Just look at the pretzels Mitt Romney has to twist himself into! Between "ObamneyCare" and "Let Detroit die," it's so plainly obvious that the Republicans aren't honest actors, but rather, just dishonest AND REALLY, REALLY FUCKING STUPID politicians who'll oppose EVERYTHING Obama does so that they can continue to drag this country to the right...to their peril!
That's a lie, and you know it! "Cash for Clunkers" was one of the most successful programs of the entire Stimulus, and this is beyond debate. The numbers don't lie (like you apparently do)! Once again, the Republicans didn't legitimately attack a policy, because it's wrong or a mistake, but because it's OBAMA's plan, and they have to hate everything Obama does.
Just look at the pretzels Romney has to twist himself into! Between "ObamneyCare" and "Let Detroit die," it's so plainl
't pulls forward new car sales, but it also scraps perfectly good, serviceable vehicles, thus lowering supply and driving up used-car prices.
In the U.S., the predicted volume was underestimated, the budget was woefully inadequate, and the government was unable to process payments in a timely manner. Cash for Clunkers quickly became a synonym for government overreach and incompetence.' Victor Dial, the man behind the concept of the program.
A year later, consumer debt is up since they could not afford a new car as it was. Banks are hurting with higher default on car loans. The build quality of the cars was inferior than the older cars with need for sooner replacement. The foreign manufacturers gained market share in the US. Used car values have increased, meaning its even harder now to buy a better car for the poor who now can not afford a new car more than ever... which in turn hurts the new car industry long term.
Bad: Energy used in creating a new car was more than would have been spent with older less efficient car. Smaller replacement cars require more trips to haul cargo, for more fuel consumtion. Artificially removing used cars out of the system before their time increases cost of existing ones since there is a reduced supply, hurting the poor and those not affording new cars. It hurts the auto repair and service sectors of the economy. Decreased US market share since most replacements are foreign.
Yeah, and I'm sure a program for free houses, free food, free beer, free clothing, free movies, free disco balls, etc, would be enormously popular as well. That is, until the people realize that they don't have any money, because the government is taking it all, either through taxes or printing. And then the people will be even more upset when they realize that the government is broke too, and now they have to stand in ration lines.
They took the money I sent in over the last several years and gave it to another guy to buy a new car.I guess they thought medicare and social security had more than enough money for our future "NOT"!!!! People we are being robbed ,we know it yet we just set back and do nothing.I can`t believe that people actually think that this program was a good idea.I no longer believe our government functions properly it`s broke.Time to buy a new one I wonder if they will give out money for that.LOL
Listen Republicans oil isn't unlimited and the less we use the less we pay. because the oil companies use what's called supply and demand. so if 30% of Americans go from 10 mpg to 20 mpg or more. that's a hell of a lot of oil saved and thus we pay less a gallon......!
What does it cost in energy to make a car and ship it? What does it cost in energy to destroy the "clunker", ship it and crush it?
And, less than 1 million cars were sold under C4C. The total population of vehicles in the U.S. is around 254 million as of 2007 according to the U.S. DOT, so where did you get your 30% figure from?
Plus, C4C only amounted to a .6 and .7 MPG improvement of the average gas mileage of all vehicles purchased in the months C4C was in effect.
There are financial considerations; if you have a vehicle that's reliable and paid for, what's spent on gas is offset by what's saved in lower insurance costs and no car payments. Now, if this program only got cars that really were dangerous off the road, then maybe it's okay. But C4C destroyed lots of serviceable vehicles.
Plus, there's the cost of C4C the taxpayer will foot; lots of people won't be happy when they file their IRS forms on April 2011.
As for oil not being unlimited, thanks for telling people something that's already known.
But the problem is what to do about it (and, frankly, I think geopolitical problems will be most likely to disrupt oil production and consumption well before we run out of the planet's supply of crude).
@Watcher3223 Sadly some people don't know that they don't understand it's "fossil fuel". aka what's left for the Dinosaurs some 50 million years ago and as for crude oil. most cars should be electric/solar by now don't you think.....?
"Sadly some people don't know that they don't understand it's "fossil fuel". aka what's left for the Dinosaurs some 50 million years ago and as for crude oil."
You are assuming that people don't know; the thing to consider is what to do about it that's really effective.
"most cars should be electric/solar by now don't you think.....?"
Problem is practicality. If you can have an electric car with about the same range and drivability as a gas-powered car for a comparable price and the ability to recharge fully in minutes, about as quickly as pumping a tank full, then things may change.
Solar may supplement the batteries, but photovoltaic cells still do not have the level of efficiency necessary to be really practical and they're expensive.
Plus, electricity is generated through the use of natural resources, including fossil fuels; you move consumption from one area into another.
Of course, there are many other sources of electricity generation besides fossil fuel such as wind sail, solar (both photovoltaic and thermal), hydroelectricity, and nuclear. But majority of electricity production in the U.S. is coal.
But there's also the vehicle and parts, such as what to do with bad batteries.
Unfortunately, electric cars aren't entirely practical yet. We may get there, but there will be hurdles such as high price, limited infrastructure and opposition from certain interests.
The electric hybrid and cars like the Tesla, the Chevrolet Volt and the GM EV-1 are best viewed as stepping stones towards a path.
But, I submit that you have been opining under stereotype, especially as you referred specifically to republicans, as if they were the bane of human progress.
i really would like to see some billionaire pay people not to vote and when nobody does then there cant be a president because no one even chose to have one, and then when they say there was a winner then, badda bam badda boom, they are busted for fucking with our rights and freedom and choosing what they want...we dont need some fucktards running our country...and spending our money and telling us what we need to do with our money....its our country not the governments and we need to stand up.
IT'S JUST ANOTHER OBAMA SCAM---- 0bama had to do the cash for clunkers.. China wants our metal not our worthless dollar. I worked at a scrap yard, when cars went from $11.00 a hundred to $2.00 per hundred pounds people stopped bringing in their cars for scrap, that's when 0bama started cash for clunkers to get china our metal. This is a FACT research it. Private scrap yards can buy the average junk car for $250.00- 0bama would rather pay $4,500.00 +... "WE'RE SCREWED'!!!
here's a nice twist for you idiots that think this helped the economy.
we that canfix our own cars have no useful parts in the salvage yards because the motors were destoyed. so when you go the the mechanic and need a motor for your car expect to buy a new $4000 + for a new motor when you coulda got one from a salvage for around $600- $900 dollars.
If you cant find any other downs maybe you should go to the killing fields behind the dealerships and watch as they destroy so many perfectly good *and needed* cars. I have seen classics die out there: mustangs, camaro ss, sport firebirds, even Corvettes and a Maseratis were not immune. You just dont destroy something that still has good use to it.
@CheetahFoxx I've seen the entire list of cars that were turned in for C4C. One person turned in an '89 25th Anniversary Turbo Trans Am - and even more rare, someone turned in an '87 Buick GNX.
Barry sure has some airheaded followers without a whit of business acumen..
These TYT hacks make me sick. You can't stimulate the economy by handing out taxpayers' money to small minority that buys cars. "Something out of nothing"
On the note of the environment, this program was an absolute disaster. The amount of emissions from the gasoline not being used is outweighed many times over by the process of manufacturing a new car, not to mention scrapping the old one.
Lastly, the program took many fantastic low mileage cars off the road.
The quickest way out of a recession is to spend your way out of it (or to be more precise to get the cash moving again.) When people lose confidence in banks and stock markets they stop buying stuff, people who make the stuff get laid off etc, etc. FDR dragged the US out of the Great Depression in the same way. Costly in the short run pays off long term. Good recent example is Germany switching to the Euro, Turned out billions of DM were saved at home when they were exchanged the economy went up
@RedNProud, heres my issue; FDR used that money to CREATE things. And amazing things at that. Boulder Dam, National Parks, The Golden Gate, The Empire State... He created icons and assets that we could use decades later. Obama is destroying things! Our heritage: classic American automobiles that are stylish and durable: much more than the foreign OR American cars being made. Many people in America desperately need cars. YOU JUST SHOULDN'T SPEND PEOPLES MONEY ON DESTROYING WHAT THEY NEED!
this is an example of destroying real payed off assets for more debt in an already over indebted population. The solution to being in unmanageable debt isnt to take on more debt. Think bout it dumbass. just look at the population of all the other debt slave populations in the banana republics around the world for a clue.
I know I am not going to convert any of you brainwashed drones, but you need to know that you have been brainwashed. I am against my government taking my hard earned money and bailing out their friends in the auto (or BANKING) industry. The way I know that most of you are brainwashed is because nothing has really "changed" from the Bush administration. Both parties have sold out. Wake up and smell the corruption.
All programs have a goal. The goal of this program was to see if you can convince Americans to turn in X vehicles for $1B. The goal was reached. The question is then... is it worth $2B more to get a 2X more vehicles traded in? The answer is almost always 'Yes' if the original goal was worth it.
If it isn't worth $3B to save 3X gas, help out car companies, reduce imported oil, etc. then you shouldn't have voted for the $1B to save X gas?
This is money we don't have. We are borrowing, or worse, printing this money. Other than that, your logic about if it was worth one billion, it is automatically worth three billion does not hold any water whatsoever.
Yes... name calling. That's a great argument -- just toss out an insult and hope the users are too stupid to notice that you can't counter the actual points.
So does the Federal government not tax manufactored goods in the US just because you call someone an idiot? Sure...
Our tax dollars are not meant to help people buy cars. Also, we are not generating enough tax dollars to simply run the country, let alone help people buy cars. When will you understand that we are borrowing this money, and it is going to hurt our country more than it helps in the end?
Sad ... you can't figure out that the each time the government convinces one to buy through the program they are making more than they provide in incentives.
If I give you $1 and then you have to give me $2, I make money. I don't need to borrow money for this program and the more people I give $1 the more people give me $2 back.
That other programs cost or waste money... sure. However, we are discussing cash-for-clunkers.
Do you admit that there is a manufacturing tax in the US?
What is truly sad is that you actually think that the government is going to make money on this. Yes, there are ways that they will get a little bit of this money back, but what about the % of the people who bought foreign cars? Is not the government helping people buy things they could not afford why we are here in the first place?
Foreign companies operate under quotas and pay massive import duties -- so most make vehicles within the US. They either pay manufacturing taxes or import duties.
Don't you know about how your own government taxes things?
In any debate, you really shouldn't be asking questions which you don't know the answers to. It merely shows you aren't qualified to be in the debate nor offering opinions on the subject likely to be correct.
So, it is still worth it (even with import duties) for the foreign car companies to import cars here right? Well, why should my tax dollars go toward benefiting an foreign car company? I did no cash in my "clunker." I did not get a new car. I think that destroying a perfectly good pickup is pointless. You really think that our government will make it's (my) 4,500 dollars back from import duties? Give me a break.
The few vehicles imported into the US are mostly luxury vehicles. Nearly all vehicles sold in the US assembled in the US. Either way... they are taxed.
What part of 'clunker' do you not understand? If your current vehicle is worth $4500 it wouldn't qualify, you wouldn't accept the scrap value of it, nor would a dealer pay your $4500 for parts.
I'm not sure how your inability to pick an example covered by the program proves that the program costs the government money.
The U.S. imports a lot of cars, and I don't think that "most" of them are luxury, not that it matters. Also, when did I use the word "clunker" wrong? My pickup qualified for the program.
Other than that, if you really think that the government is going to make money by giving out 3 billion to help people buy cars, then I don't even know why I am talking to you. They will get a % back, but not even close to all of it. It is not the role of government to pick and choose who stays in business.
Due to quotas and import duties it does not make sense to import cheap cars.
You raised the example of a $4500 vechicle. That isn't a clunker. Any vehicle will qualify for the program but you won't find any dealer willing to take give you $4500 for only scaps, nor any consumer willing to accept only scap value on a $4500 vehicle.
The government gets a % of the total price of the vehicle in taxes or duties. That is still likely way more than the discount offered in the program.
This guy is such an it idiot. If cash for clunkers works so well why not put 100 million into it....hell why stop there put 1 billion into it. Hell.... lets start giving people money for food. It makes absolutely no sense to strip the private sector of capital in order to subsidize car purchases that people can't afford to put them deeper into debt and in the process destroy their "clunker" which just happens to be a very valuable asset that is paid for.
hmm.. you apparently don't think through the full loop of things. The energy used to build the new cars and destroy the old ones was so great it could have been used to drive the old cars for 20 years. Also, the fuel 'savings' you talk about assume they drive equal distances--not true. People with the new cars are expected to drive MORE (imagine that) to the point that they use more gas overall. Also, don't forget that money was just printed for this program. It didn't come from 'taxes.'
Do you think you could provide me with a link of some kind. I'd really like to see some evidence. Sounds interesting. I already know that he left out the fact that 4/5 cars sold through the cash for clunkers program are foreign made vehicles, thus, money is leaving the country.
Take money from all taxpayers (yes, all taxpayers--the subsidies for the C4C program are derived from borrowed capital--which we ALL have to pay interest on), to encourage people to borrow money from lending institutes (because being in too much debt to creditors is not a problem at all for American people), to buy new cars and destroy old cars (which is, essentially, eliminating viable resources from the economy). What could go wrong?
ALSO, the US share of these sales was only about 4%. The rest went to foreign companies. Yep, it's working just fine if you want to put the US market and car dealerships out of business. YOUNG TURK, do you have ANY education at all??
Lets see... trade in your fully paid off car so we can borrow more money from china to finance a government program to destroy those perfectly good cars and put more people in debt. Ok I'm a little slow but I think I got it. You guys need to look up the definition of "unintended consiquence" and see how it might apply here.
Did Cenk just say that he did not get involved in the 'cash for clunkers" program? Did he also say that he was in effect supporting the persons who took part in the program? I guess that this is NOT socialism !!!!!! I am sure that most americans need to really understand what socialism really is and not confuse it with COMMUNISM, the two are NOTthe same.
Let's put us 3 billion more in debt to help the economy - hmmm . . . and this guy thinks the numbers make sense? And says it's worth it when considering fuel efficiency???? How about letting us drill in our own country for oil - that would save a lot more money for consumers!
Unfortunately, many in the GOP were for it. My Congressman was for it - and he was an idiot to support it. Hey, I couldn't afford to buy a new car yet my 2008 fed tax bill paid for 2 cash for clunkers. how is that right?
So, now not only are people tens of thousands of dollars in debt because they own a new car, but the national debt has increased as well, which we'll be paying back with higher taxes and inflation.
WHERE THE FUCK IS THE POSITIVE IN THIS?!??!??!?!?!
We were in a recession because debt. So the solution is to put us into more debt. LOL. IT DOESNT HELP THE ECONOMY IF PEOPLE ARE IN DEBT HLY SHIT.
Trace the system. The engines of these purchased cars are being destroyed. The steel is being scrapped and recycled. What happens to all the toxic glues, plastics, and other materials in the cars? They are ending up in the air and our soils. If these cars were repurposed with electric motors, they could then be resold as a new and improved product, create jobs for those building the new electric from clunker fleet, and create far less environmental catastrophe.
What about people who actually like old cars. Some of these cars being destroyed now might be collector cars in the future and since the engines, transmissions, and everything else must be destroyed, this might result in a shortage of used parts, making it more expensive for people who can't afford new cars to repair their older cars. In my opinion, the whole concept of encouraging people to throw away working items and have them destroyed and purchase new cars doesn't make sense.
Great prior few comments. The cars being turned in have to be functional, and also have to be destroyed. So we're taking a functional vehicle and destroying it prematurely, to replace it with new one that consumes incredible resources to build. Really, how green is this? Are we really saving energy? As badly as this was engineered, how can anyone possibly think they'll be able to design a better health care system? Not put a further financial burden on us? If it weren't so sad it'd be hilarious
hey IDIOT...if it worked so well, why did they cancel the last 3 months they planned for it? and if it's so "fuel-efficient," why are Hummers eligible to buy through the program. and "real money'?? yeah, just a few billion here and there, you MORON. talk about astro-turfing...watch car sales after this monday - they will fall of a cliff. This is just another stupid entitlement program - an incentive to buy cars that put GM an Chrysler in bankruptcy haha or non-American cars that are better...
8/21/2009...How's that cash for clunkers working now? Car dealers not being reimbursed for cars sold. Yet another example of the Democrat government managing things better than we the people can. One day they will decide how to reimburse me for my work. NO THANKS. What ever happened to FREE MARKETS? I know Liberals think free markets are unfair, after all it should just be handed out to them. F*ck anyone who has a nickle more than me. What ever happened to SELF RELIANCE & SELF PRIDE?
ummm... one fact that should also be looked at is that the most car dealerships still do not have their money from the government from the first round of Cash 4 Clunkers much less the second round. And everyone will pay the difference they save on the car with higher taxes. The government makes money through taxes, they give the money away, to recoup the loss, they will raise taxes.
Our gov is bankrupt, we cannot afford this. Wake up people---WAKE UP----The people who are better off than most (able to afford a new car)are benifiting and the poor have to pay for it. Our gov has to stop spending
the poor dont have to pay for it. the poor dont pay taxes. its the "better off than most" that will have to pay for all this spending in the form of higher taxes.
yes, we call pay for inflation when we see the value of our money deteriorate.
the stimulus and other programs like C4C where the fed infuses more cash into the economy is going to cause inflation on a scale we haven't seen since the carter years.
In the alternative of bailout money, why didn't they across the board do incentives like this for other things. It's a win-win for everyone. Consumers start spending for the good deals and business is better off in the current slump we're in. Not many things I can look at the government and say "That Worked" but this is one of them.
Incentives and tax CREDITS (not deductions) would greatly benefit EVERYONE to boost this economy instead of free money via some bailout.
Excuse me "redpoint5", but how in the world you came up with "this program harms the environment and economy"???
The program is replacing gas guzzlers with new, more fuel efficient cars and somehow you turn this into program that harms environment???
And about the economy, the program is influencing sales and manufacturing so people keep their jobs and paycheck, and guess what - they pay taxes that go back into the tax pool to finance this program and others!
the program may not harm the environment, but it isnt as "green" as proponents make it out to be b/c people dont consider the energy (carbon) it takes to manufacture a new car. yes, you are replacing a less fuel efficient car with a more efficient one, but the old one took energy (carbon) to make and it still had useful life and you are destroying it before its useful life was over. so energy savings from the new cars are offset by extra carbon emitted to replace the old (still useful) cars.
It's painfully obvious this clown of a "news" host has never had an economics 101 course, otherwise his opinion would be much different.
Of course he is correct that it's politically unpopular for Repubs to be against it, but just because the program is popular with the inept public doesn't mean it's a good idea.
The average citizen is oblivious to the fact that this program harms the environment and economy. They just like getting a new car; like dangling a carrot in front of a jackass.
redpoint5: TYT has never been "news" in an objective journalistic sense. They are just an opinion show and their opinion is always the same. Whatever Obama does it great. The GOP and anyone else who doesn't like it is bad. There's the TYT party line for you.
Their videos consistently lack perspective and I have never seen one worth more than 1 star.
LOL Cash for Clunkers is a joke, my 92 honda that gets 16 mpg eats oil, rattles sometimes misfires, has 389k miles on it, and doesn't qualify for this program.
You can forget the saving the environment part, b/c a number of these "clunkers" were not crushed or dismantled, many of them were resold back on the market through the back door.
A guy I know who works for Ford even told me, people were giving just the frame of an old car they had and were still getting the $4,500 anyways.
Cash for Clunkers was a scam and it created artificial demand for cars for a brief period of time.
What you seem to have forgotten to say is that the Car Dealerships are not getting paid the money back they were promised....so let's see, if they go out of business who do you think will buy them out and take over?
How about poor people who can only afford a "clunker"? I got my 95 honda civic 2 years ago for $1000. i saved a lot of money buying a used car and it gets good mileage also. Fuck cash for clunkers.
Honda cars get great mileage. I doubt they would qualify anyway. But it would be good to have a wider selection of used vehicles that are perfectly drivable.
The problem with Cash for Clunkers is that anybody who needed a car has bought one. The number of cars that will be sold for the next 2-5 will drop. It is an artificial stimulant into the economy.
i say lets borrow more money from china so we can buy more cars from japan and give china the state of california to pay off the loan. does the people at TYT really think that we are that stupid
Wow. Yeah, let's not mention the hurting auto repair industry. Awesome idea, "Hey let's trade in my old car that I own for some brand new debt!" Yeah what a great Idea! Let's solve the economic problem by creating more debt. Not to mention people keep forgetting that the government owns the big American car manufacturers. Fucking morons.
This video proves, once and for all, that Cent has no concept of economics and is just a blind follower of the democratic agenda. Notice he doesn't talk to any USED car dealers, if there are even any left now. Socialism is a "win for everybody"? Tell that to to anybody trying to sell a used car, you ignorant tool.
I would like to applaud the other commenters on here. The intelligent posts have drowned out the idiots, which is rare on TYT videos.
Your next-door neighbor wants to buy a new car, so obama takes $100 from you and 44 other neighbors to buy his old "clunker" and give him $4,500 for a new car. Socialism at its finest.
The clunker is destroyed, as mandated by the bill. Used cars now are all worth $4,500. Good luck buying one for less, or even finding one since they are being DESTROYED. You can only trade in for a NEW car, and the clunker can't be resold. So, used car salesmen, meet unemployment line.
They are spending billions on programs like this only to cut Medicare by 500 billion. So help the environment a little and let our parents and grandparents die from lack of medical care.
yes, C4C will increase overall fuel efficiency by taking fuel inefficient cars off the road in favor of more efficient ones. but it still takes energy to make new cars, energy that takes carbon output to make. so for every new car that is manufactured for the C4C, there is a certain amount of carbon output that wouldn't be there if not for C4C. Yet everyone thinks this is great for the environment.
librophile - you totally miss the point of my argument. it takes energy to make new cars. the same energy that was PREVIOUSLY used to build the clunkers. thats the point, the energy was already used to build these cars, which the C4C program destroys before their useful life is over. now to replace them, we have to use MORE energy to replace the clunkers with new cars. so even if the new cars are more fuel efficient, you still use energy to replace cars that still had useful life
BTW, if democrats are so much for the middle class, how come they are RUINING the used car industry that only people of lesser income can afford, and giving it to these huge companies who have CEO's that get payed massive amounts of money?
All the meantime, the struggling used car dealership is watching all of their potential inventory being crushed and thrown away!
How the hell is this helping out the middle class? TELL ME!
I dont have a Job and have to sell my truck to survive...
I cant sell my fucking truck now!
Whos gonna pay the same amount of money for a used vehicle when they can buy new? Im stuck with this truck and just want to get rid of it so I can get a cluncker to get me through college.
Without the CASH4CLUNKERS program, NO NEW CARS would sell = NO USED CARS taken in exchange.
The number of EXISTING used cars ALREADY on the used car lots will be same.
It's only the used cars taken in exchange for a new car that will be going to the scrapyards...NOT THE ONES ALREADY on used-cars lots AND YOU KNOW IT !!
I do know that the vehicles already on lots are not being affected, or sold for that matter. Who would pay the same price for used?
The point I am trying to make is that Future inventories of used car lots are being affected because these cars that would have been on the lots are being destroyed.
Besides, the Government doesnt even have the money to back up shit right now.
Money is supposed to be a note for services renderd...not a handout.
Oh, and you wont make your point by insulting me :)
So wait let me get this straight. The government started a program that helps poor people get rid of vehicles that are in working condition and they own it. This leads to poor people creating more debt than they need. I'm not a Republican nor am I part of any political party but just think about this, Why support a program thats going to put the poor in a worse situation?
They are dumping all of their old technology off on the public which will be outdated in a few short years. The folks participating in this program are getting ripped off. Unfortunately, anyone who pays taxes is being forced to participate. Those that have to borrow $ to by the new cars will be handing over their $ to the bankers. Also, don't forget the sales tax revenue that will be handed to the state governments. These facts are not just coincidence, but well thought out built in residuals.
Guess you don't believe in private property rights. Looks like you believe in centralized 1 size fits all unconstitutional fascism. Guess its OK until it effects you personally, & the property you have worked for & own outright. By the way, the $ I earn from my labor is my private property, & should not be forcibly redistributed to benefit others involuntarily as is being done in the C4C, tarp, bank bailouts, policing the world, etc etc etc. Systematic destructing all elements of freedom.
Taking aborion rights from women, the right to marry from gays, the right to practice free religion, and breaking separation of church and state is just as unconstitutional, and unlike entire industries that no one has control over, this effects INDIVIDUALS!
Does the woman not choose to have sex? Does she not get to choose adoption? Running away from responsibility through legalized murder is denying any choice that the child/human would otherwise have. Would you yourself have chosen to be aborted? Therefore, every choice that human would have made is now denied b/c of abortion. I see a lot more choices in no abortion.
Now on rape and life threatening conditions, I am conflicted and really dont have an answer for those right now.
"he hadn't had a customer in a while".... no shit, these same people are going to be the ones who can't pay for this shit in a couple of months. You people scare the shit out of me! At best you are very NoT smart.
So lets tax people, drawing money out of the economy and subsidizes one industry and praise it as a success, when we cannot measure the lost it may have had throughout the aggregate economy since the money is being taking from somewhere. And then, pay more of these clunkers when poorer people may be able to buy these used cars for cheaper than $4k. Lets destroy usable cars and have people go into debt to buy a new one! Brilliant economics b/c we focus solely on the one industry it benefits!
Define "poor," since anybody can use the program. Besides, it would be better off financially down the road that they get the new, more reliable, and more fuel-efficient vehicle than an older, less reliable, and less fuel-efficient vehicle.
Here is what I meant by poor. Since people are guaranteed say $4k for this used vehicle when on a market it may only cost $2k, the poorer people who may need a cheap car at $2k, but the subsidy will drive up the price on cars. Yes these cars will be more fuel efficient which is great, but dealerships are already offering leases and loans for these cars, which will entice people to go into debt when they already have a usable car. I'm mostly concerned w/ how it helps one industry over another
Get rid of the Unions, Special intrest organizations, and this idiot, and we will be America again. Until then, spread your wealth to all these lazy fucks who will take all they can.
All other issues aside. This program is a waste of time economically speaking. Just a parlor trick to kick start debt spending consumerism which is the reason we are screwed in the first place.
cash for clunkers is wellfair, there's no free lunch, that money was stollen at gun point from hard WORKING people and is being used to buy votes. wake up people!!!!!
Well this money may have been just created out of thin air. So it may not have been stolen at gun point but stolen none the less lol I agree with you though
You think of it as spending, we think of it as an investment. Even more money than what was spent on the program will be saved down the road in fuel costs for the consumer.
Its not investing, its shifting demand. By helping the new car industry, they hurt the used car industry. That includeds dealors, parts shops and repair garages. Destroying something of value does not create value. It is the broken window fallacy.
whhen the republians were in power about six years ago didnt they spend 600bilion dollers on a drug bill? and before u say anything i didnt miss type, 600bil
OK...cash for clunkers. Heres the problem(s) with this. 1 it takes away a source of funding for many charities that have been accepting cars. 2 it does nothing, repeat NOTHING to help with any environmental issues and 3 its a huge waste of money. The positive has been that its increased car sales for the dealers, but that was done intentionally to make Obamas takeovers of the car companies APPEAR to have worked. If Obama said it, its a LIE.
''cash for clunkers''....I thought the government just payed BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to the car makers for building shitty cars. All of us taxpayers get to repay the billions spent on this welfare program. This is NOT free money. Cars are already being made more fuel efficient without "cash for clunkers". The price of gasoline has already increased the sales of gas efficient cars. I thought this dumbass administration wanted to diminish our dependence on oil?
First of all, I assume that by the billions of dollars the government payed to the car industry, you mean the bailout out money that the Bush Administration gave to the car companies. Then, yes, taxpayers get to repay the money that Bush spent to bail out the auto-makers.
But then, shouldn't you be more pissed about all the money he spent to bail out the rich fucks on Wallstreet? To your credit, efficient cars are already being produced without the "Cash for Clunkers" program. The program just serves to provide incentives for people to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles, while trading in ones with less mileage. Also, while the price of gasoline has increased the sales of efficient vehicles, it would clearly have not done as much without the aforementioned program.
Bush didnt bail out any car companies. That is wholly Obamas baby. Bush did TARP and started this whole stupid ball rolling, but give credit where it is due. Obama did this, wasted these billions of dollars for NOTHING (like thats a first) and now will claim that his takeover of the car companies worked because now sales are up. In the meantime pollution from cars is down what...0.012%? AMAZING!!!! Way to go Barry. Only 20 more programs like this and pollution will be down a whole 1%
Just look at the pretzels Mitt Romney has to twist himself into! Between "ObamneyCare" and "Let Detroit die," it's so plainly obvious that the Republicans aren't honest actors, but rather, just dishonest AND REALLY, REALLY FUCKING STUPID politicians who'll oppose EVERYTHING Obama does so that they can continue to drag this country to the right...to their peril!
macgeek2004 7 months ago
@willsbananna
That's a lie, and you know it! "Cash for Clunkers" was one of the most successful programs of the entire Stimulus, and this is beyond debate. The numbers don't lie (like you apparently do)! Once again, the Republicans didn't legitimately attack a policy, because it's wrong or a mistake, but because it's OBAMA's plan, and they have to hate everything Obama does.
Just look at the pretzels Romney has to twist himself into! Between "ObamneyCare" and "Let Detroit die," it's so plainl
macgeek2004 7 months ago
't pulls forward new car sales, but it also scraps perfectly good, serviceable vehicles, thus lowering supply and driving up used-car prices.
In the U.S., the predicted volume was underestimated, the budget was woefully inadequate, and the government was unable to process payments in a timely manner. Cash for Clunkers quickly became a synonym for government overreach and incompetence.' Victor Dial, the man behind the concept of the program.
willsbanana 8 months ago
Funny that the republicans were dead right on this
willsbanana 8 months ago
Everyone, search this in google: 'The guy who first thought of “cash for clunkers” tells you it’s wasteful' and read the article!
willsbanana 8 months ago
The cash for clunkers program was a fantastic example of the atrocious overspending of the democrats....
willsbanana 8 months ago
this guy is lying obviously propaganda
snarfeater 9 months ago
A year later, consumer debt is up since they could not afford a new car as it was. Banks are hurting with higher default on car loans. The build quality of the cars was inferior than the older cars with need for sooner replacement. The foreign manufacturers gained market share in the US. Used car values have increased, meaning its even harder now to buy a better car for the poor who now can not afford a new car more than ever... which in turn hurts the new car industry long term.
IdahoVideo 10 months ago
Bad: Energy used in creating a new car was more than would have been spent with older less efficient car. Smaller replacement cars require more trips to haul cargo, for more fuel consumtion. Artificially removing used cars out of the system before their time increases cost of existing ones since there is a reduced supply, hurting the poor and those not affording new cars. It hurts the auto repair and service sectors of the economy. Decreased US market share since most replacements are foreign.
IdahoVideo 10 months ago
Comment removed
IdahoVideo 10 months ago
Comment removed
IdahoVideo 10 months ago
Comment removed
IdahoVideo 10 months ago
Ya stupid, sold a bunch of imports, put Americans in more debt with my tax money. This guy has Zero I.Q.
ENCOMAN 11 months ago
Comment removed
ENCOMAN 11 months ago
Hahaha how the fuck does this guy have a show. SO FUCKING STUPID
greene825 1 year ago
Yeah, and I'm sure a program for free houses, free food, free beer, free clothing, free movies, free disco balls, etc, would be enormously popular as well. That is, until the people realize that they don't have any money, because the government is taking it all, either through taxes or printing. And then the people will be even more upset when they realize that the government is broke too, and now they have to stand in ration lines.
obtree 1 year ago
They took the money I sent in over the last several years and gave it to another guy to buy a new car.I guess they thought medicare and social security had more than enough money for our future "NOT"!!!! People we are being robbed ,we know it yet we just set back and do nothing.I can`t believe that people actually think that this program was a good idea.I no longer believe our government functions properly it`s broke.Time to buy a new one I wonder if they will give out money for that.LOL
LordHumongousisback 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Obama can suck my WHITE DICK!!!!!!!
shmikens 1 year ago
Listen Republicans oil isn't unlimited and the less we use the less we pay. because the oil companies use what's called supply and demand. so if 30% of Americans go from 10 mpg to 20 mpg or more. that's a hell of a lot of oil saved and thus we pay less a gallon......!
METALMAN4Wii 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
What does it cost in energy to make a car and ship it? What does it cost in energy to destroy the "clunker", ship it and crush it?
And, less than 1 million cars were sold under C4C. The total population of vehicles in the U.S. is around 254 million as of 2007 according to the U.S. DOT, so where did you get your 30% figure from?
Plus, C4C only amounted to a .6 and .7 MPG improvement of the average gas mileage of all vehicles purchased in the months C4C was in effect.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
The oil saved won't lower demand much.
There are financial considerations; if you have a vehicle that's reliable and paid for, what's spent on gas is offset by what's saved in lower insurance costs and no car payments. Now, if this program only got cars that really were dangerous off the road, then maybe it's okay. But C4C destroyed lots of serviceable vehicles.
Plus, there's the cost of C4C the taxpayer will foot; lots of people won't be happy when they file their IRS forms on April 2011.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
As for oil not being unlimited, thanks for telling people something that's already known.
But the problem is what to do about it (and, frankly, I think geopolitical problems will be most likely to disrupt oil production and consumption well before we run out of the planet's supply of crude).
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@Watcher3223 Sadly some people don't know that they don't understand it's "fossil fuel". aka what's left for the Dinosaurs some 50 million years ago and as for crude oil. most cars should be electric/solar by now don't you think.....?
METALMAN4Wii 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
"Sadly some people don't know that they don't understand it's "fossil fuel". aka what's left for the Dinosaurs some 50 million years ago and as for crude oil."
You are assuming that people don't know; the thing to consider is what to do about it that's really effective.
Natural gas and coal are also fossil.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
"most cars should be electric/solar by now don't you think.....?"
Problem is practicality. If you can have an electric car with about the same range and drivability as a gas-powered car for a comparable price and the ability to recharge fully in minutes, about as quickly as pumping a tank full, then things may change.
Solar may supplement the batteries, but photovoltaic cells still do not have the level of efficiency necessary to be really practical and they're expensive.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
Plus, electricity is generated through the use of natural resources, including fossil fuels; you move consumption from one area into another.
Of course, there are many other sources of electricity generation besides fossil fuel such as wind sail, solar (both photovoltaic and thermal), hydroelectricity, and nuclear. But majority of electricity production in the U.S. is coal.
But there's also the vehicle and parts, such as what to do with bad batteries.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
@METALMAN4Wii
Unfortunately, electric cars aren't entirely practical yet. We may get there, but there will be hurdles such as high price, limited infrastructure and opposition from certain interests.
The electric hybrid and cars like the Tesla, the Chevrolet Volt and the GM EV-1 are best viewed as stepping stones towards a path.
But, I submit that you have been opining under stereotype, especially as you referred specifically to republicans, as if they were the bane of human progress.
Watcher3223 1 year ago
i really would like to see some billionaire pay people not to vote and when nobody does then there cant be a president because no one even chose to have one, and then when they say there was a winner then, badda bam badda boom, they are busted for fucking with our rights and freedom and choosing what they want...we dont need some fucktards running our country...and spending our money and telling us what we need to do with our money....its our country not the governments and we need to stand up.
gloverage 1 year ago
IT'S JUST ANOTHER OBAMA SCAM---- 0bama had to do the cash for clunkers.. China wants our metal not our worthless dollar. I worked at a scrap yard, when cars went from $11.00 a hundred to $2.00 per hundred pounds people stopped bringing in their cars for scrap, that's when 0bama started cash for clunkers to get china our metal. This is a FACT research it. Private scrap yards can buy the average junk car for $250.00- 0bama would rather pay $4,500.00 +... "WE'RE SCREWED'!!!
greenhornet63 1 year ago
here's a nice twist for you idiots that think this helped the economy.
we that canfix our own cars have no useful parts in the salvage yards because the motors were destoyed. so when you go the the mechanic and need a motor for your car expect to buy a new $4000 + for a new motor when you coulda got one from a salvage for around $600- $900 dollars.
juggernautxtr 2 years ago
Bastiat covered this issue three centuries ago. Nothing has changed since then.
j1a2r34 2 years ago
If you cant find any other downs maybe you should go to the killing fields behind the dealerships and watch as they destroy so many perfectly good *and needed* cars. I have seen classics die out there: mustangs, camaro ss, sport firebirds, even Corvettes and a Maseratis were not immune. You just dont destroy something that still has good use to it.
CheetahFoxx 2 years ago
@CheetahFoxx I've seen the entire list of cars that were turned in for C4C. One person turned in an '89 25th Anniversary Turbo Trans Am - and even more rare, someone turned in an '87 Buick GNX.
Barry sure has some airheaded followers without a whit of business acumen..
USAon3 1 year ago
When will they talk about somthing with substance, like.... the global warming scam.
jared7087 2 years ago
Fuck off with the "global worming" thing...its only for marketing, and you know it.
RansomCowboy 2 years ago
These TYT hacks make me sick. You can't stimulate the economy by handing out taxpayers' money to small minority that buys cars. "Something out of nothing"
On the note of the environment, this program was an absolute disaster. The amount of emissions from the gasoline not being used is outweighed many times over by the process of manufacturing a new car, not to mention scrapping the old one.
Lastly, the program took many fantastic low mileage cars off the road.
gtemnykh 2 years ago
The quickest way out of a recession is to spend your way out of it (or to be more precise to get the cash moving again.) When people lose confidence in banks and stock markets they stop buying stuff, people who make the stuff get laid off etc, etc. FDR dragged the US out of the Great Depression in the same way. Costly in the short run pays off long term. Good recent example is Germany switching to the Euro, Turned out billions of DM were saved at home when they were exchanged the economy went up
RedNProud 2 years ago
@RedNProud, heres my issue; FDR used that money to CREATE things. And amazing things at that. Boulder Dam, National Parks, The Golden Gate, The Empire State... He created icons and assets that we could use decades later. Obama is destroying things! Our heritage: classic American automobiles that are stylish and durable: much more than the foreign OR American cars being made. Many people in America desperately need cars. YOU JUST SHOULDN'T SPEND PEOPLES MONEY ON DESTROYING WHAT THEY NEED!
CheetahFoxx 2 years ago
this is an example of destroying real payed off assets for more debt in an already over indebted population. The solution to being in unmanageable debt isnt to take on more debt. Think bout it dumbass. just look at the population of all the other debt slave populations in the banana republics around the world for a clue.
godseyeview 2 years ago
Wasn't a big fan of "cash for clunkers." Thought it was very poorly executed.
Muchodelcrazy 2 years ago
I know I am not going to convert any of you brainwashed drones, but you need to know that you have been brainwashed. I am against my government taking my hard earned money and bailing out their friends in the auto (or BANKING) industry. The way I know that most of you are brainwashed is because nothing has really "changed" from the Bush administration. Both parties have sold out. Wake up and smell the corruption.
poopstreek 2 years ago
brilliant..haha
fosterchild4523 2 years ago
Only a liberal would call a program that went 3X over budget a great success.
poopstreek 2 years ago
All programs have a goal. The goal of this program was to see if you can convince Americans to turn in X vehicles for $1B. The goal was reached. The question is then... is it worth $2B more to get a 2X more vehicles traded in? The answer is almost always 'Yes' if the original goal was worth it.
If it isn't worth $3B to save 3X gas, help out car companies, reduce imported oil, etc. then you shouldn't have voted for the $1B to save X gas?
BW022 2 years ago
This is money we don't have. We are borrowing, or worse, printing this money. Other than that, your logic about if it was worth one billion, it is automatically worth three billion does not hold any water whatsoever.
poopstreek 2 years ago
What part of the word *if* do you not understand?
However, it doesn't cost anything. Try thinking about this for a second.
1. You tax manufacters. If you give someone $300 to buy a $15,000 car which you tax manufacters at 3%... you make $150.
2. You own 80% of two major car companies. Any cars they sell, is money you aren't paying in debts.
3. You tax income. Any salary, commisions, etc. of the people making or selling the cars you see 10-20% of.
etc.
BW022 2 years ago
You are an idiot. This is why government does not belong in business.
poopstreek 2 years ago
Yes... name calling. That's a great argument -- just toss out an insult and hope the users are too stupid to notice that you can't counter the actual points.
So does the Federal government not tax manufactored goods in the US just because you call someone an idiot? Sure...
BW022 2 years ago
Our tax dollars are not meant to help people buy cars. Also, we are not generating enough tax dollars to simply run the country, let alone help people buy cars. When will you understand that we are borrowing this money, and it is going to hurt our country more than it helps in the end?
poopstreek 2 years ago
Sad ... you can't figure out that the each time the government convinces one to buy through the program they are making more than they provide in incentives.
If I give you $1 and then you have to give me $2, I make money. I don't need to borrow money for this program and the more people I give $1 the more people give me $2 back.
That other programs cost or waste money... sure. However, we are discussing cash-for-clunkers.
Do you admit that there is a manufacturing tax in the US?
BW022 2 years ago
What is truly sad is that you actually think that the government is going to make money on this. Yes, there are ways that they will get a little bit of this money back, but what about the % of the people who bought foreign cars? Is not the government helping people buy things they could not afford why we are here in the first place?
poopstreek 2 years ago
Foreign companies operate under quotas and pay massive import duties -- so most make vehicles within the US. They either pay manufacturing taxes or import duties.
Don't you know about how your own government taxes things?
In any debate, you really shouldn't be asking questions which you don't know the answers to. It merely shows you aren't qualified to be in the debate nor offering opinions on the subject likely to be correct.
BW022 2 years ago
So, it is still worth it (even with import duties) for the foreign car companies to import cars here right? Well, why should my tax dollars go toward benefiting an foreign car company? I did no cash in my "clunker." I did not get a new car. I think that destroying a perfectly good pickup is pointless. You really think that our government will make it's (my) 4,500 dollars back from import duties? Give me a break.
poopstreek 2 years ago
The few vehicles imported into the US are mostly luxury vehicles. Nearly all vehicles sold in the US assembled in the US. Either way... they are taxed.
What part of 'clunker' do you not understand? If your current vehicle is worth $4500 it wouldn't qualify, you wouldn't accept the scrap value of it, nor would a dealer pay your $4500 for parts.
I'm not sure how your inability to pick an example covered by the program proves that the program costs the government money.
BW022 2 years ago
The U.S. imports a lot of cars, and I don't think that "most" of them are luxury, not that it matters. Also, when did I use the word "clunker" wrong? My pickup qualified for the program.
Other than that, if you really think that the government is going to make money by giving out 3 billion to help people buy cars, then I don't even know why I am talking to you. They will get a % back, but not even close to all of it. It is not the role of government to pick and choose who stays in business.
poopstreek 2 years ago
Due to quotas and import duties it does not make sense to import cheap cars.
You raised the example of a $4500 vechicle. That isn't a clunker. Any vehicle will qualify for the program but you won't find any dealer willing to take give you $4500 for only scaps, nor any consumer willing to accept only scap value on a $4500 vehicle.
The government gets a % of the total price of the vehicle in taxes or duties. That is still likely way more than the discount offered in the program.
BW022 2 years ago
Ahhh, the broken window philosophy
johny344 2 years ago
This guy is such an it idiot. If cash for clunkers works so well why not put 100 million into it....hell why stop there put 1 billion into it. Hell.... lets start giving people money for food. It makes absolutely no sense to strip the private sector of capital in order to subsidize car purchases that people can't afford to put them deeper into debt and in the process destroy their "clunker" which just happens to be a very valuable asset that is paid for.
fosterchild4523 2 years ago 2
two billion was put into the last bill.
tarpumpphillips 2 years ago
good point of view
adamshea999 2 years ago
hmm.. you apparently don't think through the full loop of things. The energy used to build the new cars and destroy the old ones was so great it could have been used to drive the old cars for 20 years. Also, the fuel 'savings' you talk about assume they drive equal distances--not true. People with the new cars are expected to drive MORE (imagine that) to the point that they use more gas overall. Also, don't forget that money was just printed for this program. It didn't come from 'taxes.'
eifersucht2 2 years ago
Do you think you could provide me with a link of some kind. I'd really like to see some evidence. Sounds interesting. I already know that he left out the fact that 4/5 cars sold through the cash for clunkers program are foreign made vehicles, thus, money is leaving the country.
Awesomenessincarnate 2 years ago
Take money from all taxpayers (yes, all taxpayers--the subsidies for the C4C program are derived from borrowed capital--which we ALL have to pay interest on), to encourage people to borrow money from lending institutes (because being in too much debt to creditors is not a problem at all for American people), to buy new cars and destroy old cars (which is, essentially, eliminating viable resources from the economy). What could go wrong?
HazeTheVenomousMist 2 years ago
Comment removed
marsCubed 2 years ago
lulz sorry epic fail of a report. I want my veiw back
downward0sprial 2 years ago
Cash for Clunkers was an additional stealth bailout for GM
Rant about socialism here.
We won't help each other with health insurance costs but say there fellow American need help buying that car? what BS.
uturniaphobic 2 years ago
Sure free money sounds great, but where does it come from?
bkbenjy 2 years ago 2
i believe from taxes.
pdaniels9000 2 years ago
ALSO, the US share of these sales was only about 4%. The rest went to foreign companies. Yep, it's working just fine if you want to put the US market and car dealerships out of business. YOUNG TURK, do you have ANY education at all??
JudyW55 2 years ago
This guy is a TOTAL idiot!!! Just ask her if he's gotten paid yet for his sales yet. What an imbecile!!
JudyW55 2 years ago
Lets see... trade in your fully paid off car so we can borrow more money from china to finance a government program to destroy those perfectly good cars and put more people in debt. Ok I'm a little slow but I think I got it. You guys need to look up the definition of "unintended consiquence" and see how it might apply here.
dvlscapes 2 years ago
Yeesss, lets create a new government program with houses. program with houses. All houses built before 1985 should b
dvlscapes 2 years ago
Did Cenk just say that he did not get involved in the 'cash for clunkers" program? Did he also say that he was in effect supporting the persons who took part in the program? I guess that this is NOT socialism !!!!!! I am sure that most americans need to really understand what socialism really is and not confuse it with COMMUNISM, the two are NOTthe same.
tarpumpphillips 2 years ago
Well this is the The Young Turkey channel, what can you expect
phantomcharger 2 years ago
well this is 'young Turkey' channel? referring to..what?
61talya 2 years ago
Let's put us 3 billion more in debt to help the economy - hmmm . . . and this guy thinks the numbers make sense? And says it's worth it when considering fuel efficiency???? How about letting us drill in our own country for oil - that would save a lot more money for consumers!
katiedaysie 2 years ago
Unfortunately, many in the GOP were for it. My Congressman was for it - and he was an idiot to support it. Hey, I couldn't afford to buy a new car yet my 2008 fed tax bill paid for 2 cash for clunkers. how is that right?
Dlaz52 2 years ago
WE THE PEOPLE are gonna turn your clunker propaganda ass in for real journalists.
elbrookman 2 years ago
Amen brother.........Young Turks suck. Propagandist for the Democratic Socialist Party
frio109 2 years ago
'this has really worked'
LOL......................
Talk about missing the point ENTIRELY.
So, now not only are people tens of thousands of dollars in debt because they own a new car, but the national debt has increased as well, which we'll be paying back with higher taxes and inflation.
WHERE THE FUCK IS THE POSITIVE IN THIS?!??!??!?!?!
We were in a recession because debt. So the solution is to put us into more debt. LOL. IT DOESNT HELP THE ECONOMY IF PEOPLE ARE IN DEBT HLY SHIT.
audiohi 2 years ago 10
Trace the system. The engines of these purchased cars are being destroyed. The steel is being scrapped and recycled. What happens to all the toxic glues, plastics, and other materials in the cars? They are ending up in the air and our soils. If these cars were repurposed with electric motors, they could then be resold as a new and improved product, create jobs for those building the new electric from clunker fleet, and create far less environmental catastrophe.
surrealpol 2 years ago
I can't wait to see everyones faces when they recieve that 1099 from Uncle Sam for that 4500.00 to add to their taxes...
TomSky4U 2 years ago 4
The only one seeing taxes is the dealers. The rebate involves only a transaction between the govt and dealer.
usatv 2 years ago
What about people who actually like old cars. Some of these cars being destroyed now might be collector cars in the future and since the engines, transmissions, and everything else must be destroyed, this might result in a shortage of used parts, making it more expensive for people who can't afford new cars to repair their older cars. In my opinion, the whole concept of encouraging people to throw away working items and have them destroyed and purchase new cars doesn't make sense.
justineuropa 2 years ago 2
Seriously? They just encourage people to trade in cars and destroy them just to boost the car industry?
....well! Why don't we just go around and burn down people's houses to boost the real estate industry then! *facepalm*
Broken Window Fallacy, look it up folks.
lordthawkeye 2 years ago
Great prior few comments. The cars being turned in have to be functional, and also have to be destroyed. So we're taking a functional vehicle and destroying it prematurely, to replace it with new one that consumes incredible resources to build. Really, how green is this? Are we really saving energy? As badly as this was engineered, how can anyone possibly think they'll be able to design a better health care system? Not put a further financial burden on us? If it weren't so sad it'd be hilarious
RSands65 2 years ago 3
hey IDIOT...if it worked so well, why did they cancel the last 3 months they planned for it? and if it's so "fuel-efficient," why are Hummers eligible to buy through the program. and "real money'?? yeah, just a few billion here and there, you MORON. talk about astro-turfing...watch car sales after this monday - they will fall of a cliff. This is just another stupid entitlement program - an incentive to buy cars that put GM an Chrysler in bankruptcy haha or non-American cars that are better...
TheRubberHandMan 2 years ago 3
This guy has a 3rd grade understanding of economics and unfortunately so does 95% of America.
jerthemessiah 2 years ago 2
8/21/2009...How's that cash for clunkers working now? Car dealers not being reimbursed for cars sold. Yet another example of the Democrat government managing things better than we the people can. One day they will decide how to reimburse me for my work. NO THANKS. What ever happened to FREE MARKETS? I know Liberals think free markets are unfair, after all it should just be handed out to them. F*ck anyone who has a nickle more than me. What ever happened to SELF RELIANCE & SELF PRIDE?
kma34108 2 years ago
ummm... one fact that should also be looked at is that the most car dealerships still do not have their money from the government from the first round of Cash 4 Clunkers much less the second round. And everyone will pay the difference they save on the car with higher taxes. The government makes money through taxes, they give the money away, to recoup the loss, they will raise taxes.
guitarflame 2 years ago
Our gov is bankrupt, we cannot afford this. Wake up people---WAKE UP----The people who are better off than most (able to afford a new car)are benifiting and the poor have to pay for it. Our gov has to stop spending
caganb 2 years ago 3
the poor dont have to pay for it. the poor dont pay taxes. its the "better off than most" that will have to pay for all this spending in the form of higher taxes.
xekul 2 years ago
The poor pay taxes when they buy a bottle of ripple like everyone else
caganb 2 years ago
The poor pay the inflation tax when they see the price for a loaf of bread go higher... or to double digits.
Swanston 2 years ago
yes, we call pay for inflation when we see the value of our money deteriorate.
the stimulus and other programs like C4C where the fed infuses more cash into the economy is going to cause inflation on a scale we haven't seen since the carter years.
thanks obama!
xekul 2 years ago
In the alternative of bailout money, why didn't they across the board do incentives like this for other things. It's a win-win for everyone. Consumers start spending for the good deals and business is better off in the current slump we're in. Not many things I can look at the government and say "That Worked" but this is one of them.
Incentives and tax CREDITS (not deductions) would greatly benefit EVERYONE to boost this economy instead of free money via some bailout.
U4TSAF2 2 years ago
Excuse me "redpoint5", but how in the world you came up with "this program harms the environment and economy"???
The program is replacing gas guzzlers with new, more fuel efficient cars and somehow you turn this into program that harms environment???
And about the economy, the program is influencing sales and manufacturing so people keep their jobs and paycheck, and guess what - they pay taxes that go back into the tax pool to finance this program and others!
mvelimir 2 years ago
the program may not harm the environment, but it isnt as "green" as proponents make it out to be b/c people dont consider the energy (carbon) it takes to manufacture a new car. yes, you are replacing a less fuel efficient car with a more efficient one, but the old one took energy (carbon) to make and it still had useful life and you are destroying it before its useful life was over. so energy savings from the new cars are offset by extra carbon emitted to replace the old (still useful) cars.
xekul 2 years ago 2
It's painfully obvious this clown of a "news" host has never had an economics 101 course, otherwise his opinion would be much different.
Of course he is correct that it's politically unpopular for Repubs to be against it, but just because the program is popular with the inept public doesn't mean it's a good idea.
The average citizen is oblivious to the fact that this program harms the environment and economy. They just like getting a new car; like dangling a carrot in front of a jackass.
redpoint5 2 years ago 3
redpoint5: TYT has never been "news" in an objective journalistic sense. They are just an opinion show and their opinion is always the same. Whatever Obama does it great. The GOP and anyone else who doesn't like it is bad. There's the TYT party line for you.
Their videos consistently lack perspective and I have never seen one worth more than 1 star.
xekul 2 years ago 3
Very untrue, they've been pissed at Obama for being an epic failure.
Vlogtimusprime 2 years ago
@redpoint5 TYT isnt news. Btw their waaaay smarter and literate than the news hosts on major channels. GF.
callowaymotorcompany 1 year ago
good haircut cenk
skylarella 2 years ago
What kinda idiot takes a car he owns outright in order to take on more debt to get a new car?
ChristiansMustLearn 2 years ago 3
LOL Cash for Clunkers is a joke, my 92 honda that gets 16 mpg eats oil, rattles sometimes misfires, has 389k miles on it, and doesn't qualify for this program.
Silkfox 2 years ago
Silkfox, What kind of Honda? I checked the MPG for '92 Accords and Civics, and it's much higher than that.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
You can forget the saving the environment part, b/c a number of these "clunkers" were not crushed or dismantled, many of them were resold back on the market through the back door.
A guy I know who works for Ford even told me, people were giving just the frame of an old car they had and were still getting the $4,500 anyways.
Cash for Clunkers was a scam and it created artificial demand for cars for a brief period of time.
dicendimes 2 years ago 2
What you seem to have forgotten to say is that the Car Dealerships are not getting paid the money back they were promised....so let's see, if they go out of business who do you think will buy them out and take over?
OldestOzzyFan 2 years ago
How about poor people who can only afford a "clunker"? I got my 95 honda civic 2 years ago for $1000. i saved a lot of money buying a used car and it gets good mileage also. Fuck cash for clunkers.
FarangBalls 2 years ago 3
Honda cars get great mileage. I doubt they would qualify anyway. But it would be good to have a wider selection of used vehicles that are perfectly drivable.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
HOLY SHIT free money was successul? I didnt see that one coming.
ForTehNguyen 2 years ago 2
The problem with Cash for Clunkers is that anybody who needed a car has bought one. The number of cars that will be sold for the next 2-5 will drop. It is an artificial stimulant into the economy.
oliverleehornbake 2 years ago
i say lets borrow more money from china so we can buy more cars from japan and give china the state of california to pay off the loan. does the people at TYT really think that we are that stupid
brandymmyers 2 years ago
lol good one
dirty1223 2 years ago
Wow. Yeah, let's not mention the hurting auto repair industry. Awesome idea, "Hey let's trade in my old car that I own for some brand new debt!" Yeah what a great Idea! Let's solve the economic problem by creating more debt. Not to mention people keep forgetting that the government owns the big American car manufacturers. Fucking morons.
kryp10yt 2 years ago 2
This video proves, once and for all, that Cent has no concept of economics and is just a blind follower of the democratic agenda. Notice he doesn't talk to any USED car dealers, if there are even any left now. Socialism is a "win for everybody"? Tell that to to anybody trying to sell a used car, you ignorant tool.
I would like to applaud the other commenters on here. The intelligent posts have drowned out the idiots, which is rare on TYT videos.
Monawanaha 2 years ago 3
Cash for clunkers is this:
Your next-door neighbor wants to buy a new car, so obama takes $100 from you and 44 other neighbors to buy his old "clunker" and give him $4,500 for a new car. Socialism at its finest.
The clunker is destroyed, as mandated by the bill. Used cars now are all worth $4,500. Good luck buying one for less, or even finding one since they are being DESTROYED. You can only trade in for a NEW car, and the clunker can't be resold. So, used car salesmen, meet unemployment line.
Monawanaha 2 years ago
They are spending billions on programs like this only to cut Medicare by 500 billion. So help the environment a little and let our parents and grandparents die from lack of medical care.
KrisMayeaux 2 years ago
Arab - mix out of american finance!!!!!!!
toknow07 2 years ago
yes, C4C will increase overall fuel efficiency by taking fuel inefficient cars off the road in favor of more efficient ones. but it still takes energy to make new cars, energy that takes carbon output to make. so for every new car that is manufactured for the C4C, there is a certain amount of carbon output that wouldn't be there if not for C4C. Yet everyone thinks this is great for the environment.
xekul 2 years ago
xekul ...Cash4Clunkers program promotes the sale of fuel efficient cars.
The SAME ENERGY was previously used to build GAS GUZZLERS.
So the new Cash4Clunkers program is far superior in every way.
Your argument has no substance...and YES more fuel efficient cars on the roads, will prove to be great for the environment.
librophile 2 years ago
librophile - you totally miss the point of my argument. it takes energy to make new cars. the same energy that was PREVIOUSLY used to build the clunkers. thats the point, the energy was already used to build these cars, which the C4C program destroys before their useful life is over. now to replace them, we have to use MORE energy to replace the clunkers with new cars. so even if the new cars are more fuel efficient, you still use energy to replace cars that still had useful life
xekul 2 years ago 2
Duh. I'm all for the program, I thought it was funny that it's working so well that it's already used up the alloted funds; dumbass.
toddlamp 2 years ago
I'm done here, no more comments. I'm not going to stoop so low as to start flaming.
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
BTW, if democrats are so much for the middle class, how come they are RUINING the used car industry that only people of lesser income can afford, and giving it to these huge companies who have CEO's that get payed massive amounts of money?
All the meantime, the struggling used car dealership is watching all of their potential inventory being crushed and thrown away!
How the hell is this helping out the middle class? TELL ME!
neemguy81 2 years ago
Again, no one is forcing you to use C4C, it's a voluntary program! Also, are you not aware that making new cars = jobs?
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
I dont have a Job and have to sell my truck to survive...
I cant sell my fucking truck now!
Whos gonna pay the same amount of money for a used vehicle when they can buy new? Im stuck with this truck and just want to get rid of it so I can get a cluncker to get me through college.
C4C sucks for used cars.
neemguy81 2 years ago
Then get a used car! C4C is a voluntary program, no one's forcing you to use it!
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
I would LOVE to buy a used vehicle! But the debt that remains with the truck im trying to sell is preventing this.
Its hard to sell a used truck because some1 can pay the same for a new one.
Does that not make any sense?
I cant sell my truck now because of this program and I desperatly need to.
neemguy81 2 years ago 2
neemguy81...You're not thinking college boy.
The market for used cars will not be affected.
Without the CASH4CLUNKERS program, NO NEW CARS would sell = NO USED CARS taken in exchange.
The number of EXISTING used cars ALREADY on the used car lots will be same.
It's only the used cars taken in exchange for a new car that will be going to the scrapyards...NOT THE ONES ALREADY on used-cars lots AND YOU KNOW IT !!
Use your brain & T-H-I-N-K !!
librophile 2 years ago
I do know that the vehicles already on lots are not being affected, or sold for that matter. Who would pay the same price for used?
The point I am trying to make is that Future inventories of used car lots are being affected because these cars that would have been on the lots are being destroyed.
Besides, the Government doesnt even have the money to back up shit right now.
Money is supposed to be a note for services renderd...not a handout.
Oh, and you wont make your point by insulting me :)
neemguy81 2 years ago 2
The majority of the comments here are negative, yet Cenk doesn't address half of them. He just talks about how successful the program is.
gcbarone 2 years ago
Anna Dump your BF and move in with me! I'll give yah a Bumper to Bumper waranty! =D
Tunedup81 2 years ago
So wait let me get this straight. The government started a program that helps poor people get rid of vehicles that are in working condition and they own it. This leads to poor people creating more debt than they need. I'm not a Republican nor am I part of any political party but just think about this, Why support a program thats going to put the poor in a worse situation?
Estate17 2 years ago
They are dumping all of their old technology off on the public which will be outdated in a few short years. The folks participating in this program are getting ripped off. Unfortunately, anyone who pays taxes is being forced to participate. Those that have to borrow $ to by the new cars will be handing over their $ to the bankers. Also, don't forget the sales tax revenue that will be handed to the state governments. These facts are not just coincidence, but well thought out built in residuals.
aldell1 2 years ago
Old cars need to get off the road, noisy cars need to be FORCED off the road.
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
Guess you don't believe in private property rights. Looks like you believe in centralized 1 size fits all unconstitutional fascism. Guess its OK until it effects you personally, & the property you have worked for & own outright. By the way, the $ I earn from my labor is my private property, & should not be forcibly redistributed to benefit others involuntarily as is being done in the C4C, tarp, bank bailouts, policing the world, etc etc etc. Systematic destructing all elements of freedom.
aldell1 2 years ago
Taking aborion rights from women, the right to marry from gays, the right to practice free religion, and breaking separation of church and state is just as unconstitutional, and unlike entire industries that no one has control over, this effects INDIVIDUALS!
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
On abortion...
Does the woman not choose to have sex? Does she not get to choose adoption? Running away from responsibility through legalized murder is denying any choice that the child/human would otherwise have. Would you yourself have chosen to be aborted? Therefore, every choice that human would have made is now denied b/c of abortion. I see a lot more choices in no abortion.
Now on rape and life threatening conditions, I am conflicted and really dont have an answer for those right now.
neemguy81 2 years ago
"he hadn't had a customer in a while".... no shit, these same people are going to be the ones who can't pay for this shit in a couple of months. You people scare the shit out of me! At best you are very NoT smart.
readywerx 2 years ago
So lets tax people, drawing money out of the economy and subsidizes one industry and praise it as a success, when we cannot measure the lost it may have had throughout the aggregate economy since the money is being taking from somewhere. And then, pay more of these clunkers when poorer people may be able to buy these used cars for cheaper than $4k. Lets destroy usable cars and have people go into debt to buy a new one! Brilliant economics b/c we focus solely on the one industry it benefits!
cmbradford 2 years ago
Define "poor," since anybody can use the program. Besides, it would be better off financially down the road that they get the new, more reliable, and more fuel-efficient vehicle than an older, less reliable, and less fuel-efficient vehicle.
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
Here is what I meant by poor. Since people are guaranteed say $4k for this used vehicle when on a market it may only cost $2k, the poorer people who may need a cheap car at $2k, but the subsidy will drive up the price on cars. Yes these cars will be more fuel efficient which is great, but dealerships are already offering leases and loans for these cars, which will entice people to go into debt when they already have a usable car. I'm mostly concerned w/ how it helps one industry over another
cmbradford 2 years ago
Get rid of the Unions, Special intrest organizations, and this idiot, and we will be America again. Until then, spread your wealth to all these lazy fucks who will take all they can.
hawerdo 2 years ago
All other issues aside. This program is a waste of time economically speaking. Just a parlor trick to kick start debt spending consumerism which is the reason we are screwed in the first place.
Badactor67 2 years ago 2
aaamen
sandman1439 2 years ago
cash for clunkers is wellfair, there's no free lunch, that money was stollen at gun point from hard WORKING people and is being used to buy votes. wake up people!!!!!
sandman1439 2 years ago
Well this money may have been just created out of thin air. So it may not have been stolen at gun point but stolen none the less lol I agree with you though
Estate17 2 years ago
i love how he says 1 or 2 billion dollars isn't real money. a liberal WOULD think that.
rcorbinnnn 2 years ago 3
you must be American. It's called a figure of speech.
youvexme 2 years ago
You're obviously not American, so you wouldn't understand.
rcorbinnnn 2 years ago
You think of it as spending, we think of it as an investment. Even more money than what was spent on the program will be saved down the road in fuel costs for the consumer.
theclarkeshow 2 years ago
Its not investing, its shifting demand. By helping the new car industry, they hurt the used car industry. That includeds dealors, parts shops and repair garages. Destroying something of value does not create value. It is the broken window fallacy.
gcbarone 2 years ago
You have to mention reduced demand for fuel , which in theory should reduce fuel costs, further stimulating the economy.
gotilk 2 years ago
LOL
gtfoudbs 2 years ago
whhen the republians were in power about six years ago didnt they spend 600bilion dollers on a drug bill? and before u say anything i didnt miss type, 600bil
blondefishavatar 2 years ago
OK...cash for clunkers. Heres the problem(s) with this. 1 it takes away a source of funding for many charities that have been accepting cars. 2 it does nothing, repeat NOTHING to help with any environmental issues and 3 its a huge waste of money. The positive has been that its increased car sales for the dealers, but that was done intentionally to make Obamas takeovers of the car companies APPEAR to have worked. If Obama said it, its a LIE.
PJYost38 2 years ago 2
TYT .. you people are idiots
I don't need to prove it. Every time you open your mouth, stupidity oozes out of it.
Robert697 2 years ago 2
Hes working till midnight because he is boinking his secretary!
8 am till midnight for a guy that sells cars just doesnt happen!
F4O4U4R4S 2 years ago
ANNA HAS A BOYFRIEND?!!?!?!!!
GaminHasard 2 years ago
I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T .. I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T .. I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T
Why the not-for-profit Government run PUBLIC PLAN is better then the profit-driven PRIVATE PLAN. The Public Plan doesn't have "RESCISSION"
GOOGLE: Health Insurance Rescission Spells Trouble For Consumers.
librophile 2 years ago
glad i could help pay ur boyfriends bills
legacy6684 2 years ago
it is a nice socialist program
legacy6684 2 years ago
Once again, TYT is wrong on the issues. lol...so much for "progressive thinking"....
blowjobclinton 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T .. I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T .. I-M-P-O-R-T-A-N-T
Why the not-for-profit Government run PUBLIC PLAN is better then the profit-driven PRIVATE PLAN. The Public Plan doesn't have "RESCISSION"
GOOGLE: Health Insurance Rescission Spells Trouble For Consumers.
librophile 2 years ago
If you clearly disapprove of liberal thinking over the fucked up, redneck thinking that you clearly participate in, then why even watch TYT?
Elendil176 2 years ago
because we like to know what kind of bullshit is being thrown around today, that's why.
gtfoudbs 2 years ago
''cash for clunkers''....I thought the government just payed BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to the car makers for building shitty cars. All of us taxpayers get to repay the billions spent on this welfare program. This is NOT free money. Cars are already being made more fuel efficient without "cash for clunkers". The price of gasoline has already increased the sales of gas efficient cars. I thought this dumbass administration wanted to diminish our dependence on oil?
blowjobclinton 2 years ago
First of all, I assume that by the billions of dollars the government payed to the car industry, you mean the bailout out money that the Bush Administration gave to the car companies. Then, yes, taxpayers get to repay the money that Bush spent to bail out the auto-makers.
Elendil176 2 years ago
But then, shouldn't you be more pissed about all the money he spent to bail out the rich fucks on Wallstreet? To your credit, efficient cars are already being produced without the "Cash for Clunkers" program. The program just serves to provide incentives for people to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles, while trading in ones with less mileage. Also, while the price of gasoline has increased the sales of efficient vehicles, it would clearly have not done as much without the aforementioned program.
Elendil176 2 years ago
Bush didnt bail out any car companies. That is wholly Obamas baby. Bush did TARP and started this whole stupid ball rolling, but give credit where it is due. Obama did this, wasted these billions of dollars for NOTHING (like thats a first) and now will claim that his takeover of the car companies worked because now sales are up. In the meantime pollution from cars is down what...0.012%? AMAZING!!!! Way to go Barry. Only 20 more programs like this and pollution will be down a whole 1%
PJYost38 2 years ago 2
To your last point, what the fuck does that have to do with anything?
Elendil176 2 years ago