Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

BadKosh · 10:27 AM

Where did all the money go? Corruption? "administration fees" ? This seems like a crock to me. If this is any hint as to how poorly thought out the rest of Obamas schemes will end up, they need to stop everything.

Linky:

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...10/620000657/1

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/auto...ysis/index.htm

Laminar · Oct 30, 2009, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by BadKosh

If this is any hint as to how poorly thought out the rest of Obamas schemes will end up, they need to stop everything.

HOLY **** DID YOUR ZERO KEY FINALLY BREAK FROM OVERUSE? allcaps
And your apostrophe key as well?

Doofy · Oct 30, 2009, 10:36 AM

OK, that's it.

I'm issuing a "head for the hills" warning for the US. Anyone who understands what I'm saying, take note. The rest of you just carry on.

ort888 · 11:02 AM

That's some fuzzy ****ing math.

I was thinking it was going to be something like government bureaucracy made the entire program costs so much that $24,000 of government money was spent for every $4,500 given to an actual consumer... but no.

25% spike in sales does not mean that you can just dump all the money on that last 25% to make a scary number that plays well in sound bites. It's just stupid. That's just not how it works.

But I guess if you wake up every morning and comb thru news stories in an feverous effort to find something about terrible about 0bama that is going to pump up your pre-conceived perceptions on him, then this is as good as anything.

OMG OMG OMG

Cash for clunkers was $24,000 per CAR! Did you hear? $24,000 per car. Can you believe it? $24,000! That 0bama sure is terrible.

(Sounds like that's exactly what you did BadKosh. Corruption? Fees? Did you actually read the article, or were you in to big of a hurry to post it on here and go neener neener neener?)

The Final Dakar · Oct 30, 2009, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by BadKosh

Where did all the money go? Corruption? "administration fees" ? This seems like a crock to me. If this is any hint as to how poorly thought out the rest of Obamas schemes will end up, they need to stop everything.

Linky:

Taxpayers' real cost of cash for clunkers: $24,000 a car, Edmunds.com analysis says - Drive On: A conversation about the cars and trucks we drive - USATODAY.com

Cash for Clunkers costs taxpayers $24,000 per car - Oct. 28, 2009

Hey remember your "Opinion stated as fact"?

I present Exhibit A.

Dork. · Oct 30, 2009, 11:01 AM

It's not even Opinion Stated as Fact. It's "Incorrect conclusion stated as fact".

The Edmunds article was up-front about how it did its analysis. Anyone who reads that article and thinks that all the money "disappeared" simply cannot comprehend English. (Or is posting in a knee-jerk fashion without actually reading the article).

For those of you disinclined to read the article, Edmunds estimated the number of Cash for Clunkers sales that they think would have been made without the incentive, took them out of the equation, and allocated the whole cost of Cash for Clunkers across the reduced sales pool. This evaluates the program strictly as new sales generated for the Auto industry, and that's how they get the $24000 figure. A valid analysis (if you accept their fundamental estimate), which the OP badly misreads.

nonhuman · Oct 30, 2009, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

OK, that's it.

I'm issuing a "head for the hills" warning for the US. Anyone who understands what I'm saying, take note. The rest of you just carry on.

Any advice on which hills one might want to head for?

Laminar · Oct 30, 2009, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Any advice on which hills one might want to head for?

Not any hills where the IRS can get to you lolololol

The Final Dakar · Oct 30, 2009, 11:15 AM

lulz

ShortcutToMoncton · Oct 30, 2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Any advice on which hills one might want to head for?

Those isolated British hills

Doofy · Oct 30, 2009, 12:11 PM

.

Originally Posted by doofy

the rest of you just carry on.

Laminar · Oct 30, 2009, 02:48 PM

nonhuman · Oct 30, 2009, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Those isolated British hills

You mean the ones where the local council is empowered to place you under covert surveillance to find out if you're breaking the law and it's considered to not be an invasion of your privacy?

ghporter · Oct 30, 2009, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

You mean the ones where the local council is empowered to place you under covert surveillance to find out if you're breaking the law and it's considered to not be an invasion of your privacy?

That would be "all of them" then, wouldn't it.

I don't think Edmonds has any sort of magic glasses that lets them figure out "which sales would have been done anyway" during the program; car sales here were amazingly brisk during the program, and I'm sure the increase was due to the program. That increase over the norm for sales in that period is the more accurate number to use to evaluate the effect on the recession and thus the final numbers.

hyteckit · Oct 30, 2009, 05:44 PM

Damn liberal media.

Rumor · Oct 30, 2009, 08:19 PM

I can't wait for the OP to come back. The dodging, twisting, and backpeddling should be entertaining.

BadKosh · Nov 1, 2009, 06:55 PM

You're right. The numerous articles I read all questioned the 24K number. I kept getting about 4700 per car when I did the simple math. I read some 'experts' defending the 24K for 125K cars they claim were due to JUST because of C4C, claiming the rest would have been sold anyway. Yeah, I fell for a headlyin' (instead of headline). The program, like tampering in the automotive industry was still a mistake, and the carmakers should have gone bankrupt. I still blame the unions hostile attitudes and the boneheads who manage the companies equally. They all need to be in different industries - like selling hotdogs on the corner.

besson3c · Nov 1, 2009, 07:36 PM

BadKosh: is it okay if I spell your name as "BadK0sh"? You kind of own the zero around here.

nonhuman · Nov 1, 2009, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

That would be "all of them" then, wouldn't it.

I don't think Edmonds has any sort of magic glasses that lets them figure out "which sales would have been done anyway" during the program; car sales here were amazingly brisk during the program, and I'm sure the increase was due to the program. That increase over the norm for sales in that period is the more accurate number to use to evaluate the effect on the recession and thus the final numbers.

Oh absolutely. Cash for Clunkers was absolutely a good thing for car dealerships, and it certainly helped put a lot of people in more expensive cars than they otherwise would have bought. However I'm not sure that there was an increase over the norm. Certainly there was a spike in sales for this year, but this year was severely lagging behind the average. That coupled with the fact that all that money is going to have to come out of our taxes eventually makes me very skeptical of any claims that the program actually produced any serious benefits.

ghporter · Nov 1, 2009, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Oh absolutely. Cash for Clunkers was absolutely a good thing for car dealerships, and it certainly helped put a lot of people in more expensive cars than they otherwise would have bought. However I'm not sure that there was an increase over the norm. Certainly there was a spike in sales for this year, but this year was severely lagging behind the average. That coupled with the fact that all that money is going to have to come out of our taxes eventually makes me very skeptical of any claims that the program actually produced any serious benefits.

Everything I've read in my local area says that there WAS a noticeable increase over what could have been expected for that period without the recession. Not a huge increase, but noticeable. And when compared to the months before the program started, the increase was VERY big. There are a bunch of dealers in the San Antonio area that would have gone under if people had kept staying away from buying a car.

Another benefit is that there are thousands of really crappy old cars OFF THE ROAD here. I don't have to worry nearly as much about a muffler falling off in front of me, or not being able to see through the cloud of smoke from the '79 Riveria in front of me pulling away from a light.

nonhuman · Nov 1, 2009, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Everything I've read in my local area says that there WAS a noticeable increase over what could have been expected for that period without the recession. Not a huge increase, but noticeable. And when compared to the months before the program started, the increase was VERY big. There are a bunch of dealers in the San Antonio area that would have gone under if people had kept staying away from buying a car.

It's entirely possible, I just haven't looked at the numbers. It's also the sort of thing that will vary wildly by region as people in some areas are much less likely to have clunkers than people in others...

I'm curious though, so I'll see if I can find some time to take a look at the sales numbers tomorrow.

BadKosh · Nov 2, 2009, 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

BadKosh: is it okay if I spell your name as "BadK0sh"? You kind of own the zero around here.

Sure , I haven't been using the ZERO for a week or so , so I guess you can have it back.