Anyone else experiencing "moral" issues with the cash for clunkers deal?

[Todd Wilson]

There are no incentives or wheeling and dealing.  Its sticker price minus the clunker cash and thats how it works.  The program is really only for select situations and not as good of a deal as we all originally thought.
Todd

So what's to stop the dealers from jacking the prices in anticipation of this? If they know there's no negotiating then why not pad the already-too-high price by a 2-3 G's or more? I could see where someone using this "rebate" program might actually spend more money on a car than they would have otherwise. It's like Vegas, the house always wins.

Thats a good question and I really dont know the answer for sure. They do have MSRP or sticker price on a vehicle and its always a lot higher then you can usually get them for if you wheel and deal. At least on bigger cars. Smaller cars I think they are right on the edge.  I  was told Dodge dealers a year or 2 ago had roughly 6-8 grand to deal with off the sticker price on a new diesel ram 40000$ could maybe be had for 32000$ if you played your cards right or the dealer needed to move the vehicle.   WIth the clunker  it would be 40g's  - 3500$.   Far less then if you were to wheel and deal.  Now the smaller cars like Caliber and so forth dont have much in the way to play as far as dealing but sticker price - your clunker money would be a good deal and the dealer puts full profit in their pockets.

Lots of dealers lately are hungry and are probably selling stuff close to invoice price on most vehicles. I wonder if they would clunker off invoice or sticker. Probably depends on the dealer, the vehicle and how hungry they are.


Todd

[Old Moparz]

There are no incentives or wheeling and dealing.  Its sticker price minus the clunker cash and thats how it works.  The program is really only for select situations and not as good of a deal as we all originally thought.
Todd

So what's to stop the dealers from jacking the prices in anticipation of this? If they know there's no negotiating then why not pad the already-too-high price by a 2-3 G's or more? I could see where someone using this "rebate" program might actually spend more money on a car than they would have otherwise. It's like Vegas, the house always wins.

Dealers have been doing that already. They brag about how much you're saving on a factory rebate & make it sound like they are the ones discounting the MSRP when in fact they aren't discounting much at all. Also when you tell them you have a trade in vehicle, (regular trade, not pollution credit, clunker trade) they deduct the trade value from the MSRP so it's no different than getting a small discount on the new car & giving them your old car for free.

[bearbqd]

Well, I 've never bought anything from a dealer and I don't plan to.

[chargergirl]

I wonder what those folks that are driving old beaters will drive when their current beaters give up. There wont be any 90's cars left to buy for 800$ if this clunker deal and tax credit thing pans out like they hope.


Todd

I just got a postcard in the mail. Hey Lyn turn in that gas guzzler and receive UP TO $4500! Doesn't that sound great! Truck is valued at more than $12,000 and we'll give you up to...I've got an up to I would like to relate! There is also fodder about taxing you on the amount of mileage you drive every year. So not only will we tax you to death on gas/diesel we now will tax you on your driving. That will teach those that quit driving so much when gas prices went up. Remember that? We were told that gas was so high because of our demand...THEN...we were told gas prices were going up again since we weren't demanding as much oil. What Todd said above is exactly the plan. Crushing the cars that would be purchased by those could not afford a new car will MAKE one have to buy a new car. That will make the, badly managed, car makers happy and lucrative once again. Ah and the news today stated Obama wants to pay the Opium dealers to not plant opium anymore. WHAT!?! And we pay again! I have no more money!

[my73charger]

chargergirl makes reference to the gas mileage tax.  My rep, James Oberstar, the Chair of the Transportation Committee, is pushing this idea.  He wants to put a GPS in everyones cars to track their mileage.  Not only will this plan cost a rediulous amount of money to institute but it will add a whole new layer of government.  Plus, who wants the government to be able to track every move you make with a GPS?  Talk about invasion of privacy!  I have already written every rep I have including Oberstar to express my thoughts and feelings on this garbage.

[694spdRT]

Lots of dealers lately are hungry and are probably selling stuff close to invoice price on most vehicles. I wonder if they would clunker off invoice or sticker. Probably depends on the dealer, the vehicle and how hungry they are.


Todd

If the dealers don't treat these as an outright buy without trade this whole plan is worthless. Unless the dealer is willing to move off of window sticker, include rebates, etc. and then deduct the $3500 or $4500 you may as well keep your car or sell it outright and then buy what you want.

[Go Hogs Go]

At the dealership I sell cars for the clunker price will be treated as cash down. The Government is buying the car, not the dealership. It will not effect the purchase price of the new vehicle. Right now you can buy almost any GM vehicle at supplier pricing less rebates. Any clunker money will come off that bottom line price. Someone is feeding you a load of bull on the MSRP no negotiations stuff. Right now we cannot even register for the program until July 24, and it will be the 27 before we can even submit a deal to the goverment. You have no ideal what a headache this thing is going to be.

[Ghoste]

It's going to be a headache?  C'mon, who are you trying to kid?  After all, it's a government program so there is no way it could be any more complicated than say, income tax for example.

[Go Hogs Go]

From what we are seeing right now, I think we'll be killing a lot more trees with the paperwork and required forms than we are saving crushing cars.

[694spdRT]

From what we are seeing right now, I think we'll be killing a lot more trees with the paperwork and required forms than we are saving crushing cars.

No doubt about that.  I wonder how many dealers will decide to just pass on it altogether.

I was thinking maybe a new Caliber SXT 5 speed for $12,900 less the $3500 or $4500 might be an option for a run around car.

[bull]

Some noteworthy provisions in the rules:

Only new-car dealers can issue the credit, and they must have an active franchise agreement with the manufacturer. That means used-car dealers can't issue the vouchers. Neither can a new-car dealer that has lost its franchise, as several thousand Chrysler and General Motors dealers have recently.

Dealers are required to disclose to the consumer the scrap value of their trade-in and can keep $50 of that amount to cover their administrative costs.

Though all trades must be in drivable condition, dealers are required to disable the vehicles' engines before scrapping them. Regulators' accepted procedure: Drain the oil, then run several quarts of sodium silicate through the engine. As engine heat evaporates the solution, deposits of dehydrated sodium silicate line the engine's lubrication system, abrading all the moving parts and causing the engine to seize.

The dealer must stamp the title "Junk Automobile, Cars.gov" before submitting it for reimbursement. And the dealer must have clear title before doing so.

Scrap facilities can sell any part of the car except the engine block or whole drivetrain, but ultimately the car must be taken off the road.

Violators of the rules face civil penalties of up to $15,000 per incident.

[b5blue]

So now if your buying a new car your nuts not to buy a POS to trade in first! 

[bull]

So now if your buying a new car your nuts not to buy a POS to trade in first! 

Exactly what I was thinking. Used car sales just might go up.

[mauve66]

but you have to own the clunker for a year BEFORE trading it in, if they don't resell the engines and trans then where are all the aftermarket re-manufactured blocks going to come from in 5-15 years ??  are those businesses just going out of business??

[b5blue]

Next will be insurance on "clunkers" will go through the roof.

[Todd Wilson]

I just had a meeting this afternoon with the Gm of our Chrysler dealership. We talked about the clunker deal. Its going like wild fire here at our dealership.   Chrysler is now matching the 4500$ clunker cash. The right situation you could get 9000$ off the purchase of a new vehicle. Clunker cash and all factory rebates/incentives apply. You got some old 1990 gas guzzling pickup truck and trade it in on a new economy car you could get a new car for real cheap. Depending on your MPG rating on your clunker and new unit will decide on 3500$ or 4500$ rebate.



Todd

[Todd Wilson]

chargergirl makes reference to the gas mileage tax.  My rep, James Oberstar, the Chair of the Transportation Committee, is pushing this idea.  He wants to put a GPS in everyones cars to track their mileage.  Not only will this plan cost a rediulous amount of money to institute but it will add a whole new layer of government.  Plus, who wants the government to be able to track every move you make with a GPS?  Talk about invasion of privacy!  I have already written every rep I have including Oberstar to express my thoughts and feelings on this garbage.

Theres been a radio ad playing on one of our stations that the College of Iowa is looking for people to participate in a deal where they put a GPS/computer on your vehicle and track your miles driven. Its a test that could help provide us with better roads for driving in the future! Thats what they say anyways. Gonna pay people 800$ to do it.  They are already trying to get things in place to  tax us via GPS.   Wonder if they will have a 6volt positive ground unit for my old 47 Dodge! HA!


Todd

[68X426]

A little subversiveness would go a long way. I think we all sign up and then drive through every cornfield we can find just to skew the statistics in the "study". Or strap one to a possum and let Big Brother figure out what it all means. 

[Mike DC]

I'm surprised it has taken Congress this long to start pushing for GPS's in everyone's cars.   

[mauve66]

chargergirl makes reference to the gas mileage tax.  My rep, James Oberstar, the Chair of the Transportation Committee, is pushing this idea.  He wants to put a GPS in everyones cars to track their mileage.  Not only will this plan cost a rediulous amount of money to institute but it will add a whole new layer of government.  Plus, who wants the government to be able to track every move you make with a GPS?  Talk about invasion of privacy!  I have already written every rep I have including Oberstar to express my thoughts and feelings on this garbage.

Theres been a radio ad playing on one of our stations that the College of Iowa is looking for people to participate in a deal where they put a GPS/computer on your vehicle and track your miles driven. Its a test that could help provide us with better roads for driving in the future! Thats what they say anyways. Gonna pay people 800$ to do it.  They are already trying to get things in place to  tax us via GPS.   Wonder if they will have a 6volt positive ground unit for my old 47 Dodge! HA!


Todd

bet its a study from the government to determine if they can get enough money from taxing it that way to offset the cost of the program

[Todd Wilson]

chargergirl makes reference to the gas mileage tax.  My rep, James Oberstar, the Chair of the Transportation Committee, is pushing this idea.  He wants to put a GPS in everyones cars to track their mileage.  Not only will this plan cost a rediulous amount of money to institute but it will add a whole new layer of government.  Plus, who wants the government to be able to track every move you make with a GPS?  Talk about invasion of privacy!  I have already written every rep I have including Oberstar to express my thoughts and feelings on this garbage.

Theres been a radio ad playing on one of our stations that the College of Iowa is looking for people to participate in a deal where they put a GPS/computer on your vehicle and track your miles driven. Its a test that could help provide us with better roads for driving in the future! Thats what they say anyways. Gonna pay people 800$ to do it.  They are already trying to get things in place to  tax us via GPS.   Wonder if they will have a 6volt positive ground unit for my old 47 Dodge! HA!


Todd

bet its a study from the government to determine if they can get enough money from taxing it that way to offset the cost of the program

You are exactly right!   Get some college kids to do it so it makes everyone feel good that they are helping kids get an education by participating.


Todd

[chargergirl]

Technically they already have GPS on most of the new cars. It makes it all sound so great and it is...to a degree. It's called low jack and OnStar.

[Steve P.]

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::(Here's a twist on the clunker story. I know someone with a 2002 Honda Insight. 80k miles and the battery needs replacing. It is $5000 for the battery and $1000 or more to install. The Blue Book is $4800. The old battery comes out and Honda gets to recycle it and keep the money. The Insight owner is financially screwed. But she will remain green no matter the waste.  pity

Ironic, that she really does have a clunker.

Where is there anything practical, green, or sensible with this car? Just more consumer waste but that's ok to the greenies because she lowered her carbon footprint. I'll keep my free range, fair trade Hemi Road Runner.)

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

To answer your question: (Where is there anything practical, green, or sensible with this car?)

1) This car brand new today is dirt cheap to buy.

2) She spent very little on fuel over the 7 years it's been driven.

3) If she had been making extra payments with the gas savings the car would have been paid for. (I am using it's avg. mileage against MY avg. mpg). My V-10 F-250 gets about 10.5 mpg. It's also a 2002 with nearly 80K on it.

4) It seems that a 2002' should have been paid off 2 years ago or so. Maybe she bought it used and paid too much.

5) Yes, she has made a much smaller footprint when compared to MOST cars.

6) Most people buy a new vehicle and are upside down the day they signed for it. Also most need many repairs starting just about the time they should be paid off.  (Funny how that works, huh)? 


So I don't see your point. This car averages 40 MPG. So in comparison to my truck, she get's very near 4 times as many miles out of the same gallon of gas.

My truck with 80 K at today's pump price = 7,691  Gallons = $18,285.oo
Her INSIGHT w/80K at today's gas prices = 2,000  Gallons = $  4,800.oo

This seems to me she could have saved $13,485 dollars worth of gas. And since the price of a brand new Insite is under $20,000 (base sticker, no extra deals), she should be in VERY good shape...

Or am I missing something??

[bull]

Steve,

I won't argue the fuel cost savings but I will argue the "green" aspect of the hybrid issue in that there is still no environmentally sound way to dispose of the batteries used in these kinds of cars. Basically they're trading one evil (the "eco-horror" that is our dependence on foreign oil) for another (the environmentally hazardous nature of spent batteries) and the nasty methods used to create lithium-ion batteries in the first place. IMO car makers could (and do) squeeze the same mpg out of small turbo diesel engines (read TDI Jetta) with next to no emissions and effectively eliminate the need for hybrid technology at all. Hybrid cars are not nearly as green as some people would like us to believe, and therefore I have to assume they don't factor the battery construction and disposal in to their "carbon footprint" formula.

In reality my 17 mpg on-a-good-day-Durango is less of an overall polluter than the Prius: http://www.dosomething.org/blog/chatterbox/prius-not-so-green-afterall

"CNW Marketing Research's second annual "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal" report concludes that the overall environmental impact of the Prius is significantly higher than many SUVs and other nonhybrid cars because the automobile's fuel economy is not the largest factor in its impact.

The study added up all energy needed to design, build, ship, drive and dispose of a vehicle throughout its lifetime. The data is then translated to a dollar figure. According to findings, the Prius costs $2.19 per mile over its expected life span of 100,000 miles. There are 156 cars with lower per mile cost than the Prius, including pickup trucks and SUVs such as the Toyota Tacoma ($.97), Jeep Liberty ($1.11), Ford Explorer ($1.87), Dodge Durango ($1.69) and Jeep Wrangler ($.65).

The top factor in determining a car's environmental cost-per-mile is its recyclability. Because hybrids are newer technology, their parts are less reusable in other makes and models. For example, each Prius battery is made of 32 pounds of nickel. The environmental cost of mining the nickel and the cost of recycling the nickel batteries are significant because there is not a massive industry, as there is for regular batteries.

Overall, the CNW study found that newer technology, while it may be environmentally friendly in theory, can do more harm than good until the technology becomes more widespread. Hopefully other tech can catch up to these superior engines."

[68X426]

 Hi Everyone. This has been an excellent topic and dialogue.

So Steve said.... Or am I missing something??. Nothing personal, really, but here I go.

Yes, you are missing something in two ways:

one is the "morality" component of the posed question,
second is the economics of the matter.

You didn't address the morality. The alleged morality of a green car gets back to my earlier post regarding Conspicuous Virtue. Please check it out. Your take, I think, is that cheap is better and therefore (probably) the morally right thing to do.

I absolutely agree it's a cheap car. She saved a ton on the fuel. It seems like she made a smaller footprint. On the surface only though. Now comes the unintended consequences (conveniently ignored by greens).

Your point one is that the new ones are dirt cheap. Yes, because the current ones are worthless at 80k (mandatory repair is greater than the car value). If the car wasn't a clunker today, the free market (what is that?) would not price the new car as dirt cheap today. The car wasn't intended to be a clunker, but it is definitely a clunker, so the clunker discount is part of the new price.

The difference in the fuel cost is $13,485. I agree it's cheaper by a ton. But now the economic reality: take off $6000 + for the repair. $7485 is still a nice savings. I have to ask: would you do the repair and be under water by $1200 just to save future fuel cost? So now it's down to $6285. Not bad at all, but that's just on the surface.

You have to consider that you can't know how long the new battery will last (I think she said it's a 50k warranty) and all the while the car wears out around you. (I know Hondas are tough but they do wear out). There will be unforeseen costs to keep that car going for 10 years. You simply cannot sell it. Therefore, you could only, reasonably, junk the car because it cannot accomplish anything else (for anyone) except save fuel.

I don't see how it makes a bit of economic sense to replace that battery. It may make moral sense to someone, it is certainly fuel sensible, but it is not economically practical. She, and the soon to be hundreds of thousands more owners, will just dump the car. Society pays the price for her fuel savings. The law of unintended consequences is obvious because Honda didn't mean for it to be worthless (I don't think. That's another subject). But it is worthless.

Quite the paradox: fuel savings for her that then hurts the rest of us human beings when the car is worthless. Her Conspicuous Virtue makes it acceptable to consume ever more energy and materials. And now the clunker bill makes it socially, morally, and politically acceptable to dump ever increasing amounts of our crap into the scrap heap. Dirty secret: recycle has not reached economically sustainable levels and green cars are not green.

I submit that your truck is the equal of her Insight for its carbon footprint and its "morality" and it is superior for its total economic value. (Assuming you use it as a truck). Consider:

You can haul 4 to 6 people, she can do 2 (in the real world).

You can haul maybe one ton of material and tow 5 tons, she can do a couple grocery bags. 

You are likely to keep the truck going forever, and she has a car that has redefined what worthless means.

Replacing her car would include the impact of the new steel, plastic, battery cells, glass, fiber, time, energy, on and on, and no green ever will discuss the total environmental cost of buying, using, and replacing a green car.

Her only green choice is to walk, bicycle or ride a horse. And they have unintended consequences as well.

Most important, if nothing else matters, consider the impact of how she has to make 20 trips to accomplish what you do in one trip. Plus, she has had to either rent a truck to get jobs done, or borrow favors from truck friends, or pay for UPS, et all, for deliveries. So the fossil fuel for her lifestyle is most certainly being spent, just not by her using up her fossil fuel, but her lifestyle is using the fossil fuel. Convenient rational for the greens: my shit is green and I therefore I don't care about the real impact to the planet.

Example: Bono and Springsteen telling us to save the planet, one private jet trip at a time. Everyday examples: the Prius owner who orders their Victoria Secrets, REI, and Williams Sonoma and waits for UPS and FedEx to just magically appear. Multiply that impact by billions. And while waiting for UPS they drive the Insight to yoga on day 1, then to the tea shop on day 2, then to the organic farmers market on day 3 (instead of growing their own tomatoes). Multiplied by millions

The issue is her, your, mine, and everybody's lifestyle costs and their impacts. Not just the fuel savings. You make every trip count. She makes no adjustments, she just consumes.

I submit that you and your truck accomplish more for society and the environment than the green machine. Your dollar of fuel is also far more economically efficient than her dollar of fuel because you simply can do more and do do more with the truck.

She saved the fuel, but we (you, me, society, and the environment) did not save anything based on that car choice.

Full disclosure, before someone responds about politics or not loving Mother Nature, I am green, long before green was cool. I am also an economist, scientist, and farmer, and love Bruce. I just wanted to point out the complex human behavior we see exhibited by greens and their cars. The paradox of Conspicuous Virtue has no better example than the Honda Insight. She appears to have lowered the carbon footprint but we all pay a higher environmental price for it.

In summary, I say save the planet by using what is already here: get a pound puppy, adopt a child, plant your own veggies, buy recycled, walk, bike, and most importantly restore a Mopar. Be contrarian. These things will save the environment.

Steve, please keep your truck running, you are the efficient one, not the hybrid or electric.