It actually hurts the environment more to destroy these cars and make new ones then it would to let the clunkers drive around. Washing to the rescue by making things worse!:(

 

WASHINGTON – Pedal to the metal, Congress sent President Barack Obama legislation Thursday night with an additional $2 billion for "cash for clunkers," the economy-boosting rebate program that caught the fancy of car buyers and instantly increased sales for an auto industry long mired in recession.

 

The Senate approved the money on a 60-37 vote after administration officials said an initial $1 billion had run out in only 10 days. The House voted last week to keep alive the program, which gives consumers up to $4,500 in federal subsidies if they trade in their cars for new, more energy-efficient models.

 

Without action, lawmakers risked a wave of voter discontent as they left the Capitol for a monthlong vacation.

 

"Cash for clunkers has been a proven success," Obama said in a written statement issued shortly after the vote. "The initial transactions are generating a more than 50 percent increase in fuel economy; they are generating $700 to $1000 in annual savings for consumers in reduced gas costs alone, and they are getting the oldest, dirtiest and most air polluting trucks and SUVs off the road for good."

 

Senate supporters of the program hailed its effect on the auto industry — which had its best month in nearly a year in July — as well as its claimed environmental benefits.

 

"The reality is this is a program that has been working. Consumers believe it's working. Small business people believe it's working. People who make steel and aluminum and advertisers ... and everyone who's involved in the larger economic impact of the auto industry believe it is working," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich.

 

The legislation had its share of critics, though, most of them Republicans.

 

"What we're doing is creating debt. ... The bill to pay for those cars is going to come due on our children and grandchildren," said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H.

 

Officials said the program's initial $1 billion probably already has been spent, but a paperwork backlog prevented an accurate accounting. The additional $2 billion is enough to help consumers purchase a half-million more new cars, they added.

 

There was no suspense about the outcome in the Senate, where supporters of the legislation focused their energies on defeating all attempts at amending the measure. Passage of any changes would effectively scuttle "cash for clunkers," they said, since the House has already begun a summer vacation and is not in session to vote on revisions.

 

An attempt by Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, to limit the program to lower and middle-income consumers was jettisoned on a vote of 65-32. Gregg's call for Congress to offset the $2 billion with spending cuts elsewhere also failed, 51-46.

 

On the final vote, 51 Democrats, two independents and seven Republicans supported the bill, while 33 Republicans and four Democrats opposed it.

 

The Senate's debate capped an unusually swift response by lawmakers, who were informed scarcely a week ago that the program was quickly running short of money.

 

The government said Wednesday that more than $775 million of the original funds had been spent, accounting for the sale of nearly 185,000 new vehicles. Administration officials estimate the extra funding will last into Labor Day.

 

Under the program, passenger car owners are eligible for a voucher worth $3,500 if they trade in a vehicle getting 18 miles per gallon or less for a new car getting at least 22 mpg. Vouchers of $4,500 are available for owners who trade in a passenger car getting 18 mpg or less for a model that gets at least 28 mpg.

 

There are similar guidelines for SUVs and pickup trucks.

 

Dealers are barred from reselling the trade-ins and are charged with ensuring their destruction.

 

Jeremy Anwyl, CEO of the auto Web site Edmunds.com, said the unintended result is that vehicle prices are climbing.

 

"What we've created now is a shortage for key models," he said. "Prices are going up dramatically."

 

Hyundai Motor Co. has added a day of production at its Montgomery, Ala., factory, while Ford Motor Co. and GM are considering following suit.

 

Tom Stephens, vice chairman of product development at GM, said in an interview that the company has had spot shortages of compact and midsize cars, which have been popular with consumers jettisoning their clunkers. The company also reported an increase in sales of the Chevrolet HHR small sport utility.

 

"Consumer confidence is really what you need here," Stephens said. "It's hard for them if they don't know if they have a job or a for-sure paycheck to go out and make a major purchase, so I think this is kind of jump-starting some things."

 

The longer-term impact of the program is less clear.

 

"Once these clunker rebates expire, it is over," predicted economist Richard Yamarone of Argus Research. "Consumers are not going to keep buying cars. It is a temporary one-time gimmick, not a long-lasting tonic for the recovery."

 

In the program so far, GM's share of cars sold is largest, accounting for 18.7 percent of new sales. Toyota Motor Corp. followed with 17.9 percent, while Ford had 16 percent. Detroit automakers represented 45.3 percent of the total sales, while Toyota, Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co., all Japanese firms, totaled 36.5 percent.

 

Toyota also has the best-selling new model for traders of clunkers, the Corolla. The Ford Focus, Honda Civic, Toyota Prius and Toyota Camry are also favorites. There is one SUV on the list, the Ford Escape, which also comes in a hybrid model that can get up to 32 mpg. Six of the top-10 selling vehicles are built by foreign manufacturers, but most are built in North America.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090807/ap_on_go_co/us_cash_for_clunkers

 

Converting our homes to higher efficiency heating and cooling systems, better insulation, newer high efficiency appliances and LED lighting would easily cut electric consumption in half. Throw on a few solar panels and you could supply another 25% of the homes power needs. This can be done relatively quickly, using existing technology. We'd suddenly find ourselves with a big excess of electricity, which could power electric cars.

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/clunkers-bill-poised-to-clear-senate-on-thursday-2009-08-06

Eh, at least they're on the right track trying to reward people for making more environmentally-conscious decisions.

Eh, at least they're on the right track trying to reward people for making more environmentally-conscious decisions.

 

By hurting the environment? Hurt it to help it is their policy.

 

Converting our homes to higher efficiency heating and cooling systems, better insulation, newer high efficiency appliances and LED lighting would easily cut electric consumption in half.

 

^Would do more for the cause this does almost nothing. The government could go on a 1 billion dollar campaign to save the life of one tree and you could say its step in the right direction, but much better and efficient efforts can be made.

By hurting the environment? Hurt it to help it is their policy.

 

Well I meant that their 'hearts' were in the right place. I don't expect many gov't decisions to actually work well, but at least they're making an effort. I never expect much from the gov't :shrug:

One thing - the old cars and trucks tend to be the ones that smoke.. I know that because I own one!:laugh3: (a real problem in cities, but not such a big deal in the rural areas..) Obviously more of a way to spur auto sales than save the environment; to do that, we would need elected officials that answer to our needs and broad social values, when in reality they answer to the highest bidder. "Hey, I bought me a senator! Ya, I bought one too!! Now they work for me and you..." (a funny song - somewhere it's gotta be cataloged..)

I think it was Jay who said its mainly about price controls the modern day equivalent of burning crops and slaughtering livestock to raise prices. They're trying to spur auto sales but also keep prices high on used cars. All will come back to bite us because were only taking away future sales and many of the people buying these cars probably can't afford another loan or at least shouldn't get one.

 

Plus they're taking away buying power from other industries, spend 15,000 on a new car, thats 15,000 less you'll spend on other things. If they created wealth not money, then someone could buy a new car and maybe some other things, but what they're doing is shifting the money from one area to anther and from the future to the present.

Either that, or they are trying to get auto sales back up, and keep the auto sector busy.. It's perhaps a way of paying back the donors, and keeping political power - auto workers, auto makers, dealer, etc. - and the cash contributions to campaigns.

Well Nick, at least one good thing comes of it - less rusty parts will be falling off other vehicles in front of you or I on the freeway!:laugh3:

Well Nick, at least one good thing comes of it - less rusty parts will be falling off other vehicles in front of you or I on the freeway!

 

lol not true because its my vehicle that the parts fall off of!

:rolleyes::laugh3: Oh well, - less tailgaters then. (or in Florida, tail-gators?)

Gator tail sounds good, i'm hungry and hyper which sucks because I need to go to bed.

 

How are you doing Chuck, its been a while?

Doing well, Nick, doing well - just been busy with gardening, work, and life in general. Still trying new sounds on the piano, and planing lumber in the shop. How's the summer been going for you?

Its been great except for being broke. I'm meeting a lot of new people, getting things done and making myself proud for once. And I'm finding the Garden to be quite rewarding.

Unemployment is also down a tick, 9.4%. So the stimulus is working, temporarily.

 

Although if you measure it like the government did in the 1990's, it would currently be around 19%. Imagine how high it would be if the govt hadn't saved GE, AIG, etc! Now remember these corporations are all being propped up artificially... and that their eventual collapse (or lack thereof) will end up harming the economy even more than it would have if the government hadn't done anything. This fall (autumn, too) will be fascinating!

 

Another interesting tidbit I read is that the amount of money being taken from savings and put into the stock market isn't nearly as much as the amount equities have risen by... indicating that much of the rise in stocks has been due to stimulus cash handed out by the Federal Reserve. Equities are always the first thing to go up in an inflationary environment.

 

I really do hope healthcare gets passed. I know the Republicans are making a stink about it, but it's for the good of the country. You might as well make America's bankruptcy quick, so it's less painful and drawn-out.

Unemployment is also down a tick, 9.4%. So the stimulus is working, temporarily.

 

Although if you measure it like the government did in the 1990's, it would currently be around 19%. Imagine how high it would be if the govt hadn't saved GE, AIG, etc! Now remember these corporations are all being propped up artificially... and that their eventual collapse (or lack thereof) will end up harming the economy even more than it would have if the government hadn't done anything. This fall (autumn, too) will be fascinating!

 

Another interesting tidbit I read is that the amount of money being taken from savings and put into the stock market isn't nearly as much as the amount equities have risen by... indicating that much of the rise in stocks has been due to stimulus cash handed out by the Federal Reserve. Equities are always the first thing to go up in an inflationary environment.

 

I really do hope healthcare gets passed. I know the Republicans are making a stink about it, but it's for the good of the country. You might as well make America's bankruptcy quick, so it's less painful and drawn-out.

 

I think anyone who wants to know in what general direction things will go should look at Japan from 1988 to now. There is a huge amount of money out there so it'll go back into the markets, but look at the dollar its getting killed as the market goes up. Also foreign markets as usual are outdoing the American markets. Peter Schiff was talking about how people thought we'd lead the way out of this, but foreign countries like China are.

 

10 Yr Bond(%) 3.8600% +0.1140

 

But today the dollar is up, I just checked but in the last week it has been getting killed.

 

Jay whats your take on the Bond market now? The Fed is apparently buying long term Tbills because other nations are cutting back.

I think the US will default on its debt, because a collapse in the dollar would be a pretty painful rebuke. But first our nation's rating will be cut, as investors start to see the edge of the cliff coming into focus.

 

The thing to keep in mind is everything the Austrians are talking about isn't going to happen immediately. If Austrian economics were a tradable theory, Mises and Hayek would have been millionaires long before Baruch got there.

 

Over the next month or two I think we'll see more good numbers oozing from the government. The market might finally break past 9,500 again. Part of me is wondering how dramatic the collapse will be, because the 1930s was really exacerbated by the tariffs they put into place.

 

I've also read that 2010 will be the year Obama makes his push to change Social Security in some dramatic way. Hopefully it will involve more debt! *giddy*

 

The funny thing about politics is every year that every election that comes around is the "game changer". It's always a dramatic and important time to vote! Otherwise things will go to hell in a handbasket!

 

This is probably the first time in this nation's history when that has actually been true. It's do or die. Of course, the masses will choose to die.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99U74NG0&show_article=1

 

Maybe he's covering his bases? Or maybe he knows something we don't know. I think the latter.

 

In fact, I think one of the major reasons Obama has been in such a hurry to get all this major legislation through is because his advisers warned him early on he won't have a second term in office.

I don't think we'll ever default, the Fed has made it clear it will print its way out of debt if need be. Or a combination of raising taxes and printing....Obama is already salivating on new ways to tax us more but he's smart enough to hit the middle and low class with under the radar taxes like consumption taxes, and "sin" taxes, so he can say "I'm only taxing 250,000 and over!" but we all know they will get a large amount of taxes from the middle and lower classes through the back door taxing.

 

In fact, I think one of the major reasons Obama has been in such a hurry to get all this major legislation through is because his advisers warned him early on he won't have a second term in office.

 

It all depends on how long he can keep the depression off, like Bush did. Maybe he will be able to sweep it under the rug long enough to get a 2nd term like Bush did, I don't know. I'm going to laugh if he pulls it off and the next major economic crisis comes back only after he's re-elected.

 

Jay, did you check out the budget report I sent you? I just got a hard copy and I'm going through it but its ridiculous, the spending here is out of control. 250,000 for keeping 2 pools operational throughout the year! they wanted to spend 160,000 on library books for a city of 21,000 people! Luckily yesterday in the meeting they cut the number to 80,000.

The problem with the UK scheme is that the cars which are getting scrapped are decent cars like 11 year old VW Polos, cars which could last for another 11 years, being passed down to new drivers, it's removing a layer of decent runabouts. Good for spare parts though.

 

And "It actually hurts the environment more to destroy these cars and make new ones then it would to let the clunkers drive around"

 

So true, 90% of a car's CO2 production is in it's production/destruction stages

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99U74NG0&show_article=1

 

Maybe he's covering his bases? Or maybe he knows something we don't know. I think the latter.

 

In fact, I think one of the major reasons Obama has been in such a hurry to get all this major legislation through is because his advisers warned him early on he won't have a second term in office.

 

Why do you say this. I hope Obama gets a second term. Otherwise Queen Sarah the Alaskan Hick Whench may take over:mad:

lol, colduser, maybe I'm giving Obama more credit than I should be. Maybe he's just rushing the legislation because he hates procrastinating! ;)

 

And it really doesn't matter to me who gets elected, the American voters have proven themselves adept at picking their leaders! It's funny to see conservative commentators on the news talk about Sarah Palin with a straight face. I mean seriously, that woman has the IQ of an autistic dog.

 

What's really fascinating is how the Republican party's supporters don't suffer from the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome! They always talk about limiting government when they're out of office. Just like the Democrats talk about being generally against war and heavy military spending.

Why do you say this. I hope Obama gets a second term. Otherwise Queen Sarah the Alaskan Hick Whench may take over:mad:

 

She would NEVER win, otherwise I'd move to Canada.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XTi-WdOu2s]YouTube - post office[/ame]

 

:laugh3:

lol, colduser, maybe I'm giving Obama more credit than I should be. Maybe he's just rushing the legislation because he hates procrastinating! ;)

 

And it really doesn't matter to me who gets elected, the American voters have proven themselves adept at picking their leaders! It's funny to see conservative commentators on the news talk about Sarah Palin with a straight face. I mean seriously, that woman has the IQ of an autistic dog.

 

What's really fascinating is how the Republican party's supporters don't suffer from the "boy who cried wolf" syndrome! They always talk about limiting government when they're out of office. Just like the Democrats talk about being generally against war and heavy military spending.

 

I have to say. I still do not understand the anti-Obama sentiment from people(not you necessarily). I mean, the guy can't get a fair shake. People attack him from day one. And seriously, he is definitely better than McCain would have been. Neither the Dems nor the Reps will ever really be radical or way right or way left. Moderation will always rule the day. Although Bush took it a little too far to the evangelical right for my taste. Ick. Anyway, things will never change and this country will continue to waste away..........

Colduser, you've got to understand my perspective is probably more consistent than Republicans.

 

Republicans hate Obama because they are Republican, and Obama is Democrat. And they are Republican because their parents were Republican. If you ask them for a specific reason as to why they hate Obama, they'll be as general as possible so as to avoid revealing ignorance on specific issues.

 

My reason for hating all politicians is that they work day and night to write laws, which are documents that point guns at people.

 

EDIT: It's nothing personal, I think Obama is probably a fine father and he's probably never struck another person in his life. This is true for a lot of politicians (particularly those who get into the business because they want to effectuate change on society that they feel would be compassionate).

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e4a67592-8b74-11de-9f50-00144feabdc0.html

 

Americans want Japanese cars, and they're using their Cash-for-Clunkers money to buy them.