Let’s see… I buy a hunk a junk for $50 and get a voucher for $3500-4500? Sounds good to me!
The vehicle scrappage bill has been under negotiations for months as lawmakers try to find a solution that boosts car sales while providing some environmental benefits. Proponents have pointed to similar programs in Europe that have enhanced auto sales.
[…]
Separately, House and Senate appropriators were discussing providing $1 billion to a supplemental war funding bill for the “cash for clunkers” program, which aims to generate about one million new auto sales. Since the yearlong vehicle program is expected to cost $4 billion, lawmakers would attempt to find the additional money later this year.Under the House bill, car owners could get a voucher worth $3,500 if they traded in a vehicle getting 18 miles per gallon or less for one getting at least 22 miles per gallon. The value of the voucher would grow to $4,500 if the mileage of the new car is 10 mpg higher than the old vehicle. The miles per gallon figures are listed on the window sticker.
Owners of sport-utility vehicles, pickup trucks or minivans that get 18 mpg or less could receive a voucher for $3,500 if their new truck or SUV is at least 2 mpg higher than their old vehicle. The voucher would increase to $4,500 if the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 5 mpg higher than the older vehicle. Consumers could also receive vouchers for leased vehicles.
And then there’s Israel.
We have children running the asylum. Throw a dart and whatever square it hits is the plan of the week. What a pitiful creature we have in the White House.
2 mpg higher is worth $3.5k?
That’s nuts. It should be an incentive to trade your SUV in for a car, especially if you live in any metro area and never drive on dirt.
It wasn’t more than a couple years ago that liberals were crying about the debt load that was being created for our grandchildren.
Funny how times change…..
Just when you thought congress couldn’t get any stupider…
You lot are hilarious. Perish the thought you actually read something. Like the bill.
Wow! My Expedition is now worth $3500 more?
That makes it $3502 for a trade-in…
#7,
Doesn’t matter. It’s still worth $3500 more now.
Thank you, Uncle Obama!
Reading that last paragraph it seems like you will not get the added value for your trade in. You would only get 3500/4500 for your vehicle.
The dealer has to destroy your vehicle so your trade in is worth 3500/4500 no matter what the value of the car is.
Also, the car has to be registered and in use for a year. That part seems to have been left out of this article.
#11 “Also, the car has to be registered and in use for a year.”
Define in use for a year. If I drive it around the block once a year does that count?
Well I made money on my pickup truck. I’m at 11 mpg now. If I go up 5 mpg a year I can drive a new junker every year for the next 2 years.
I would love to get a new car but this program won’t help me. My ’82 Toyota get’s 30+ mpg. Hey Congress, throw me a bone.
I can’t wait for this to go into effect. I hate my 1990 truck and can’t wait to get something newer. I only paid $3600 for it 8 years ago so I will end up making money on this and get something that gets a lot better mpg.
How are they going to verify the mpg of your current car? I can say it gets anything I want to.
#15….
http://fueleconomy.gov/Feg/findacar.htm
ha, so basically I think this will create a huge black market for old crap cars. I go give some poor old guy with a piece of crap car that does not run, $500 to hold the title, while I buy a new car and get $3500 credit. Then I buy the new car from the old guy.
I’m sure the dealers are going to be real strict on the rules considering how cars are flying off the lots these days.
CLASH??? Editor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[I loved The Clash! Oh, well, fixed. — UD]
Porsche GT2!!! $3500 will get me a leather covered hand brake lever!!!
really!
#18, except like most of the Republikan whiners here – you have neither the smarts nor inclination nor balls to pull it off.
“the cash for clunkers MPG goals are set to low, it should have been 5MPG or better for cars or truck/SUVs. A sliding scale of more money for a bigger improvement would have been nice. It was probably set so low because of the sorry state of most of the domestic vehicles to choose from.”
Prolonged high gas prices will be the only to get the US to cut consumption. That’s why the cars in Europe and Asia are better with fuel than ours.
Fuel Tax any one? works for me
Ed- – how about letting us debate that GM boycott Rush story?
# 21 malingerer said, “you have neither the smarts nor inclination nor balls to pull it off.”
I have to admit, theft & deception are skills Dems excel at and Repubs are not good at.
I’m sure the dealers will just scrap the cars, and won’t salvage the parts which will be worth more than the vehicle.
#2 – 22 – 18 = 4. But, no. The minimum requirement should be for a much higher mileage vehicle, at least significantly better than our current fleet average of 27 MPG. How about if we set the minimum to qualify at 35 or 40 MPG on the new vehicle?
My clunker gets better mileage than the fleet average now. 22 MPG is still a gas guzzler. Europe averages 44 MPG, Japan 45 MPG, U.S. 27. Even at that, 22 still looks bad.
#8 – Alfred1,
If we actually paid the full cost of gasoline at the pump, you might be right. Why don’t you rail against the U.S. paying for a military escort out of the Gulf for each and every oil tanker? Why not rail against subsidies for oil exploration/exploitation supporting 19th century solutions for 21st century problems? Why not rant and rave about lower taxes for oil companies?
In short, why do you love big oil? What has ExxonMobil given you lately? Asthma? 70-130,000 people a year in the U.S. alone die from air pollution. Does that not bother you?
My Toyota gets good mileage and while it is ten years old it has less than 60,000 miles on it. I expect to drive it for at least another ten years.
I did some research on this because as I said above I’m looking to get rid of my current vehicle and keep in mind that this bill is still working its way through congress so this all may change but from what I read and from what I have heard 1)the mpg is based on what the government says it is supposed to get not what it actually gets and 2)part of the deal is that certain parts such as the engine are destroyed so that they can’t be resold or even used to keep a broken vehicle in service.
#21 malingerer, I’m certain I have more smarts and balls than you….and I’m not a republican.
In fact I am a contributor to many tree huger organizations. That doesn’t change the fact that government programs like this are nothing more than invitations to fraud that will not actually improve the environment.
Why not spend some time adding some actual content instead of some stupid fucking knee jerk political party BS.
What a negative attitude towards American consumers y’all seem to have. Fifteen countries already have programs like this in place and all report positive results – increasing car sales – more clunkers off the road.
Of course, they haven’t any Republicans.
#17 thanks for the chart but I don’t think that would be real world. Those numbers are for new cars. The same car would get less MPG now. Probably 5% or better decrease per year depending on maintenance and model.
And no one here realizes that you have to actually owned the car for a year and have driven it in that year. Another blog trying to be something it is not, a news service.
How will they calculate the mileage of my 1964 Chevy II? There were no CAFE standards when it was made? I was going to sell it for a few hundred bucks, but this is better.