“Out of 142 deals they owe us for, we’ve gotten paid on seven,” Lou Tornabeni of Ettleson Hyundai said.

“We had 102 cash for clunkers,” Carm Scarpace of Westfield Ford said. “We’ve been paid for one.”

With each Cash for Clunkers deal worth between $3,500 and $4,500, many dealerships are anxiously awaiting their government payday.

Some, like Advantage Chevrolet, which sold cars up until the last minute, have more than half a million dollars on the line.

“It was chaotic towards the end,” Jason Roberts said.

Roberts says his dealership sold 142 cars under the program — for a total of about $568,000 in government rebates. So far, the dealership has only been paid about $68,000 for about 17 of the deals, which means Uncle Sam still owes them roughly $500,000.

p.s. you stopped copying a bit too soon and missed my point entirely, so I will quote myself “My point is that the government is not omnipotent and does not and can not predict the fallout from their intervention in the market place.”

And again…what got us into this mess is too much borrowing and too much spending. You cannot fix a problem caused by too much borrowing and too much spending by doing more borrowing and more spending.

And for the record, I am not some neo-con mark, and I am not in favor of the status quo. Just because I don’t agree with the current administration’s vision of change does not mean that I do not myself desire change.

Your argument would be more compelling if it were based on economic reality instead of political ideology. Long-term, this program is disasterous. This is problem with Washington…their horizon is typically only 2 years…the next election.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/business/14ford.html

“Ford said on Thursday that it would add 10,000 vehicles to its production schedule in the third quarter and significantly increase its fourth-quarter output as well. The company now plans to make 570,000 vehicles in its North American plants during the last three months of the year.”

Clearly you overestimate the intelligence of American automakers. Did you not notice them, hat in hand, asking to be bailed out a few months back?

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/13/news/economy/retail_sales_July/

“Retail sales fell in July after two straight months of gains, the government reported Thursday, a drop that surprised economists. Without car sales from the “Cash for Clunkers,” the numbers would have been even worse.”

The second half of this statement is ridiculous…these people now have $500/month car payments to deal with. But note the first half…my point exactly.

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1036/top-cash-for-clunkers-trade-ins-and-new-cars/

“The number one vehicle destroyed under the Cash for Clunkers program, the Transportation Department says, was the Ford Explorer (1998 edition). Number two, the Ford Explorer (1997). Number Three…you guessed it. The ‘96 model.

The top eight, Jalopnik reports, were all SUVs. In fact, they were all various editions of the Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee. A pair of late ‘90s minivans, the ‘97 Ford Windstar and ‘99 Dodge Grand Caravan, round out the top ten. All ten were domestic vehicles.”

These aren’t exactly 1994 or earlier cars. New cars don’t require as much work typically. As cars age, you typically have to spend several hundred dollars to $1000 or so each year to keep them running. As someone with a 7 year old car, I can attest to this.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57F12O20090816

“Volunteers of America and other charities that receive tens of thousands of cars each year said such donations have quickly fallen up to 12 percent — and fear a 25 percent drop eventually, or over $100 million — as owners rush to trade gas guzzlers for new fuel-efficient models while federal rebates last.”

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-clunkers-0728,0,3093927.story

“Not all auto recyclers are relishing the government’s new cash for clunkers program, which requires car dealers to destroy the gas-guzzlers they get as trade-ins from new car buyers.

Used engines and drivetrains are a big part of recyclers’ income from each scrapped car, and under the federal program those engines must be destroyed. The idea is to promote fuel efficiency and help automakers, but it comes at a time when more than a dozen U.S. auto parts suppliers have filed for bankruptcy this year.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/05/business/econwatch/entry5217824.shtml

“Sadly, the cash-for-clunkers program requires that vehicles traded in have their engines destroyed. This will raise the costs of used vehicles for poorer Americans. It will also raise the cost of used U.S. vehicles around the world: Cambodians are less likely to upgrade to newer, safer, less polluting, and more fuel-efficient used Corollas.

Perhaps the need to bail out a struggling U.S. automobile industry is enough to justify renewing the program, even though four out of the five top sellers are Japanese. But it’s a bit silly for politicians to claim that cash-for-clunkers can be justified by environmental or economic concerns, and even sillier for Americans to pretend to believe them.”

http://www.ehow.com/how_2325207_donate-car-salvation-army.html

“Keep in mind that the process is a simple one that only takes a few minutes to activate.”

Donating to the salvation army is not as difficult as you’d think.

This was not intended to be a national ‘volkswagon’ plan for car purchasing for ever more.

Now, point by point:

American automakers ramped up production and paid out overtime to keep up with demand…but this demand is completely artificial. Potentially these people could be out of work now that the program is finished
– the program is already over – the car makers know this. If they start pumping out hundreds of thousands of cars despite the program being over, their stupid. As for the people who could be out of a job – this program got people more hours/more work and brought some back to their jobs – so they got more than they would’ve without. So you’re argument is don’t give them anything, because they won’t have it forever? If anything, this is an argument for keeping the program going. The same applies to your statement : what will that do to demand for vehicles after the incentive is gone?. That’s the way of the world isn’t it? So you should sell nothing because the demand may one day decrease?

Retail spending has tanked since this program was enacted. So people that would have probably spent their money otherwise funneled it into the car industry (buying mostly imports mind you) instead of buying other goods/services.
– Retail spending tanked LONG before this program was enacted. If you look at past recessions, it’s usually the car industry that helps lead the country back. In addition, it’s heartwarming that you’re so concerned about other peoples prioritization of expenses, however it’s not really our concern, nor is it likely that someone who can’t scrounge up the cash to pay rent is buying a new Toyota. Regardless, you could say this about just about anything – online porn, movies, etc. It’s a straw man argument. As far as imports, I agree, most are going into imports, which is too bad. But if the government restricted it from imports, then you’d have people in states where they build BMWs, Toyotas, etc. complaining because import or not, we’ve got jobs and suppliers etc. all reliant on those makers also.

What will this do for the auto mechanics? Certainly this will take a lot of business away from them as there will not be as many older cars on the road for them to service.
- another straw man. First off, the program hasn’t gone long enough to even begin to worry about this, but regardless – how many shops are currently flooded with 1994 or earlier cars? I haven’t looked up the stats, but my guess is that most places are busy servicing cars that are 10 years old or less.

What about the poor? Our government just sucked about 3/4 of a million cars off the road, many of them in perfectly good working order. This will dramatically affect the used car market. Also, many of these cars could have been donated to the poor. Instead, the put a glass solution in the engine to seize it up and ruin it forever and junked the cars.
- I don’t know you or your politics, but I’m wondering if the question ‘what about the poor’ is often the first question you ask yourself when confronted with legislation choices. If so, bravo. Again, I don’t believe there’s been nearly enough of this program for you to stop seeing people selling their used cars. Dramatically affect? Come on . . . I agree, donating to the poor would be great. But how much legal bs would be involved for that to be done? And as if there’s not enough paperwork involved, add to it title transfers, plates, insurance, etc. Let’s not forget that most of the poor can’t afford to run and upkeep a car, insurance, registration, etc. let alone buy one.

Speaking of junking the cars, what will this do to to the auto parts market? They aren’t even cannibalizing these “clunkers” for parts. What about people with older cars that need replacement parts? We’ve greatly reduced their ability to obtain them, as well as killed the demand in general for used parts as new cars typically don’t need them.
– this is incorrect. The yards that these cars get sent to are stripped of anything that can be reused, resold, etc. ‘We’ve GREATLY’ reduced? Seriously? With your ‘greatly’s’ and ‘dramatically’s’ you’d think that 2 out of 3 Americans just took advantage of this program in the short time it existed.

Bottom line – it gave a much needed injection into the car industry, the dealerships, suppliers, etc. It gave a lot of people a new, more efficient car. They’re probably saving a lot of money at the pump since most were going from a truck/suv to a car. The program was intended to be a quick jolt to the stagnated economy and to get a lot of high polluting/gas guzzling cars of the road. It met those intentions and made a lot of people happy, as seen by the use of the plan (of course there will always be folks like Jay who weren’t please, but as his father loves to say – ‘life’s a bell curve’)

Is any plan fool proof? Does it have it’s issues? Sure, but it’s being closed down before they can really iron out the kinks, etc.

If only the war in Iraq was handled the same way . . . .

People are buying cars now…what will that do to demand for vehicles after the incentive is gone? American automakers ramped up production and paid out overtime to keep up with demand…but this demand is completely artificial. Potentially these people could be out of work now that the program is finished. What happens when we have excess inventory sitting on the lots for the next several years because people bought cars now?

Retail spending has tanked since this program was enacted. So people that would have probably spent their money otherwise funneled it into the car industry (buying mostly imports mind you) instead of buying other goods/services.

What will this do for the auto mechanics? Certainly this will take a lot of business away from them as there will not be as many older cars on the road for them to service.

What about the poor? Our government just sucked about 3/4 of a million cars off the road, many of them in perfectly good working order. This will dramatically affect the used car market. Also, many of these cars could have been donated to the poor. Instead, the put a glass solution in the engine to seize it up and ruin it forever and junked the cars.

Speaking of junking the cars, what will this do to to the auto parts market? They aren’t even cannibalizing these “clunkers” for parts. What about people with older cars that need replacement parts? We’ve greatly reduced their ability to obtain them, as well as killed the demand in general for used parts as new cars typically don’t need them.

What I’ve discussed is just the tip of the iceberg. This was a completely ILL-conceived and poorly thought out plan. But that’s the government’s m.o., right? They helped their buddies in the auto unions out short-term…and the dealers and the rest of us (i.e. taxpayers that funded this) are going to be left holding the bag. Not to mention that tons of people bought new cars that they probably didn’t need and took on loans that they might not be able to afford…unnecessary debt is what got us into this whole mess in the first place.

Hooray government intervention!