And how many people on the roads are commuters versus non-commuters? The total of people on the roads is going to be higher than just commuters; ther are plenty of people going 10 miles up the road to go shopping or to the movies, and there is plenty of commercial truck traffic.
IMO you could shutdown the DC to NYC trains and you would hardly notice a volume difference on the roads between DC and NYC.
I about decided that home ownership is over-rated and that the mortgage incentive should be done away with. Let me get a Clunker voucher first though. :shades:
The Clunker Bump is estimated to be 5%, at least in NJ:
"Although the CARS bill initially stated that vehicle purchases made after July 1 would be eligible for a credit, NHTSA is recommending that both dealers and consumers wait until the July 23 rollout date, when all the CARS resources have been put in place."
Well do it this way. Figure out how many people a day ride those trains, then figure (liberally) that there are at most 2 people to a car on the highway, then add that number of cars to peak hours traffic flow (that is, cars per hour at peak commuter time).
Another factor is that in terms of Fuel Used Per Person, nothing on earth beats a train for efficiency as a people mover.
Unfortunately, since America junked most of its intercity and intracity rail networks nationwide, it is now prohibitively expensive (if not impossible due to land costs) to replace them.
so yeah, C4C is a good idea to stimulate car sales, but as a "green" idea, it's pretty much a dead end.
I've traveled my fair share , and the problems in those areas are less than the societal and environmental injustice seen in the beneficiaries of globalization - the founders of which are who have also encouraged the demographic difficulties in more developed regions. You must be drinking from the von Mises/Hayek Kool-Aid.
Our unemployment numbers are also white lies at best, deceptions in reality.
Efficient mass transit in densely populated areas is a quality of life benefit, and a sign of true development.
I predict C4C will have a negligible effect on the automotive market in general. There's more hype to it than anything - so many exclusions, and no endless amounts of consumers who can afford a new car right now.
Just got back from buying a 2010. $125 over invoice, I keep dealer 500 rebate and 12,250 for the Torrent. Also, no doc fees at this dealer, plus managed to work 3 free oil changes in the deal.
Bus travel between Washington and New York has been increasing rapidly. You can travel by bus between these two cities for ~$40-$45 round trip, which is much, much lower than by rail or air. Consequently, more and more people are riding the bus. Several bus companies compete on this route, and they're all privately owned.
I predict C4C will have a negligible effect on the automotive market in general. There's more hype to it than anything - so many exclusions, and no endless amounts of consumers who can afford a new car right now.
I think this bill may have some unintended benefits if the car manufacturers take advantage of more people looking at cars simply to see if their car qualifies. July-October is "normally" when manufacturers are trying to clear the current year models to prepare for the new model year in October. Also the time when you see more rebates and incentives. It may be possible for a consumer to get $4500 C4C voucher and $2k-$3k rebate. $6500 off a new car (not including the discounted price) might entice some clunker drivers.
Suppose a dealer takes a clunker in trade on a Prius at $4500. Then on July 23rd the actual rules come out from the NHTSA, saying only vehicles built in the USA. Will the dealers that got in a big hurry just have to bite the bullet. Or say they are not approved for one reason or another. There is NOTHING straight forward with our Government. The Congress handed over the authority to the NHTSA to administer. A dealer would be crazy to write a contract until then. The bill only gives mileage parameters. It would seem to stimulate the domestic auto industry the sales should be limited to vehicles at least assembled in the USA. Why send the money to Japan, Korea, Canada or Mexico?
Website says:
Program Being Developed Target for Program Implementation Late July, 2009
Hyundai is pretty smart with their marketing these days. The "no car payments if you get laid off" promotion was great PR and the locked in $1.49 gas special announced a few days ago isn't too shabby.
For Cash for Clunkers they are going to advance their dealers money to cover the voucher payments until the feds catch up.
So if I go in and buy one of these cool lookin' Genesis sport cars from Hyundai BEFORE the July 23rd-ish start date and it is later determined by the government that only autos assembled in the USA are eligible for the voucher, who pays for the mistake? The dealership or the consumer? This oughtta be good!!!
How long will it take the other automakers to come up to the plate? Personally I think it is risky with Federal red tape. Though it should be the auto maker taking the risk and not the individual dealers.
So what would happen if by the time the RULES are announced on July 23rd, more than the allocation is gone? Big month for aggressive dealers and automakers could leave some dealers on the hook for $4500. If the interest is as high as some of our sales people claim.
Sales as of July 1 may be eligible for credits under the clunkers program, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said last week. Still, dealers that make sales before the rules are finalized "bear the risks" of later showing that the sales qualify, the agency said on the program's website.
The National Automobile Dealers Assn. recommends that dealers wait for the rules to come out before acting, said John McEleney, chairman of the McLean, Va.-based group.
"I just hate to see someone get burned," he said. Dealers could be fined $15,000 per sale for violating the rules, NHTSA has said.
So it is a big gamble, who wins the throw of the dice?
The rules are set as to what qualifies(it's in the Bill). The NHTSA can't changewhat the Bill stipulates.What the NHTSA is doing is setting up the organization to 1: register dealer 2: set procedures for verification of eligability. 3: set rules to pay dealers.
They can't specify domestic autos only because of free trade aggrements.
NHTSA could not specify domestic only, in any case, since the bill (now the law) does not say that. The bill that passed and was signed into law could not specify domestic only, due to free trade agreements.
I think Hyundai will come out well being the first. They are taking advantage of the "can't wait mentality". By being the ready a couple weeks before others, they have a greater chance of getting people in their showrooms before other makes.
The rules have been set, now it's just getting the administrative procedures in place. By Hyundai Corp funding the cash, individual dealers don't have to worry about how long it will take for government reimbursement.
They can't specify domestic autos only because of free trade aggrements.
Can't is a mighty big word for this administration. The current stimulus bill is filled with violations of our free trade agreements. We are fighting with both Canada and Mexico over our violations as we speak. Foreign does not have to mean foreign built. They could specify foreign nameplates assembled in the USA. Which makes more sense than supporting foreign manufacturers.
The Congress handed over the authority to the NHTSA to administer.
Did you expect that congress, itself, was going to run this program :confuse: .
Every law that is passed is implemented by some agency or other in the exective branch, developing administrative rules that interpret the law and develop the details that the law requires. For example, this law says:
For each eligible trade-in vehicle surrendered to a dealer under the Program, the dealer shall certify to the Secretary, in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe by rule,...
I wish they would have some good rebates along with the C4C money but I predict that won't happen. The companies will just wait until C4C is over before the really good rebates will come out. They don't give rebates unless they have to.
What's this 'roll the dice'. There's little or no risk for a prudent businessman/woman. The rules aren't fixed yet so there's no reason to jump the gun and do anything. The new vehicles will still be there on July 23rd and the old clunkers will still be there on July 23rd and that's only 3 weeks away.
Why rush? Not much is going to change in 3 weeks. Those that are smart will just plan to finalize everything on or after July 23rd. As I've noted I have 3 or now maybe 4 potential buyers that want to take advantage of the program but I've just told them 'As soon as the rules are known, then we can complete everything. Not sooner.'
You're looking for ways to game the system or to find pitfalls for the unsuspecting. There are none for the prudent.
The rules aren't fixed yet so there's no reason to jump the gun and do anything.
I think that is what I said also. Anyone selling a vehicle hoping to get it all right are taking a chance. That is why the reference to rolling the dice hoping you win. In the case of Hyundai dealers the manufacturer is taking the risk.
This is like rewarding a cookie to a kid for bad behavior !! Hey kiddo... you messed up .... great ... here's a cookie... go & mess up more.
Why incentivise someone for making a bad decision of buying a gass guzzler when rest of the country pays for it. I don't understand the logic. The government should simply give incentives for good behaviour. The higher the mileage of the car, higher is the rebate. And this should be open to anyone who wants to buy a new car.
For those who have been wise & conservative to buy a fuel efficient cars until now - here's my advise. The government pays for bad behavior, so go ahead & buy gas guzzlers instead. Its a great incentive to be bad.
Well, my minivan officially gets 18 combined although after 10 years and 133,000 miles, I'm getting around 21 mpg combined. We moved 3,000 miles using it and did a year long road trip in it, hauling all our camping gear and toys. It's served us well, but now it's about time to retire it and downsize a bit. An extra few miles to the gallon will be nice too.
So we're clunker shopping.
There have been unintended consequences with the program:
The Government has already bailed out companies who made bad business decisions. Now they are going to do the same thing for those people who bought gas guzzlers they didn't need. I guess it pays to be stupid now. In business, and in life When are the people who do things right going to get a break?
It tells me I can get a $4500 rebate for a 3.5L AWD Rav4. The AWD Rav4 is listed on various sites as getting 21 mpg combined. Since this is only 3 mpg better that what I'm trading in shouldn't it be only $3500?
I thought that it had to be a 5 mpg better than my trade in to get the $4500? Am I missing something?
There have been unintended consequences with the program:
It may do the same in July. At least till the last week after the NHTSA puts out the official RULES. Looks like Subaru, Kia & Ford are gaining market share in this market. Also VW is doing well selling their diesel Jettas. Chrysler, GM and Toyota are the BIG losers this year. Ford may end up on top this year. Ford got their act together with the best midsized hybrid and its non hybrid stable mate. Those should be big sellers in the clunker trade business.
Half way through the year and only 4.8 million sold. How is the C4C with only 250,000 additional sales going to make an impact in the market. You are going to probably frustrate more buyers than you satisfy. The guy with a legitimate clunker that cannot get financing drives home in his old beater. Another thinks his vehicle should qualify and it does not with the same result.
Look at the sales for June. 859K total sales, off from last year by 27.7%. 250,000 more cars sold in a single month would not equal last years poor sales. Cracking 10 million sales this year will be a tough sell, even with this lame C4C bill.
I agree with Koshti, this is more socialism. Reward those that make bad decisions with money from those that do not.
So all of us who didn't buy a guzzler we didn't need in the first place are left out in the cold. And what about someone who did this very thing (traded a guzzler for a hybrid) last year? They must be fuming right now. :mad:
The Toyota website needs a serious overhaul. It says my 99 Ford Ranger 2WD FFV auto does not qualify for any amount. According to the gov site it gets 17 MPG. That is a generous rating for this gas guzzling under powered truck. Sadly no new small truck with enough power to pull my utility trailer qualifies.
I wish I could help out Chrysler. My Chrysler minivans have been fantastic autos, but I already own a 2008 T&C so I'm looking for a AWD SUV to replace my 2000 T&C clunker and Chrysler really offers nothing. The 2 Jeeps - Compass and Patriot are horrible, the Sebring is pretty bad as well. Considered a hybrid Chrysler Aspen, even though it is bigger than I wanted, but it costs about 45K. It looks like there is a reason Chrysler is in trouble - their product line is weak.
Though I qualify, I agree that this program, like the auto bailouts, is socialism. The government has no business interfering with the private sector like this, but they keep electing Socialists so what does anyone expect?
What gets me is how many older vehicles that came in a dozen configurations sometimes(mostly SUVs and trucks) only have 2-3 selections listed.
If they really wanted to get the worst polluters off the road, they'd make it a rolling 15-25 year old window. If you have a vehicle that's 15-25 years old, it pollutes dozens of times more than even a 5 year old one. Mine burns a quart of oil a month at nearly 275K on the engine. Yet it barely passes smog. Squeeks by at just under 300ppm, which is really stupidly high compared to anything new.
Get off the political soapbox already. It's childish. Your anti-government rants about everything - on every subject - being the fault of... ..a) the local government of San Diego ..b) the state government in Sacramento ..c) the Congress ..d) the President ..e) the SCOTUS ..f) the EPA ..g) CARB ( did I miss any? ) ...is getting old and frankly boring.
It's beautiful and sunny today...no rain..my grass is suffering...it's Congress' fault. I've got to work today...the EPA's fault The auto industry wrote a bill for their benefit..it's the President's fault
The auto industry designed this legislation to benefit themselves. It's their bill they created it. Now it has to play out.
BTW, in all your rants against everything you've been wrong nearly all the time; the first one from several years ago was the Great Battery Debate. How can you be so consistently on the wrong side of every subject?
You didn't complain during the last socialist administration when it redistributed wealth from the gas guzzling buyers to your Honda Civic Hybrid buyers now did you? Nope that was in your benefit.
Strange how perceptions change depending our personal involvements.
Ford Fusion Hybrid buyers and Jetta TDI buyers today are the continuing beneficiaries of the previous socialist administration. But the curmudgeon from San Diego is in favor of that type of socialism. Curious how these similar situations are viewed positively and negatively simply when viewed through different political lenses.
Or it can just be childish rantings ( see prior post ).
I think this program is about economics with no consideration about values. An economist would probably understand C4C in these somewhat formulaic terms and wouldn't try to inject moral values into it----of course, economic decisions like this always run into a hard sell, because people want to inject value judgments about "fairness", or who deserves what. But the economist, if he / she has her head on straight, is a "big picture" person and pretty hard-nosed about what the positive and negative effects might be, but only those effects were are measurable.
Cars sales go up, PROGRAM GOOD. Car sales don't go up, PROGRAM BAD.
How is the C4C with only 250,000 additional sales going to make an impact in the market
One thing it's done is given a lot of people car fever. Even if they don't drive a clunker, a lot of people are looking up the rules to see if they qualify for C4C. Then they spend a couple of hours at Edmunds dreaming of a new car. They may not buy this month but the pent-up demand is growing.
Cars sales go up, PROGRAM GOOD. Car sales don't go up, PROGRAM BAD.
I'm not totally convinced that it's going to make car sales go up. Pull sales forward, yes. But the only thing that's going to make car sales go up is an improved economy.
Exactly. That's why all of this is hype more than anything else. Most who can afford to buy a new car will do so when they can afford it, which has little to do with a $4500 subsidy. And with the great recession here to stay, fewer are able to afford this no matter if they have an incentive or not.
I think many economists would disagree whether this program is good for the US economy or not, and whether those effects are beneficial over the long haul. All those entitlement programs don't seem to have produced much, but our debt sure has skyrocketed.
The bailouts given to the automakers don't seem to have made them produce better, more competitive autos either. If there is no reward for good behavior, don't expect change. Spitting in the wind comes back at you. We are being funded to trade in our American made gas guzzlers for foreign gas savers, while we throw money at American auto companies to make more gas guzzlers.
And lets hope there are better requirements made upon those borrowing money for their dream cars than there were made upon those borrowing money for their dream homes.
I have a 96 Chrysler New Yorker I was going to use for the program but it misses it by 1mpg!! It gets a combined 19mpg. The 97 New Yorker with the same body style and engine qualifies, it gets 18mpg combined!
I love all the ranting! I have a MPV van which for some odd reason is listed at 18 MPG. (I get 23 b/c of careful driving and b/c I have taken 2 rows of seats out. But it has 140K miles and I am starting to put about 1500 a year into it. and I am 50 and I don't really need the van anymore. So now I can buy a Fit for 12,000. That 4500 surely makes a difference for me, and might let me get a more fuel efficient and newer car a couple of years before I could justify it otherwise. Feels like this is one of the few times that the government actually has a program that helps selfish me.
First.. it's 250,000 units in one quarter.. Bet on this. It will be extended for two, three more quarters.
It will be at most a 10% boost in actual sales but most likely a 5% net boost ( some people would have bought vehicles anyway ). The key benefit is simply to get buyers out of their houses and get them shopping and buying vehicles. It's a stimulus, nothing more.
Bet on this. It will be extended for two, three more quarters.
I hope so - we're in a similar situation as Vettech but we're all over the map on what to buy. The way we shop, it could be a few months. And going to a 2010 has a nicer ring to it than getting a 2009.
Now we're thinking of moving up a level from the sub-compacts we've been shopping. The Fit is nice but we ruled it out (for a while anyway, lol).
This is a puny $1 billion program. Add 3 zeros and it'd be a trillion the federal budget is over $3 trillion...so we are talking about 0.033% of the budget. Put another way, if you spend $50,000 per year this is like getting all worked up over $16.67.
Those who want to endlessly wail and knash their teeth over government spending and programs really should find something more significant to be incensed over.
Comments
IMO you could shutdown the DC to NYC trains and you would hardly notice a volume difference on the roads between DC and NYC.
The Clunker Bump is estimated to be 5%, at least in NJ:
N.J. car sales could rise 5 percent under 'cash-for-clunkers' program (NJ.com)
And the date has been set:
Cash for Clunkers Kickoff Slated for July 23 (Edmunds Daily)
"Although the CARS bill initially stated that vehicle purchases made after July 1 would be eligible for a credit, NHTSA is recommending that both dealers and consumers wait until the July 23 rollout date, when all the CARS resources have been put in place."
Another factor is that in terms of Fuel Used Per Person, nothing on earth beats a train for efficiency as a people mover.
Unfortunately, since America junked most of its intercity and intracity rail networks nationwide, it is now prohibitively expensive (if not impossible due to land costs) to replace them.
so yeah, C4C is a good idea to stimulate car sales, but as a "green" idea, it's pretty much a dead end.
Our unemployment numbers are also white lies at best, deceptions in reality.
Efficient mass transit in densely populated areas is a quality of life benefit, and a sign of true development.
I predict C4C will have a negligible effect on the automotive market in general. There's more hype to it than anything - so many exclusions, and no endless amounts of consumers who can afford a new car right now.
Just got back from buying a 2010. $125 over invoice, I keep dealer 500 rebate and 12,250 for the Torrent. Also, no doc fees at this dealer, plus managed to work 3 free oil changes in the deal.
I think this bill may have some unintended benefits if the car manufacturers take advantage of more people looking at cars simply to see if their car qualifies. July-October is "normally" when manufacturers are trying to clear the current year models to prepare for the new model year in October. Also the time when you see more rebates and incentives. It may be possible for a consumer to get $4500 C4C voucher and $2k-$3k rebate. $6500 off a new car (not including the discounted price) might entice some clunker drivers.
Website says:
Program Being Developed Target for Program Implementation Late July, 2009
http://www.cars.gov/index.php/rollout
For Cash for Clunkers they are going to advance their dealers money to cover the voucher payments until the feds catch up.
Hyundai advances cash to car dealers for 'clunkers' program (LA Times)
Oh, cars.gov already says foreign cars are ok to purchase.
So what would happen if by the time the RULES are announced on July 23rd, more than the allocation is gone? Big month for aggressive dealers and automakers could leave some dealers on the hook for $4500. If the interest is as high as some of our sales people claim.
Sales as of July 1 may be eligible for credits under the clunkers program, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said last week. Still, dealers that make sales before the rules are finalized "bear the risks" of later showing that the sales qualify, the agency said on the program's website.
The National Automobile Dealers Assn. recommends that dealers wait for the rules to come out before acting, said John McEleney, chairman of the McLean, Va.-based group.
"I just hate to see someone get burned," he said. Dealers could be fined $15,000 per sale for violating the rules, NHTSA has said.
So it is a big gamble, who wins the throw of the dice?
1: register dealer
2: set procedures for verification of eligability.
3: set rules to pay dealers.
They can't specify domestic autos only because of free trade aggrements.
The rules have been set, now it's just getting the administrative procedures in place. By Hyundai Corp funding the cash, individual dealers don't have to worry about how long it will take for government reimbursement.
All in all, brilliant marketing!
Can't is a mighty big word for this administration. The current stimulus bill is filled with violations of our free trade agreements. We are fighting with both Canada and Mexico over our violations as we speak. Foreign does not have to mean foreign built. They could specify foreign nameplates assembled in the USA. Which makes more sense than supporting foreign manufacturers.
Did you expect that congress, itself, was going to run this program :confuse: .
Every law that is passed is implemented by some agency or other in the exective branch, developing administrative rules that interpret the law and develop the details that the law requires. For example, this law says:
For each eligible trade-in vehicle surrendered to a dealer under the Program, the dealer shall certify to the Secretary, in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe by rule,...
Why rush? Not much is going to change in 3 weeks. Those that are smart will just plan to finalize everything on or after July 23rd. As I've noted I have 3 or now maybe 4 potential buyers that want to take advantage of the program but I've just told them 'As soon as the rules are known, then we can complete everything. Not sooner.'
You're looking for ways to game the system or to find pitfalls for the unsuspecting. There are none for the prudent.
I think that is what I said also. Anyone selling a vehicle hoping to get it all right are taking a chance. That is why the reference to rolling the dice hoping you win. In the case of Hyundai dealers the manufacturer is taking the risk.
Why incentivise someone for making a bad decision of buying a gass guzzler when rest of the country pays for it. I don't understand the logic. The government should simply give incentives for good behaviour. The higher the mileage of the car, higher is the rebate. And this should be open to anyone who wants to buy a new car.
For those who have been wise & conservative to buy a fuel efficient cars until now - here's my advise. The government pays for bad behavior, so go ahead & buy gas guzzlers instead. Its a great incentive to be bad.
So we're clunker shopping.
There have been unintended consequences with the program:
June auto sales fall short as buyers await 'clunkers' cash (Detroit News)
http://www.buyatoyota.com/cars.aspx?siteid=tcom_C4C_bat_rebate%20calc
It tells me I can get a $4500 rebate for a 3.5L AWD Rav4. The AWD Rav4 is listed on various sites as getting 21 mpg combined. Since this is only 3 mpg better that what I'm trading in shouldn't it be only $3500?
I thought that it had to be a 5 mpg better than my trade in to get the $4500? Am I missing something?
Why not go directly to the Cash for Clunkers website and key in your data? Much more accurate.
It may do the same in July. At least till the last week after the NHTSA puts out the official RULES. Looks like Subaru, Kia & Ford are gaining market share in this market. Also VW is doing well selling their diesel Jettas. Chrysler, GM and Toyota are the BIG losers this year. Ford may end up on top this year. Ford got their act together with the best midsized hybrid and its non hybrid stable mate. Those should be big sellers in the clunker trade business.
Half way through the year and only 4.8 million sold. How is the C4C with only 250,000 additional sales going to make an impact in the market. You are going to probably frustrate more buyers than you satisfy. The guy with a legitimate clunker that cannot get financing drives home in his old beater. Another thinks his vehicle should qualify and it does not with the same result.
Look at the sales for June. 859K total sales, off from last year by 27.7%. 250,000 more cars sold in a single month would not equal last years poor sales. Cracking 10 million sales this year will be a tough sell, even with this lame C4C bill.
I agree with Koshti, this is more socialism. Reward those that make bad decisions with money from those that do not.
Have a wonderful 4th of July.....
Though I qualify, I agree that this program, like the auto bailouts, is socialism. The government has no business interfering with the private sector like this, but they keep electing Socialists so what does anyone expect?
I'll stop there.
If they really wanted to get the worst polluters off the road, they'd make it a rolling 15-25 year old window. If you have a vehicle that's 15-25 years old, it pollutes dozens of times more than even a 5 year old one. Mine burns a quart of oil a month at nearly 275K on the engine. Yet it barely passes smog. Squeeks by at just under 300ppm, which is really stupidly high compared to anything new.
..a) the local government of San Diego
..b) the state government in Sacramento
..c) the Congress
..d) the President
..e) the SCOTUS
..f) the EPA
..g) CARB
( did I miss any? )
...is getting old and frankly boring.
It's beautiful and sunny today...no rain..my grass is suffering...it's Congress' fault.
I've got to work today...the EPA's fault
The auto industry wrote a bill for their benefit..it's the President's fault
The auto industry designed this legislation to benefit themselves. It's their bill they created it. Now it has to play out.
BTW, in all your rants against everything you've been wrong nearly all the time; the first one from several years ago was the Great Battery Debate. How can you be so consistently on the wrong side of every subject?
Strange how perceptions change depending our personal involvements.
Ford Fusion Hybrid buyers and Jetta TDI buyers today are the continuing beneficiaries of the previous socialist administration. But the curmudgeon from San Diego is in favor of that type of socialism. Curious how these similar situations are viewed positively and negatively simply when viewed through different political lenses.
Or it can just be childish rantings ( see prior post ).
Cars sales go up, PROGRAM GOOD. Car sales don't go up, PROGRAM BAD.
Limited goals, seems to me, is the nature of C4C
Like that
One thing it's done is given a lot of people car fever. Even if they don't drive a clunker, a lot of people are looking up the rules to see if they qualify for C4C. Then they spend a couple of hours at Edmunds dreaming of a new car. They may not buy this month but the pent-up demand is growing.
I'm not totally convinced that it's going to make car sales go up. Pull sales forward, yes. But the only thing that's going to make car sales go up is an improved economy.
The bailouts given to the automakers don't seem to have made them produce better, more competitive autos either. If there is no reward for good behavior, don't expect change. Spitting in the wind comes back at you. We are being funded to trade in our American made gas guzzlers for foreign gas savers, while we throw money at American auto companies to make more gas guzzlers.
Someone mentioned Ford - they've rolled out their own clunker identification website.
Saw the Ford website yesterday and it seems more accurate than the Toyota site.
Yeah, like anything, there has to be a balance somewhere in the middle. But, what's that old cliche, the market doth love its extremes?
It will be at most a 10% boost in actual sales but most likely a 5% net boost ( some people would have bought vehicles anyway ). The key benefit is simply to get buyers out of their houses and get them shopping and buying vehicles. It's a stimulus, nothing more.
I hope so - we're in a similar situation as Vettech but we're all over the map on what to buy. The way we shop, it could be a few months. And going to a 2010 has a nicer ring to it than getting a 2009.
Now we're thinking of moving up a level from the sub-compacts we've been shopping. The Fit is nice but we ruled it out (for a while anyway, lol).
Can you put a canoe on a Prius? :shades:
Those who want to endlessly wail and knash their teeth over government spending and programs really should find something more significant to be incensed over.