Cash for Clunkers

A share holder is a share holder, and I doubt if GM, Ford or Chrysler keeps any or all of there profits here either, again share holders and profits. Just who are the share holders? The investment firms with their investing.

So all in all it is somewhat of a moot point. My point was and is that the tax payer should not be paying for this "cash for clunkers."

The gov-mint should not even be involved, same as unearned income credit.

Get people off of the socialist teat..I prefer, if you don't work you don't eat, excluding the valid disabled. Being an illegal alien does not qualify you... Hell if the facts were analyzed, an illegal alien can probably obtain gov-mint benefits easier then a US citizen.
 
highslice said:
I hate the damn program. But since it already exists, shouldn't we limit it to domestic cars? Anybody else uncomfortable with your tax dollars being used to help foreign automakers sell cars?:smt021
Click to expand...

Not in the least. As a matter of fact, I am finally going to get some satisfaction out of our government. I never qualify for anything. I pay, and I pay, and I pay, but I can never get any of the "benefits".

A local Nissan dealer is doubling the CARS credit. My 1994 GMS Sonoma that I paid 16K for back in late 93 and has 356,000 miles on it went from being worth well... nothing a couple of weeks ago to being worth 9K right now. So, that truck is going to have cost me just a little under 6K after I go pick up a new Sentra for putzing around in. I can get another used truck to do my hauling cheap.

An the best part about it is that I get to stick it to the union guys by buying a non union vehicle. Screw them guys. I am not buying anything from them until they stop supporting people and policies that are bad for our country. I voted against the politicians and I lost. Now, I am voting against the constituents. :smt021
 
A friend of mine is a Chrysler and Toyota Dealer. I stopped by the Toyota store on Friday and the place was packed. He just looked at me, smiled and said "I love government cheese!"
 
The rest of the story:

I own 2 car lots (25%). At one, we pull old cars out of junk jards, put them in good working order, and sell them for about $2995 (also a 10-bay garage). If something goes wrong with the vehicle, we fix it at a 20% discount, you pay for parts, and the labor is tacked onto the back of the payments - interest free. Our shop rate is $65/hour, book rates.

At the other lot, we sell slightly higher end vehicles, but many have been taken in with a bad engine or transmission and then fixed at the first lot/10-bay garage. We also sell cars on consignment there.

Now, where am I supposed to get my vehicles to repair and sell? Riddle me that, Obamaman.
 
this program is harming repair shops, salvage yards, used car lots, and low income people trying to buy a car they can afford. it shouldn't exist...period.

it's harming the next generation. the ones who get to pay the tab.

working? it's working? no it's not. no government plan can. it's a boondoggle. like welfare to work, medicare, and what social security has become.

i can't wait till they screw with our healthcare.

i'll see dead people....and obamacare will have killed them.
 
fc3 said:
I looked at the cars.gov URL. I didn't see that warning. Post the URL where that warning shows.

S bunch of nuts are running around saying the Osama's birth certificate is a forgery (produced by the State of Hawaii). This guy sounds like he's probably one of them. There's some good, substantial things that Osama has done very badly. Why make up crap?
Click to expand...

From what I understand it appears after you agree to the security and privacy statement. After you agree.
 
Great.

Now everyone's gardener and housekeeper will have to pay more for a used car since there will be less supply in that low price range...
 
Different perspective on cash for clunkers.

Don't know who the lady is speaking at the start of the video, but she should be president. Sounds like she has a far better grasp on reality than Osama.

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=GduzSUSU8z#

Best regards,
Frank
 
dpvandy01 said:
"When logged on to the CARS System,
Click to expand...

That's the key part everyone seems to skim over when freaking out about how the government now owns their computer just because they went to the CARS website. Once you terminate the connection, your computer ceases to be part of the "federal computer system".

It's pretty standard verbage for a government website's terms of use.

Here's the usage agreement from the website for people looking for jobs with the TSA (tsajobs.tsa.dhs.gov) which states:

This is a Federal computer system and is the property of the United States Government. It is for authorized use only. Users (authorized or unauthorized) have no explicit or implicit expectation of privacy. Any or all uses of this system, associated connected systems and all files may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized site, Transportation Security Administration, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign. By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring, recording, copying, auditing, inspection, and disclosure at the discretion of authorized site or Transportation Security Administration personnel. Unauthorized or improper use of this system may result in administrative disciplinary action and civil and criminal penalties. By continuing to use this system you indicate your awareness of and consent to these terms and conditions of use. LOG OFF IMMEDIATELY if you do not agree to the conditions stated in this warning.
Click to expand...

It's not uncommon to see the above prefaced with something along the lines of :

You are accessing a U.S. Government information system, which includes (1) this computer, (2) this computer network, (3) all computers connected to this network, and (4) all devices and storage media attached to this network or to a computer on this network. This information system is provided for U.S. Government-authorized use only.
Click to expand...

These sorts of agreements have been in place since the dawn of the internet... the nerd in me gets a kick out of the sudden uproar over it because some sensationalist talking head brought it up.
 
mjrubino said:
...Once you terminate the connection, your computer ceases to be part of the "federal computer system".
Click to expand...

Here you are assuming it ceases to be, the only way for sure is if it is not connected to any network, e.g an active ISP connection. Your system has no wireless or cable connected connection.

For my money it probably is not being looked at from Cars... I myself do not worry, but by just not being connected to cars.. does not mean one cannot be looked at.

But, if someone wishes to look (Homeland Security, NSA, etc), well now they have all of the necessary information to do so. :huh:
 
fc3 said:
Different perspective on cash for clunkers.

Don't know who the lady is speaking at the start of the video, but she should be president. Sounds like she has a far better grasp on reality than Osama.

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=GduzSUSU8z#

Best regards,
Frank
Click to expand...

AMEN.
and
AMEN!

This CFC crap is just another in the long line of handouts and bailouts for the f'ing auto industry. Like that industry is the ONLY one hurting. Gimme a break! I'm so sick and tired of hearing about the auto industry and how important IT is. Bullsh**.

Hey- I want a new big screen. Howzabout a new laptop? Why not throw some gubmint money at that stuff- I'm sure those industries would appreciate it! I don't need a new car- unfortunately for me, I bought one less than a year ago. So in the interest of fairness, where's my $$, Osama?

This administration is spending our kids' money like an outta control teenager. Makes me sick.
 
The whole Program “Cash for Clunkers’ "C4C" has caught America’s imagination and driven them to dealerships to trade in older low MPG vehicles for newer efficient models.

The program was tapped out of $1Billon dollar sin rebates in a single week. Now the Senate is considering adding another $2Billion to the program to keep it alive. Good or Bad Idea?

My take on the program is it was good use of stimulus money and would serve to jump start the economy quickly. While a repair and replacing aging and dangerous bridges across America is import infrastructure work, it is long term, and creates few jobs in the near 2 year period. Helpful on employment over time yes, but to put chickens in the pot today, pretty fruitless effort. C4C program serves to clear out the inventory of high MPG models, gets drowning dealership humming again, gets the financee industry cooking and the yes ever scrap dealers who are disposing of these old cars are cooking in the recycling them. Over all I like the C4C plan and think it should be funded, not for Green reasons but for economic stimulus reasons.

However, we also must look at the costs here. Rebates have long been the tool of the auto industry to get sales moving … essentially put dropping the price. But not really, when a dealer sold you a care for $20k on a finance note, and then sent you a rebate, they were doing what ? Giving you back your own money which you needed to repay to the finance company, a shell game actually and a ruse to keep the finance note high, distract the consumer from real costs in the purchase contract. The Federal Government now owning GM and needed to get AFL/CIO auto workers back on the lines has stepped up and is giving real cash incentives, not rebates. This C4C deal is “Cut your very best dea”l and get a check from Uncle Sam. This deal is different. You don’t repay this money to a finance company. But you do pay it back. Why, well the money paid for the C4C is being borrowed and those Federal reserve Loans have to be repaid to the investors that lent the money. We as a society will have to pay up in taxes to jumpstart car sales now. That is the tough one, but the assumption we can make is we can afford higher taxes in a growth economy.

That this stimulus component has a green component is also good. Reducing fuel consumption and hence fuel imports is good for America in concept. The sooner we reduce consumption the better our position and strength will be. C4C heads us towards that goal. Another good point for its maintenance for now.

On balance I’m in support of C4C and because it doesn’t limit freedom, choice or divide the nation through class distinctions, I’m liking it a lot and beats the heck out of bridges to no where.
 
I found this interesting.


Lurita Doan
- FOXNews.com
- August 05, 2009
Guess What 'Cash for Clunkers' Is Costing You


Before Congress allocates further funding to the "clunker" program, they should demand an audit of the full cost of the program. Washington is busy patting itself on the back for the cash for clunkers program. Congress, meanwhile, is preparing to pour another $2 billion into the program. Spurred by government stimulus rebates of up to $4,500 per clunker, folks are rushing to car dealers to get a piece of the action. Yet, what no one in Washington is talking about is the actual cost to taxpayers of each clunker. Certainly, it's more than $4,500 per car.

Reading the C.A.R.S. "clunker" legislation, the program details reveal that a significant amount of the $1 billion program's funding is used by Department of Transportation (DOT) to administer the program.

First, DOT created and staffed an entirely new organization with three divisions to administer the clunkers program.

Second, the funding was allocated to cover extensive Help Desk telephonic support, promotional materials, mailers, travel, Web site development and maintenance. Plus, extensive administrative and managerial staffing was also funded. There is staffing to manage the contracts, to review the auto dealer submissions, to develop Executive Branch and Congressional reporting, and to provide investigatory oversight for the program.

Federal government staffing for 3 divisions doesn't come cheaply. Add to it other administrative and overhead costs for office space, telecommunications, power, equipment and furniture, as well as costs for meetings, photocopying, paper, pens, help desk support. When the government's costs of running the program are totaled up, each clunker is likely to cost taxpayers around $6,000 per car.

And there's more: A quick look just at staffing reveals staggering costs. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was given approval to staff up for the completion of a series of four Forms connected with the program (Forms 1070, 1071, 1073 and 1075). Estimated staffing for these 4 reports was 160,353 man hours, or approximately 78 employees.

These 78 employees might be contracted out with a private sector vendor (which thepPresident has made clear is not a choice he prefers). Or, they may be pulled from existing projects, which increases the execution risks for those assignments (perhaps critical infrastructure?). Or, the government might hire new employees. At a fully loaded cost, including all compensation and benefits, that works out to approximately $150,000 per employee.

Even the most modest estimate means that DOT will have used approximately $12 million of the funds from the clunker program just to handle 4 of the forms for car dealers. Of course, there are many more forms connected with the clunker program. Get the picture?

Then there is the government's Help Desk Support, which is usually provided by the private sector and often funded on a per call basis. But, often minimum values are built into each contract, protecting the help desk provider, who must man the phones, regardless of calls received. If DOT uses an existing government vendor, contracts would still have to be modified to add funding and requirements for this new task, which requires the efforts of contracting officers, program managers and administrative support.

The administrative costs are huge on the record keeping side also. The law states that the records have to be kept for a period of five years, which would involve storage of hard copies and electronic media. One of the off-site record storage entities would need their government contract modified to add funding for this new task.

Clunker funding was used to develop the official Web site (www.cars.gov), but also, undoubtedly, the contract has an ongoing requirement to support the Web site and its transactions. The cost for the Recovery.gov Web site contract was approximately $18 million to upgrade and modify an existing Web site -- so, one can only imagine what the price tag is on a rush-job, creating a robust Web site, capable of handling millions of hits, as well as forms processing and data storage.

Add up all the various government costs of administrating the program and it will likely come to several hundred million dollars, which makes the true taxpayer cost of each clunker approximately $6,000.

In addition to the high costs comes tremendous execution risk in the Clunker program and the likelihood of fraud. Perhaps, one of the most disturbing parts of the Clunker program is that the recipient of the $4,500 doesn't need to provide a Social Security number. So, it is possible for illegal immigrants, as well as resourceful folks from Canada and Mexico, to cross our borders, trade in their clunkers, and get American taxpayer dollars. But don't expect anyone in Congress to admit that taxpayers are paying around $6,000 to provide a $4,500 rebate for a foreigner or illegal immigrant to buy a new car.

Before Congress allocates further funding to the "clunker" program, they should demand an audit of the full cost of the program. This time, Congress should insist upon learning the full administrative and overhead costs of DOT to run the program, with special consideration to the long term costs associated with federal employees to run a program of short duration. More interesting, still, would be an audit to determine how many non-American citizens are participating in the program. Once Americans get some transparency on those numbers, we will have a much better understanding of the clunker program and will be better able to determine its success.

When Americans find out just how much this program is costing, and where the benefits are going, watch the enthusiasm evaporate.

Lurita Doan is the former Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration and commentator for Federal News Radio 1500AM.
 
mjrubino said:
That's the key part everyone seems to skim over when freaking out about how the government now owns their computer just because they went to the CARS website. Once you terminate the connection, your computer ceases to be part of the "federal computer system".

It's pretty standard verbage for a government website's terms of use.

Here's the usage agreement from the website for people looking for jobs with the TSA (tsajobs.tsa.dhs.gov) which states:



It's not uncommon to see the above prefaced with something along the lines of :



These sorts of agreements have been in place since the dawn of the internet... the nerd in me gets a kick out of the sudden uproar over it because some sensationalist talking head brought it up.
Click to expand...

yup... so standard in fact that the CARS program administrators announced that they are "revisiting the verbiage" .. well isn't that curious. Shine a bit of light on these nefarious programs and low and behold they get "revised"
 
First of all. In my view, this is just rewarding more bad behavior. The economy was killed by too many people buying crap they couldn't afford. So folks like me keep older cars and trucks to aviod the payments and live comfortable (2 years ago) Now if I had payments it all would have been reposessed! Now big brother says trade in the Old Ford truck and get a Honda....that you can't afford.
So if you bought a car with C4C money. THANK ME FOR BUYING IT FOR YOU!!! as a happily drive away in my still paid for Ford and Cadillac! Clunkers my ass!
 
highslice said:
I hate the damn program. But since it already exists, shouldn't we limit it to domestic cars? Anybody else uncomfortable with your tax dollars being used to help foreign automakers sell cars?:smt021
Click to expand...

Amen Brother.....+1:thumbsup:

How about a deal for "Clunker Boats"? What the hell...why not?:huh:
 
Last edited:
sprink56 said:
Amen Brother.....+1:thumbsup:

How about a deal for "Clunker Boats"? What the hell...why not?:huh:
Click to expand...

I could get an extra $35,000 for trading my gas-guzzling 340 for a diesel sipping 420.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,184
Messages
1,428,135
Members
61,094
Latest member
Linword
Back
Top