How 'cash for clunkers' could rev our engines

  • Article by: JASON HILL
  • Updated: June 15, 2011 - 9:22 PM

Not just on by getting new cars off the lots, but by bettering fuel efficiency.

  • 56
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
raygunrevoltJun. 15, 11 9:31 PM

Another lame attempt justify another meddling government failure.

46
27
looneylibJun. 15, 11 9:43 PM

Please stop the insanity. Everything government touches it messes up and then they want to fix it with more money. Please - just stop already!

51
28
rvd420Jun. 15, 11 9:44 PM

The biggest failure of the Cash for Clunkers program is that the money went to people who would have bought a new car within a year or two anyways. If the program would have been means based. Then the people who drive older gas guzzlers would have been in a better position to participate in the program. Because the was no means based testing the program helped the wealthy and the well off instead of helping everyone.

46
17
LilBeaverJun. 15, 11 9:44 PM

It would help considerably if the government decides to do this that they make it available only to used vehicles purchased by trading in a vehicle over 10 years old for one no more than 4 years old and having been owned by the purchaser for at least one year!

19
15
best3800Jun. 15, 11 9:55 PM

Last car I bought, I asked the sales manager how cash for clunkers worked for them? They sold every car on the Lot! Got people back buying cars again and helped jump start an industry that's now doing well.

26
33
FrankLJun. 15, 1110:08 PM

Of course if you want people to part with their money to but another vehicle, the best way is to make something that people want to buy. The auto industry has not made enough progress, most of the new models are minor upgrades. Contrary to the naysayers, Americans will buy new technology when it makes sense. Case in point, go try to buy a CRT TV.

17
11
usmc1127Jun. 15, 1110:58 PM

"Cash for Clunkers prevented around 4.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from being emitted into the atmosphere, or about 0.4 percent of US annual vehicle emissions." With no mention of putting how many thousands of Americans into MORE personal debt by tempting them to buy a new car when they had one that was already paid off.

35
23
viktorvaughnJun. 15, 1111:16 PM

Increasing the subsidies of cars will not help us break our oil dependence.

29
13
garagewineJun. 15, 1111:25 PM

Cash for Clunkers was an abject failure. The data on vehicle sales shows that the program did exactly what economists warned it would do -- merely move some sales up by two or three months without affecting overall demand. Because it also caused the idling of many otherwise useful used cars, it also raised the price for the used vehciles that remained, as a recent Strib article uncovered. We don't need a new Cash for Clunkers. Both Bush and Obama signed legislation tightening fuel economy standards for new vehicles, with the latter ratcheting up the fleet average fuel economy to 35 mpg by 2016. The ethanol and petroleum tax breaks should be ended, but the savings should be used to reduce our mammoth deficit, not on more feel-good programs.

47
10
bigticketJun. 15, 1111:52 PM

Cash for clunkers were lauded by democrats at the time because of people gobbling up "free money." But I believe it was determined after the fact that it cost taxpayers about $30,000 per car sold for cars that would not have been purchased without the credit. And to this day the used car market still has not recovered because the prices on used cars have not went down but instead went up and thousands of very viable cars some still worth thousands of dollars having their engines ruined and sent to be parted out (which did happen. If you actually believe the government tracked down all those cars to make sure they were destroyed whole, I have a job for you in the 1986 amensty office in Washington which is still open to this day). Not to mention all the folks who weren't going to buy a car and had no car payment now had a depreciable asset and how many of those eventually ended up with the repo man and back to the banks? There literally was not one good thing about this bill other than those you owned the scrapyards. A complete and total joke. Period.

41
14

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT