Driving a Better Bargain

Is the government's 'Cash for Clunkers' plan right for every driver? Nope.

By Linda Stern | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jun 30, 2009

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: mtnlover0529 @ 07/30/2009 3:43:49 PM

    What the hell will they do to us next. This is just like the housing market. Offer all these people free money to buy a new car and what happens in 6 mos. or a year when they can't afford the payments, combined with the full coverage insurance they now have to have. The auto company gets the car back. Just like the mortgage industry. This is appauling! Not only have a lot of innocent people lost their house, now they will be losing their car also. All to save the auto industry. Believe me, this is NOT helping the average Joe at all. Come on. Do you explain all this to the people that are trading in their paid off cars, only to get into something they can't afford? So, here we go again, a bandage for big busniesses and the little people get SCREWED. They just won't know it for a few months. Hope some looks into this, so we don't end up in the same mess as the mortgage company.

  • Posted By: wrrock @ 07/20/2009 12:01:30 PM

    Buyer beware - some scams have been popping up on the Internet and at car dealerships you should know about if you are going to do the cash for clunkers program. Best tip is not to give your sensitive information online to get a credit. Watch this video,

    http://tinyurl.com/nbs3bd

  • Posted By: wrrock @ 07/20/2009 11:57:45 AM

    Good in theory, if it worked like the graphic, but the unintended consequences make it a lemon:

    http://butasforme.com/2009/07/17/cash-for-clunkers-the-ultimate-bait-and-switch-marketing-tool/

  • Posted By: bo-derek @ 07/03/2009 9:34:10 AM

    That's great, at least is killing a lot of amc gremlins and pacers, and the people is buying fusions and corollas.
    Moving the economy, eh?

  • Posted By: bojack27 @ 07/02/2009 12:50:26 PM

    Does anyone even know that this is not an original idea from the Obama administration? Germany already gives cash for clunkers at Euro rate of 2500.

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 1:07:57 PM

    Mr. Obama:

    I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and not caring about what you idiots do. We are watching what you are doing and we are getting increasingly fed up with all of you. I also want you to know that I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensive to every one of my sensibilities. I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.

    Sincerely,

    Every Real American

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 1:30:27 PM

      Oh, give me a break. You don't speak for "Every Real American". You speak for yourself. At the end of the day, you have the same thing as any of the rest of us - one voice, and one vote. And that ought to be enough.

      • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/01/2009 4:27:57 PM

        While I do agree with your discounting his b/s of "real Americans", one vote one voice only functions to get office but to use that office counter to the wishes of the majority there is no democracy, period! This and all issues pertaining to the official that both you and I helped elect seems to never effect your buyers satisfaction and I therefore must conclude that you are so loyal to someone who clearly has lied and represents tiny minority over the majority on a consistant basis means that you have gone from just a voter to political idolitry which is mindless and unthinking!
        Though I voted for Obama and still hope for the change (for the better) and for him to the best for the American people, I am still capable of seeing his lies and inconsistencies and will point them out in shock at the bald faced disgust over betrayal of the principals of the "so called" democratic party! Grow a set, man up and realize that patting on the back and just saying "atta-boy" as someone does exactly as the last idiot did only perpetuates the eternal screwing of the people!

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 4:43:39 PM

          My testicles are fine, thank you. And I'll said what I've said before - though I have concern over some of Obama's policies and don't agree with some of them so far, I'm also willing to give those policies a chance to take effect before I prejudge them as failures.

          It's politics. The more I look at it, as I have intensely over the last year and a half, the more I am convinced of how imperfect the world is. So what's the right answer? *** 'em all? Find an honest politician and vote one in?

          Here's a deal for you: find me an honest politician and I'll vote for one. Seriously, man. Go find one. Obama's far from perfect, but I knew that when I voted. He's very slick - I knew that when I voted too. He's also incredibly analytical, and CAPABLE of effectively running a large machine as he proved with his campaign. That was a big reason I voted for him, since I treat the efficiency and financial management of a campaign as a proving ground for the Presidency. Hillary ran herself out of money twice and needed the DNC to bail her out - and McCain spent six figures to deck Sarah Palin out in nice jewelry when the economy was collapsing.

          I'm not perfect myself - far from it. I also know that the world and its history are very, very imperfect - human history is very human, so to speak. That's why I understand when someone who I still feel is trying to do a good job ends up catering to some of the people who get elected. Believe it or not, I understand why Bush did it too - I just felt like his management style and unilateralism were wrecking our morale and image abroad, and I don't think the oil industry, which was a big part of Bush's particular set of political backers among others, gives a damn about the environment.

          In the end, I'm still going to vote for the man who I feel is the best candidate. In addition, Obama put out a piece of campaign literature that told me to believe in my own ability to produce change in Washington. That means I have to take an active role in trying to make my views known, more active than I have been, even. He managed to get himself elected the year I voted for him, so that was a good start. I think it's a good attitude to have, as well. One of the reasons I'm not worried about this "sky is falling' stuff is that for the last year and a half, I've been cleaning up MY world, cleaning up the mistakes I myself have made in the last few years, and just generally trying to put myself in the best position to ride things out that I can. And I have faith in my ability to do it, in addition to working actively.

          I think that if we really had a mass movement of people who started actively trying to clean things up around them instead of waiting for the government to fix it all, it would be a lot better. And I plan to pay my taxes willingly and with an understanding that all these roads we drive on every day, the schools kids go to, the fire department, the police - those things cost money.

          • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/02/2009 11:38:54 AM

            Honestly refreshing, the first time I have read any desent of any Obama policies from you. As far as the philisophical "find me an honest polititian", not much help, but I also believe to know a polititian is to know a liar, hypocrit, and someone who would not know or accept the will of the people, thanks.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 4:46:27 PM

            "In the end, I'm still going to vote for the man who I feel is the best candidate. "

            Actually, let's make that man OR woman, the way I should have said in the first place. :P

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 5:02:17 PM

          "This and all issues pertaining to the official that both you and I helped elect seems to never effect your buyers satisfaction"

          Oh, dear. I guess the voting booth people didn't inform you of our "no returns or exchanges" policy when it comes to Presidential merchandise.

          Cheer up. I hear politicians' back pockets are half off these days. Recession special and everything must go!

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 5:07:56 PM

            You can get the "Rod Blagojevich" for an astonishingly low rate right now, in fact.

            The "Jack Abramoff" is astonishingly affordable too. Or go higher-end and purchase some oil Senators? :D

  • Posted By: ok4u @ 07/02/2009 8:36:22 AM

    These harsh comments aren't fair. As the bumper sticker says, 99% of Democrats give the rest a bad name.

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 11:54:55 AM

    It seems everyday there is another example of media deception in America. With the Fourth of July approaching, it is well worth remembering why the founding fathers gave the press special privileges. They wanted journalists to report honestly???to give the folks accurate, unbiased information so they could make informed decisions about who should hold power. Many of the founders like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams didn't much like the press, but they well understood that, for a democratic Republic to work, voters need honest information.

    Unfortunately, the vision of a free and honest press is fast disappearing in America. Let me give you yet another vivid example. This week a poll by the New York Times asked, "Would you be willing to pay higher taxes so that all Americans have health insurance... ?"

    57% said they were willing, 37% not willing, and 6% said "no opinion."

    So, according to the Times, overwhelmingly, Americans want government-financed health care. That's what the poll says, right?

    But if you read all the way down to the bottom of the poll, you see another question. "Who did you vote for [in the presidential election]?"

    48% said Obama; just 25% answered McCain. The rest, 19%, did not vote. Wow, that's almost two to one for Obama.

    But the popular vote tally in the election last November was 53% for Barack Obama, and 46% for John McCain. Wait a minute. That's a lot closer than two to one. So apparently the New York Times skewed the polling by offering the questions to mostly Obama voters. I'm shocked they supported higher taxes for federal health care, aren't you?

    This kind of dishonesty is not uncommon in the media. The Times says its poll is "scientific." Sure it is???scientifically stacking the deck.

    I believe very few people read the entire poll before digesting the health care headline. The result is a flawed perception of what the American public really wants. The folks may, indeed, support Uncle Sam paying some heavy medical bills, but this poll is not a reflection of anything other than a New York Times deception.

    By the way, CBS News also had its name on that poll.

    As a media guy who wants accurate information, that kind of stuff tees me off. As soon as the pollsters learned most the respondents were Obama people, they should have thrown the results out. But the Times ardently favors national health care and a huge federal government. So the con played out.

    The most frustrating part about this is that nothing can be done. The Times has an ombudsman, but he's a joke, and no outside agency has any power over the paper. It can pretty much do what it wants, and does.

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 1:37:14 PM

      "But the popular vote tally in the election last November was 53% for Barack Obama, and 46% for John McCain. Wait a minute. That's a lot closer than two to one. So apparently the New York Times skewed the polling by offering the questions to mostly Obama voters. I'm shocked they supported higher taxes for federal health care, aren't you?"

      What you are referring to is called "selection bias", and it may or may not have anything to do with the Times itself. You can't force anybody to take any given poll. So those people who choose to take the poll and respond may be those with more of an interest in the issue - and the Times' readership skews towards Obama anyway. It is quite likely that, consciously or unconsciously - given the slant of that paper's editorials - the poll ended up appealing more to the left than the right.

      I also would like to bring your attention to the fact that it happens on both sides. I was browsing Fox News the other day, and this poll came up: http://news1.newsmax.com/obama_socialist/?PROMO_CODE=8051-1 I think it's safe to say that that particular poll caters to right-wing bias...I can guarantee you that the wording, the picture choice, and the questions in that poll will all be more likely to pull from the right than the left, if only because most liberals will look at the word "socialist" and end up at least mildly disgusted and not want to have anything to do with it. I took it, but only to deliberately combat the selection bias.

      • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/01/2009 2:01:34 PM

        Real clear politics .com carries comparisons of all polls and since I have been reading them(at least 5 years) no Fox poll has been even 10% off the median poll average, more importantly I believe that someone as save as you are about politics already knows this and making the statement you did reduces drastically any belief that you could ever be "fair and balanced" when it did not serve you purposes which literally redirects your statement directly at yourself! Pathetic!

        • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 2:24:07 PM

          I actually don't pay much attention to polls at all. But I did learn some statistics in school.

          Anyway, *** you too, bro. Good to see the level of discourse being elevated, here.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 2:28:33 PM

            Just to clarify, the Newsmax poll was advertised on Fox News, not an officially sanctioned Fox News poll. So indeed it's unreasonable to compare it to an official Fox or Times poll. But my point that selection bias in polling absolutely happens on both sides is still quite valid.

            • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/01/2009 3:27:45 PM

              Only "valid" if of course you ignore the original premise of "off by 50%", which is the forte' of those found to live by arguing one way till proven wron and then quicklt assuming another posture or arguement to make themselve look less wrong, btw, you are great at that!

              • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 4:18:02 PM

                There's no "off by 50%" anywhere in the equation. You don't agree with me, and you think Fox News polls are fair and unbiased. That's fine. I disagree, and I think there's bias in any poll, with some worse than others. Which are worse than which is not my concern. My concern is that "Stil Free" believes that the Times is severely biased while Fox News is not, and I reiterate my opposition to that position. My argument is also not wrong just because you say so, in particular not when you keep attacking me with ad hominem statements instead of debating my points on their own credibility.

                • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/01/2009 4:30:45 PM

                  "But the popular vote tally in the election last November was 53% for Barack Obama, and 46% for John McCain. Wait a minute. That's a lot closer than two to one. So apparently the New York Times skewed the polling by offering the questions to mostly Obama voters.

                  • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 4:56:12 PM

                    46% - 25% = 21%, no? You're 29% short of your quota, there. Unless you're referring to differences in other totals too, but your meaning was unclear, and it seemed like you were trying to say one of the figures was 50% off itself.

          • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 2:26:10 PM

            Besides which, is "Newsmax" really a Fox poll? Also, do you have any data to back up your claim, or are you just kind of going, "well, I don't think any Fox polls have been drastically different from the poll average"? That's the kind of assertion you have to back up with data, or it's invalid. People make mistakes when they aren't taking specific notes.

      • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 1:39:02 PM

        (Here's the address again all on one line for convenience:

        http://news1.newsmax.com/obama_socialist/?PROMO_CODE=8051-1

        )

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 1:07:21 PM

    Mr. Obama:

    Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century? Where do you get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country? Have you not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States? This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this
    country, at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage. Do you not understand this?

    Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans. Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia. You don't show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, the respect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia. How dare you, sir! How dare you!

    You can't find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because you don't want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey. You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germans more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves. What's the matter with you?

    • Posted By: Vigilance @ 07/01/2009 2:41:59 PM

      "Where do you get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country?"

      It isn't. We practice religious tolerance and pluralism and nobody living here is forced to convert to Christianity. It's one of the greatest things about our country - you can be Buddhist, Christian, Sikh, Taoist, Jewish, Muslim, or Ba'hai here.

      I mean, does that really upset you that badly? Or - let's ask a less loaded question. Taking into account that a lot of America has a poor image of Muslims right now, let's pretend just for a second they were off the list. (Not going to happen, but just for the sake of argument.)

      Does it bother you that Buddhists, Jews, Ba'hai, agnostics, Sikhs, Taoists, Confucians, and other people from different faiths are allowed to worship freely in America, with no expectation that they must believe in Christianity or become Christians at any point?

  • Posted By: jenzy @ 07/01/2009 2:33:47 PM

    It's already done damage to the industry: http://businesstrends.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/cash-for-clunkers-declining-consumer-confidence/

  • Posted By: concerned liberal @ 07/01/2009 1:30:37 PM

    As usual in the U.S. the definition of democracy is the opposite of the dictionary! The majority carry much less clout than the extreme minority.
    If all the people (American citizens) that were employed by the auto industries and all subsiquent subsidiaries were immediately left without work(would never happen because of decades or maybe even generations of aftermarket sales for existing vehicles) they would constitute less than 3% of the American population and therefore never should be ANY consideration in terms of democracy! Beyond the absurd tinyness of the pampered few (especially the unions who literally made their own beds in this manner), the American taxpayers cash outlay for these undeserving few would in itself pay decades of unemployment and 4 year degree reeducation for all those employees making this debaulkle nothing more than a corupt payback from our latest 4 year dictator!

    20 years from today the auto industry will still be paying no taxes and the American people will still be saddled with yet another minority gifting of lifestyle. It would seem the only way to get a fair shake in America is to become one of the slothfull underqualified employees of the government or possibly to purposely breed or marry minority status into your life therefore bringing some minut possiblity of equal treatment for all!

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 1:07:36 PM

    Mr. Obama:

    I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of yourselves, all of you. You are so
    self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do you intend to do about them? Anything? I seriously doubt it.

    What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members -- on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer.

    You haven't said anything about that. Who authorized that? I surely didn't! Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that's $45 million more than the AIG bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million -- not a bad take. Who
    authorized that and why haven't you expressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now.

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 1:06:41 PM

    Mr. Obama:

    I have had it with you and your administration, sir. Your conduct on your recent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequate representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.
    You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that you have
    abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America. You are responsible to the citizens of the United States.

    You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth. I personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United States telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about their status in the world. Sir, what do you think the First World War and the Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of Europe? Are you brain dead? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about?

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 1:04:48 PM

    LMAO! Is this the same green president that wants us to stop buying "STUFF" on credit to fill our empty souls but we need these new green autos to keep jobs alive. I drive a 1994 Buick Skylark 4-door; perfect for kids and dogs. 32 plus miles to the gallon. The real question is when is America going to realize that there is a VERY dangerous man taking away the very fiber of what this country was built on minute by minute and the damage he is doing will harm your children for generations to come as it already has. Do you see Iran cozying up to us? How about Fidel Castro? Are you living any better? "give him time", look, in the short time all he has done is pissed more people off and unfortunately its not the PTA lady; its people who are equally insane but they have their fingers on the buttons of nuclear weopons. blah blah blah, scare tactics of Repubs. PLEASE. Wake up people.

  • Posted By: ok4u @ 07/01/2009 12:46:47 PM

    Let's personalize this, get it out of the fuzzy reporting. I'm still trying to understand why it would be good for me to give someone else money so they can trade in their auto for a new one. I personally have never owned a new automobile. Perhaps someone could explain why I, as a taxpayer should subsidize someone's new auto...for any reason. Are we ever going to grow up enough to get the idea that when it comes to government spending of money, WE are the ones whose money is being spent? That it isn't about saving the environment anyway, but in controlling yet another aspect of your life?

  • Posted By: very old man 0838 @ 07/01/2009 1:02:17 PM

    There is a better way to make GM (Government Motors) a success and I wish Obi-wan will take a look at this suggestion.
    One of the reasons why GM???s been making lousy cars all these years is because those people who made them don???t drive the lousy vehicles they made. They have no idea how bad GM cars were. This is similar to the lousy performance of the Post Office. Most of the people working for the Post Office do not write or mail letters so they don???t know how long it takes for a letter to get from point A to point B.
    If the rule says, ???Every GM employee must drive GM cars only or you are fired??? and they were made to trade in their BMW???s or Toyotas, buy GM cars with employee discounts but with one condition: employee cars do not come with a new car warranty. If anything went wrong, they have to pay for the repairs. If the CO2 sensor failed, they have to pay. If the sun roof leaks, they have to pay. If the transmission fails, they have to pay. If the car is noisy and uncomfortable, that is too bad. If the car uses twice as much gas as their neighbour???s, too bad.
    Once everybody from the CEO to the union boss to the hubcap man were totally frustrated by the very poor and unacceptable quality of their GM cars, and they got tired of paying for repairs, lost of use of their vehicles, and lost face in front of their friends, they will have no choice but to make the car the best in the world and everybody will want to buy one.
    Now, can they make cars they are proud to own themselves? Are they sincere about saving the company? Let us put the monkey back on their shoulders and they can walk their talks.

  • Posted By: The Messiah @ 07/01/2009 12:04:33 PM

    For those who don't know there is or should we say was - as in past tense, a complete industry that recycles and restores classic cars. One man's clunker is another mans treasure. Now many more U.S. jobs will be lost as a result of Bama-Nomics. Your worst nightmare is just starting to occur. When you have no job, no home, no retirement and you're hungry, THEN you'll start to understand that Bama-Nomics is killing America.

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 11:53:55 AM

    Take away the moral order, and you have chaos???not just on the streets, but in board rooms and financial markets as well. It???s a worldview problem???disregarding the common good. Obama supporters are like surfers riding a euphoric tidal wave when the real destruction is creeping up on them. Here is what he has done:
    Voted against banning partial birth abortion.
    Voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out of state abortions
    In 2001 he questioned harsh penalties for drug dealing.
    Says he will deal with street level drug dealing as a minimum wage affair.
    Met with Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jung Il and Mahmud Ahmadinejad.
    Votes yes on providing habeas corpus for Guantanamo Bay detainees and what is the recidivism rate?
    Supports granting drivers licenses to illegals.
    Supports extending welfare to illegals.
    Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to claim and participate in Social Security.
    Voted no on repealing the death tax
    Wants to raise Capital Gains tax (any accounting 101 classes will teach the disastrous ramifications)

    The role of government, promoting justice, means that government must safeguard the rights of people???life, in particular, and property, the rights of all citizens???while seeking the common good.
    Government???s job: preserve order and promote justice. Government is not a vending machine to dispense goodies to its citizens.


  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 11:52:45 AM

    Barack Obama: "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." (January 2008)

  • Posted By: Still Free in the USA @ 07/01/2009 11:51:20 AM

    DON???T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR THE AMERICAN

    I???LL KEEP MY MONEY, FREEDOM AND GUNS; YOU KEEP THE ???CHANGE???

    I???LL GIVE YOUR PRESIDENT THE SAME RESPECT YOU GAVE THE GOVERNOR OF ALASKA

    PLEASE DON???T TELL OBAMA WHAT COMES AFTER A TRILLION!

    OBAMA: WHY WORK WHEN YOU CAN STEAL MONEY FROM THOSE WHO DO

    VOTE DEMOCRATIC. IT???S EASIER THAN WORKING.
    WORK HARDER. MILLIONS ON WELFARE DEPEND ON YOU.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse