Cash for Clunkers: Good or Bad?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Eredar Warlock

追放されたバカ
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Messages
1,329
Reaction score
1
The Cash for Clunkers initiative is a program that I'm sure you all know about: Trade in your old car and get a rebate towards a new, fuel efficient car. The program has been quite successful, so much so that it's running out of money.

Here's my take. I'm rather cynical of the whole situation. I'm not participating simply for this reason: My car is a perfectly good car. I don't need a new car. But what I see here is simple: People are buying cars that they otherwise wouldn't buy because they have an incentive. That's fine. However, what happens when the program ends? Those cars that sold so well will end up rusting in the lots again.

Here's where I have a problem. Why exactly must these engines be destroyed so utterly? This is where I see something potentially sinister: When a lot of these cars are salvaged, parts that would be otherwise hard to find are saved. If these engines are so utterly destroyed, you cannot salvage and re-use those parts, causing the price of these parts to skyrocket. For those wishing to service their old cars, they find it extremely expensive to do so. In this way, people are forced to buy cars they wouldn't buy otherwise short of the rebates.

Second, who is benefiting from the disassembly of these cars? Where are these car husks going? If they're going to landfills, that's not very environmentally sound, defeating the very purpose for fuel efficient cars.

Any thoughts?
 
The engine have to be destroyed because they're the reason they're considered clunkers. The idea is to get gas guzzling engines off the road and replace them with more efficient engines. As for the parts, engine components are cheaper to make than extract from an engine block. All the other parts are removed and sold to used parts deals. The scrap metal is going to be recycled (likely in China) to make metal for new cars.

I do have to agree that when this program ends car sails will fall again. Unfortunately, people can't afford new cars without something like this.

I have good car too, despite it being twenty-years old. I might have considered turning it in, but it's as fuel efficient as your average, modern Toyota.
 
Well this program has been a success by most accounts. But Yeah, most of the car's parts will probably be recycled back in China...as is most of the stuff in the US is. =/

But meh, dealers need to get cars out of the lot, people want new cars, and we want a cleaner environment. So it's fine. ^_^
 
Arcane Mind said:
People are buying cars that they otherwise wouldn't buy because they have an incentive.
Click to expand...

My problem is just that. You're offering incentive for people to get more loans that they shouldn't get and/or probably can't afford. Only this time it's for a car instead of a house. Clearly we have not learned from our mortgage lending that got us into this whole economic mess...
 
The program is certainly doing what it's intended to do. It's a good idea but things like this really show how much better stricter MPG standards would be; if we just mandated that all cars must get 22mpg or greater by 2020 unless they had an exemption sticker, people would whine, and the car companies would innovate, and we'd be fine.

Remember, the car companies said that mandating seat belts would bankrupt them, way back when.
 
evkl, for that, I completely agree with you. The technology for better gas mileage or alternative fuels is there, it's just not being used or even encouraged. It's also why I support things like the Auto X Prize. I hope that one day I will be driving a car with either 100+ mpg or an alternative fuel that was inspired by that competition.
 
I hold no opinion either way, I currently drive a relatively new car (2004 van in the winter, regular 2007 car in the summer). Both get good mileage, with the regular car having around 30 mph on the highway.

I too can't wait for a 100 mpg car, or a car that runs off of oil made by algae.
 
A car with a very high mpg would be great, but it would take a lot before I get myself into debt when I could instead drive my 1993 Lincoln Town Car that I got for free. To be honest, I could get around 22mpg highway, but city mileage is quite a bit lower.
 
It's 18 combined or lower. So, unless your car gets 14 mpg city or worse, it wouldn't qualify anyway.
 
Ahh good, I definitely wouldn't qualify.
 
the gadfly said:
To prevent the dealers from reselling them.
Click to expand...

Why?

For that matter, why is it that cars recently have become so complex, that you can no longer fix them yourself? Are car shops part of auto unions, or something? Are they benefiting from this?

This is why I'm rather cynical. I don't trust the unions. I otherwise really don't care, because I have no reason to participate. the one "clunker" I own is an old truck that I rarely use.
 
Arcane Mind said:
For that matter, why is it that cars recently have become so complex, that you can no longer fix them yourself? Are car shops part of auto unions, or something? Are they benefiting from this?
Click to expand...

Because the United Socialist States of America, pushed by the commie state of California, decided auto manufacturers should make cars that polluted less, got better fuel mileage and protected the people inside better.

Yeah, I know. What were they thinking?
 
Arcane Mind said:
For that matter, why is it that cars recently have become so complex, that you can no longer fix them yourself? Are car shops part of auto unions, or something? Are they benefiting from this?
Click to expand...
Paranoid much? What's next, a member of the evil UAW is hiding in every trash can, waiting to steal your first born?

They can't sell the engines because the whole point of this exercise is to get these engines off the road. That's why they can't resell them.

As for complexity, it's the same thing that's happened to all technology.
 
Al, it's pretty obvious that Arcane Mind is being sarcastic.

...at least, he better be. [/ass-covering disclaimer]
 
Only partially. My uncle is a certified mechanic and can fix cars himself anyway. A friend of mine happens to build planes from scratch as a hobby, so he knows engines, too. I am concerned, however, that some states or cities have laws stating that cars must be fixed at certified shops. My uncle works for the gold mines, he's not part of a shop.
 
I think the gov't is wasting their time. I would say this idea is in between good and bad.
 
I like that it is boosting the economy, but they really should make you buy like smaller cars instead of gas guzzlers (read where it said pickups and "Work Trucks", they said to just trade them in for newer ones.)

And also, in case you havent seen it, This is exactly what they do to the clunker engines.. Which creates pollution.

And either way, the winners are the automakers and the metal scrappers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom