Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger240
ronmcdon you raise some great points. environmentally, sure theoretical fuel savings are a definite possibility. but whats not to say that drivers who have suddenly lowered their per/mile operating costs wont drive more because they can more easily afford it, you saw the reverse happen last year w/ 4.50 gas.
also, the fundimentals of why this this program was enacted are surely questionable. political motive is always in the politicans best interest first. checkout this acceptance speech on that noble prize winning concept.
|
Well, even the government in a democracy can do so much to influence consumer behavior.
They can only count on what they can change, which is better fuel economy & reduced emissions.
The process of creating new vehicles itself produces a good deal of pollution,
so it's questionable whether or not the gains truly offset the losses.
Personally, I'm inclined to think the environmental gains were more or less negligible.
However, as an economic stimulus to automakers & dealerships, it was an unquestionable success,
and imo, (agreed with Asianpoopy) it was money better spent than 'bailout' $$$ flushed down the toilet to help Chevy & Chrysler.
Yes, political motives are always present no doubt.
Kinda interesting was how the data for CARS rebate sales (by the US government) were compiled.
Edmunds compiled their data differently, & questioned the political motives as well.
It was obviously set up to look like most of the sales were for US cars,
when in fact Japanese cars were doing better than they were given credit for.
Maybe the US government wanted to give the public the impression that it was also helping out US automakers, idk.
Disagreement
According to an independent evaluation carried out by Edmunds two full-size trucks and a small crossover SUV were among the top ten sellers during the first week of the program, and the Ford Escape crossover SUV was the actual best seller while the Ford Focus ranked in second place according to Edmunds.[43][47] The differences in the ranking are due to differences in the methods used by the government and Edmunds analysts. The government uses the EPA's guidelines that subdivides models according to engine and transmission types, counting such versions as separate vehicles. For example two- and four-wheel drive, and hybrid version are considered as different vehicles, such it is the case of the Ford Escape, which is available in six versions, tallied by the government as six different models. In the other hand, Edmunds uses traditional sales measurements, counting sales by make and model.[43] John McElroy from Autoblog commented, "No one in the history of the auto industry has ever counted sales this way, and it's mighty peculiar why the government would choose to do so. Is there some other agenda at work?"[52] The following is the ranking as of August 6, 2009 according to Edmunds method:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_All..._Rebate_System
Quote:
Originally Posted by aznpoopy
the problem with subprime lending was super lax lending standards.
the whole reason you need new debt creation/direct stimulus to consumers (which btw, is the only way out of a keyenesian liquidity trap) is because the credit markets are frozen with high lending standards; banks are tight with their money.
in short, the people who actually have the ability to take advantage of the program are going to be people who can qualify for loans under these conditions, and actually need a loan to buy a car.
i.e. the first qualification basically eliminates the super poor; these are not mexican farmhands being sold $500,000 dollar homes here with inane lending. the stimulus is going straight to the middle class.
|
Agreed with you there.
It's not like the 'Community Reinvestment Act' extends to car loans for the under qualified.
If that were the case, we'd all be scooting around in our GTR's/ZR-1's, etc.
(and having them repo'd 2 months later).
The government may issue the existing rebate(s).
But, it is still the banks still determine whether or not we qualify for car loans after the rebates.
You're essentially just financing approx $4,500 less as a result of CARS rebate.
If anything, it's probably more difficult to get a car loan (as with any other loan) today all things equal.
idk about being a middle class thing.
theoretically, it would really help a lower income person trade in their gas-guzzling junker for $5k Versa/10k Fit, etc.
The offset in gas savings might even reduce overall monthly expenditure even further.
It would cost peanuts to finance something that cheap.
Likewise, I doubt there's anything to stop some rich guy to get a $4,500 discount on a lambo.