The House approved a "cash for clunkers" bill

FREEZE:

The House approved a "cash for clunkers" bill that aims to boost new auto sales by allowing consumers to turn in their gas-guzzling cars and trucks for vouchers worth up to $4,500 toward more fuel-efficient vehicles. President Barack Obama has encouraged Congress to approve consumer incentives for new car purchases as part of the government's work to restructure General Motors and Chrysler.

More updates here:

http://www.carnewsreport.org/

What can you say about this news? :rolleyes:

Bad news for mechanics as the pool of older used vehicles on the road needing repair will decrease at a faster rate. Plus owners of new vehicles tend to frequent the dealer for repairs and maintenance while the vehicle is under warranty.
Bad news for students and others who can only afford older used cars. Removing a lot of older used cars from the market will drive up the price for those remaining, making it harder for those with less money to afford.
Bad news for collectors and enthusiasts as potentially collectible or restorable cars will end up being destroyed in the name of a voucher. All of the vehicle, including the body parts and drivetrain are required to be destroyed. So figure on the cost of used parts to also increase as the supply diminishes at a faster rate.
There are too many down sides to this Bill, and I think they could've gone back and spent a little more time formulating some changes with those groups I mentioned above in mind.
What's there to say that people with a voucher will select a vehicle made from the Big 3 ? There are plenty of cheap foreign nameplate vehicles out there that will meet the guidelines for fuel efficiency that you can choose from. And with heavy marketing and advertising, coupled with a lingering uncertainty over the overall health of GM and Chrysler, these foreign nameplates will take advantage of it. Right now in my area a bunch of Korea car dealers, are blitzing the area with ads for Kia and Hyundai. While ford, Chryslerand GM are shuttering dealers in my area, Kia has opened 2 new dealerships, while Honda has expanded both (owned by different franchisees) and Nissan and Toyota have moved some dealerships into larger locations. This should be interesting to see after some time has passed at how successful this ill is in getting people to purchase US (or North American) name plated vehicles.
(EDIT) Also , it still is difficult for many consumers to obtain financing due to the tightened credit industry, which is related to the economy and banking industry issues. Lenders and banks are going to have to loosen requirements to get more people financed in order to qualify for a new car.After all $3500 to $4500 can only go so far towards the purchase of a new car even after incentives and rebates are figured in.

Would the older gas-guzzling vehicles that were traded-in be scrapped, or just re-sold? I can see a dealer accepting a gas guzzler, getting their money from the feds, then re-selling it...... so it would not actually be taken off the road.

Also that rep, Betty Sutton is not correct when saying that this program would help the environment. There is considerable environmental damage accumulated to make a new car, in terms of mining industry, usage or chemicals, plastics, petroleum and energy.... damage that would not be incurred of people simply drove the cars they already own, instead of buying new.

Finally, is the voucher applicable to a retail price of a car? Most people are already able to knock money off the retail price as it is. The Automobile Protection Association of Ontario (a consumer advocacy group) has found that people who have vouchers or publicised discounts tend not to negotiate as hard when buying a car, thus negating some of the voucher's value.

Would the older gas-guzzling vehicles that were traded-in be scrapped, or just re-sold? I can see a dealer accepting a gas guzzler, getting their money from the feds, then re-selling it...... so it would not actually be taken off the road.


From what I've read, all the vehicles taken in for vouchers are supposed to be scrapped or shredded, and that includes the whole vehicle. Nothing is supposed to be removed like the drivetrain or body parts, etc.Everything is supposed to be documented with a paper trail as well. I suspect some dealers may find ways around this and find ways to salvage some parts or even a car or two,(there always seems to be some that find the loopholes.)

What if your clunker is valued higher than 4500 bucks? Are you screwed with the loan you still have on it for the rest? Just wondering.

There was one article online I read (can't find it now) where it said it would make more sense to sell your vehicle outright if it was worth more than they are giving you in th voucher. You could use that same thinking that if you owe more on your vehicle than it's voucher value you should either pay it down, which for some may be impractical,sell it and apply the proceeds to the loan, or you may end up being stuck with the vehicle if you owe so much and either of the previous options won't work for you. I'm sure there will be plenty of people in that position who are in an upside down loans currently.

Any one that has a love for old classic cars and trucks need to take heed to this . All the old antiques sitting in fields or barns , waiting to be discovered , will be in danger ! The days of finding that old car from your youth and bringing it back to life may soon be over . I guess this is part of the " Change " the American people were promised ? :sarcasm1:

Any one that has a love for old classic cars and trucks need to take heed to this . All the old antiques sitting in fields or barns , waiting to be discovered , will be in danger ! The days of finding that old car from your youth and bringing it back to life may soon be over . I guess this is part of the " Change " the American people were promised ? :sarcasm1:
Somewhat good news. Provisions of the bill mainly target those vehicles manufactured in model year 1984 or later. See quote from article below with link to the whole article.
In order to qualify, older trade-in vehicles must be drivable, continuously insured by the same owner for at least one year prior to the trade in, have been manufactured in the 1984 model year or later, and have a city-highway combined fuel rating of 18 m.p.g. or less.
Link:http://www.freep.com/article/20090616/NEWS15/90616081
I originally had the same thoughts when I heard about this bill when it was in it's early stages. Having seen damage done to the hobby of collecting and restoring classic/antique cars back in the '80s by similar programs aimed at clearing the air, I thought '"here we go again." But not this time hopefully. What we do have to worry about is those cars/trucks that could be considered future classics that could be destroyed. There are some limited production models out there that would qualify for that title. Hopefully those owners will know that their vehicle is special and not consider trading it in for a voucher.
The bill will, however decrease the supply of used parts for these post 1984 model cars as they get destroyed as part of the plan, and as stated before limit what's available for those who cannot afford a new car , or a more expensive used car.

Here is a basic list of vehicles eligible for vouchers under the Cash for Clunkers Bill:
http://www.edmunds.com/media/cashforclunkers/vehicles_under_4500.pdf

Good news, they have temporarily suspended the CFC program, Story (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200907301903dowjonesdjonline001 120&title=cash-for-clunkers-to-be-temporarily-suspended-sources)

Hello all nice to meet you I have been following the CARS or "Cash for Clunkers" for a little while and I heard on fox this morning that a new extension bill passed the house and is awaiting the Senate. I too do not like this program. Not only are they crushing good cars but that are in a sense killing them as well. I heard on Fox news that the dealer is forced to drain the oil and then put some kind of agent in them and run them 5 minutes that will blow and make the engine usable for any one ever again. That in my book is car murder. They showed a picture in the paper of a local dealer and some of the cars awaiting the "gas chamber" so to speak and most I seen are good cars that could run for many many more miles be taking to be destroyed. It is sad really in my opinion. I am definitely going to keep following this.

SOURCE (http://richmond.craigslist.org/rnr/1307986998.html)

I spoke to 2 people that were taking advantage of the Cash for Clunkers program ....one could not afford a car payment (thats why he had a clunker) but decided he could buy a new car...he said if he could not make the payments, he could sell it for what he owed (since he was GIVEN $4500 off the top). I told him he would probably not get close to what he owed...he believes I am wrong....and I am shocked that he went ahead anyways. The other person said that they are losing their job at the end of the month and believes that he may have to drive 120 plus miles per day (if he gets this new job). He traded in his car for 2 reasons: 1st - in case he drives 120 daily he has a fuel efficient and smaller car 2nd - If he does not get this job he is worried without a job he would not get approved for a new car loan. He said he NEEDS a reliable car to either commute or to drive to interviews. So he is taking the gamble that he will be able to afford the payments.

I am wondering if many of the clunker drivers are going to have repossesed vehicles within 6 months?

So if a guy had an old beater worth nothing in the real world, trade it in and get the $4500 plus another few grand off with all the bonus incentives going on right now. The guy could turn around and just sell the new car to get his money out of the old beater. Nice way to sell the un-sellable beater.
Or when you buy a new car are you held liable to keep it for a period of time?

Just thinking out loud...

I looked up and found a site that list some of the rules I don't see that you must keep it but there is some odd rules I found.


Since monies for the CARS program are limited do not plan that the program will last until November 1st without additional funding so act quickly, if you can.http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.com/bill/cash-for-clunkers-rules

I don't know quite who owns this site but from what I have heard on tv it seems pretty truthful.

The main problem I think most of us have is that good cars are getting crushed when they could be resold to good people that need a good affordable used car that can't afford a new car. Not to mention so nice old cars are on this list that can be turned in and lost forever.

And to kind of answer your earlier question racedad21 I found this rule on the page too.

If your vehicle is worth more than $4,500 there is no incentive to particpate in the CARS program. You can trade in your vehicle and apply factory rebates and credits.It sound like you can't even turn it in for the 4500 if it is worth more to me.

But what you just said I guess it would be a good way to get rid of a old beater if you want to, just it has to be able to drive there I guess.

It sound like you can't even turn it in for the 4500 if it is worth more to me.


I think what that quote you were commenting on is saying is that if the vehicle you have is worth more than $4500, you shouldn't get rid of it under the CARS program as you could get whatever the book value is (obviously more than the $4500) from the dealer. Trading it in under the CARS program would mean you would lose trade in value if it was worth more. Also some dealers aren't giving the customer any extra discounts such as rebates or incentives, just the $3500 or $4500 off for the CARS value.

when you buy a new car are you held liable to keep it for a period of time?

Not sure of all the stipulations pertaining to the CARS program, but you might want to check with whomever you get the financing from, if you get a loan to purchase the vehicle as they may have a separate set of guidelines to follow concerning how long you have to hold onto the vehicle.

Ya I understand it a bit more now that you said it like that. As far as incentives if you search hard enough you might be able to get quite a bit off with out even having to cash in a clunker. Our local ford dealer is still doing a I think a 2000 cash allowance for new cars 1000 off if you owned a ford from the last 15 years for owner loyalty and if you look they have some stuff on the website. I found one that a lot are participating in that you get 500 off for being a college student. That's 3500 right there with out having to send a good car to car heck before its time.

We have a similar incentive scheme here in the UK where The government subsidised part of a new car purchase on scrappage of your existing 10+ year old car. This was a scheme that dealerships could opt in/out of.

Today, we got the latest set of new car sales that shows half of all new cars sold since the scheme was introduced took advantage of the scrappage scheme; the numbers being up 2.4% over the same period last year and being the first rise in figures since April.

This is the first I heared about it. Could explain a few things around here as to why hubby tore up my car. It seems like a good idea, yet people like my grandpa and reletives who collect Model T's what about them?

People please, don't jump to the extreme of examples.
In the UK, the scheme is targetting the 10-25 year old cars that a lot of families run around in, not the collectible classics. It is targetting those people who were thinking of buying a car, as many in the UK do after a car has reached 10 years (or 100,000 miles) but had to change plans after the economic woes.

No one is going to scrap in their Citroen DS, Ford Capri or even Peugeot 306 GTIs, all 10+ year old cars but each having their own cult following for the sake of the scrappage scheme.

As an added plus to the benefits to the economy, it also, as it seems to be the larger concern of your scheme, is that it encourages those typical 10+ year old family cars to be replaced with newer and cleaner cars. In the Uk especially, diesels sell big and a 10 year old diesel just doesn't compare to a modern diesel, let alone regular petrol engine comparisons.

This is the first I heared about it. Could explain a few things around here as to why hubby tore up my car. It seems like a good idea, yet people like my grandpa and reletives who collect Model T's what about them?

Not to worry this time. The current program targets certain makes and model vehicles from 1984 on that meet certain mpg standards.See here (http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=5988637&postcount=9) for a link to the list of vehicles

At least the Senator I voted for had enough 'intestinal fortitude' (and brains) to vote against using our hard-earned tax dollars as yet another short-term stimulus package for the failing auto industry. I wonder how many of these new cars will be repossessed within the first year? Remember, the Sub-Prime mortgage crisis is what got us in this mess!

Source (http://www.ajc.com/business/scrapped-111056.html)
Scrapped 'Clunkers' may, or may not, salvage business

Scrap yards don't expect to make a killing from demolished hulks

“When one of our mechanics injected the sodium silicate into his first clunker it was kind of sad,” said DeKalb state senator Emanuel Jones, who owns Legacy Ford in McDonough. “It was like watching a doctor kill a patient.”

At least the Senator I voted for had enough 'intestinal fortitude' (and brains) to vote against using our hard-earned tax dollars as yet another short-term stimulus package for the failing auto industry.


You mean the stimulus package for the auto industries of Japan and Korea to name a couple? :iceslolan Looking at the list of the top vehicles purchased under the program, 60% are foreign nameplates. SOURCE (http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/04/autos/cash_for_clunkers_cars/index.htm)
What surprised me was when this program was first announced, the vehicles were supposed to have their engines destroyed and then crushed or shredded with no time in between for the removal of parts. This in effect was to prevent an available inventory of parts for these vehicles that remained in use and to hasten their demise when used parts would be in short supply due to the destruction of the CFC vehicles. Now they are allowing parts to be removed and saved before the vehicle is to be destroyed. ( That is at least one saving grace of this program to allow that and help out those left behind who cannot afford something newer.)
Here is a list i came across of the top vehicles being scrapped under the program:
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:

1. 1998 Ford Explorer

2. 1997 Ford Explorer

3. 1996 Ford Explorer

4. 1999 Ford Explorer

5. Jeep Grand Cherokee

6. Jeep Cherokee

7. 1995 Ford Explorer

8. 1994 Ford Explorer

9. 1997 Ford Windstar

10. 1999 Dodge Caravan
SOURCE (http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars/)

Looking at the list of top-10 clunkers is no surprise, all of them were 'clunkers' when bought new! :rofl:

Another interesting video I watched HERE (http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/25669998/too-much-of-a-good-thing.htm) also brings up some interesting facts. Like the $4500 'rebate' is actually $6000+ when you figure in the extra costs, and they brought up a some interesting info as some dealerships have started to offer their own C4C type program.

IMO based on the top 10 "cash for clunkers" new cars sold it looks like the people taking advantage of the program are in lower income brackets which is on par for a social program or need their heads examined. :screwy: Personally I don't know of anyone or any friends that would buy one of those cars except maybe the Toyota Camry but not the 4 cylinder model. :rolleyes:


The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars:

1. Ford Focus

2. Honda Civic

3. Toyota Corolla

4. Toyota Prius

5. Ford Escape

6. Toyota Camry

7. Dodge Caliber

8. Hyundai Elantra

9. Honda Fit

10. Chevy Cobalt

You mean the stimulus package for the auto industries of Japan and Korea to name a couple?

Just because it has a Japanese name doesn't mean it was made in Japan - I believe Honda has been making their Civics in Ohio since 2003.

I think what makes cash for clunkers theoretically appealing is that that it can be seen as killing two birds with one stone - getting older less efficient dirtier cars off the road (good for the environment) and getting new cars off of the lots (good for the economy).

Of course realistically, there are more cost effective ways to clean up the air, and the economy...

IMO based on the top 10 "cash for clunkers" new cars sold it looks like the people taking advantage of the program are in lower income brackets which is on par for a social program or need their heads examined.

The entire idea was to get old crocks off the road and replace them with new efficient cars. Shocking isn't it?

Just because it has a Japanese name doesn't mean it was made in Japan - I believe Honda has been making their Civics in Ohio since 2003.
I know that. But the majority of the money still goes back to the home headquarters in the country where the manufacturer is from originally. There have been ads in our local papers to entice buyers taking advantage of the CFC program to purchase vehicles made in this country to keep the money more "local". The ads include a VIN # identifier to educate buyers where the vehicle was made. If the VIN # begins with a 1, 4 or 5 then it was made in the US. 2 identifies a vehicle made in Canada, 3 is Mexico. K is for Korea, S denotes a vehicle produced in England. W is Germany, and Y is Sweden or Finland. I believe the program was originally meant to help the car manufacturers in the US, and give a boost to manufacturing and the economy.

I think what makes cash for clunkers theoretically appealing is that that it can be seen as killing two birds with one stone - getting older less efficient dirtier cars off the road (good for the environment) and getting new cars off of the lots (good for the economy).
Of course realistically, there are more cost effective ways to clean up the air, and the economy...
The entire idea was to get old crocks off the road and replace them with new efficient cars. Shocking isn't it?

While it may get older , less efficient vehicles off the road, it creates problems as well. It causes hardships for those who don't have the money for a newer car to have to pay more for a used vehicle or parts to fix their own, as the supply of older cars dwindles, the prices will increase (supply and demand).
The older cars tended to be easier and less expensive to repair, and parts are generally cheaper too. The true test for the economy may not be seen for several months to see if the car owners can keep up with the new payments on these new vehicles. ( See posts above.) If not it could be another serious blow to an economy trying to recover.While these newer cars may be more efficient, how durable are they, will they be able to last as long as those vehicles they are destined to replace? Where will we be in a few years when they start to fall apart and need to be replaced yet again. (More scrap to be processed, that sure is good for the environment.)
Overall, I think they could've done a better job formulating a program to boost the economy that the CFC program. Since the government is in the car business now it just makes sense to come up with a program like this :headshake:.
Although now that I think of it, the government already achieved one goal of the program:recycling. They have taken the taxpayers money and recycled it back to us in the form of a rebate so we could go out with our own money and buy one of these new cars. When they voted this week to fund $2B more into the program, where do you think the extra money will come from?

)
Here is a list i came across of the top vehicles being scrapped under the program:
The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins:

1. 1998 Ford Explorer

2. 1997 Ford Explorer

3. 1996 Ford Explorer

4. 1999 Ford Explorer

5. Jeep Grand Cherokee

6. Jeep Cherokee

7. 1995 Ford Explorer

8. 1994 Ford Explorer

9. 1997 Ford Windstar

10. 1999 Dodge Caravan
SOURCE (http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars/)


Interesting # 10 is my personal vehicle. With 120k miles on it, it recently got a new transmission, I don't plan on getting rid of it any time soon.

I like the room to haul my kids friends around, as well as large items, and it hasn't given me major problems except recently the transmission.

I don't want to go in debt with a loan on another vehicle either, this one is all paid for!:smile:

IMO based on the top 10 "cash for clunkers" new cars sold it looks like the people taking advantage of the program are in lower income brackets which is on par for a social program or need their heads examined. :screwy: Personally I don't know of anyone or any friends that would buy one of those cars except maybe the Toyota Camry but not the 4 cylinder model. :rolleyes:4. Toyota Prius??

I thought this program was suppose to help the environment.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTOyiKLARk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsJjZIuF1lg

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=718900859924733158

The older cars tended to be easier and less expensive to repair, and parts are generally cheaper too.

A good chunk of these older vehicles had been shipped to Mexico before CFC started (a shame really - thank NAFTA).

Another interesting thing, I myself had wondered why it seemed so hard to find cars from the 80s for sale or in junkyards - shocking thing is most junkyards won't take them. I know because in search of parts to keep several older vehicles on the road I've called dozens of junkyards and was told that they don't deal in anything that old (80s). So really, CFC isn't doing much damage to the used parts business.

The true test for the economy may not be seen for several months to see if the car owners can keep up with the new payments on these new vehicles. ( See posts above.) If not it could be another serious blow to an economy trying to recover.While these newer cars may be more efficient, how durable are they, will they be able to last as long as those vehicles they are destined to replace?

I know some people might not want to hear it - but the truth is ALL cars today are probably more durable than most cars built 20 years ago, in the golden age of pure crap motoring.
Although the majority of the cars coming in seem to be 90s Ford Explorers...

I do also want to see what happens when people have to start making payments on all these new cars - it's definitely the most iffy part of the CFC plan.

A good chunk of these older vehicles had been shipped to Mexico before CFC started (a shame really - thank NAFTA).

Another interesting thing, I myself had wondered why it seemed so hard to find cars from the 80s for sale or in junkyards - shocking thing is most junkyards won't take them. I know because in search of parts to keep several older vehicles on the road I've called dozens of junkyards and was told that they don't deal in anything that old (80s). So really, CFC isn't doing much damage to the used parts business.
Most salvage yards today deal with newer vehicles as that is where the money is. They keep up the supply for a majority of the vehicles on the road ( at least in my area where we use a lot of salt in the winter so the average age of our vehicles is less (newer).There are however, some who deal in older parts, some exclusively. You have to know where to look. Some good places to start are the ads in Hemmings Motor News, which has a lot of salvage yards advertising rust free parts for older vehicles, and www.car-part.com. The latter has lists of yards that might have your parts after you input the year make , and model , and the part you are looking for.

I know some people might not want to hear it - but the truth is ALL cars today are probably more durable than most cars built 20 years ago, in the golden age of pure crap motoring.
I do also want to see what happens when people have to start making payments on all these new cars - it's definitely the most iffy part of the CFC plan.
I don't know how true that will be in the future judging at least by the vehicles I see in my area prematurely rusting earlier in their life cycle than their older counterparts did. Add to that the high usage of plastic, thinner gauge metal, etc.
What I should have said in my previous post instead was to comment on their trade in values when it comes time to replace the vehicle. A lot of these newer cars don't seem to hold their values as before and that could be due to a high production rate, flooding the market with a lot of a specific model, high usage as rentals/leases being turned in, etc.

While the bulk of these vehicles being turned in appear to be in the 1990's, I stand beside my original intention that this program could create a "shortage" of available vehicles from this time frame in the future, and causing hardships for those who can only afford these types of vehicles, ( students, single moms, lower income,etc.)Plus those who enjoy working on these types of vehicles will find fewer available to do so.

A lot of those vehicles on that list are a complete joke that you would have to be insane to trade in. Even my 94' 3000GT VR4 twin turbo is on there and rest assured it is worth much more than $4,500. Heck, even the 96 VR4 is on there which tend to sell for around $15+ with lowerish miles and in good shape. On top of that all the Land Rovers, etc...it's a joke. And my question is why is Obama so hell-bent on helping out just the corporate and dealership auto industry and basically nobody else? In fact, hurting everybody else.

EDIT: I see there is also vaiours Porsches (ie 928), the MKIV Supra turbo (not a bad way to lose $30k on a trade in as a clunker), and the V12 BMW 8 series. :shakehead

Well it's over as of this Monday 8/24. Story (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/cash-for-clunkers-to-end-monday/)

Our government is going to regret this and it did hurt the used car market.The auctions were empty and the price of any used car or truck went up.Used cars went up a grand or two including trucks in price.Our government should pay used car dealers for what damage they did.

Our government is going to regret this and it did hurt the used car market.The auctions were empty and the price of any used car or truck went up.Used cars went up a grand or two including trucks in price.Our government should pay used car dealers for what damage they did.

So they helped everybody who owned a used car by increasing its value - but hurt used car dealers (a vast minority) - and should pay back a few people for helping everybody else out.

Um, ok.

In any event, it's over so prices will go back to normal.

So they helped everybody who owned a used car by increasing its value - but hurt used car dealers (a vast minority) - and should pay back a few people for helping everybody else out.

Um, ok.

In any event, it's over so prices will go back to normal.

While they may have helped everybody who owned a used car by increasing it's value, at the same time they hurt those, especially those that cannot afford a higher priced used car because of lack of money or inability to get financing.( I'm not concerned about the used car dealers, rather the individual and the private sales.)
I think it will take awhile for the market to recover from the loss of the vehicles destroyed during the program's run. The lower end priced cars probably suffered the biggest loss in totals, and will take a few years for the newer model year vehicle's value to drop enough to be affordable by those primarily affected by the current loss.

It did hurt the used car market and it is going to hurt more,a price of an used car is going to go up a grand or two next year.The damage has been done and can't be repaired.It was a huge joke and hurt families that cannot afford a new car was another situation.

simple question:
which is better for your economy, selling new cars or selling old cars?

Even simpler question: "What better ways are there to both stimulate the economy by selling new cars AND at the same time not destroy any viable used cars in the process?"

It is now obvious there were a LOT of negatives about this program to the point many dealers opted out of the program starting the first week of inception. There were a lot of dealers and customer left with a sour taste after trying to go through the process and hitting roadblock after roadblock. The government website was continually slow and crashing, mounds of paperwork, the process to destroy the engines of the vehicles, misinformation, and dealers not following the rules properly to name just a few. Also this uptick in sales is only temporary and may have cannabilized auto sales for the upcoming Fall and Winter seasons since there are no more incentives like the ones the program offered to buy a new car.

But the one given here is that used car stocks increase every year without fail.
For point of reference, In 1998-1999, Ford sold nigh on 40,000 Explorers, with the total car sales being around 640,000.

How many cars were sold under the Cash for clunkers scheme?
I recall an estimate of 800,000 being the high figure.
Is there a more accurate figure now that the scheme is over?

It did hurt the used car market and it is going to hurt more,a price of an used car is going to go up a grand or two next year.

Ok. You do know that before this program existed, dealers were shipping thousands of used cars to Mexico because they could sell them without having to repair emissions problems, etc. That's a long term situation that will become more of a problem than the temporary cash for clunkers program could ever dream of being for buyers of used cars. CFC is over, but NAFTA will continue to allow dealers to ship thousands of used cars to Mexico every year.
This isn't only bad for the used car and used parts business, but it's bad for the new car business as well - selling these used cars in Mexico has cut into sales of new cars from American companies too.

So if you want to whine about something... there's bigger fish to fry.


It is now obvious there were a LOT of negatives about this program to the point many dealers opted out of the program starting the first week of inception. There were a lot of dealers and customer left with a sour taste after trying to go through the process and hitting roadblock after roadblock. The government website was continually slow and crashing, mounds of paperwork, the process to destroy the engines of the vehicles, misinformation, and dealers not following the rules properly to name just a few.

A lot of the problems were not inherent in the idea, but created by dealers who just wanted to move inventory out - the program was basically a free advertising gimmick for them.
The biggest problem so far as I can see is simply that those billions could have seen better use invested into other programs reaching for the same goals.

Mexico has some laws and certain year cars can be shipped in,1999 only.My father is an used car dealer and has not sold an used car since this happened.The auctions were empty too,pubilc and dealer only auctions.Nafta needs to be done away with,our jobs taken away!

There were a lot of dealers and customer left with a sour taste after trying to go through the process and hitting roadblock after roadblock. The government website was continually slow and crashing, mounds of paperwork, the process to destroy the engines of the vehicles, misinformation, and dealers not following the rules properly to name just a few.As the old saying goes "You ain't see nothing yet"! If you think this program was a cluster-suck, wait until you see what the Obama Nationalized Health Care has in store! The 3-billion wasted on clunkers, (original 1-billion allocated in the Military budget for the war on terror) will be a drop in the bucket compared to this fiasco!

I know this is off topic, but I have four extra tickets for the Robbie Knievel (son of Evil Knievel) event at the Ford Center next weekend in Beaumont, Texas, if anybody wants them. He's going to try to jump 1,000 Obama supporters with a bulldozer. Should be a good time - let me know. Thanks, SB

I know this is off topic, but I have four extra tickets for the Robbie Knievel (son of Evil Knievel) event at the Ford Center next weekend in Beaumont, Texas, if anybody wants them. He's going to try to jump 1,000 Obama supporters with a bulldozer. Should be a good time - let me know. Thanks, SB

OK, I didn't see that one coming. :bananadie

My boss bought a new vehicle using the cash for clunkers program about a month ago.

The "clunker" vehicle was a BMW!

CASH FOR CLUNKERS PROGRAM

The POSITIVE results were:

It’s taken thousands of Obama/Biden bumper stickers off the road!!!! :naughty:

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8391/fobamaonesocm1de0f73.jpg