Popular Posts

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

Pelosi Is At It Again

Please take a moment of your time to read what our legislators are attempting without your knowledge. It literally takes 2 minutes to respond using the red button at the bottom to send e-mails to your representatives as well as Pelosi.

I have seen nothing about this in the MSM but it will affect everyone who owns an older vehicle and cannot afford a new car payment. It will also cost more jobs in the auto repair and parts business as well as remove your freedom of choice as to what vehicle the government says you can drive.

The government wants to give stimulus money of up to $5000.00 to consumers to force them to turn in their older vehicles and buy newer ones that many cannot afford. I personally take issue with MY money being used to finance someone else’s decision to buy a vehicle they cannot afford. As with the housing mess, this will lead to more repos and a glut of unsalable used vehicles hitting the market then driving the value of the cars that responsible people have worked hard to pay for.

Please act now while you still can!! This is being forced through without public knowledge as we have seen many examples of in recent months.

“Cash for Clunkers” Limits Access to Affordable Used Vehicles for Low and Middle Income Families

BETHESDA, MD — April 15, 2009 — Cash for Clunkers would prematurely destroy vehicles and their valuable parts and components, denying more affordable used vehicles to millions of low and middle income families who cannot afford to purchase a new car even with a $3,000 to $5,000 government voucher.

“For families that cannot afford the price of a new vehicle even with a government voucher, the Cash for Clunkers program would limit their access to affordable transportation, a must for most working Americans,” said Aaron Lowe, vice president of government affairs for the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association. “Cash for Clunkers may sound good at first, but when you take a closer look, it is clear that the Cash for Clunkers proposal will negatively impact car owners, wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.”Steven Levitt, a University of Chicago professor of economics and author of the best-seller Freakonomics, recently wrote about Cash for Clunkers on his New York Times blog: “It also seems to me that any effect on the demand for new cars would be extremely limited. People who drive clunkers are generally not in the market for new cars. Presumably their replacement car will be a used car. The increased demand for used cars will lead to higher prices for used cars, which will push some buyers towards a new car, but the likely impact on new cars would be small.”Congress and states have considered Cash for Clunkers proposals in the past and in many cases have decided against them. Many legislators have come to realize the unintended consequences of this program and that they are not a cost effective use of government money
.
“Providing incentives for individuals to purchase fuel efficient vehicles or to have their current vehicle maintained would be a better use of federal money,” continued Lowe. “The bottom line is that Cash for Clunkers is a bad idea and should be rejected by Congress.”

Administration Cash for Clunkers Proposal Bad for Consumers & EnvironmentTrade Association Cautions Against Creating Another Home Mortgage Debacle

BETHESDA, MD — March 30, 2009 — While the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA) supports efforts by the Obama administration to help stabilize U.S. based vehicle manufacturers, the association cautions that the “Cash for Clunkers” proposal will harm the environment, negatively impact car owners, waste billions of taxpayer dollars and hurt the hundreds of thousands of vehicle service and repair businesses in America. Read More...
Opposition to “Cash for Clunkers” Programs to be Major Issue for 2009 Aftermarket Legislative Summit

BETHESDA, MD — February 19, 2009 — The Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA) has added the “Cash for Clunkers” issue to the agenda for the Aftermarket Legislative Summit, scheduled for March 11-12, in Washington, D.C.The “Cash for Clunkers” program that was removed from the Economic Stimulus package passed by Congress last week would have appropriated $16 billion in federal funds for car owners to trade in their sport utility vehicles in exchange for vouchers to be used for the purchase of a newer, more fuel-efficient vehicle. Although it was removed, congressional supporters have vowed to include the provision in another legislative vehicle, likely an energy bill that is slated for debate this spring. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who introduced S.AMDT.338 to the stimulus, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who wrote the “Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act” (S. 247), have been clear in their intent to obtain enactment of such a program in the 111th Congress. Read More...
“Cash for Clunkers” Amendment Withdrawn from Senate Stimulus Bill Victory for Consumers and Small Business Owners

BETHESDA, MD — February 6, 2009 — The “Cash for Clunkers” amendment to the United States Senate stimulus package was withdrawn from the bill on Thursday. The Cash for Clunkers program would have earmarked federal funds for car owners to trade-in their sport utility vehicles in exchange for vouchers to be used to obtain newer, more fuel efficient vehicles. Read More...

“Cash for Clunkers” Program: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing Plan to Scrap Older Vehicles Will Hurt Many Consumers

The Cash for Clunkers program being considered by Congress for inclusion in the economic stimulus package is really a wolf in sheep’s clothing, according Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association. The Cash for Clunkers program would earmark federal funds for car owners to trade-in their sport utility vehicles in exchange for vouchers to be used to obtain newer, more fuel efficient vehicles. On the surface the program may sound reasonable, but its consequences will create issues for those not fortunate enough to afford the cost of a new vehicle and would be a waste of taxpayer dollars. Read More...


THIS IS IMPORTANT! GO HERE TO READ MORE.

20 comments:

  1. That's what they did with homeowership, gave loans to people that couldn't afford them with the fexible mortgage rates and now there are more forclosures than you can shake a stick at.

    This is a Democrat here, aren't we supposed to learn from history?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a non issue, "the government wants to give stimulus money of up to $5,000 to consumers to FORCE them to tuen in their older vehicles and buy newer ones that many cannot afford." Give me a break, it's a simple economic stimulus to help people off the fence and buy the new car they have been holding off on. It does two things, first, stimulates the economy and injects life into the US auto industry, second, drops the end cost of the car to the consumer by $5,000.

    Get off the ledge Joe, there are no black helicopters chasing you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have been looking and I have not found a reliable car for $5000.00 and I don't belive I will. Just because Nancy Pelosi has plenty of money to sit around and destroy this country dosen't mean that the rest of us that pay her salry does.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If this gets passed it would be a good time to start a REPO business!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not only the cost of the new car, but the required full coverage insurance is what raises the monthly cost. I'll keep my paid off clunkers with their minimum liability on them.
    And I'll write to stop the government from spending my money on others with lousy judgment. With these issues being pushed through every day, though, it's almost like a full time job we have trying to stop this crap.

    ReplyDelete
  6. On top of it Joe. AS someone that has never owned a new vehicle I think it is very important that people speak up and take action against these morons! I personally have no desire to own a new vehicle why invest a fortune in something that will consistently lose value? Seems pretty stupid to me!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Really twisting the facts here, no one would be "forced" to give up their vehicle. It is an incentive program to make it easier for people to give up there fuel guzzlers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So. What's wrong with the program? I missed that part.

    And where was the "forcing" part? How is offering someone $5,000 forcing them to do anything??
    Maybe arrested prostitues can use this line of reasoning: "But officer, It was rape. He offered me $5,000!!"

    And why do we want the old clunkers on the road? Other countries do this. Go to Japan and try to find an old clunker on the road... not so easy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. well, I guess I'll go start my powerstroke and let it just puff away for about 2 hours. Screw them and their aganda.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is far from settled yet, there are two very different proposals.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The government has no business subsidizing anything.Look at the bangup job they did with housing

    ReplyDelete
  12. 12:45 You never took your mortgage deduction?

    ReplyDelete
  13. 11:53,

    That $5000 came out of YOUR pocket! Well, sort of... it was $8000 when it left your pocket, but administrative costs, you know.

    THAT'S what's wrong with this. The more people bite on this, the more comes out of your pocket; and YOU don't get a new car!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't feel "I" as a taxpayer needs to or should help Joe Blow (pardon me Joe) to get rid of his/her gas guzzler on MY dime!
    They wanted it, they bought it and now they must deal with it!

    ReplyDelete
  15. 1:54 "THAT'S what's wrong with this. The more people bite on this, the more comes out of your pocket; and YOU don't get a new car!"

    No, I don't get a new car, but I do get some benefits. Looks what happens when we get rid of gas guzzling SUVs:

    1. less oil money going to terrorists in the mideast
    2. less pollution
    3. lower gasoline prices
    4. less road damage
    5. safer highways
    6. And... fewer a-holes on the road!

    Heck... I'm happy to "donate" money to crush and shred Hummers and Ford Excretions.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 3:53pm...gas has gone down on the barrel but you don't see the price at the pump going down because there are fewer and fewer refineries operating and no new ones being built. Gas will always be high. Highways will be safer when people start laying off the cell phones, laying off the gas pedal and driving the limits and more people start paying attention. Less road damage, seriously? You're probably the biggest A-hole on the road (note the caps!!). You can thank me the next time you see a slow moving Expedition in front of your car, probably riding the brakes and wasting your gas...because you're the moron in a teeny traffic accident waiting to happen bumper riding Prius..

    ReplyDelete
  17. The problem with the car industries, banks etc. is not the vehicles, loans, etc. it is the greed that has taken over the United States. They want their so called Bonuses and high wages so bad that they had to start screwing with the working (middleclass) mans pocket by raising the price of cars so high a normal working man can not afford to purchase one. If you can not afford these high dollar vehicles they just sit on the lots. NO MONEY FOR THEM!!! Is't that a shame. They need to lose. The banks have been given the go ahead to keep robbing the working man by raising interest rates and fees until July 2010. They deserve to lose too. Politcs is sickning!

    ReplyDelete
  18. It's more goverment subsity to car makers, they are consuming our tax money from two orifces.

    I would have prefered to see this program before the stimulus was passed, at least the taxpayer would have gotten something out of it. Now they want it both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  19. if i cant afford a used one now because of the theout ragous prices , average $5000 plus profit for the dealers. how can i afford a new one at $25000 plus? tax me then screw me with my money. SOCIALISM at its best.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.