Evaluating Cash for Clunkers - Toyota COO Jim Lentz

[sybilcharon]

You did a good job with this, Thank you very much

[klard]

What a bunch of crap. Of course this guys likes the program. The program was a huge net fuel waster because they did not take into account that it takes 300 to 400 gallons of fuel to build a car and transport it to the dealership. The clunker program was the most ridiculous waste of resources on the planet ever in human history.

[MrTwitcher216]

Anybody that buys a toyota, honda, kia, etc is a fucking idiot. GO DIE YOU DUMB MOTHER FUCKERS. THE CEO OF TOYOTA PROBABLY HAS A DICK IN HIS REAR RIGHT NOW!!!

[cmd21700]

Hooray for bailing out foriegn car companies...

[waldentree]

Defending the indefensible. Corporate welfarism. Tax money given to car companies. New car owners put in debt and their perfectly useful vehicles destroyed. Utter bullshit. Wake the fuck up America.

[MrTwitcher216]

Agreed, and the CEO of toyota usa is a douche bag cock sucker.

[ezze902]

Putting people more in debt and Destroying perfectly working cars... Great job! So worth it! ... *sarcasm*

The cost of building those cars, takes more energy then keeping the older ones on the road.

You know whats hidden? Dealers recycling their used inventory....

[malcolmbryant]

Yes. That may be a hidden scandal - recycled cars that were theoretically scrapped. But is there evidence for this? I do also think the guy is being disingenuous to 'factor out' the cost of scrapping a working product and the cost of making the new product.

[TABOOVSKNOWLEDGE]

Small talk in a big problem.

[dukehey2]

Interesting!

[taineasy]

What a pompous ass.

[anikinippon]

2:05 Yea because taxes on California are way too expensive! You have to pay a tax on a car that you own even if it doesn't work and is sitting in you garage! Talk about B.S. Besides, it's never a good thing to pay taxes to a state that duplicates every Bureau that the federal government already has, it's just a waste of money that they could be spending on REAL jobs like fixing the roads.

[magichandpuppet]

Boo!

[MotionFur]

Protecting specific jobs in the auto industry =/= 'stimulating' the economy. If people spent and additional X amount of money on vehicles because of the cash for clunkers program, they would have been spending it on something else without the cash for clunkers program. The auto industry gets a big boost at a slight expense to every other industry [think of movies that people didn't rent, clothes they didn't buy, and restaurants they didn't eat at because of their new car payments.]

[MotionFur]

It is true that a certain ~sector~ of the economy was stimulated, but he left off the word ~sector~ at 0:35. Either he unknowingly is thinking of the "economy" incorrectly, or more likely, he gains massive benefits from this kind of government action, so honesty can take a back seat here.

[m0nkeybl1tz]

Well all those things are slow burning costs. This is a big one time burst.

[HBSchool]

Let's not forget that money isn't exactly idle while it's in a bank.

Savings serve the Economy as well.

[MrMP81]

@HBSchool

Not in the U.S. it doesn't, and hasn't for a good 30+ years since becoming a "consumer" economy. if we don't spend, our economy doesn't do well. Our system is messed up because of our monetary policy and the fact that we don't produce anything anymore.

This cash for clunkers, he mentions the numbers and how people will save, what he doesn't mention is, while the years come up and people are still paying, what will happen when the inflation hits. Then we'll see how well it was.

[HBSchool]

Our savings rate was 10 percent in 1980 and over 12 percent in 1982. It was negative .5 percent in 2005 and is rising again.

If savings hasn't been serving us- it's because we haven't any.

[malcolmbryant]

Simple point so often ignored.