Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions27,119
- Orphaned Marques
- ↳ Hudson21,185
- ↳ Street Rods805
- ↳ Off Topic564
- ↳ American Motors149
- ↳ Kaiser - Frazer70
- ↳ Nash71
- ↳ Packard163
- ↳ Studebaker121
- Classic American Cars
- ↳ Ford Motor Company959
- ↳ Chrysler Corporation478
- ↳ GM Corporation1,394
- ↳ Post War Chevrolets75
- ↳ Pontiac Forum119
- General
- ↳ All makes1,961
- ↳ Poll Discussions24
- Swapmeets & Events
- ↳ Events130
- ↳ Swapmeets108
- Hot Rod Corner
- ↳ Ford Rods90
- ↳ Lead Sleds67
- Special Interest Groups
- ↳ The Flathead Forum139
- European marques
- ↳ MG Car Company2
- ↳ Mercedes-Benz2
In this Discussion
- 1049superg January 2009
- 39CCl8 January 2009
- 46HudsonPU January 2009
- BJ__TN January 2009
- Clutch guy January 2009
- Dave53-7C January 2009
- Harry Hill January 2009
- Heart Of Texas January 2009
- hudsontech January 2009
- Jon B January 2009
- MikeWA January 2009
- rambos_ride January 2009
- Ray January 2009
- Ron P January 2009
- tombia January 2009
Bill for getting rid of old cars
-
I'm not sure if this is the same as the previous bill that was discussed on the forum about a week ago but regardless it seems like another well intentioned but bad piece of legislation. Let em know what you think.
http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=d6137935-0a4f-1ab7-ddb4-8a1760ea170c -
Aaron D. IL wrote:I'm not sure if this is the same as the previous bill that was discussed on the forum about a week ago but regardless it seems like another well intentioned but bad piece of legislation. Let em know what you think.
http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=d6137935-0a4f-1ab7-ddb4-8a1760ea170c
Don't be fooled by this crazy legislation!! How much oil and other "ozone depleting gases"does it take to make a new Plastic car?.:eek::rolleyes: -
$2500 to $4500 vouchers to help buy a "new" car - About all that would buy these days is another clunker.
Hudsonly,
Alex Burr
Memphis, TN -
People who drive clunkers may not have the finanical or credit resources to buy a new car, even with a voucher.
-
The same people who created the predicament the country is in now by loaning money to people who couldn't qualify for a home loan will now push to qualify people who can't afford to buy a car. The same crooked or stupid politicians will push people to get even deeper in debt while making the big three richer and we tax payers will keep having to bail everyone out. I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said we have to prevent the bankers from getting control of the country or the country will be doomed. How prophetic of him to see that over two hundred years ago, or maybe what was true then is still true today. I'll keep my clunker and stay out of debt thank you.
Harry -
I wonder if my 2002 Toyota Camry with 158,000 miles on it (and still going strong) qualifies as a "clunker" under this proposed give away government program?
-
1049superg wrote:I wonder if my 2002 Toyota Camry with 158,000 miles on it (and still going strong) qualifies as a "clunker" under this proposed give away government program?
Yes, but only if it is driveable, gets under 18mpg and has been registered for the past 120 days. -
Its ridiculous to assume that those who drove clunkers can suddenly afford a new car if given a credit for the clunker. People whose clunker dies will buy another, but slightly better, clunker. Just another example of how profoundly ingorant our lawmakers are.
In other news:
Despite huge rebates and "incentives", the auto industry is unable to sell new cars, because those who can afford them are "hunkerin' down" in the present economy until they're sure they have jobs for the long term, and until their fractured 401k's recover. But, I'm happy to report, GM has found a solution! They had their finance arm, GMAC, declared a "bank" so they could get some TARP money; then, shades of the mortgage meltdown, lowered their credit score requirement for financing from 700 to 620 (actual numbers may be slightly different). For it is a maxim of business that if you can't get the smart money to buy, furnish some dumb money to folks, and they will! So now, in the spirit of the folks who couldn't pay their mortgage payments, we'll get folks who can't make their car payments. Cars will get reposessed (and financing losses covered by TARP money), and resold at used car prices (which is probably more like what they were actually worth in the first place). But the main goal is achieved- getting those new cars off the lot! So, we now have the answer to GM's question, "Who will buy our cars?" The answer is, in a roundabout way, THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER! -
Mike (WA) wrote:Its ridiculous to assume that those who drove clunkers can suddenly afford a new car if given a credit for the clunker. People whose clunker dies will buy another, but slightly better, clunker. Just another example of how profoundly ingorant our lawmakers are.
In other news:
Despite huge rebates and "incentives", the auto industry is unable to sell new cars, because those who can afford them are "hunkerin' down" in the present economy until they're sure they have jobs for the long term, and until their fractured 401k's recover. But, I'm happy to report, GM has found a solution! They had their finance arm, GMAC, declared a "bank" so they could get some TARP money; then, shades of the mortgage meltdown, lowered their credit score requirement for financing from 700 to 620 (actual numbers may be slightly different). For it is a maxim of business that if you can't get the smart money to buy, furnish some dumb money to folks, and they will! So now, in the spirit of the folks who couldn't pay their mortgage payments, we'll get folks who can't make their car payments. Cars will get reposessed (and financing losses covered by TARP money), and resold at used car prices (which is probably more like what they were actually worth in the first place). But the main goal is achieved- getting those new cars off the lot! So, we now have the answer to GM's question, "Who will buy our cars?" The answer is, in a roundabout way, THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER!
I agree with mike prices are too high regardless - I for one, will NEVER spend more than 15k on ANY car, truck, boat or other mode of convieyance. So, If all I could ever buy new is an econo-box-death-trap - I'll pass.
I feel the economy, markets and such are doing what they normally do - cycle down every 8-12 years - before ramping back up.
But somehow our current crop of "idiots in charge" can't stand to think of any economic downturn (it might effect their chances of re-election) and therefore government "is the only one who can get us out of this"
BHO didn't win by a huge majority - 55 million DIDN'T vote for him - so,
I'm starting to understand this huge economic downturn started when conservative folks started realizing McCain didn't have a chance to win in this charged-up-political-climate and they started to pull their investments out of Housing, Stocks, Energy on the fears of Liberal, high-tax policies coming down the pike...seems our fears are justified.
Just 18 months ago when they sent out the 1st "stimulus" checks -
BHO was lambasting the Bush Administration for adding 160 Billion to the deficit...but somehow now "the one" is telling us that 1 TRILLION more won't hurt??? WTF??? :confused:
I'd laugh, if I wasn't crying so much :mad:
-
Dan,
While you're on a roll, don't forget who's spending $150 million ($110 million paid for by us) for a self indulgent bash...shame, shame. -
Dave53-7C wrote:Dan,
While you're on a roll, don't forget who's spending $150 million ($110 million paid for by us) for a self indulgent bash...shame, shame.
LOL - yeah - we're in the worst economic crisis since the great depression, so I guess unemployment is up around 20% right?
Yet somehow it's OK to outspend the last PI by 100 million because it's "mostly paid by private donars"
The writing was on the walls during the debates when BHO commented that 18 billion in earmarks was such a small percentage of the budget that it was insiginifcant - this y0-y0's think 18 billion is chump change...Change we need indeed
:mad: -
I've got the change you need, $150 million worth! And all while some are losing their jobs, cars and homes...for shame.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1400353/record_setting_150_million_dollar_inauguration.html?cat=9 -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Keep_My_Guns_Free_12324559331001137.jpg960 x 394 - 48K -
In light of the change we are about to embark on tomorrow, keep your life preservers close as the change is a tidal wave of spending. The pent up demands of those who have been waiting for the chance to steal the rest of debt funds has been unleashed!
-
How much change can there be when everyone of his appointees and cabinet members will be the same old Washington crowd? Selected from the Clinton administration, and Democratic Big wigs that helped create the problem.......One thing for sure about Washington DC. Every 4 years there IS NO change.
Bob -
Fellows. Are not your Republican rants and raving supposed to be on the descussion forum? Not on here.
-
Tom, Not ranting or raving Just stating a FACT. Republican or Democrat, names change but still the same old faces, no change. That said, You probably are right.
Have a nice day!
Bob -
Okay, this is trending more towards a political discussion than a helpful Hudson talk, so I'm moving over to the Discussions group.
--Jon-B -
Back to the issue at hand...
Here is the link to the issue, posted on the SEMA Action Network website:
http://echo.bluehornet.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=2a0e24df6a094fecb259f61ec74d7dee&CID=1440303432&ch=20A3949EA933C10924E29A46A4C25AF4 -
Seriously, I doubt this legislation would have much of a detrimental effect on our hobby.
For 1, It must be limited in overall scope because they're not going to give more than 1 voucher or tax credit per taxpayer.
Most likely the clunker turned in is going be more like an 80.s Ford Granada or 90.s Ford Taurus (sorry to pick on F*$d)
If it was a "bounty" paid on any car, and no limit - I might become concerned. -
-
-
rambos_ride wrote:Seriously, I doubt this legislation would have much of a detrimental effect on our hobby.
For 1, It must be limited in overall scope because they're not going to give more than 1 voucher or tax credit per taxpayer.
Most likely the clunker turned in is going be more like an 80.s Ford Granada or 90.s Ford Taurus (sorry to pick on F*$d)
If it was a "bounty" paid on any car, and no limit - I might become concerned.
I was at the scrap yard about a year and a half ago, and a 1940 Dodge sedan, in nice shape, was being stacked on top of the pile. It sat in the guy's yard for over a year and no one would even give him $500 for it. Everyone wanted to make easy payments, or ask the wife, or couldn't leave the new SUV outside, etc., etc. I've also seen very decent later-model cars that were worth more in scrap than people would pay. Many drove in under their own power. I also saw a fairly decent '63 Galaxie and a '65 Wagoneer that were for sale near my place for about $1200 each. Both ended up on the pile. I certainly would have bought the Dodge had I known it was for sale.
"Clunker" legislation has been tried under both parties (sorry, lefties and righties!) for as long as I can remember and even when it fails local ordinances can force people to scrap these cars. The best way to keep them out of the scrapyard is to pick them up when you have the chance, and get them in the hands of hobbyists who will enjoy them. (Yes, my barns are full of projects!).
