Attorney · Raleigh, NC · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
Isn't this surprising out of a Chicago politician? The administration refuses to release data on the "success" of the program, but is telling congress it needs more funding.
I don't know about you but when I go to a bank for funding and refuse to give them data on my past performance - it works like a charm. :roll:
In a way....why not? If congress isn't going to even read legislation before spending money then why should they give a rip about whether or not the legislation is working before spending more money on it?
I'm getting the feeling that some people in the media are getting a guilty conscience.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Many countries in Europe have instituted a similar program a while back. It boosted auto sales, nobody denies that. And everything that comes along with it. But they can all be wrong, since they're socialists, and we stand tall and proud to be right.
Anywho, the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of such program can probably be measured in a matter of years, so the solution is to put off until then extending it? The one certainty for now is its success, exhausted its funds in just about a week or so. On a personal note, I think it's more effective than the ginormous amounts were pumped in the banks just to push them in the black, with no tangible results to the end user. At least this one has such a thing.
BiggerPockets Founder · HI · Member since 2008 · 16k+ posts · 5k+ votes
17y
Am I the only one who thinks that we should set benchmarks for determining just what exactly "effectiveness" means when it comes to programs like this, Tarp, etc.?
How are we to truly know if it has, in fact, been effective (even if the govt. did decide to release the numbers)?
Real Estate Investor · Las Vegas, NV · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 447 votes
17y
Originally posted by Joshua Dorkin:
How are we to truly know if it has, in fact, been effective
Oh come on now Josh, it's effective because our fearless leader says it is. It's just like all those jobs that have been "created or saved", if Big O says it's so the sheeple will believe it.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
a benchmark to measure their effectiveness would be awesome. I'd like to see that applied to many areas (banks comes to mind first but others also) but I'm afraid the numbers would be twisted to show whatever the producer(s) of that report want them to show. No matter which direction the report comes from - right or left.
As far as the sheeple being lied to, that's a non partisan issue also, we're just so used to being lied to, it hardly matters anymore. With the risk of being slapped again, just look at the past 8 yrs, and the other 8 before that, and so on. It's part of the culture, being lied to, like watching a mountain dew or bud light commercial. Does anyone believe drinking mt dew makes you strong enough to butt heads with a buffalo or drinking bud light brings you 72 scantily dressed women? But it's so engrained in the culture, we accept it tacitly - and smile. Same with the politicians lying, misleading, deceiving. Realistically, does anyone expect them not to? And that's across the globe, not just here. It's just a matter of getting caught, and twisting the results, so ultimately interpretation...
Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
17y
I heard one of the congressmen yesterday say that the actual cost of the clunkers program might be $40,000 per car - although I don't know how that really makes sense.
Speaking of effectiveness, I would like to know if destroying perfectly good clunkers actually does anything to improve the environment. Yes, the new cars get a little better gas mileage, but what does it take (environmentally speaking) to manufacture those cars; destroy the clunkers, destroy all the parts which could have been recycled, etc.
Furthermore, I would like to know how effective the clunkers program is at enslaving those lease able to afford it with more debt. Is that really a good thing?
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Originally posted by MikeOH:
Speaking of effectiveness, I would like to know if destroying perfectly good clunkers actually does anything to improve the environment.
Mike
I think it's pretty much on par with trashing a perfectly functional (but outdated) kitchen/bath in order to install latest maple cabinets w/ granite countertops. Or trashing the old white appliances because they had rounded corners and replace them with en vogue stainless steel ones (or red).
It's the American way.
At least on a car one could argue the newer one is more efficient which is hardly the case with a new kitchen for example. Debatable on the appliances.
Real Estate Investor · North Central Arkansas · Member since 2009 · 509 posts · 178 votes
17y
Originally posted by Sorin T:
Originally posted by MikeOH:
Speaking of effectiveness, I would like to know if destroying perfectly good clunkers actually does anything to improve the environment.
Mike
I think it's pretty much on par with trashing a perfectly functional (but outdated) kitchen/bath in order to install latest maple cabinets w/ granite countertops. Or trashing the old white appliances because they had rounded corners and replace them with en vogue stainless steel ones (or red).
It's the American way.
At least on a car one could argue the newer one is more efficient which is hardly the case with a new kitchen for example. Debatable on the appliances.
This is a ridiculous comparison. Tax dollars do not go towards remodeling your kitchen. This program is a joke.
As far as the "It's the American way" comment....What do you care if someone wants to spend their hard earned money on making their home nicer? It's better then sending it to the black hole in Washington.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
My comment was pointing just the tendency of replacing perfectly functional but outdated items with newer ones, the finest of consumerism, specific to not many countries beside this one. It's what got the economy going for many years. Ours and the Chinese.
I was not referring to tax subsidies, etc.
As far as this program being a joke, a lot of the same countries in Europe have had the same sense of humor way before here and for a lot longer than a few weeks. I remember seeing it when I visited there as far back as 2-3 yrs ago. The joke seems to be working OK for them otherwise they would've discontinued it.
Real Estate Investor · North Central Arkansas · Member since 2009 · 509 posts · 178 votes
17y
Originally posted by Sorin T:
My comment was pointing just the tendency of replacing perfectly functional but outdated items with newer ones, the finest of consumerism, specific to not many countries beside this one. Not about tax subsidies, etc.
Again, what do you care? It's not your money. Even if this program was not tax funded it would still be a joke. As far as "consumerism" goes, that's another topic but very important to the economy. You can bash it all you want but that is how the economy grows.
And BTW, What do you think this program is doing? Besides the replacements being more fuel efficient, they are doing the same thing by replacing old outdated items with newer ones.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Jeff, I'm not bashing the consumerism, I'm stating a fact. It would be hypocritical of me considering I've replaced all my tv/monitors from tube to lcd's and remodeling kitchen is on my list. It's a fact of life, but not common in many other places, yes?
And your 2nd paragraph, yes, we agree, the program is replacing old ones with newer ones. Where did I ever dispute that?
Real Estate Investor · North Central Arkansas · Member since 2009 · 509 posts · 178 votes
17y
Originally posted by Sorin T:
Jeff, I'm not bashing the consumerism, I'm stating a fact. It would be hypocritical of me considering I've replaced all my tv/monitors from tube to lcd's and remodeling kitchen is on my list. It's a fact of life, but not common in many other places, yes?
And your 2nd paragraph, yes, we agree, the program is replacing old ones with newer ones. Where did I ever dispute that?
I guess I'm not seeing an issue here. There are lots of things that we do in the US that are not common in other parts of the world, like sitting by and doing nothing while our govt. steals our money to give it to a "Cash for clunkers" program. Other countries are forced to keep quite while their govt. steals their money, we are not. I don't see the use in comparing the greatest country in the world to other countries.
You didn't dispute the fact of what the program is doing but you do seem to think that somehow printing more money, giving the bill to the tax payers and throwing away running cars is a good thing. The fact that other countries have done similar things and have not canceled the program is not evidence of success.
Bottom line, if this program was a success then Obama would have no issue proving it. In fact, you would see the "proof" all over every liberal news channel and newspaper in the country.
Real Estate Investor · North Central Arkansas · Member since 2009 · 509 posts · 178 votes
17y
Originally posted by Sorin T:
For the record, pumping obscene amounts of money into the greedy banks and into a senseless quagmire, that I consider a joke. But to each, his own.
I agree. Bush started the bailout and Obama is continuing it. Now that is CHANGE!
Cash for clunkers is more of the same. The only difference is this program takes tax payer $ to fund it, then puts the tax payer into debt to pay for their new "fuel efficient" car.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Jeff, does everything around here has to be a partisan, "us vs them" issue? It's ridiculous. I just said I consider this to be beneficial, specially when compared to other amounts that pale by comparison, we spent on banks, and war. And that, regardless of who spent them, and I don't wait for the media, liberal or otherwise to tell me that money have pushed the banks out of the red, I still think it was moronic.
And yes, I too would like to see the benefits of this program quantified but I'm afraid it's too early for that after only a week, and when the real data will be available several months from now, it will probably be twisted to fit some partisan agenda, so I wouldn't put my faith on it. But my gut tells me that it's better than other programs we wasted 100X more money on. And no, I did not benefit from it, I'm only paying for it. Is that fair and balanced?
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Originally posted by Jeff And Cheray Warner:
Other countries are forced to keep quite while their govt. steals their money, we are not. I don't see the use in comparing the greatest country in the world to other countries.
Jeff
I don't think other countries are being "forced" to keep quiet. If you have evidence of that please do provide so.
And I do believe that being humble is a quality (modesty is the crown of kings) and that we, as great as we are, could and would have plenty beneficial things to learn from other places. I guess that's where the views differ.
In today's global world, when you sneeze on one continent and another one catches the flu, the self righteous borderline arrogance that previous admin has displayed plentiful is a depleted, outdated (and dangerous) trait. But that is another discussion.
Investor · colorado springs, CO · Member since 2009 · 283 posts · 45 votes
17y
Originally posted by Jeff And Cheray Warner:
Originally posted by Sorin T:
I don't think other countries are being "forced" to keep quiet. If you have evidence of that please do provide so.
So the people of Cuba are free to speak out against their govt.?
Jeff
C'mon Jeff, now you're being ridiculous. We're talking here about countries in Europe where a similar program is in place for a while. Name one of those that's being forced to keep quiet. I didn't ask if you can find one country on the globe with a totalitarian regime, perhaps you have the questions confused.
P.S Cuba is one place on the planet where "cash for clunkers" would be an astounding success but I doubt you'll be seeing that soon over there.
P.P.S.If we compare ourselves with Cuba, no wonder we come so far ahead. Perhaps we should find more reasonable terms of comparison, other than 3rd world countries. That would be a true test. For the record, I do think this is the best place to be, but comparing ourselves with Cuba is not in our best interest...
Real Estate Investor · North Central Arkansas · Member since 2009 · 509 posts · 178 votes
17y
Your question as stated above was:
"I don't think other countries are being "forced" to keep quiet. If you have evidence of that please do provide so."
You didn't say "Give me evidence of European countries forced to keep quiet. I'm not talking about just Europe, I'm talking about the world and governments all over the world stealing money via taxes from their people, which is why I brought up Cuba.
Cash for clunkers is just one example of govt theft via taxes.