you a trade in for you old car, just like any other dealership would. They have to assume that many of the people who do this are going to purchace a GM vehicle, and even if they don't it's going to get people spending money. Buying cars will help the econnomy. How those evil super villan minds on capitol hill can bend things around to make money and force us to change your behavior.

[Christopherr]

If I want a new car, could I buy a shitty clunker for %500 and save myself $4,000?