Are you better off than you were (4) years ago?

[Grandmaster B]

Why don't you shut your stupid h*ck @ass up already......the only thing people like you are good for economically is keeping white trash bars afloat.

[rsnnh12]

ignoring facts again, i see.

like i posted above, there was a comprehensive study done on the effectiveness of cash for clunkers which blows the previous edmunds claims out of the water.

http://www.maritz.com/Press-Releases/2010/Maritz-Research-Findings-Cash-for-Clunkers-More-Successful-Than-Previously-Reported.aspx

Cash for Clunkers Spurred More Than 500,000 Incremental New Vehicle Sales
The NVCS findings show that the Cash for Clunkers program created 542,000 incremental new car or truck sales, meaning that those auto buyers and lessees would not have existed without the incentive program. Previous estimates put resulting incremental sales at somewhere between 125,000 and 346,000.

CARS Did Not Mortgage Future Automotive Sales
The Maritz study also debunks concerns that CARS was mortgaging the future by stealing sales that would have occurred anyway at a later date. While experiencing a slight dip in sales in September 2009, most likely due to a shortage of auto dealer inventory, the Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate (SAAR) from October through December 2009 shows that automobiles continued to sell at a higher pace than before the CARS program was implemented, according to statistics from the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Cash for Clunkers Creates Jobs, Not Just Sales
Not only do we now know the incentive program created sales that otherwise wouldn’t have occurred, a body of research also proves that Cash for Clunkers created jobs throughout the automotive industry, including those at manufacturers and their suppliers. According to NHTSA’s Report to Congress, CARS resulted in a $3.8 billion to $6.8 billion increase in gross domestic product and “created or saved nearly 60,000 jobs.” And, according to the Ann Arbor, Michigan-based Center for Automotive Research, 40,200 new jobs were created including about 11,000 in Michigan and Ohio alone (for a list of states where the most jobs were created due to CARS, please visit www.cargroup.org/pdfs/Cash_for_Clunkers_Report.pdf).

Cash for Clunkers Generated Sales Resulting in a Positive Impact on Energy Stewardship
Maritz’s research further supports NHTSA’s data on the positive impact CARS had on the environment and energy savings. According to the NVCS, half of all trade-ins were more than 10 years old and had more than 100,000 miles. Older vehicles such as these only averaged 15.8 miles per gallon and were replaced with vehicles averaging 24.9 miles per gallon, according to NHTSA, which estimates that “the reduction in fuel consumption over the next 25 years to be 824 million gallons…saving roughly 33 million gallons annually.” NHTSA also reports, “The estimated reduction in carbon dioxide emissions and related greenhouse gases over the next 25 years is nine million metric tons, a reduction with an estimated social benefit of $278 million over 25 years (in 2008 dollars).”

So it added 700,000 sales, 500,000 being "new sales" (people who wouldn't have bought cars), and yet 350,000 trade-ins were either over 10 years old or 100,000 miles? All numbers from your article. So what were those people going to do? Don't say buy used, because they still coughed up $20,000+ WITH the rebate. Its not like they would've just bought a cheap $5,000 used car instead

Did you even read the Cargroup PDF? It estimates the new sales at under 400,000, with HALF being produced OUTSIDE the US. So even with an optimistic estimation of 400k new buyers (which is unlikely, given my first paragraph explanation), only 200k were produced in the US. And yet, this program "saved" the car industry? All at a cost of $3 billion. Even though Ford recovered just fine on its own, without the government bailing it out. Ford also was 3rd in market share during C4C, and again, produced the higher MPG vehicles all on its own, without the government telling them to. Hmmmm

[Yich123]

i am more than 200% more powerful AND smarter than I was 4 years. I am now 22 and slowly reaching a point where i move away from home... scaryyyy

[crustyme]

So it added 700,000 sales, 500,000 being "new sales" (people who wouldn't have bought cars), and yet 350,000 trade-ins were either over 10 years old or 100,000 miles? All numbers from your article. So what were those people going to do? Don't say buy used, because they still coughed up $20,000+ WITH the rebate. Its not like they would've just bought a cheap $5,000 used car instead

Did you even read the Cargroup PDF? It estimates the new sales at under 400,000, with HALF being produced OUTSIDE the US. So even with an optimistic estimation of 400k new buyers (which is unlikely, given my first paragraph explanation), only 200k were produced in the US. And yet, this program "saved" the car industry? All at a cost of $3 billion. Even though Ford recovered just fine on its own, without the government bailing it out. Ford also was 3rd in market share during C4C, and again, produced the higher MPG vehicles all on its own, without the government telling them to. Hmmmm

it's the recession, people don't make big purchases. those people would have KEPT their cars if not for the gov't incentive. you do know cars can last well over 20 years/300,000 miles, right????

ford, gm and chrysler produce cars outside the us, so what's your point????

ford sales slid 32% in late 2008 and 41% in 1qt of 2009. yeah, they were well on their way to global domination.

[crustyme]

ford didn't request a gov't bailout cause they already received $18 billion in loans in 2006.

ford lost $14.6 billion in 2008 and was well on their way to another huge losses in 2009 if not for 'cash 4 clunkers.'

[Andy117]

When the GOP wins the Senate in 2012, I am going to personally kick every Liberal's tail in here (verbally ofcourse). Each aned every one of you fools is going to be walking around with your tails rapped around your shoulders. You scum bags disappeared last year when I successfully predicted the outcome of the 2010 elections. You will probably do the same in 2012, because you do not have the balls to admit that you were wrong.

Your prediction was the same as everyone else. No one really expected a different outcome in 2010.

[rsnnh12]

it's the recession, people don't make big purchases. those people would have KEPT their cars if not for the gov't incentive. you do know cars can last well over 20 years/300,000 miles, right????

ford, gm and chrysler produce cars outside the us, so what's your point????

ford sales slid 32% in late 2008 and 41% in 1qt of 2009. yeah, they were well on their way to global domination.

So the recession would keep people from buying $24,000 new cars, but not $20,000 new cars? LOL

According to the US Dept of Transportation, the average lifespan of a car is 13 years and 145,000 miles-

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

So, it wasn't the recession keeping those people from buying new cars, as they could apparently afford a $20k new car. HALF of the buyers wouldn't have had their cars for more than a few more years, and clearly had the funds to afford a new car, rebate or not.

Yes, Ford's sales were down... did you expect their new CEO to turn it around in a month? It took a whole bunch of tough moves, including fighting the union, to keep Ford afloat and to make them profitable again.

[Andy117]

reason.org... lol.

here are the facts:

2008 saw the worst in cars sales since 1992....

http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/01/2008-us-auto-sales-are-worst-since-1992.html

2009 also saw slow sales which is why obama implemented 'cash 4 clunkers.' it was a huge success as nearly 3/4 million cars were sold through the program.

2010 also saw a rise in sales especially for ford, gm and chrysler.

new study found 'cash 4 clunkers' was even more successful than originally thought.

http://www.maritz.com/Press-Releases/2010/Maritz-Research-Findings-Cash-for-Clunkers-More-Successful-Than-Previously-Reported.aspx

the new deal came 4 years after the start of the great depression and fueled a rapid recovery from 1933-7 until the recession of 1937. but had hoover acted immediately to stem the tide it would never have gotten as bad as it did.

otoh, obama acted right away which is why it never got as bad and we are now seeing a faster recovery.

[rsnnh12]

ford didn't request a gov't bailout cause they already received $18 billion in loans in 2006.

ford lost $14.6 billion in 2008 and was well on their way to another huge losses in 2009 if not for 'cash 4 clunkers.'

Yes, they got a loan... that's how businesses work. They don't rely on the government to "save" them

Proof they were "well on their way to more huge losses"? Or more baseless info?

[crustyme]

So the recession would keep people from buying $24,000 new cars, but not $20,000 new cars? LOL

According to the US Dept of Transportation, the average lifespan of a car is 13 years and 145,000 miles-

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

So, it wasn't the recession keeping those people from buying new cars, as they could apparently afford a $20k new car. HALF of the buyers wouldn't have had their cars for more than a few more years, and clearly had the funds to afford a new car, rebate or not.

Yes, Ford's sales were down... did you expect their new CEO to turn it around in a month? It took a whole bunch of tough moves, including fighting the union, to keep Ford afloat and to make them profitable again.

so they would have kept their cars for another 3 years/45,000 miles anyways (according to your own stats).

who says these people don't have money? in tough economic times, people put off big purchases like cars and houses. but the gov't incentive lured them to the dealerships.

if you can trade in a car worth $500 for $4500, wouldn't you do it? $4500 off on a Toyota Prius that regularly sells for MSRP for example is a GREAT deal.

yet ford continued to bleed billions and didn't turn a profit until 3q 2009 buoyed by 'cash 4 clunkers'.... but it was all a coincidence, right?

[crustyme]

Yes, they got a loan... that's how businesses work. They don't rely on the government to "save" them

Proof they were "well on their way to more huge losses"? Or more baseless info?

had gm received a large loan, they wouldn't have needed a gov't bailout either, so what's your point?

ford lost $2 billion in 1st half of 2009 and didn't turn a profit until 3q after 'cash 4 clunkers' was implemented.

[jnickell100]

This is the lament of the typical ignorant Liberal excuse maker. Does Bush have to saddle some of the blame? Absolutely. But the fact is that the Liberals like yourself ran Congress from 2006 to 2010, when most of the damage was done, and Obama has been in the white House for two of those years. You Liberals have nothing to fall back on, so you use that old, stupid excuse. Obama is a complete and total failure, and you Liberal fools simply cannot admit that. His Foreign and Domestic policies have failed miserably. Onlh a complete illiterate would think otherwise. Liberalism has been a cancer on the economy and the welfare of this nation. It must be eliminated, just like the fools such as yourself and Golf who back these moronic policies. Your use of the "blame it on Bush" excuse just verifies how ignorant you are. The Republicans are going to ake the Senate in 2012, and keep the House. Hopefully, they will rid the white house of that cancer that is now occupying it. After that, we will rid the coungtry of Liberals like yourselves who try to poison the minds of thinking american with your Bull S**t. We will defeat you , and then we will put people like you and the other Liberals in here in your place.

BigDaddy, you are such an ignorant fool...But whats new. Your argument are always filled with bullshit and irrelevant facts. So let me hone in on your the thesis of your whole post.
Liberals created the depression while Bush was in power. And Liberals are still to blame because Obama is now in Power?

Honestly, every time i see one of your posts on here my blood boils because you are such an idiot. Each and everyone of your posts....whether it be political or college football is just filled with bullshit.

[jw]

Another vote for yes - much better ... home value is higher, income is much higher, investments worth much more, 401k much higher, debt much, much lower ... am I paying more for gas and food ... yup ... but as a percentage of my income ... i'm paying less now than I was 4 years ago.

[Extra Innings]

You guys are a bunch of goof balls....fact of the matter is Obama has deficit spent in the last (3) years what Bush did in (8).

[Extra Innings]

So the recession would keep people from buying $24,000 new cars, but not $20,000 new cars? LOL

According to the US Dept of Transportation, the average lifespan of a car is 13 years and 145,000 miles-

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

So, it wasn't the recession keeping those people from buying new cars, as they could apparently afford a $20k new car. HALF of the buyers wouldn't have had their cars for more than a few more years, and clearly had the funds to afford a new car, rebate or not.

Yes, Ford's sales were down... did you expect their new CEO to turn it around in a month? It took a whole bunch of tough moves, including fighting the union, to keep Ford afloat and to make them profitable again.

and what happened to the used car market? How about the used part market?

[Nookx]

Obama spent more money in 6 months then G. Bush did in 8 years. Obama has entered the entire world into hyper inflation. I love how many people are blind to what is happening in the United States and world.

[Extra Innings]

Obama spent more money in 6 months then G. Bush did in 8 years. Obama has entered the entire world into hyper inflation. I love how many people are blind to what is happening in the United States and world.

Well said my friend, well said

[ByeShea]

Obama spent more money in 6 months then G. Bush did in 8 years. Obama has entered the entire world into hyper inflation. I love how many people are blind to what is happening in the United States and world.

Essentially saw our economy was drowning and threw it an anvil (more spending, higher taxes, devalue the dollar, add layers of business regulation, disincentive just about all business) instead of a liferope (enacting plain pro-business policies).

Obama is a disaster.

[opie1988]

Overall, my generated revenue has increased exponentially. Unfortunately, so have my expenses.

I would say from a net standpoint, I'm most likely about even with where I was 4 years ago.

But considering the overall climate of the economy, as well as the specific struggles of my industry, even is the new up!

[crustyme]

inflation >>>>>>>>>>> great depression 2

had previous idiot not wasted trillions on some towelheads half way around the world he wouldnt need to spend fixing his problems.

under bush americans lost $10 trillion in personal wealth.

[cant call it]

[marcoloco]

not me

[yesdear]

no

nooo way im worse now then ever! screw the president

[Extra Innings]

Overall, my generated revenue has increased exponentially. Unfortunately, so have my expenses.

I would say from a net standpoint, I'm most likely about even with where I was 4 years ago.

But considering the overall climate of the economy, as well as the specific struggles of my industry, even is the new up!

How much is the State sales tax where you live? Do you realize I pay 3% just for local income here...3% regardless of income .... Federal (and all the associated garbage), Property, and then a cool 6% State!

[BigdaddyQH]

In California, the tax rate varies, but well over 50% of the working public pays nothing.

[newguy]

In California, the tax rate varies, but well over 50% of the working public pays nothing.

They also don't work in california - there is a reason so many businesses are bailing out of that hell hole!!!

[BiffTFinancial]

much much better off than four years ago.

[mikeanite]

i wish i was back 7 yrs ago

[opie1988]

How much is the State sales tax where you live? Do you realize I pay 3% just for local income here...3% regardless of income .... Federal (and all the associated garbage), Property, and then a cool 6% State!

My local sales tax is 8.25%. But I live in Texas....so we have no State income tax.

[King Mayan]

They also don't work in california - there is a reason so many businesses are bailing out of that hell hole!!!

Don't work?? businesses are leaving because they can't poison our land anymore.. So they'll go to your state and poison your air and land....

[8ArIvd5]

worse off after reading most of the bullshit on this thread. i'll be better off after fixing my irrigation system without having to pay someone to do it.

[jnickell100]

In California, the tax rate varies, but well over 50% of the working public pays nothing.

There you go spouting of false bullshit. Over 50% of the people in California do not pay taxes huh? Can you tell me exactly where you get these statistics? Let me inform you BigDaddy......Whether you are employed or unemployed, you pay taxes. Everytime something is bought, you pay taxes, every time you sell something, you pay a tax. So for every transaction you pay a tax.

Now i know your response so let me just save you the time of typing. Citizens collecting unemployment pay taxes. It is taken as an earned income and must be reported at the end of the year. They pay taxes on all of the unemployment benefits now matter what the source.

So please, tell me how 50% of Californians dont pay taxes

[8ArIvd5]

In California, the tax rate varies, but well over 50% of the working public pays nothing.

mods, make a section to nominate douche-bag statements, please. thank you.

[Extra Innings]

Wholesale prices rise due to costlier gas and food
Wholesale prices rose 0.8 pct. in April due to higher energy and food costs

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wholesale-prices-rise-due-to-apf-1600189560.html?x=0

[DwightShrute]