It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:47 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




 Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:55 pm 
Major Trou
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:22 am
Posts: 8794
Location: Indypolis
LetItSnow wrote:
Mechie3 wrote:
If I put an STI turbo on my car (which the new WRX has, just with a different rotated compressor housing) I'll make 265hp stock as well.

Yoar car with a turbo swap is not stock, cap'n. :wi:


No, it's not. But I think that a $300 turbo bringing my car up to speed with one that is 4 gens ahead (2010 WRX) is a bit different than a car that requires much much more to make it match the current gen entry level Maserati. Mainly, my car isn't that removed from the current standard (what I was getting at earlier).



_________________
I couldn't open the door because it was locked, so I used a stick of dynamite to get in.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:14 am 
Scooby Snack
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:14 pm
Posts: 2224
Location: Ithaca
Quote:
Dig up some magazine reviews, too - it's surely not worth owning if it's dubbed poor in print.


Ok!

Time magazine good? Worst car of 1984, one of 50 worst of all time. (which I found in wikipedia entry on it :mrgreen: double point!)

Image

Quote:
"Biturbo" is, of course, Italian for "expensive junk." At least, it is now, after Maserati tried to pass off this bitter heartbreak-on-wheels as a proper grand touring sedan. The Biturbo was the product of a desperate, under-funded company circling the drain of bankruptcy, and it shows. Everything that could leak, burn, snap or rupture did so with the regularity of the Anvil Chorus. The collected service advisories would look like the Gutenberg Bible. The only greater ignominy was the early 1990s Maserati TC, a version of the Chrysler Le Baron (a flaccid, front-drive, four-cylinder loser-mobile) with the proud Mazzer Trident on the nose. Finally, sir, have you no shame?
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/ ... 31,00.html



But, ya know? Screw the experts, screw logic, screw people who have owned the car before, screw everyone! I know better! I can make one of the worst cars of all time awesome!

In fact, here's one in running condition, $1800, Wait, nevermind, it stopped running between the last time she drove it and now, but hey! Whatever, it's just a fuel pump, right? I can't wait to see it in your garage.
http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.js ... f=national

The only thing in this thread that doesn't make sense is you thinking with your heart instead of your head. Is there any engine management for this car? No. Is it a reliable engine? No. Does it have a fan base? No. Does it even look good? No. (that's subjective though). I really can't believe you think keeping thousands of junk cars around for sentimental value is better than helping your fellow Americans out of the gutter.

No one has mentioned that cutting down on fuel consumption not only saves regular joe's money, it also relieves the burden of how much oil we buy from our ideological enemies, this functions on many levels, it's kind of brilliant. This type of thinking may save the country from financial and global political ruin if we do enough of it. I appreciate that destroying so many cars changes the game of restoring older cars, but restoring (keeping it running too) an older car is not something the average person can afford, were talking $20000-$100000, sink the market, we are not going to have many people who can save these kind of things at all, and truthfully, someone interested in restoration is not going to be hampered by only a few cars left. They will have money, and car manufacturers such as BMW and Ferrari have been known to make parts for cars there is only one or two left of just to keep it alive. We really need to finance the small guy who loves one model over keeping jobs? I think we have switched sides of the argument now, seems like you want GM/etc to go out of business.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:43 am 
Moar Dew.
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:17 am
Posts: 8301
Location: North Syracuse, NY
nich0lai wrote:
...seems like you want GM/etc to go out of business.

I can't dispute on a point-by-point basis, so I'll choose the most important one to me.

I have NEVER supported the idea of death to any of the Big Three. Get your head out of your ass and read what I've posted elsewhere.



_________________
Disclaimer: The above post is on the internet.
__________________________________

'00 Miata LS, Evolution Orange - Boosty!
'18 Crosstrek, Venetian Red Pearl - Lofty!
Image Image
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:50 am 
Scooby Snack
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:14 pm
Posts: 2224
Location: Ithaca
The argument you are taking is the death of GM. If it wasn't for this program, that was it.
I think you are the one who needs to wipe the brown off your face, sir, and invest in an industrial sized clue. I tried to give you one for free, but hey man, keep making stuff up, and not backing it up with anything. That's going to get you somewhere.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:55 am 
Moar Dew.
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:17 am
Posts: 8301
Location: North Syracuse, NY
nich0lai wrote:
The argument you are taking is the death of GM. If it wasn't for this program, that was it.
I think you are the one who needs to wipe the brown off your face, sir, and invest in an industrial sized clue. I tried to give you one for free, but hey man, keep making stuff up, and not backing it up with anything.

Blanket reply: Watev.



_________________
Disclaimer: The above post is on the internet.
__________________________________

'00 Miata LS, Evolution Orange - Boosty!
'18 Crosstrek, Venetian Red Pearl - Lofty!
Image Image
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:59 am 
Scooby Snack
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:14 pm
Posts: 2224
Location: Ithaca
Quote:
Blanket reply: Watev.


Well that's a nonsensical post lacking thought, content, grammar or a verb even. One of those isn't even a word. Could you have typed any less without not replying?

It's really pretty simple to me. If you have/find a better idea, please, by all means, get it to the government immediately, we are all out here waiting, I'll do everything I can to help even. Until then, cash for clunkers is working to save the things you love.

Furthermore, if you are going to post repeated threads just so you can reject every argument without merit and insult the people who take time to respond to your questions, I'd prefer you to not post them in the first place (not that I have any authority to tell you what to post I resigned my position as an admin awhile ago in case you guys didn't know, I'm just commenting as a normal person). If you are asking questions yet not open to valid arguments from multiple people you are just spreading your own propaganda or worse, that's trolling. Yes, I'm guilty of it too, I kind of imitated you in my own way to make a point. The fact you are an admin here definitely makes it worse. I appreciate you are sad over the svx, but that's no reason to take it out on our government (and me, assuming I'm who you referred to when you said,
Quote:
but it's not much more nonsensical than some of the contents of this thread! :ha:
I would certainly rather it be me than the other people who made the same points as me) who are doing their best to help the auto industry who lost you your job, with a bailout and a program to boost sales. I don't know what else to say or do about someone who scoffs in the face of so much help directed directly at an industry they claim to value so much, so I will just stop here with this post.

My last point is simple, artists have not been selling anything since this mess started, it is hitting us worse than anyone knows. There was a paltry $50 million in the bailout for National Endowment for the Arts to distribute to us hurting creative types, and it was nuked by Republicans for being ridiculous, I was called ridiculous. My very existence, ridiculous. I make far less per hour then any of you can imagine, do you hear me complaining about an improper bailout for artists? Where's my cash for crappy art?* I can't even go collect unemployment or any kind of benefit if I have a horrible year out of nowhere, nor do I have health insurance or retirement that is funded, I pay for it, and I'm chronically ill. I figure if there is no market for my work, that's my damn fault for making lousy work and choosing this profession. Few value art anymore sadly, who here has ever bought a piece of real art? Can you say we would be human without it? It's not an easy or cheap thing to do either, it takes years of sacrifice to build skill. Every time I have a new idea it costs me roughly $2000 to get it to a finished salable point. My old boss went from making a $1million a year to around $100000(split between 5 people) since 9/11, with the death blow being this crisis. He went out of business, was in Nat'l Geo special, in most museums, queen of england collects him, a national treasure, has quit.

You don't hear us asking for a bailout, and you better believe there's 2,511,000 artists in the United States in 2001, according to the 2001 Current Population Survey. Well there were, who knows now. How many does GM employ? 68500. You guys complained so much we gave you untold billions support from our/my tax dollars, my children will be paying for your failed industry, and this is appreciation? Everyone wants a free ride and life is not even close to fair. Blame the higher powers, not Obama.

To put it into simple terms, who is the socialist here, and what a bunch of selfish bugger the auto industry is.



*I honestly have no problem if someone destroys my work after they buy it, and it's one of a kind! I don't know many artists that would complain at all, someone once asked Harvey Littleton* if he would sell several pieces from a grouping for less, he replied, "buy them all and throw away the ones you don't want."
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Littleton


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 8:30 am 
Miss March
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:02 pm
Posts: 3779
Location: Seneca Falls, NY
LetItSnow wrote:
...it's not much more nonsensical than some of the contents of this thread! :ha:

QFT



_________________
ImageImageImage
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:14 am 
Moar Dew.
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:17 am
Posts: 8301
Location: North Syracuse, NY
:ot: For the last damned time,

"Big 3 Bailout" = "Big 3 LOAN"

Chrysler paid theirs back from their troubled days at the end of the '70's. It's not a handout. Welfare is socialism; loans are not.

In regards to accusations of trolling this forum, I offer this:

In the case of the tasered mom, there is no denying that she was acting strangely by getting out of her vehicle. My point was simply that of devil's advocate (which the closed-minded and simple-minded hate) which is that there is a one-in-a-million chance that something happened a little differently than the 999,999-in-a-million that usually do. For having not seen the footage, there are very, very few people who know what went on during that traffic stop. Did she threaten him? Did she physically accost him? Did she claim she simply didn't have the time for this and say she was leaving? We sure don't know. Falling into the media's presentation of their select bits of the clip of video (claiming she was tasered twice is not exactly legitimate when the first shot bounced off of her jacket, right?) or believing that the most likely situation is absolutely what occurred may be easy to do, but consider what's not being presented before passing judgment.

In the case of Cash for Clunkers, we're looking at a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Surely, this is not going to save General Motors - the only car they have in the top ten purchased via this program is the Cobalt - a car that actually costs them money to produce. Effectively, Cash for Clunkers is helping them meet CAFE fuel economy standards with the Cobalt, not make profits with it, and that allows their fuel economy to be a little bit looser on its larger vehicles, which people with less concern for fuel economy will buy up because it's only money.

Additionally, anyone who may have been waiting, say, for next year for their new car purchase who capitalized on this program will probably not be buying a new car next year. In many cases, what has happened is that we've borrowed from the future, and everything will even out in the wash. Sales may look great this quarter, but next quarter this time, the world's automakers are going to be late to the mark to have irresistible vehicles that will sell in the same quantities without a program intended to help to push them out the door.

Cash for Clunkers may lean toward reducing our country's dependency on foreign oil, but be honest: Do you know where any given brand's crude came from? Anyone who doesn't does not have concern on whether their oil comes from the Middle East, Venezuela, or (gasp!) the United States. (Keep your oil money to the western hemisphere by buying Sunoco and Red Apple/Kwik Fill instead of Mobil, for starters.)

Is there any bit of the program that may have been abused? Take a family with an ancient Explorer and a good-condition Corolla. Combined value before the program might be $2k+$6k, just for fun. Trade in the Explorer on a Corolla and the Corolla on a new SUV, making trade-in $4.5k+$6k. The taxpayers just gave $2500 to someone to buy a pair of cars with the same fuel economy. The Corolla likely didn't produce much profit, and the SUV likely didn't either, due to markdowns on such beasts these days (see: newspaper and TV).

Don't feel bad about looking at each side of a scenario, including the darker side of anything commonly held as good; they're out there.

The shown Maserati wouldn't start for the camera. This presents two problems: It was in violation of the rules of the program, and it's going to create much agitation for whomever has to run its engine at 2000 RPM until it stops. Add one more problem: If it barely ran, the owner surely wasn't going to get an amount of cash for it that would reflect its physical appearance's value from the common Joe. A mild part-out would likely have produced much more than $4500!

Said Maserati being similar to my car, with a trans swap, the SVX no longer has transaxle failure. A magazine may have called it names, but that doesn't make its value zero for all of society. An artist might find this a sensible concept.

My quoted statement above regarding the contents of this thread was meant to address the extremes of all of it. All told, is any mainstream thing inherently good or inherently evil? I think we can agree that that is simply not so.



_________________
Disclaimer: The above post is on the internet.
__________________________________

'00 Miata LS, Evolution Orange - Boosty!
'18 Crosstrek, Venetian Red Pearl - Lofty!
Image Image
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:12 pm 
Scooby Snack
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 10:14 pm
Posts: 2224
Location: Ithaca
I'm going to do this your style, and then I'm done.

Quote:
LetItSnow wrote:
:ot: For the last damned time,

"Big 3 Bailout" = "Big 3 LOAN"

Chrysler paid theirs back from their troubled days at the end of the '70's. It's not a handout. Welfare is socialism; loans are not.

They don't have to pay back the auto bailout, the government essentially bought a stake in the companies, this is not the same as what happened in the 70's
Quote:
Automakers: The government has lent General Motors, Chrysler, GMAC and the now defunct Chrysler Financial just less than $80 billion.

So far, $2.1 billion has been repaid.

But the vast majority of those loans will likely never get paid back. That's because U.S. taxpayers took large stakes in GM and Chrysler in exchange for forgiveness of large portions of the loans.

The government has given GM $50 billion -- $6.7 billion of which the company must pay back. The automaker has stated that it hopes to do that before the 2015 deadline. The Treasury agreed to convert the other $43.3 billion into GM equity, so the government's ability to recover its investment will depend on the future market value of that stake. GM's stock is not expected to trade publicly until 2010 at the earliest.

Chrysler still owes about $8 billion of its $15.2 billion federal loan. Like with GM, the government is banking on the value of its stake in Chrysler rising down the road. http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/22/news/ec ... _barofsky/




In regards to accusations of trolling this forum, I offer this:

In the case of the tasered mom, there is no denying that she was acting strangely by getting out of her vehicle. My point was simply that of devil's advocate (which the closed-minded and simple-minded hate) which is that there is a one-in-a-million chance that something happened a little differently than the 999,999-in-a-million that usually do. For having not seen the footage, there are very, very few people who know what went on during that traffic stop. Did she threaten him? Did she physically accost him? Did she claim she simply didn't have the time for this and say she was leaving? We sure don't know. Falling into the media's presentation of their select bits of the clip of video (claiming she was tasered twice is not exactly legitimate when the first shot bounced off of her jacket, right?) or believing that the most likely situation is absolutely what occurred may be easy to do, but consider what's not being presented before passing judgment.

No one has accused the mom of doing anything wrong. She did not threaten him according to police, nor did she accost him. The police dropped all charges that day. Keep making stuff up, I can't deal with illogical lies. That's a good arguing tactic, no one can address nonsense, so it usually makes them yell

In the case of Cash for Clunkers, we're looking at a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Surely, this is not going to save General Motors - the only car they have in the top ten purchased via this program is the Cobalt - a car that actually costs them money to produce. Effectively, Cash for Clunkers is helping them meet CAFE fuel economy standards with the Cobalt, not make profits with it, and that allows their fuel economy to be a little bit looser on its larger vehicles, which people with less concern for fuel economy will buy up because it's only money.


Additionally, anyone who may have been waiting, say, for next year for their new car purchase who capitalized on this program will probably not be buying a new car next year. In many cases, what has happened is that we've borrowed from the future, and everything will even out in the wash. Sales may look great this quarter, but next quarter this time, the world's automakers are going to be late to the mark to have irresistible vehicles that will sell in the same quantities without a program intended to help to push them out the door.


Pure speculation, that's impossible to address

Cash for Clunkers may lean toward reducing our country's dependency on foreign oil, but be honest: Do you know where any given brand's crude came from? Anyone who doesn't does not have concern on whether their oil comes from the Middle East, Venezuela, or (gasp!) the United States. (Keep your oil money to the western hemisphere by buying Sunoco and Red Apple/Kwik Fill instead of Mobil, for starters.)

Is there any bit of the program that may have been abused? Take a family with an ancient Explorer and a good-condition Corolla. Combined value before the program might be $2k+$6k, just for fun. Trade in the Explorer on a Corolla and the Corolla on a new SUV, making trade-in $4.5k+$6k. The taxpayers just gave $2500 to someone to buy a pair of cars with the same fuel economy. The Corolla likely didn't produce much profit, and the SUV likely didn't either, due to markdowns on such beasts these days (see: newspaper and TV).


Keep making stuff up. What idiot would trade in two cars for the very same two cars? I've already stated over and over that this is not about fuel economy and we all know it, besides you, this is to try and save the auto industry

Don't feel bad about looking at each side of a scenario, including the darker side of anything commonly held as good; they're out there.

Absolutely, finally we agree. I have read all the criticism of the program and while there is plenty of it, everyone agrees that it is doing wonders for Detroit, but you.

The shown Maserati wouldn't start for the camera. This presents two problems: It was in violation of the rules of the program, and it's going to create much agitation for whomever has to run its engine at 2000 RPM until it stops. Add one more problem: If it barely ran, the owner surely wasn't going to get an amount of cash for it that would reflect its physical appearance's value from the common Joe. A mild part-out would likely have produced much more than $4500!


So, the owner of the car couldn't sell it, but you think it's worth more than $4500...... ummm. Ya. Right.

None of these cars run reliably from what I can see. you are the only person defending them. If the dealer was concerned about fraud in this one I'm sure he would not have admitted to it on camera. Insane speculation. Practically no one but you likes this car. If there's so much to be made buy that one I showed you and profit wildly. No one wants that crap Rob. Put your money where your mouth is? I can't believe you are looking at a car that you can see proof of three dying in print randomly for no good reason, read statements from people well versed in automotive history that say the car was a useless mess, and then just declare all of them wrong without ever having touched this car in real life. I'm supposed to take your side as logic and truth without there being any fact behind what you are saying? That doesn't make sense. I don't have to eat a pile of poo to assume it's going to taste bad. How can I continue to argue with such madness?


Said Maserati being similar to my car, with a trans swap, the SVX no longer has transaxle failure. A magazine may have called it names, but that doesn't make its value zero for all of society. An artist might find this a sensible concept.


There ya go, as I said, this is about you feeling the Maserati is the same as the SVX though no one has said that, it's your sentimentality speaking here, not the facts.

If everyone told me my work sucked, I'd quit and do something else immediately, or I would be crazy.

feel free to tell me my work sucks, but there's a lot of people who beat you to it telling me it's pretty good!


I would suggest going out and re reading some of these articles on whats going on as what you are saying is completely in contest with the facts.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:30 pm 
Moar Dew.
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:17 am
Posts: 8301
Location: North Syracuse, NY
From experience, some of your information is solidly wrong, but it falls on deaf ears so mouse goes to Submit



_________________
Disclaimer: The above post is on the internet.
__________________________________

'00 Miata LS, Evolution Orange - Boosty!
'18 Crosstrek, Venetian Red Pearl - Lofty!
Image Image
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:03 pm 
Major Trou
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:22 am
Posts: 8794
Location: Indypolis
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2 ... rices.html

Quote:
The much ballyhooed Cash for Clunkers program has had the unintended consequences of driving up the cost of new and used vehicles and used auto parts, according to independent studies of the auto markets. The Cash for Clunkers program demonstrates the danger of government trying to micro-manage supply and demand, and is a warning as to the dangers of Democratic plans for health care restructuring and a cap-and-trade system.

In a press release issued on Friday, August 7, 2009, Edmunds.com released the data on the effect of the program on new car prices. Edmunds found that the government-funded incentives had caused car dealers to reduce the discounts off manufacturers suggested retail:
"Since the program launched, we've seen that shoppers are getting less of a discount off sticker price for new cars," notes Senior Analyst Michelle Krebs in her report on Edmunds' AutoObserver.com. "In some cases, they are choosing less expensive trim levels and option packages than had been typical in recent months, but paying more for them."
Edmunds also found that the incentive program came at the worst possible time:
"In truth, this program launched at the worst possible time of the year," opined Edmunds.com CEO Jeremy Anwyl. "The annual summer sell-down typically creates a rush of activity for the industry, and this year that rush came right after automakers cut production in response to the floundering economy. It's a simple case of supply and demand, bolstered by a reduced level of negotiation on the part of excited clunker traders. Add to this the automakers' unseasonable reduction in incentives and the message is clear: if you buy a car this summer, you should expect to pay higher prices."
As if price increases for new cars were not bad enough, the Cash for Clunkers program also appears to be driving up prices on used cars, creating a bubble in prices and the danger of a collapse in car demand. According to the Kelley Blue Book August Report:
With a total of 750,000 vehicles being removed from the marketplace, dealers are stocking up on used inventory in anticipation of low supply and high demand. This scenario is driving used-car prices up significantly in the short term, causing a bubble in values that will seriously impact used-vehicle values when the Cash for Clunkers program ends.

"Dealerships have reported increased foot traffic, creating a false sense of automotive market recovery," said Alec Gutierrez, senior analyst of vehicle valuation for Kelley Blue Book. "As a result, dealers are going to auction to restock inventory, driving up used-car values. However, the effect of a supply reduction of this magnitude could have an immense impact on these values in the short-term, exacerbating the already-limited supply at auction. If this bubble comes to pass, dealerships will end up with excess inventory of both new and used vehicles and be forced to offer deep discounts to remove surplus inventory, driving values down. Ultimately, there will be the possibility of a severe contraction in auto sales as soon as the Cash for Clunkers program runs out of funding."
But there's more. The Cash for Clunkers programs is likely to drive up used car parts prices according to dealers who were interviewed for a Dayton Daily News article. While I haven't seen any independent evaluation similar to the new and used car reports linked above, it makes sense that destroying working used cars would take the parts from those cars off the market, thereby decreasing the supply of used parts.

While Cash for Clunkers is being portrayed as a success, in reality it is driving up prices for consumers of all vehicles and used parts, but hits used car buyers and those who cannot afford a new car the hardest because the government rebates only apply to new vehicles. More important, this government program is likely to create a substantial distortion of market forces and a collapse of demand once the program ends.

Only in Washington could a program which uses borrowed money to drive up consumer prices, including a bubble in used car prices, be considered a success. I can't wait for health care restructuring and cap-and-trade.



_________________
I couldn't open the door because it was locked, so I used a stick of dynamite to get in.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:04 pm 
Major Trou
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:22 am
Posts: 8794
Location: Indypolis
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/ ... oosts.html

Quote:
The Toyota Corolla is the top selling car in the Cash for Clunkers program.

Cash for Clunkers is a big boon for Japanese carmakers.
The Financial Times reported, via LGF:

The US’s cash-for-clunkers scheme, designed to bolster Detroit’s embattled carmakers, is turning out to be an even bigger boon for their Japanese rivals.

According to data published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Monday, Americans are using the scrappage incentives to buy more vehicles from Toyota than any of the three Detroit carmakers.

Toyota has an 18.9 per cent share of vehicles bought so far, putting it ahead of General Motors with 17.6 per cent and Ford with 15.4 per cent. Chrysler is in fifth place, after Honda.

GM had a 19.6 per cent share of the overall US light-vehicle market in the first seven months of this year, compared with Toyota’s 16.3 per cent, according to Autodata, a New Jersey-based market research firm.

The top models bought since the scheme began on July 24 are the Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic and Ford Focus, all small sedans. Three of the top five are Toyotas.
And, four of the top five are Japanese cars.

Rep. Joe Sestak says only 2 percent of Cash for Clunkers claims have been paid so far.



_________________
I couldn't open the door because it was locked, so I used a stick of dynamite to get in.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:06 pm 
Major Trou
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:22 am
Posts: 8794
Location: Indypolis
NASIOC thread where I stole that stuff from. didn't feel like copy pasting everythign.

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthr ... ?t=1826783



_________________
I couldn't open the door because it was locked, so I used a stick of dynamite to get in.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cash for Clunkers: Purpose or Propaganda?
Unread postPosted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:22 pm 
Fiber Helps Me Go Faster
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 11:48 pm
Posts: 2059
Location: Ra-cha-cha, NY
My Mom is getting rid of her 98 Grand Marquis and picking up a 2010 Toyota Camry thanks to the CFC program. She wanted to wait a year, but the deal is just too good to pass up. With her looking the past couple of weeks, we've noticed that most of the base trim levels are sold out. She's getting the middle trim level, the LE.



_________________
"what's that, an air filter?" "No, it's an intercooler for the turbo" " oh, so it's a Civic." unamused
Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron