David Bratton,

Unfortunately, you can’t do that. If you have read the article, you would have learned that you first need to be the owner of the clunker, second you need to buy an American made brand new car. If you don’t satisfy both conditions, you won’t receive cash for your clunker.

The government, extorting money by force from taxpayers to then use that money to buy cars and destroy them.

This sounds like 1984 where they make war only so that the works of the masses never accomplish anything productive.

The rationale is that by making war, the leaders destroy the work accomplished by the masses and therefore the masses are always poor and dependent on Big Brother.

Well, this cash for clunkers looks like a wealth destruction system.

I wonder how much pollution the military is doing in Iraq and Afghanistan ?

I wonder how much pollution the government’s nuclear program created ?

How can they have any moral authority to lecture us on pollution with our extorted by force tax money.

The “Green Baptists” is really a very funny epithet for the environmentalists. Of course, Mr. Watts does risk offending the traditional variety of Baptist.

Art, that is clever. I second that motion. The “broken windshield fallacy” it is.

Cheers

GM = Government Motors… good one. Thanks. I’ll use that.

The fact is that there is a very good chance that carbureted vehicles will prove to become much more valuable than late model fuel injected vehicles. Stay tuned…

Greg, aren’t the drivers of low-mpg vehicles already paying a proportional premium now in terms of the fuel they burn?

And if they’re infringing on your rights, how are your rights restored by the government seizing more money for its own use? In fact, doesn’t that give the government a direct financial interest in keeping low-mpg vehicles on the road, belching exhaust into our common air?

Hazlitt says economics is the science of tracing all the consequences of an action, not just a few desirable ones. If you consider the effect of your proposal on the behavior of clunker drivers, you must also consider the effect on the government bureaucracy that administrates it, and on taxpayers who don’t share your particular estimate of the costs of pollution. Obviously, there are countless other implications as well which neither of us have considered.

I know that putting a gun to someone’s head and taking their money or their car might seem like a simple solution, but if there’s one thing I’ve learned from Austrian economics, it’s that the consequences of coercion are inevitably more complicated than they may appear at first.

Government Motors Canada is owned 12% by the Ontario and Canadian federal government. The government of Ontario recently announced a $10,000 rebate (that is, a gift of taxpayers money) to all those purchasing a Government Motors new Volt.

Funny, but Toyota says that’s not fair competition. Now why would they say that? Next, you’ll have the private health insurers saying the same thing when faced with U.S. taxpayer subsidized government health insurance if Obama’s health scheme goes through Congress. Gee, I wonder how that will work out.

Greg, there’s also the little problem of gas-guzzlers that are net carbon sinks. If that sounds ridiculous, consider the semis that deliver carbon-capture equipment and the hordes of older pickups that bring in scrap for recycling. Sure, they pollute, but they reduce pollution even more.

Being a Baptist, and a regular reader of this site.. perhaps I am expecting too much by expecting there to be some logical connection between the Big Gov’t's actions in bribing people to buy cars and Baptists breaking car windows to try to bring green salvation to America?….quite a stretch… In fact, millions of Baptists are not extreme environmentalists, nor for bigger government.

We’ve already had a similar scheme in place here for the past six years.
As the old saying goes “if you want more of something, subsidize it”.
The Italian car market litterally spiralled out of control, growing 15-20% each year. In early 2008 Italy, with 20 million people less and a much lower median income, overtook Germany as the premium European market for brand new cars. 0% APR financing also helped out more than a bit. Nobody wanted a second hand car anymore, not even low income earners.
Dealership and resellers popped up all over the place. The result for the end user was a steady decline in customer service, since dealers were usually more interested in selling the financial product (they still get a bonus for each financing they can flog) than in satisfying the customer. You had to hope your brand new car was trouble-free since many of these brand new dealerships don’t even own an in-house workshop.
BMW kept a very tight rein in this game, refusing to open new dealerships and concentrating on customer satisfaction, and the market is still rewarding them. Smart fellows, I may even trade in my Kawasaki for one of their bikes soomer than I expected…
Then the New Depression arrived. 0% APR financing became a dream and State funding began to dry up as funds were needed elsewhere. People became more cautious with their money. As a result our car market lost between 15 and 25% each month this year over the same last year period. There was a slight increase in June when new “Cars for Clunkers” funds arrived but it appears to be already over. Second hand cars are becoming palatable again.
Politicians and their accomplices in the car industry are running around like scared ducks: they don’t know what to do. The former are wondering what have they done wrong since they followed Keynes’ Big Recipes Book by the letter, the latter have become so dependent on external help that are just voicing for “more help”. Nobody wants to shoulder its own share of the blame.
But I am sure the US government, as direct owner of GM, will somehow get around sound economics.
perhaps by forcing you to buy new cars (yes, they tried that too here but that’s another story for another day).

Why not keep the car and make an art car out of it. I took my old 81 Mercedes and covered it in 10,000 pens. I say keep you car and then decorate it.

I’m curious to know where the idea that the cars “will be destroyed” came from. I’m not arguing that is not the case however, I can’t find anything that supports this claim.

Seems a bit assumptive to me.

Put a time limit on the clunker program, 1yr. This should sovle must of the writer’s complaints.

Unfortunately, you can’t do that. If you have read the article, you would have learned that you first need to be the owner of the clunker, second you need to buy an American made brand new car. If you don’t satisfy both conditions, you won’t receive cash for your clunker

“Cash for Clunkers is being suspended.”
Rats! I guess we need another wealth transfer program.

An important side effect of this program was discovered after a candid conversation with the typical American laymen–an overzealous buyer of the government’s snake oil. This gentlemen jubilance was a direct result of being approved to cash in his clunker, which currently held a market value of $1500, for a $4500 government rebate. However, the more alarming part of the conversation came when the man admitted that his joy came from the fact that he was approved to purchase a car that two weeks ago he would have never been able to finance. This brings an alarming, yet predictable element to the governments brilliant new snake oil scheme: In the midst of an economic recession the Obamanites (Republicans included) have provided yet another incentive to consumers to throw saving money to the wayside in favor of purchasing a new car which they could not afford. Moreover the government has only perpetuated the current financial crisis by broadcasting to the car companies “you scratch our back we will scratch yours” which translates to: “you take as many clunkers off the road by approving anyone for a car loan that processes a clunker that qualifies, and we will continue to inject bailout money into the veins of your company”.

Government snake oil straight out of the bottle, BRILLIANT!!!