Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
I'm sure that you have no idea that the program pays for itself and our children and grandchildren are getting a better world because of it. Oh...BTW this has nothing to do with anything 'greenie'.
Interesting historical point. I didn't know that.
The speed with which Chrysler and GM exited Chapter 11 was indeed impressive. Let's hope they make it now.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20090805/AUTO01/908050379/1148/auto01/New+clunker- - +funding+gains+in+Senate
Where's the money going?
http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20090805&Category=AU- - - TO01&ArtNo=908050379&Ref=AR&Profile=1148
Which states are dumping their clunkers the fastest?
http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20090805&Category=AU- - - TO01&ArtNo=908050379&Ref=V2&Profile=1148
Just think about it. Lets say I was in the market for a new car. I have no clunker, but who will stop me buying a clunker for $200. Get a licence plate and then go to a dealer and trade it in as a clunker for cash. Now I will get $4500.00 off of the car which I would have bought anyway. Does this make sense?
Welcome to the forum btw (and hi to all the other new members).
The problem is, we have funded wars against terror, bailed out banks and financial institutions, rescued large private business entities, so the consumers want their cake as well.
Bottom line: The idea for this type of program is a good one, and was already funded by taking appropriations from another already budgeted program. Unfortunately, the program was just launched without any forethought whatsoever. With that approach, we can clearly see that garbage in = garbage out! What a pathetic display as to the ineptitude of our "leadership" in being able to implement what should be a pretty straight forward program. Yikes-they should know by now that HOPE IS NOT A PLAN!
I sell new cars, so I have been able to witness the chaos first hand. It is clear to me that no one bothered to collect input from dealerships or auto dealers associations as to how this program should be implemented. First step: Figure out how much pent up demand you are unleashing with this type of program. This would be easy data to collect at the dealerhsip level, had anyone asked us to do so prior to launch. Step two: With the data collected from dealers, estimates could have been made as to what degree a program like this would need to funded. Step three: Decide if a rebate program is appropriate, based on the findings of steps 1-2. If a program is appropriate, don't release the rules on Friday, and let the **** fly! Provide a time frame for dealers to register their information, along with a current estimate of deals waiting for submission before the program even starts....This would have alieviated so many problems before the launch of this program. I would have expected someone at the NHTSA to have anticipated such problems.
We've created a leviathan! How do we bring it down before it spreads into every facet of our lives???
August 5, 2009, 9:45 pm
Clunker Class War
My clunker was a ’64 Ford Galaxie, logging maybe eight miles to the gallon on level ground, the back seat burned to the coils by a knucklehead friend who left a cigarette to smolder. When it died, just short of 140,000 miles, everything went. Sold it for scrap and $50 — with the tow.
Today, I’d trade that dog on wheels in a New York minute for the upgrade, some smart mileage car that is one of the autos zooming off my neighborhood lot as part of the Cash for Clunkers program.
But according to a barnacled cluster of senators, this program must be sunk, now. It’s been far too successful — dealers have been swamped, people are lining up to buy cars that burn less gas and bring instant cash to crippled local economies.
This is old fashioned stimulus of a sort that Republicans have always advocated, using financial incentives to change behavior. Representative Candice Miller, a G.O.P. lawmaker — albeit from the car-dependent state of Michigan — called it “the best $1 billion of economic stimulus the government has ever spent.”
...
http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/clunker-class-war/
Besides all that, I don't believe that critics are thinking it through deeply enough, as to the positive consequences of stimulus packages in general (if wisely applied). Jobs, paychecks, factories remaining open---none of this seems to appear in the shoot from the hip criticisms one hears on the radio.
Also, few Americans seem to grasp the utterly disastrous consequences of a sudden collapse of the US auto industry. (which was imminent).
The money spent on C4C would seem a pittance in relation to the relief work necessary to keep another million unemployed Americans from a desperate situation, to say nothing of the loss of world prestige and the depressing effect on the economy in general.
I doubt Chrysler will survive anyway, but GM will and Ford will, and C4C would have helped that along, no doubt in my mind at least.
Thus the rest of the argumentation is simply wrong because the whole premise is wrong. Do you need to see why? The explanation is actually very simple if you take the time to sit and think about it.
You being in the forefront of the sales process should be able to understand WHY this program pays for itself. I can show you right off the bat that your whole argument is fallacious.
I do think 4 of the top 5 sellers are made in the USA, at least.
Until you submit facts backing your non thinking emotional response, his position on the issue stands with respect and authority especially when he states,
HOPE IS NOT A PLAN
He and others were not fooled by the socialist candidate for President.
Not surprising. During the years many of those vehicles being traded in were made, Detroit was emphasizing and pushing F-150's, Ram-1500's, and Suburbans, while the foreigners were pushing Civics, Camrys, and Passats.
If Americans were already driving high fuel economy cars, the "stimulus" to buy would have been far less stimulating, for buyers and for the D3.
I mean, do the math. You trade in a 15 mpg vehicle for a 31 mpg vehicle, you are saving $$$...in my neck of the woods, that adds up to $1575 a year. If you bought a base Honda Fit, say, on a 60 month loan, and had the $4500 to put down on it, that $1575 in gas savings is just about 6 car payments. Not a bad trade for a clapped out Ford Explorer--
The way to achieve financial independence and stop fighting pointless wars overseas is simple. We need to consume less.
Then shouldn't that be enough incentive to buy without a federal subsidy?
$1575 a year alone is not a huge justification to spend $18000. That's an 11 & 1/2 year payback.
But with C4C, it's an 8 year payback AND you aren't upside down in the loan. So easier to bail out if you wish.
Just curious, what is your primary vehicle?
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/06/news/companies/clunkers_economic_impact/index.ht- m?cnn=yes
BTW, how many "stimulus" packages have we had in the past 7-8 years? is this one number 5?
1) Bush - tax checks (2004, I think)
2) Bush - tax checks (2008)
3) TARP (Oct. 2008) ($700B)
4) Obama stimulus ...I meant Pelosi and Reid stimulus package ($787B)
5) Cash for Clunkers ($1B...so far)
I find it funny we are complaining about potentially $3B, which will likely come out of the returned TARP money.
one of the underlying reasons for the recession is the sinking value of the US dollar compared to other world currencies. One of the reasons for the sinking dollar is the United States' dependance on foreign oil.
$4Clunkers needs to be expanded. I just 'clunkered' my 85 dodge ram suv which got 8 MPG and purchased a Nissan Versa. I will drive my other car, a toyota which gets about 20mpg and my wife will drive the 28mpg nissan because she has a longer commute. Her gas consumption will go down by about 5 gallons each week just from her daily commute. My gas consumption will also go down by about 5 gallons each week from my commuting. Plus we will save while driving the kids around on the weekends. All in all, I will be buying about 12 or 13 gallons LESS gasoline each week. that is over 50 gallons less gas each month. not to mention that my old toyota will now only need a quart of oil each month instead of each week (because my commute is much shorter than my wife's) and my old dodge won't leak a quart each week either. we will be spilling 1 quart each month onto the streets instead of the 8 quarts we were spilling previously.
I guarentee that old dodge put out more smog and CFC's in one 10 mile trip than my old toyota does in 100 miles or the nissan does in 300 miles.
just my family alone will reduce our nations demand by 50+ gallons of gas each month and 2 gallons of oil each month.
the government is figuring a little over 250,000 clunkers off the road with the first 1 billion dollars.
if other families are seeing similar savings in gas consumption, then:
250,000 x 50 = 12,500,000 less gallons of gasoline needed per month.
this isn't chump-change folks. this is a great step in helping America become energy-independant. i hope they expand the program to include any old vehicle getting less than 20 mpg regardless of it's age, as long as the new vehicle is getting 10 or more mpg. almost all of those old vehicles (like my dodge) don't need oil changes as within 3000 miles, the all the oil has dripped onto the ground and been replaced at least once or twice. (the oil that doesn't get thrown into the atmosphere from blow-by due to worn rings on those old clunker engines.)
I am a republican and a conservative and realize the boost to the auto manufacturers, the service centers (who takes an old piece of junk to the mechanic?), the parts suppliers, the insurance companies (you don't think anybody purchases collision/comprehensive insurance for an old car worth only $1000, do you?), and the taxes paid on those purchases/services will more than offset the money paid out. my vehicle alone got the $4500, but over $1000 of that went right back to my state government due to the sales taxes and titling and registration fees for my new car. I will also be taking my new car to the dealer for service during the warranty period. That's a lot of money over 5 years put into the local economy.
The only business sector that will actually see a loss from this is the big gasoline brokers like Exxon-Mobile. I don't even know any republicans/conservatives who feel that Exxon hasn't hurt American families with their policies. They blamed speculators for the high gas/oil prices last year. Can anyone guess who the biggest speculator on oil futures is? I bet it has two X's in it's name.
Of all the economic stimulus plans of the last 3 years, this one is working better than all the rest combined. I am not keen about the 700Billion in bailout money, but this is one program that i would like to see get some of that money. Fact is - many middle-class families with two working parents have at least one older car that is suitable for this program. I know for my wife and I, we were going to buy a 6 to 8 thousand dollar used car sometime in the next 6 months. but it probably wouldn't have gotten the gas milage of our new nissan and by spending a few thousand dollars extra ($9650 total price less $4clunk and rebates), we got a brand-new nissan with the optional engine, ABS, power package, alloys, etc... and a lower finance rate (new lower than used) making our payments cheaper on a new car than we were looking to spend on a 2 or 3 year old used car.
this program works on a microeconomic level (my personal finances) and a macroeconomic level (actually compelling hundreds of thousands of people to spend money and compelling them to continue to do so for years to come because everyone takes a new car to the dealer for it's service during the warranty period). even on a super-macroeconomic level (reducing US demand for foreign oil). it's a win/win/win.
I guess the thing is the import brands were simply in a better position, with more fuel efficient cars, and more importantly more class-leading cars in the small segments (don't take my word for it look at the top 10 cars).
Having said that, fitzmall is sold out of Aveos.
You gotta wonder if C4C would have worked even if the amounts were lower. Instead of $3500/4500, I wonder if $1000/1500 would have worked.
They could have kept the program going for 3 times as long, too.
I can't figure out why the turd focus is selling so well. I paid less for a totally loaded Nissan than I would have for a more basic ford with less safety and comfort features. plus - either myself, my wife, or one of my kids will be driving that same nissan 15 years from now with 200+k miles on the engine. try that with a ford.
I think one reason the Focus is doing so well is because lots of people are trading their Explorers in. They like their Explorers but just want better mpg, and maybe they don't need the benefits of a SUV now either. Since they are happy otherwise with their Explorers they don't see any need to look beyond the Ford dealer.
Yeah, they are also very low on loads of small cars. Maybe 4 Sentras. I was poking on their site last night and was amazed at how few cars there were in those classes. No Jetta TDIs at all.
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f1db290/1593#MSG1593
No politics here just numbers.
It's only natural that these should be the most numerous trade ins from that period.
With the reports that all brands appear to be running out of stock on the in-demand models and the funding likely to be renewed and doubled there might actually be a slowdown in transactions simply because there's little or no on-hand stock available.
Civic? Corolla? Focus? Cobalt? Elantra? Sentra? Whichever one is in stock gets the sale.
Like Ford there are also millions of Hondas and Toyotas sold in the 80's and 90's, but most don't qualify for clunkers (good mileage), plus most are still working and deliverying 25+ mpg without new car/insurance payments. So even though some (of these import owners) are complaining about being left out of C4C program, just consider yourself wise to have bought a good car for the long-run.
Some people want to argue with us. They are upset because their car don't qualify etc. Some think the money will last forever.
My prediction is that the next 2 Billion will be gone in less than a week.
Then what?
Quite a few. There are lots of 15 year old cars from the US manufacturers running around here. Probably a better percentage than the iron-oxide prone foreign cars.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And it will sell faster, too.
And if it were a fairly decent Corolla, automatic trans, and priced at market, your phone will be ringing before the ad is on Craiglist 1 hour and the car will be gone that evening.
This is not based on "merit" of the vehicle as much as on the usual supply and demand equation.
Why is that a problem?
If any amendment passes it means the House has to take up the bill again and the House, of course, has already adjourned for its August recess.
The Democratic leadership is now scrambling to get rank- and -fille Democratic senators to vote against an amendment almost all of them favor. It would be a very tough vote.
Might be best to let the dust settle for a month and get the car lots full again. Though 1000s could be rejected that have already made a deal.
The consequences of a collapse of the US auto industry, and this was not a certainty, would have been survivable. The enormous spending of borrowed money now being undertaken by the Federal Government may have much worse consequences.
James Madison, the father of our constitution said, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
Regards, DQ
PS Define "pittance"
Ah, guess it was related to a budget amendment. And I thought I was done with political junk for at least another year.
It was a 1999 V6 FWD SR5 package with the manual trans and extended cab. Had good meaty BFG all terrains. Also had a nice bed cap and was in good shape except for the bed itself. The bed itself was torn up pretty bad lots of scrapes, lots of dings just in poor condition relative to the rest of the truck.
The truck had about 110,000 miles on it. It was still worth about $10,500 IIRC. That is utter insanity right there. New that truck probably had a MSRP of around 24,000. So you could probably retail it with the bed cleaned up as best as possible for 13k or 14k. Who in their right ind would pay 50% of new car MSRP for a six year old truck with over a 100,000 miles on it.
Apparently enough people to make the pure wholesale number on that truck $10,500.
i am basically a republican, but washington politics is what it is.