|
Post by ladeda on Aug 3, 2009 23:19:15 GMT -5
I don't get it they turned me down.
|
|
|
Post by shockjock on Aug 5, 2009 23:04:41 GMT -5
Do you want a fuel efficient vehicle? How about a Hummer! 2009 Hummer H3T 4WD Truck 5 cyl, 3.7L, 5-speed manual: 14 city | 18 highway (AP Photo/Mel Evans) The government's "Cash for Clunkers" program was supposed to give the auto industry an economic boost, and increase the average fuel efficiency of the country's vehicles. If you are looking solely at the fact that the original $1 billion for the program was used up quickly, you might come to the conclusion that the program is a success. You might also consider it a success if you feel that each vehicle traded in for a more efficient vehicle will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and improve the environment. The problem is that things don't always seem as they appear. The nickname for the program is really a misnomer, since cars don't have to be "clunkers" in the traditional sense. In reality, they just have to be gas guzzlers. In fact, many of the cars I saw on the news seemed like perfectly good automobiles, but of course, fuel efficiency is the key, not appearances. That's why it is surprising to take a look at the list of eligible fuel efficient vehicles and find the Hummer H3T on the list. Don't get me wrong, I love Hummers, but isn't it a little inappropriate to use taxpayer money to give people rebates to buy fuel efficient vehicles, then include a Hummer? If you think this is an aberration, just look at the list of eligible vehicles: Chevrolet Silverado 1500, 2500, and 3500HD, Dodge Ram pickup 1500 and 2500, Ford Explorer, Ford F150 and 250 Super Duty, GMC Sierra 1500, GMC Yukon XL, Jeep Grand Cherokee, and Toyota Tundra.
Are you surprised to see that the government is encouraging the purchase of "fuel efficient" vehicles that have motors that are v-8's and up to 6.0 liters? Sure, there are some people buying Smart For Two's or Mini Coopers, but there are also lots of people buying Hummers or Yukons. What were they driving before? A tank?
|
|
|
Post by Pirate VB Fan on Aug 5, 2009 23:45:46 GMT -5
Well, to get the large rebate they would have to turn in a vehicle with a combined mpg of 6, so compared to that the Hummer would be a great improvement, but I totally agree that there should have been a minimum standard that the new vehicle would have to achieve. I think at least 22 mpg (the "clunker" level plus the minimum 4mpg). Personally I don' think there should have been the 18 mpg standard, just that the new vehicle get 10 mpg better than the old one and a minimum of 22 mpg. The 4mpg level is totally bogus.
|
|
|
Post by panthatheprince on Aug 6, 2009 13:03:26 GMT -5
My co-worker traded in his truck which had f150 performance parts for a 4 door Matrix and he is still waiting on his voucher from the government. The dealership won't release the car until Congress votes to get more money for the program. It sucks.
|
|
|
Post by OverAndUnder on Aug 10, 2009 14:53:41 GMT -5
Those who think government is the solution to all problems are so easily fooled by corporations into legislating a transfer of dollars to their profit machines from the labor tax we all pay to the Internal Redistribution Service.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 10, 2009 15:38:58 GMT -5
Those who think government is the solution to all problems are so easily fooled by corporations into legislating a transfer of dollars to their profit machines from the labor tax we all pay to the Internal Redistribution Service. Don't you know? What's good for GM is good for the country.
|
|
|
Post by The Bofa on the Sofa on Aug 11, 2009 10:35:03 GMT -5
Those who think government is the solution to all problems are so easily fooled by corporations into legislating a transfer of dollars to their profit machines from the labor tax we all pay to the Internal Redistribution Service. Don't you know? What's good for GM is good for the country. I gotta tell you, it has a huge impact on where I live. Them and Chrysler. Here's an example: the local public library is suddenly in deep trouble because when Chrysler went bankrupt, it defaulted on its property taxes, part of which fund the library. So when businesses go under, especially big businesses, it affects everyone. This is even aside from the fact that the value of my home, which was already on the low side in terms of national standards (we did not participate in the housing boom in my area) has now dropped significantly because all the neighbors have been fired from their jobs and had to either default or sell for dirt cheap.
|
|