I believe that you and others on this thread look at the program from the position of person who is capable of diagnosing and repairing an older vehicle.

This is the fundamental point that is missed by those that decry the program. If you own a vehicle that gets 18 mpg, but can maintain it at relatively low expense (read: do your own labor), there is an economic disincentive to get a trade-in value of only $4500. and assume a car payment on a new vehicle.

However, if you are like the vast majority of the population and understand that all a vehicle requires is for you to turn the key to "start", the program makes very good sense if you happen to own one of these older vehicles. You certainly need to seriously consider selling or trading this old vehicle anyway..........and, nobody is going to give you anywhere near $4,500. for it. So, if the government gives $4500. and the dealer gives $4500, you're $9000. closer to a brand new vehicle that gets significantly better fuel economy. If you decide to do the deal, which makes very good economic sense for you, you get a vehicle without the need for any repairs for the next five years at a cost of approximately $300. per month.

The folks who cannot see the benefits of this program are simply blind to the fact that most of the people in this country are incapable of repairing an older vehicle at a reasonable cost.

Brian, you missed the other parts of what I typed...

More money is needed for insurance...even WI. is starting (FINALLY) to require everyone to carry insurance in 2010...new or old...the insurance companies are going to require higher premiums for folks that have the newer cars...what part of not-affordable are we missing here?

Maintenance will still be required...or in five years (or less), that "new car" is going to be puking out more carbon than what it replaced...and the people less likely to do REGULAR MAINTENANCE are the same schmucks that got suckered into trashing out their older vehicles...nothings changed, just the the wheels...the same idiots are driving around in shinier cans...that's all...

And you're right...they'll have $300.00/month to pay to....whom? The bankers...the people that were at the top of the food chain when the collapse started...they'll be back up at the top...still raking in the dough and the folks at the bottom will still be paying them when their new POS finally puke out because they couldn't afford to maintain the unit, insure the unit, let alone put gas/diesel/WVO into it...but the bankers still get paid first...

Makes sense to me to keep the bankers out of my pocket altogether...

But, some people love playing (and living) as a masochist...

__________________

M. G. Burg
'10 - Dakota SXT - Daily Ride / ≈ 172.5K
.'76 - 450SLC - 107.024.12 / < .89.20 K
..'77 - 280E - 123.033.12 / > 128.20 K
...'67 - El Camino - 283ci / > 207.00 K
....'75 - Yamaha - 650XS / < 21.00 K
.....'87 - G20 Sportvan / > 206.00 K
......'85 - 4WINNS 160 I.O. / 140hp
.......'74 - Honda CT70 / Real 125
.
“I didn’t really say everything I said.”
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ Yogi Berra ~

I guess you're right. I still the the program was poorly executed and slapdash. Even if it does work out for the people who participated in it, what's the long-term benefit? What happens when all the clunkers are gone, or at least all the ones people want to trade in?

I'll admit that my perspective is skewed by the fact that I am very sentimental about cars, even crappy ones. And I am very touchy about abject waste. My tune would be much different if they were parting these vehicles out or donating them to charity. But I do not see how giving people a fleeting incentive to rush into purchasing a vehicle while throwing away a reasonable machine is going to help a deeply damaged industry and economy over the long term. The automakers will get a temporary boost, then fill the lots back up with more new cars that will just sit there as they have the past few months.

__________________
1987 300D, arctic white/palomino--314,000 miles
1978 240D 4-speed, Euro Delivery, light ivory/bamboo--370,000 miles
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD Limited, light khaki/slate--140,000 miles
2018 Chevy Cruze diesel, 6-speed manual, satin steel metallic/kalahari--19,000 miles
1982 Peugeot 505 diesel, 4-speed manual, blue/blue, 130,000 miles
1995 S320, black/parchment--34,000 miles (Dad's car)

the way that car technology is going this program will fail simply because the bottom line is cars are becoming more and more complex making repairing them harder and harder for a lot of people who dont have the knowledge or tools to repair them. More electric vehicles, hybrids will be the future of cars. There will be petrol cars out there but not too many. SO when these hybirds and electric vehicles start needing repairs they will tommorows clunkers since we all know anything complete electronic breaks and is expensive to repair.

These "new cars" will need repair and most people will chose to buy a new car instead a fix a good running car thats mor suited for them. Today a car is a no different than a appliance in most people minds: why fix it when I can buy something new.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 211K,Dealership serviced its whole life
1991 190E 2.6(120k)
1983 300D(300k)
1977 300D(211k)

Yes, your emotions are skewing your logic.

Your local junkyard will be overflowing with parts car in the next year.

Most of the "machines" being traded are at the end or near the end of their lifespan. High mileage, low fuel efficency clunkers.

As for the damged industry, Americans build and sell more car than anyone in the world. Most "foreign cars" including Toyota's, Honda, Nissan's, Subaru's are built in the USA with many domestic parts.

__________________
Question Authority before it Questions you.

Every video that I have seen was of a junker, most were heading to the scrap yard anyway. I mean come on how much life does an 85 Jeep thats beat with 330k miles on it have left? If the car is worth more than $4,500 thier not going to take advantage of the program, they will trade it.

I don't give a damn about taking some junk off the road early, what bothers me is they are taking my $4,500 to do it, when I don't have a new car myself.

__________________
2016 Corvette Stingray 2LT
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

BINGO. I think the program's wasteful as hell, and ill-conceived, but the real kicker is that it's my tax money funding it. My wife and I save and pay cash for our cars; it's a kick in the junk to know that billions of tax dollars are going to fund vehicle purchases that are unnecessary and will just put more folks in debt.

__________________
1992 300D 2.5T
1980 Euro 300D (sadly, sold)
1998 Jetta TDI, 132K "Rudy"
1974 Triumph TR6
1999 Saab 9-5 wagon (wife's)

I may be incorrect, but I believe dealerships and junkyards are prohibited from selling any part on the car ... all of it must be destroyed.

__________________
1987 300D, arctic white/palomino--314,000 miles
1978 240D 4-speed, Euro Delivery, light ivory/bamboo--370,000 miles
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD Limited, light khaki/slate--140,000 miles
2018 Chevy Cruze diesel, 6-speed manual, satin steel metallic/kalahari--19,000 miles
1982 Peugeot 505 diesel, 4-speed manual, blue/blue, 130,000 miles
1995 S320, black/parchment--34,000 miles (Dad's car)

Just the engine.

Everything else is up for grabs. I'll be thrilled to see a fine selection of newly junked MB's ready to be parted out.

__________________
Question Authority before it Questions you.

Well, that's a big improvement ... I had been told nothing could be removed for resale or salvage. Maybe that stipulation was aimed only at the dealerships, not the junkyards.

I still think the junked cars are a marvelous monument to the pathetic shortsightedness, greed and idiocy that got our country in trouble ... and that approach to life hasn't faded one bit. Getting rid of the cars won't get rid of the mind-set. We're deeply entrenched in that flawed culture. It will take a long time, and a lot of compromise, to get out of it.

__________________
1987 300D, arctic white/palomino--314,000 miles
1978 240D 4-speed, Euro Delivery, light ivory/bamboo--370,000 miles
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD Limited, light khaki/slate--140,000 miles
2018 Chevy Cruze diesel, 6-speed manual, satin steel metallic/kalahari--19,000 miles
1982 Peugeot 505 diesel, 4-speed manual, blue/blue, 130,000 miles
1995 S320, black/parchment--34,000 miles (Dad's car)

Quite right. Why should all of us help pay for someone else's new car? I have read the official gov't documents, and this program is nothing more than a scam.

People forget that the cars being "clunkered" have some sort of value, they could be traded in or sold by the owner to someone else. But that means work, and that is a four letter word these days.

I suppose it's, better to let Obama and his minions haul your clunker away(via this program) and give the dealer a direct deposit of $3500 or $4500 of taxpayer's hard earned money. The dealer keeps rebates and incentives that he could have used along with the trade in value or down payment(with proceeds from a private sale) in order to sell the car at the same price without the C.A.R.S. program.

Though, I guess by the looks of it on youboob, if you are a immature gopher at a dealership you get to have lot's of fun destroying a nicer car than you probably own.

__________________
"I was a dirty bird, Carol's not grungey - she's *****in" John Milner....American Graffiti

And for whatever it's worth, while emotions can be dangerous when used entirely in place of logic, I don't see much point in a life without any sentiment at all. I don't think my rantings are entirely without logic. I am an intelligent, and not entirely crazy (yet), person who has a different opinion than yours ... and I do know some less-emotionally bound people who share my perspective, or a similar one. For that matter I know several people who disagree with my opinion on the matter, but respect it.

So I admit to being a sentimental soul, but I don't think my thoughts should be written off.

__________________
1987 300D, arctic white/palomino--314,000 miles
1978 240D 4-speed, Euro Delivery, light ivory/bamboo--370,000 miles
2005 Jeep Liberty CRD Limited, light khaki/slate--140,000 miles
2018 Chevy Cruze diesel, 6-speed manual, satin steel metallic/kalahari--19,000 miles
1982 Peugeot 505 diesel, 4-speed manual, blue/blue, 130,000 miles
1995 S320, black/parchment--34,000 miles (Dad's car)

You miss the fact that most people that own older cars and are of the "turn the key" variety rather than a car brand fanatic, probably CAN'T AFFORD a new car and thats why they have the old car. So now they get shoved into a new car payment, higher insurance, possibly a lower quality car that won't last as long as the one they have... and so on. And lets not forget the fact that this country got into trouble by buying things IT COULD NOT AFFORD, now the government is pushing us in that direction.

And the premise of doing this for the environment is a joke, why else are 25+ year old cars excluded? These would be the biggest polluters of all. And lets not forget the negative economic impact to the dismantler industry.

Bottom line, its political BS with no positive gains outside that arena.

__________________
MB-less

Participation in the CARS program is strictly voluntary. Anyone wishing to hang onto their clunker can do so without even giving a reason. No one is pushing anyone. Where did you ever get that idea?

They probably excluded cars after 25 years because there are so few of them on the road. Plus you start to get into classic cars that do have value, I mean who wants to see a so so 69 Mustang crushed for this program? Most of the cars that I have seen in the videos seem to be from the 90's, so just over 10 years old and getting past their prime. A lot of worthless old SUV's and vans that nobody can sell anymore.

Not to mention these days you have to actualy be able to afford the car to get a loan, its not like it was a few years ago.

Like I said before, this program targets a very narrow segment. Those people with older cars worth less than $4,500/$3,500, who can afford new cars, and do buy them. All its doing is pushing their purchasing time frame up a bit. If this program didn't exist they would have junked/traded their vehicals in on new or newer ones in the next few years anyway. All the government is doing is speeding the process a long. A nice side affect is that it forces people to trade in their SUV's on more sensible cars, a taste of $5 a gallon gas last year helps this along.

I dislike the program because I don't think my tax money should buy other people new cars. But the program is well designed none the less.

__________________
2016 Corvette Stingray 2LT
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200