I don't think anyone has ever bought a Sienna for looks :P
If you think cars are ugly now...a fleet of clones will make today look like the good old days. Then again, these are the good old days pretty much already.
I just want to point out something that is obviously beyond your understanding. Before you write garbage about how the stimulus is mainly being used for welfare and unemployment insurance, I am going to caution you strongly about saying these things. While you have this idea that these programs are bad and that most people who use them are lazy and just want to live off their folks, you would be dead wrong! As one of these people, among something like 14 million plus workers out of a job, I can tell you without my emergency unemployment benefits I would be SOL, completely. Do you have to spend tons of energy looking for jobs every week? Do you have to move hundreds of miles from your home to get work, knowing you will have to commute in a vehicle that is not super old, but needs work of which you cannot afford, but will still drive until you have the money to just rent a room, much less an apartment or house? Unemployment insurance requires that I make only 3 contacts a week, but I have been doing 20-30 a week, either in person or on the phone primarily, and sometimes email. Do you even have to work? Given that you are seen here posting, wasting your time, giving opinion not always based on fact, in other words ignorance. Get a clue man, stuff is really bad right now, and jobs are very hard to come by, even for an educated guy like myself(2 college degrees). I was working in an industry that just got destroyed by the recession, as a carpenter. I hate not having a job, 100%.
As for Cash/Clunkers? Another taxpayer funded snafu that will only temporarily help the auto industry, but will ultimately cause the industry to slump off bad for the rest of the year. Its true though. Why should a taxpayer have to pay if somebody purchased a gas-guzzler originally and now gets a huge incentive to trade out of it for something much better? As for Obama's stimulus plan. A good idea, but very poorly administered, with little in the way of oversight to see how the funds are being spent. Also, it's been rolled out way too slow and has not really stopped job loss, maybe only helped slow it.
Finally, bailing out GM and Chrysler, along with all the failed banks last year, has set a terrible precedent. We are a capitalistic society, supposedly, and if a business fails, usually others will come in to take its place. Now we reward failure with government funding, even though these jerks both went to bankruptcy with the funding. Does any regular person get money to cover their financial failures? NO! We are forced to pay back BS loans and credit cards until we die, or declare bankruptcy which also sucks. Cash for Clunkers in a sense rewarded peoples bad choices by giving them money even though their choice of vehicle led much to be desired. What is this country going?
If the Chinese want to sell vehicles in the U.S. they must pass U.S. regulations...
Just barely, though. I'm imaging 2-star crash test ratings and roofs that crush when 1 lb more than the legal minimum is placed on them.
and laws concerning patent and trademark infringement
Not if they buy GM and then own the Camaro name.
They would have a green light to build the barely-legal cars in terms of safety and copy the styling minus the high tensile steels.
If they want to use GM's physical assets
My thinking is they would ship the old body molds overseas and use them far longer than designers originally intended (quality drops after a certain amount of stampings, but will they even care?).
This has indeed already happened - GM built the 3500 pushrod engine for the Equinox in China up until recently, using old stuff from US factories they sent to China. The higher quality, tight tolerance 3.6l V6 is made here.
without having to pay competivie wages and benefits, and obey environmental laws
They could move production to China and bypass most of those, too.
I'm not losing sleep, C4C has kept all the D3 alive, for now at least.
Chrysler just announced they will start leasing cars again.
GM is beginning to market their comeback, and they actually have decent cars to tout now. The Camaro is cool enough to silence any mullet jokes.
Ford's EcoBoost engine has lots of promise - it gets better mileage than their 3.7l engine with nearly 100 extra horses, all running on regular fuel.
Meanwhile, there's always that 2.0l Porsche Cayenne clone if you think the Chinese can do it better.
Fear not that is part of the Obama Health care plan. :shades:
Seriously, Walmart will have to expand to showcase all those knock-offs. Reminds me of my friend who hates to wear his real Rolex, so he wears the $25 copy and no one knows the difference. Wonder what I would look like in that Geely Rolls.
Ok, I am confused. You started out in favor of the stimulus and ended up hating it. I think you need to get on one side of the fence or the other. As far as carpenter work goes I am very familiar as I worked as a carpenter during High School for my uncle. My son does carpenter work in Alaska when he gets work. Currently he is making $13 per hour and thankful for something to keep his family going.
I know things are bad and the C4C did little to help those out of work. And did nothing for the millions of workers in the construction industry. The auto industry was an easy target for the government to get involved in. Plus they had dues to pay to the UAW for favors during the last election.
As far as being clueless about how tough it is. I survived the Jimmy Carter debacle. This may turn out to be just as bad as that was. Not close yet as interest rates have not hit 20%.
I do wish you all the luck finding work. I have family and friends in the same mess. I am thankfully retired for this recession.
> I survived the Jimmy Carter debacle. This may turn out to be just as bad as that was. Not close yet as interest rates have not hit 20%.
Didn't you watch the speech? Narcissistic Same has saved the county with all he (the democrat leaders) have done since he took office. There is no recession. There remains only one thing to fix: the insurance companies running healthcare instead of him. All those people out of work need to realize how much he's done for them. And Cash for Clunkers was to help take people's minds off healthcare imaginary bill and off the spending. Instead of looking closely at what He is doing that's meaningless, the little people can argue about cash-for-clunkers and its value, pro or con.
I expect another cash for clunkers to revive the now lack of sales which were all sucked up early.
Now that's an amusing conspiracy theory...C4C is simply a distraction to get people to look away while healthcare receives an overhaul.
I haven't met a single non-auto-enthusiast who has breathed a word about C4C. I remember no hilariously emotional town hall meetings about C4C. If this is all just a ploy to make people look away from real issues, it has failed miserably.
The losers sure are bitter, much moreso than the previous losers were a few years ago. They also show a lot less ability to take anything back, so far.
The future after this recession will be bleaker than anything after the debacle of the late 70s. The impacts of this are far worse - as the neocon globalized propaganda economy has devolved so many facets of the socio-economic spectrum in the intervening 30 years.
Local and national video media were full of reports about cars and buyers and unfairness and fairness and on and on. Even the local newspaper with next to no reporters actually managed some articles locally sourced and lots taken off the wires pimped up to make it look like they were reporting locally as well in the article.
Clunkers for cash should have included used cars and more money for trading in cars with better mileage but miles and age on them. I would like to have gotten a new or recently new Mercedes in lieu of my 98 leSabre with 22 mpg. :P
The media has time to fill - but it doesn't always translate into public discussion and distraction. Maybe my observation is anecdotal, but I didn't see anyone who wasn't already into cars discuss the program. I think the gubbamint would think of something more urgent to distract the sheeple while they force everyone into a hellish socialized medical nightmare :shades:
Most of the stories I do remember had to do with "nice" cars being clunked, like a shiny Volvo or a Maserati.
Would you have been OK with your LeSabre being killed off?
I agree the future is bleak. When you have programs like C4C that only add temporary jobs to try and administer an over bloated ill conceived program. Look around the country. The only place with a decent employment ratio is Washington DC. The Car dealerships around here are back to looking like a morgue. GM giving a 60 day free ride is to make room on their lots for the cars they built thinking C4C was going to somehow energize the auto industry. Even Toyota is back to selling some of their popular hybrids at invoice.
They could move production to China and bypass most of those, too.
Your still missing the point that if the Chinese want to make a clone of any vehicle, they do not need to buy the company, own its plants and everything else. Your theory makes no sense, as the Chinese can buy a single model of each vehicle off a showroom, ship it back to China, and reverse engineer it. They can buy 100 cars and setup the factories in China - you're right! Why would China want to buy the entire remains of GM or any other car company? That makes little sense. Do you buy a whole-new light-fixturewhen all you want and need is the light-bulb?
Looking at the sales volume C4C was intended to produce, and comparing it to even deflated yearly predictions - nobody who can analyze numbers to any degree would claim it would "energize" the industry. The media may have said this, but we know it is hyperbole. On a yearly basis, it isn't very significant. It's more like a short term crutch or a way to clear out the back lots. And in that, it worked.
As public programs go - and they will all be inefficient no matter who is in the oval office - this one is not so malevolent. At least some working taxpaynig Americans received a benefit. For the past 60 years the Feds have blown far more elsewhere that created benefit for virtually no Americans. I'd rather have the money help someone here than benefit some ungrateful being elsewhere.
Folks here are critical of the current administration, but imagine if Sarah Palin was made Car Czar.
Think about it, though...
She can see the Russian LADA auto factory from her house!
That clearly makes her imminently qualified to run a program like CARS, even though she might keep yelling MUSH!
Instead of Cash for Clunkers, they could call it Cash for Guzzlers. All the extra oil could come from the former wildlife preserves in her home state. It would be a sliding scale - they could actually subsidize gas guzzlers - the more you guzzle, the more cash you get:
30+mpg: cheapskate tree-hugging greeny-weenie, no cash for you! 25-30 mpg: $500 gas certificate plus free ammo 20-25 mpg: $3500 cash plus free gun rack 10-30 mpg: $4500 cash plus a free Smith & Wesson less than 10mpg: FREE CAR! Woo-hoo!
Imagine all the content SNL would have. At a minimum we'd get nearly an endless supply of humor once a week.
She did manage to squeeze the oil guys into giving more so the state could give each and every person in Alaska an extra $1200 in 2008 to help with high gas prices. For a total of $3269 per person. No state sales tax. No state income tax and she put money away for the future while balancing the budget. Being intellectual does not mean a person has any common sense. Give me some common sense politicians for a change. Instead of the Harvard Yale wonks we keep getting.
$3269 for every member of the family is a lot better than $4500 for an old clunker to a few people that had enough money or good enough credit to buy a new car. I do agree it was one of the few programs in this country that gave back to the tax payers.
if the Chinese want to make a clone of any vehicle, they do not need to buy the company
They do if they want to sell that cheap clone here in the USA, the world's biggest market. In many other countries, too. Many Chinese vehicles were banned from sale in Europe due to copyright and other violations.
They would be buying the name, the design rights, and the stampings and assembly line equipment. Then ship production overseas, and build the cheap clones.
Geely has no ethics. They shamelessly sell clones where they can, display their first original vehicles right in Detroit.
Do you buy a whole-new light-fixturewhen all you want and need is the light-bulb?
Yes because I replaced a high-wattage halogen with a more efficient flourescent.
Palin probably wants high oil prices, I'm sure it would help Alaska a ton, but hurt most of the other 49 states (not sure about Texas and other big oil states, it may help them as well).
I wasn't even very pro-CASH when it was announced, but I do feel like it was a necessary harm. Just a crutch to prevent full-scale catastrophe.
I'm not pro-D3 either, my whole fleet is import-branded right now, though some are made here.
Yes because I replaced a high-wattage halogen with a more efficient flourescent.
Were they made in China. I looked everywhere for made in USA CFLs and was not successful. China is doing what Japan did in the 1960s. The engine in my 1964 Land Cruiser was a PP copy of a GM 6 cylinder. Poor metal in all the high wear parts like valves and timing gear.
They would be buying the name, the design rights, and the stampings and assembly line equipment.
Well the first thing - the name - is a detriment, not an advantage. "GM" is no "Coke". If anything the "GM" name now would be a detriment not a positive to put on a vehicle. And anyone setting up a sales and distribution network in the U.S. is not going to want the bloated, expensive, and complicated GM-dealer network that was setup based on a system from the 1950's!
And if a Chinese company is going to build a cheap clone, then why would they want the original stampings and equipment? Secondly by the time the equipment was disassembled, shipped, and reassembled in factories and figured out how it works in China, would be 1-2 years. The cost of that move, the cost of having the equipment not producing product, and the fact that those models are becoming more obsolete makes a move of GM's factories and equipment basically worthless.
GM has value to a New Owner if they want to continue to make and sell existing models tomorrow in their existing factories without union labor, their dealer network, and their legacy costs. GM should have been allowed to fail, the divisions of GM could have been auctioned-off piecemeal to existing companies, and they could have been operated like many of the successful southern auto-plants are. The junk models and factories GM has could have been shutdown, as there are simply too much auto manufacturing capacity in the world.
Definitely agree there is overcapacity, I'm just not sure they should close every plant in the midwest to fix that.
They don't need to be closed; they needed to be LIBERATED FROM GM. If GM went under, a person like myself could reopen the plants, selling the vehicles for thousands less, and still make a profit. I could open those plants paying $15-20/hr + benefits using non-union workers and non-union productivity, not paying for high pensions, and not using a 50-year old dealer distribution network. There are many businessmen and private investors like Cerberus, Penske, Buffett who would buy the bits and pieces of GM, and run them as a different company maybe using some of the philosophies I suggested.
If GM failed and someone came in and restarted those exact same GM factories, and could take 25% of the cost out of the vehicle such that a $30K Buick now could sell for $22.5K, those former GM plants would be doing okay. It would be Ford who would find itself in trouble in such an environment.
Instead we have the government subsidizing high-paid auto workers with high pensions, producing fairly high priced vehicles, which then reduces the number of those vehicles that'll be sold compared to the competition. And the competition doesn't really have to lower their prices.
So we pay more in taxes (will eventually to stem the debt), and in return we get higher GM vehicle-prices to try and make up for the fact that the factories aren't busy, but the workers are getting paid well!
C4C wouldn't have been needed if the government let GM fail. GM could have been bought in whole or in pieces and cars produced 25% cheaper then they are today. That would have translated into market-share going GM's way, partly from all the foreign competition.
The only way for the American auto industry to thrive - short of getting some really secret good technology, is to reduce the cost of those vehicles and continue the good quality of the last few years. The U.S. doesn't have to match the Chinese labor costs because of Chinese quality issues. The U.S. though can't have $35/hr + pension workers, competing against $2/hr workers.
Why would China want to buy the entire remains of GM or any other car company? That makes little sense.
*** Because it saves them years doing so and gives them a worldwide lock outside of China on patents and rights to market the stuff. And also, because companies in the U.S. won't be able to do a thing about a half-priced GM car flooding the market.
Because it saves them years doing so and gives them a worldwide lock outside of China on patents and rights to market the stuff.
And what would the cost have been to buy GM before it went bankrupt and the U.S. government bailed them out - hmm? How much did the U.S. give GM and how much was GM losing per month. So you're argument is that China wanted to put in the $25B + $2B per month in losses so that they could get GM technology and the GM name. If the government did allow GM to go Ch7 and bits of GM were broken up and sold at auction, there would be U.S. and global bidders who would bid on the good assets of GM such as Corvette and any technology they had. The good bits of GM would go for market-value; it is silly to think that a Chinese company would walk in and buy Corvette when Honda or Penske would bid on it.
And also, because companies in the U.S. won't be able to do a thing about a half-priced GM car flooding the market.
Well that's going to happen in a few years anyway, just like Hyundai came and Honda before them. The Chinese don't need to buy GM for that to happen believe me. The factories, cars, and distribution plans are already being enacted. It will be just like Hyundia with very low prices and fair quality to start.
The Chinese are not stupid and can figure out how to build a decent car, just as they build your TV's refrigs, and many other goods.
They are confident that the U.S. will implode and so to them, waiting a few years or a decade or two when they can literally buy half of the U.S. for pennies on the dollar is well worth the "risk"(such as it is, which is about zero given how we're squandering money)
OK - so now we've reached the point where we can see that:
1) China was not about to buy GM before it went bankrupt and the government went bankrupt. China was not about to take on GM's debt, it's continuing losses, it's high-cost labor force, it's pensions and it's too large and expensive dealer network. GM also does not have any secret technology that would be worth those many billions, nor is the name Corvette and Cadillac worth that. If China wanted to dismantle and ship the factories and equipment to China, it would be at least a year before those factories would produce 1 car in China, so a whole year's revenue would be lost.
2) If GM went Ch 7 instead of getting saved with US$ tax-money as it did, China would not be able to buy the worthwhile pieces of GM, for pennies-on-the-dollar. The assets would be auctioned, and wealthy billionaires, corporations, and investment firms would bid on those assets. The GM's assets would be sold for what the market determined them to be worth. The organizations that GM owed money to, would make sure GM's assets sold for the highest price possible, so they could reclaim the highest % of their money.
Your fear of China is as unrealistic as the fear of Japan in 1990 was. Why? Because if we start going that broke, we wouldn't be able to afford the Chinese goods. So if we start going broke, the Chinese economy will slow down right along with us. We're the drug addict, and they're the dealer. We need each other.
I read the "Cash For Clunkers" article and I think Mr. Cooper is very wrong in assuming that market forces aren't responsive to consumer demands. It's CAFE that is is largely to blame for skewing consumers' preferences toward larger and more powerful, less fuel efficient vehicles.
Sure, Detroit made numerous mistakes, and misread the market in many cases. That's why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, while many of the import brands prospered.
Mr. Cooper gives Washington too much credit for interpreting what consumers want, and he gives market forces too little credit, in my opinion. It concerns me when "experts" depend too much on government to impose standards. If politicians were that astute, perhaps more of them (not all, to be sure) would be wealth generators instead of wealth distributors and, in some cases, wealth destroyers. To be fair, though, our domestic automakers destroyed a huge amount of market value in the last 20 or so years.
Of course, we need government, we need lawmakers, and we need laws to help balance the forces of large-scale manufacturing, labor, and consumers. As this applies to the auto industry, this industry was an oligopoly (where a few large, powerful companies control the market). On the labor side, the UAW became a virtual monopoly by the '60s. That's just the opposite of the situation in the '20s and '30s, when the manufacturers could exploit the workers. Thanks to foreign competition on the manufacturing side, and concessions by union labor, both the manufacturers and labor are more responsive to consumers' needs now. I'm not suggesting that we've got a perfect situation now, but there is more competition in the marketplace than in the '50s and '60s. My concern, however, is that the pendulum is swinging to too much government involvement and regulation, and too little reliance on market forces.
Mr. Cooper gives Washington too much credit for interpreting what consumers want, and he gives market forces too little credit, in my opinion
Exactly. The reason sales are so off is because the rental companies scaled WAY back and the consumers just plain hate the designs of GM. So only the desperate and those with no clue bought them. Well, the poor can't get that easy financing, so...
The solution is what it always has been. Build what the consumer wants to buy, not what you want to sell.
Several good points, once again, but I'll comment on one point you made:
The good bits of GM would go for market-value; it is silly to think that a Chinese company would walk in and buy Corvette when Honda or Penske would bid on it.
Keeping in mind the current market, I think they would sell below value. Few have that sort of liquidity.
Honda could never own Corvette because it flies in the face of their green philosophy.
Penske would be better, if they really had the resources.
The value of anything is - the highest price anyone is willing to pay for that item at that moment. The value can certainly change over time. Nothing ever sells below value if it is open to sale/bid to a pool of buyers.
Few have that sort of liquidity.
You are correct; if referring to the 6B people of the world. But there are certainly individuals (Gates, Buffett and the 100 or so other billionaires in this country) who could write a check to GM today to buy the Corvette name and factory. Who knows what Corvette would fetch. Maybe a car-guy like Jay Leno would buy it?
I know what you mean - a rescue like what ProDrive did for Aston Martin. That would be nice, actually.
I also agree about the value of something being what someone else is willing to pay. It's just that right now that's about as low as it would ever get.
C4C can give them a crutch (heck, Chrysler is leasing again) short-term and they may actually be worth something long-term.
Here is the best way to keep GM & Chrysler in business for the Big 3 fans out there:
1) Everyone go out and hit GM/Chrysler vehicles you see out on the road. Hit them bad enough to cause some significant damage with your bailout accident. 2) Don't hit them so hard that you kill/maim/injure seriously, or total the vehicle. 3) Buy a bunch of replacement GM & Chrysler car parts for no reason.
With all the body shops buying replacement parts for GM & Chrysler vehicles, the factories will have to start producing more parts and pieces, and keep busy producing and manufacturing.
We could have them reduce their market share to ZERO and still keep them in business this way!!!
This is Plan A. Gov't tax subsidized bailouts are Plan B.
I'd rather choose Plan A.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The author of "The Cash for Clunkers Message" goes on for a page and a half about how consumers desperately want more fuel-efficient cars, then says that C4C-type programs should be designed to giv a revenue-neutral advantage to small fuel-efficient cars "because sometimes consumers need a nudge in the right direction".
So which is it?
I WOULD like to see some sort of C4C program continue into the future, provided the fuel economy standards for getting a government rebate are MUCH higher than the program that just ended, and that cars and trucks get the same treatment. No more special standards for trucks!!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Sounds like you think the automakers can defy the laws of physics. Until the automakers bring small diesel engines to our shores they have reached the peak of economy in PU trucks. We know a hybrid truck will be nearly worthless for towing. The one I had was no better than the non hybrid around town. From what I read most of the clunkers went for the $4500 figure. It does not take much of an old used truck to be worth at least $3500. I did think they should have allowed people to trade in a class 3 for a car if they no longer needed the PU truck. Not sure who's idea that was.
I did think they should have allowed people to trade in a class 3 for a car if they no longer needed the PU truck. Not sure who's idea that was.
I don't understand either why they didn't allow the class 3-for-a-car trade up. Only thing that comes to mind is the Detroit still wanted to sell big PU trucks because that's where their profits lay.
"those searching for nice body/interior components, suspensions, transmissions, and the like for 1990s high-end European machinery are in for some happy hunting (mixed with a healthy dose of tears for all the perfectly good BMW 7 series sedans, 10-year-old Jaguars, and other cool machinery that got caught up in the Clunkpocalypse)"
The gas tax collector's in the Federal and state governments. Not everyone in government is trying to cut fuel consumption. If they were we would have a lot more diesel cars and SUVs in the USA like they do in the EU. That is why so many states are scrambling around trying to figure out how to tax by the mile.
My c4c rebate was denied because it was titled in a family trust-neither the dealer or myself was aware that it was not eligible for the rebate when we did the deal (it was in the FAQ's-not in the 136 pages of rules) I paid cash & have had the new car for over a month when the dealer notified me--am I responsible for the $3500??? Help!!
Give the car back and get all your cash and clunker back. If he has destroyed it then you are due that $3500. I have a feeling there will be a lot of unhappy buyers getting screwed in this poorly run program. There should have been a database established where the dealer could have keyed in all the particulars and gotten immediate approval or disapproval from the Feds. Expecting that bunch of losers to do anything in an efficient manner is impossible. It will only get worse. Think of the red tape involved if you have a heart attack. We have to verify you paid your taxes on time since 1980, before we can admit you to the hospital. :sick:
PS Only 46% of claims have been paid. How many were rejected due to ignorance on the part of the ACORN they had scrutinizing the claim?
Comments
If you think cars are ugly now...a fleet of clones will make today look like the good old days. Then again, these are the good old days pretty much already.
As for Cash/Clunkers? Another taxpayer funded snafu that will only temporarily help the auto industry, but will ultimately cause the industry to slump off bad for the rest of the year. Its true though. Why should a taxpayer have to pay if somebody purchased a gas-guzzler originally and now gets a huge incentive to trade out of it for something much better? As for Obama's stimulus plan. A good idea, but very poorly administered, with little in the way of oversight to see how the funds are being spent. Also, it's been rolled out way too slow and has not really stopped job loss, maybe only helped slow it.
Finally, bailing out GM and Chrysler, along with all the failed banks last year, has set a terrible precedent. We are a capitalistic society, supposedly, and if a business fails, usually others will come in to take its place. Now we reward failure with government funding, even though these jerks both went to bankruptcy with the funding. Does any regular person get money to cover their financial failures? NO! We are forced to pay back BS loans and credit cards until we die, or declare bankruptcy which also sucks. Cash for Clunkers in a sense rewarded peoples bad choices by giving them money even though their choice of vehicle led much to be desired. What is this country going?
Just barely, though. I'm imaging 2-star crash test ratings and roofs that crush when 1 lb more than the legal minimum is placed on them.
and laws concerning patent and trademark infringement
Not if they buy GM and then own the Camaro name.
They would have a green light to build the barely-legal cars in terms of safety and copy the styling minus the high tensile steels.
If they want to use GM's physical assets
My thinking is they would ship the old body molds overseas and use them far longer than designers originally intended (quality drops after a certain amount of stampings, but will they even care?).
This has indeed already happened - GM built the 3500 pushrod engine for the Equinox in China up until recently, using old stuff from US factories they sent to China. The higher quality, tight tolerance 3.6l V6 is made here.
without having to pay competivie wages and benefits, and obey environmental laws
They could move production to China and bypass most of those, too.
I'm not losing sleep, C4C has kept all the D3 alive, for now at least.
Chrysler just announced they will start leasing cars again.
GM is beginning to market their comeback, and they actually have decent cars to tout now. The Camaro is cool enough to silence any mullet jokes.
Ford's EcoBoost engine has lots of promise - it gets better mileage than their 3.7l engine with nearly 100 extra horses, all running on regular fuel.
Meanwhile, there's always that 2.0l Porsche Cayenne clone if you think the Chinese can do it better.
Fear not that is part of the Obama Health care plan. :shades:
Seriously, Walmart will have to expand to showcase all those knock-offs. Reminds me of my friend who hates to wear his real Rolex, so he wears the $25 copy and no one knows the difference. Wonder what I would look like in that Geely Rolls.
I know things are bad and the C4C did little to help those out of work. And did nothing for the millions of workers in the construction industry. The auto industry was an easy target for the government to get involved in. Plus they had dues to pay to the UAW for favors during the last election.
As far as being clueless about how tough it is. I survived the Jimmy Carter debacle. This may turn out to be just as bad as that was. Not close yet as interest rates have not hit 20%.
I do wish you all the luck finding work. I have family and friends in the same mess. I am thankfully retired for this recession.
Didn't you watch the speech? Narcissistic Same has saved the county with all he (the democrat leaders) have done since he took office. There is no recession. There remains only one thing to fix: the insurance companies running healthcare instead of him. All those people out of work need to realize how much he's done for them. And Cash for Clunkers was to help take people's minds off healthcare imaginary bill and off the spending. Instead of looking closely at what He is doing that's meaningless, the little people can argue about cash-for-clunkers and its value, pro or con.
I expect another cash for clunkers to revive the now lack of sales which were all sucked up early.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I haven't met a single non-auto-enthusiast who has breathed a word about C4C. I remember no hilariously emotional town hall meetings about C4C. If this is all just a ploy to make people look away from real issues, it has failed miserably.
The losers sure are bitter, much moreso than the previous losers were a few years ago. They also show a lot less ability to take anything back, so far.
Local and national video media were full of reports about cars and buyers and unfairness and fairness and on and on. Even the local newspaper with next to no reporters actually managed some articles locally sourced and lots taken off the wires pimped up to make it look like they were reporting locally as well in the article.
Clunkers for cash should have included used cars and more money for trading in cars with better mileage but miles and age on them. I would like to have gotten a new or recently new Mercedes in lieu of my 98 leSabre with 22 mpg. :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Most of the stories I do remember had to do with "nice" cars being clunked, like a shiny Volvo or a Maserati.
Would you have been OK with your LeSabre being killed off?
Your still missing the point that if the Chinese want to make a clone of any vehicle, they do not need to buy the company, own its plants and everything else. Your theory makes no sense, as the Chinese can buy a single model of each vehicle off a showroom, ship it back to China, and reverse engineer it. They can buy 100 cars and setup the factories in China - you're right! Why would China want to buy the entire remains of GM or any other car company? That makes little sense. Do you buy a whole-new light-fixturewhen all you want and need is the light-bulb?
As public programs go - and they will all be inefficient no matter who is in the oval office - this one is not so malevolent. At least some working taxpaynig Americans received a benefit. For the past 60 years the Feds have blown far more elsewhere that created benefit for virtually no Americans. I'd rather have the money help someone here than benefit some ungrateful being elsewhere.
Hmm, that had me thinking.
Folks here are critical of the current administration, but imagine if Sarah Palin was made Car Czar.
Think about it, though...
She can see the Russian LADA auto factory from her house!
That clearly makes her imminently qualified to run a program like CARS, even though she might keep yelling MUSH!
Instead of Cash for Clunkers, they could call it Cash for Guzzlers. All the extra oil could come from the former wildlife preserves in her home state. It would be a sliding scale - they could actually subsidize gas guzzlers - the more you guzzle, the more cash you get:
30+mpg: cheapskate tree-hugging greeny-weenie, no cash for you!
25-30 mpg: $500 gas certificate plus free ammo
20-25 mpg: $3500 cash plus free gun rack
10-30 mpg: $4500 cash plus a free Smith & Wesson
less than 10mpg: FREE CAR! Woo-hoo!
Imagine all the content SNL would have. At a minimum we'd get nearly an endless supply of humor once a week.
She did manage to squeeze the oil guys into giving more so the state could give each and every person in Alaska an extra $1200 in 2008 to help with high gas prices. For a total of $3269 per person. No state sales tax. No state income tax and she put money away for the future while balancing the budget. Being intellectual does not mean a person has any common sense. Give me some common sense politicians for a change. Instead of the Harvard Yale wonks we keep getting.
$3269 for every member of the family is a lot better than $4500 for an old clunker to a few people that had enough money or good enough credit to buy a new car. I do agree it was one of the few programs in this country that gave back to the tax payers.
Government that works for the people
if the Chinese want to make a clone of any vehicle, they do not need to buy the company
They do if they want to sell that cheap clone here in the USA, the world's biggest market. In many other countries, too. Many Chinese vehicles were banned from sale in Europe due to copyright and other violations.
They would be buying the name, the design rights, and the stampings and assembly line equipment. Then ship production overseas, and build the cheap clones.
Geely has no ethics. They shamelessly sell clones where they can, display their first original vehicles right in Detroit.
Do you buy a whole-new light-fixturewhen all you want and need is the light-bulb?
Yes because I replaced a high-wattage halogen with a more efficient flourescent.
$3269 per person, wow.
Palin probably wants high oil prices, I'm sure it would help Alaska a ton, but hurt most of the other 49 states (not sure about Texas and other big oil states, it may help them as well).
I wasn't even very pro-CASH when it was announced, but I do feel like it was a necessary harm. Just a crutch to prevent full-scale catastrophe.
I'm not pro-D3 either, my whole fleet is import-branded right now, though some are made here.
Were they made in China. I looked everywhere for made in USA CFLs and was not successful. China is doing what Japan did in the 1960s. The engine in my 1964 Land Cruiser was a PP copy of a GM 6 cylinder. Poor metal in all the high wear parts like valves and timing gear.
IKEA, so maybe Sweden? Not sure.
Well the first thing - the name - is a detriment, not an advantage. "GM" is no "Coke". If anything the "GM" name now would be a detriment not a positive to put on a vehicle. And anyone setting up a sales and distribution network in the U.S. is not going to want the bloated, expensive, and complicated GM-dealer network that was setup based on a system from the 1950's!
And if a Chinese company is going to build a cheap clone, then why would they want the original stampings and equipment? Secondly by the time the equipment was disassembled, shipped, and reassembled in factories and figured out how it works in China, would be 1-2 years. The cost of that move, the cost of having the equipment not producing product, and the fact that those models are becoming more obsolete makes a move of GM's factories and equipment basically worthless.
GM has value to a New Owner if they want to continue to make and sell existing models tomorrow in their existing factories without union labor, their dealer network, and their legacy costs. GM should have been allowed to fail, the divisions of GM could have been auctioned-off piecemeal to existing companies, and they could have been operated like many of the successful southern auto-plants are. The junk models and factories GM has could have been shutdown, as there are simply too much auto manufacturing capacity in the world.
fact that those models are becoming more obsolete
That hasn't stopped them before.
Definitely agree there is overcapacity, I'm just not sure they should close every plant in the midwest to fix that.
They don't need to be closed; they needed to be LIBERATED FROM GM. If GM went under, a person like myself could reopen the plants, selling the vehicles for thousands less, and still make a profit.
I could open those plants paying $15-20/hr + benefits using non-union workers and non-union productivity, not paying for high pensions, and not using a 50-year old dealer distribution network.
There are many businessmen and private investors like Cerberus, Penske, Buffett who would buy the bits and pieces of GM, and run them as a different company maybe using some of the philosophies I suggested.
If GM failed and someone came in and restarted those exact same GM factories, and could take 25% of the cost out of the vehicle such that a $30K Buick now could sell for $22.5K, those former GM plants would be doing okay. It would be Ford who would find itself in trouble in such an environment.
Instead we have the government subsidizing high-paid auto workers with high pensions, producing fairly high priced vehicles, which then reduces the number of those vehicles that'll be sold compared to the competition. And the competition doesn't really have to lower their prices.
So we pay more in taxes (will eventually to stem the debt), and in return we get higher GM vehicle-prices to try and make up for the fact that the factories aren't busy, but the workers are getting paid well!
C4C wouldn't have been needed if the government let GM fail. GM could have been bought in whole or in pieces and cars produced 25% cheaper then they are today. That would have translated into market-share going GM's way, partly from all the foreign competition.
The only way for the American auto industry to thrive - short of getting some really secret good technology, is to reduce the cost of those vehicles and continue the good quality of the last few years. The U.S. doesn't have to match the Chinese labor costs because of Chinese quality issues. The U.S. though can't have $35/hr + pension workers, competing against $2/hr workers.
LOL!
I think I'm going to stop here and take the weekend off. Good to end on a funny note.
***
Because it saves them years doing so and gives them a worldwide lock outside of China on patents and rights to market the stuff. And also, because companies in the U.S. won't be able to do a thing about a half-priced GM car flooding the market.
And what would the cost have been to buy GM before it went bankrupt and the U.S. government bailed them out - hmm? How much did the U.S. give GM and how much was GM losing per month. So you're argument is that China wanted to put in the $25B + $2B per month in losses so that they could get GM technology and the GM name.
If the government did allow GM to go Ch7 and bits of GM were broken up and sold at auction, there would be U.S. and global bidders who would bid on the good assets of GM such as Corvette and any technology they had. The good bits of GM would go for market-value; it is silly to think that a Chinese company would walk in and buy Corvette when Honda or Penske would bid on it.
And also, because companies in the U.S. won't be able to do a thing about a half-priced GM car flooding the market.
Well that's going to happen in a few years anyway, just like Hyundai came and Honda before them. The Chinese don't need to buy GM for that to happen believe me. The factories, cars, and distribution plans are already being enacted. It will be just like Hyundia with very low prices and fair quality to start.
The Chinese are not stupid and can figure out how to build a decent car, just as they build your TV's refrigs, and many other goods.
1) China was not about to buy GM before it went bankrupt and the government went bankrupt. China was not about to take on GM's debt, it's continuing losses, it's high-cost labor force, it's pensions and it's too large and expensive dealer network. GM also does not have any secret technology that would be worth those many billions, nor is the name Corvette and Cadillac worth that. If China wanted to dismantle and ship the factories and equipment to China, it would be at least a year before those factories would produce 1 car in China, so a whole year's revenue would be lost.
2) If GM went Ch 7 instead of getting saved with US$ tax-money as it did, China would not be able to buy the worthwhile pieces of GM, for pennies-on-the-dollar. The assets would be auctioned, and wealthy billionaires, corporations, and investment firms would bid on those assets. The GM's assets would be sold for what the market determined them to be worth. The organizations that GM owed money to, would make sure GM's assets sold for the highest price possible, so they could reclaim the highest % of their money.
Your fear of China is as unrealistic as the fear of Japan in 1990 was. Why? Because if we start going that broke, we wouldn't be able to afford the Chinese goods. So if we start going broke, the Chinese economy will slow down right along with us. We're the drug addict, and they're the dealer. We need each other.
'Cash for clunkers' buyers missed out on real deals, experts say
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
Sure, Detroit made numerous mistakes, and misread the market in many cases. That's why GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, while many of the import brands prospered.
Mr. Cooper gives Washington too much credit for interpreting what consumers want, and he gives market forces too little credit, in my opinion. It concerns me when "experts" depend too much on government to impose standards. If politicians were that astute, perhaps more of them (not all, to be sure) would be wealth generators instead of wealth distributors and, in some cases, wealth destroyers. To be fair, though, our domestic automakers destroyed a huge amount of market value in the last 20 or so years.
Of course, we need government, we need lawmakers, and we need laws to help balance the forces of large-scale manufacturing, labor, and consumers. As this applies to the auto industry, this industry was an oligopoly (where a few large, powerful companies control the market). On the labor side, the UAW became a virtual monopoly by the '60s. That's just the opposite of the situation in the '20s and '30s, when the manufacturers could exploit the workers. Thanks to foreign competition on the manufacturing side, and concessions by union labor, both the manufacturers and labor are more responsive to consumers' needs now. I'm not suggesting that we've got a perfect situation now, but there is more competition in the marketplace than in the '50s and '60s. My concern, however, is that the pendulum is swinging to too much government involvement and regulation, and too little reliance on market forces.
Exactly. The reason sales are so off is because the rental companies scaled WAY back and the consumers just plain hate the designs of GM. So only the desperate and those with no clue bought them. Well, the poor can't get that easy financing, so...
The solution is what it always has been. Build what the consumer wants to buy, not what you want to sell.
The good bits of GM would go for market-value; it is silly to think that a Chinese company would walk in and buy Corvette when Honda or Penske would bid on it.
Keeping in mind the current market, I think they would sell below value. Few have that sort of liquidity.
Honda could never own Corvette because it flies in the face of their green philosophy.
Penske would be better, if they really had the resources.
The value of anything is - the highest price anyone is willing to pay for that item at that moment. The value can certainly change over time. Nothing ever sells below value if it is open to sale/bid to a pool of buyers.
Few have that sort of liquidity.
You are correct; if referring to the 6B people of the world. But there are certainly individuals (Gates, Buffett and the 100 or so other billionaires in this country) who could write a check to GM today to buy the Corvette name and factory. Who knows what Corvette would fetch. Maybe a car-guy like Jay Leno would buy it?
I also agree about the value of something being what someone else is willing to pay. It's just that right now that's about as low as it would ever get.
C4C can give them a crutch (heck, Chrysler is leasing again) short-term and they may actually be worth something long-term.
1) Everyone go out and hit GM/Chrysler vehicles you see out on the road. Hit them bad enough to cause some significant damage with your bailout accident.
2) Don't hit them so hard that you kill/maim/injure seriously, or total the vehicle.
3) Buy a bunch of replacement GM & Chrysler car parts for no reason.
With all the body shops buying replacement parts for GM & Chrysler vehicles, the factories will have to start producing more parts and pieces, and keep busy producing and manufacturing.
We could have them reduce their market share to ZERO and still keep them in business this way!!!
This is Plan A. Gov't tax subsidized bailouts are Plan B.
I'd rather choose Plan A.
So which is it?
I WOULD like to see some sort of C4C program continue into the future, provided the fuel economy standards for getting a government rebate are MUCH higher than the program that just ended, and that cars and trucks get the same treatment. No more special standards for trucks!!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Sounds like you think the automakers can defy the laws of physics. Until the automakers bring small diesel engines to our shores they have reached the peak of economy in PU trucks. We know a hybrid truck will be nearly worthless for towing. The one I had was no better than the non hybrid around town. From what I read most of the clunkers went for the $4500 figure. It does not take much of an old used truck to be worth at least $3500. I did think they should have allowed people to trade in a class 3 for a car if they no longer needed the PU truck. Not sure who's idea that was.
I don't understand either why they didn't allow the class 3-for-a-car trade up. Only thing that comes to mind is the Detroit still wanted to sell big PU trucks because that's where their profits lay.
"those searching for nice body/interior components, suspensions, transmissions, and the like for 1990s high-end European machinery are in for some happy hunting (mixed with a healthy dose of tears for all the perfectly good BMW 7 series sedans, 10-year-old Jaguars, and other cool machinery that got caught up in the Clunkpocalypse)"
Is anyone anti-fuel efficiency?
The gas tax collector's in the Federal and state governments. Not everyone in government is trying to cut fuel consumption. If they were we would have a lot more diesel cars and SUVs in the USA like they do in the EU. That is why so many states are scrambling around trying to figure out how to tax by the mile.
I am pro-efficiency but that guy cares a lot more than the average person.
Perfectly good? Not likely.... :surprise:
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
PS
Only 46% of claims have been paid. How many were rejected due to ignorance on the part of the ACORN they had scrutinizing the claim?