11 thoughts on “Cash For Clunkers”

1. You’re missing an ‘h’ on the URL.

2. It still beats a bridge to nowhere.

3. @Godzilla, no, no it doesn’t. The bridge to nowhere would have cost an estimated third of a billion dollars, and has had its federal earmark funding cancelled. In contrast, cash for clunkers has cost 10 times that amount. In addition, the bridge to nowhere may have been an unjustified project but it would have had some benefit, whereas cash for clunkers not only wastes money but actively does harm as well.

4. The troubling thing is, it’s the most popular move that the government has taken since the financial crisis hit. The gap between what makes sense, and what will be popular back in the district, is frustratingly wide.

   That said, Cash for Clunkers wasn’t a very big program, and did have some modest benefits, so it’s far from the worst thing the government has done. In a severe recession with interest rates that have hit bottom it actually does create value to break windows and pay people to fix them; but it’s even better to pay them to fix windows that are already broken.

5. The troubling thing is, it’s the most popular move that the government has taken since the financial crisis hit.

   It wasn’t popular with anyone except those who were fencing stolen taxpayer dollars for the government. No one anywhere could run on supporting it as an issue and win an election. Welfare in general is a “popular program” among those receiving it. But not to taxpayers.

   In a severe recession with interest rates that have hit bottom it actually does create value to break windows and pay people to fix them

   No, it doesn’t. This is an example of your complete pig-ignorance of economics.

6. My wife and I thought cash for clunkers was a truly stupid waste of money. This did not prevent us checking to see if we could trade in a 1996 Dodge Caravan clunker (I will never buy another Dodge – and I was saying that before the bailout). But it’s gas mileage was too good for a minivan, so it didn’t qualify to trade it in for the much less gas guzzling Honda Fit we were looking at. This makes me think the program was even more truly stupid than we thought.

   Yours,
   Tom DeGisi

7. I grew up in the town where the bridge to nowhere was to be built. What everyone missed is it was a bridge from the town to its airport, not a bridge to the 50 people living on the island. They currently run a ferry between Ketchikan and Gravina Island to access the airport. If you do proper cost accounting for funding the ferry forever, the bridge might even have made sense given the prevailing interest rates at the time.

8. you don’t create value by destroying it.

   If you were in a position to capitalize on it, you should have done so, but doesn’t change the fact that more value was destroyed than created destroyed.

9. Jim said: The troubling thing is, it’s the most popular move that the government has taken since the financial crisis hit.

   Rand said: It wasn’t popular with anyone except those who were fencing stolen taxpayer dollars for the government.

   And I say: You’re both right. Make of that what you will.

10. I say: You’re both right.

    Yes, being the most popular thing that this administration has done is a pretty low bar.

11. If you weren’t able to take advantage of Cash for Clunkers, you can donate your car to charity and get a tax deduction of at least $500. Your car doesn’t have to run.

Comments are closed.