I helped design the program. Here are the facts:

1. The average MPG of the cars we will be junking is 12 MPG.

The MINIMUM MPG of the cars you can buy with the voucher is 33.5 MPG for 2009 and then it INCREASES from there. That is more than a 250% increase in MPG!

This program is CARBON NEGATIVE.

Beyond the great benefits for climate there here are a few more:

1. SAFETY: We are getting people out of cars with no air bags into cars with air bags and other safety features.

2. HEALTH - According to a CA study - cars that are 13 years and older represent 25% of the miles driven but 75% of the toxic emissions!

France, Germany and China (!) have just announced similar programs. This bill also will stimulate the economy and encourage the automakers to retool factories for more efficient cars - short term AND long term effects.

I encourage you to relook at the facts and post again after having done so. This bill will be a big gamechanger for America.

Jack

 Reply

Besides, the rebate you get really isn't that great unless were talking Focuses and Aveos. Why not just offer killer tax rebates for everyone who is taking on general conservation efforts... and catalytic converters; that way I can get that annoying SES light in my Jetta to go away.

Anyway, this whole thing seems flawed from every angle.

*signs petition to abolish the Government*

 Reply

Most of your cars with lower fuel efficiency that are worth a damn, aren't going to wind up turned in, either. For one of two reasons.

A: It's worth more than the proposed coupon value

B: It's in the hands of an owner who, even with a $4500 coupon wouldn't be able to afford to buy a new car.

It'd be a sad demise for a handful of worthy cars, but mostly, it'd be a decent guaranteed value out of a car that didn't have long before the crusher anyway.

If it gives the incentive necessary to boost sales at least up to prior levels, I'd be willing to adopt a wait and see approach.

 Reply

This will only have an impact on the availability of older Ford Panthers the OHV engines (the ones with the OHC engines all get over 20mpg), older GM G and B bodies with carbs and big old crap cans from the 1970s... many of which aren't allowed anyway due to the 4200 pound weight limit.

Most of the FWD stuff from the 1980s won't be eligible... probably not even the FWD Cadillacs with the Craptacular HT4100 V8 engine.

I don't even think any of the fuel injected Panthers would be eligible since I hear they get somewhere around 20mpg

 Reply

What this bill would do is effectively raise the minimum price of all cars on the road to $2500.

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but the VAST majority of cars I have owned were purchased for far less than that.

Do the authors/supporters of the bill not realize that a gigantic portion of the country cannot afford cars that cost more than $2500 let alone new ones.

It used to be that leaders of countries understood that the economic health of a country was vastly boosted by the ability of the populous to be on mobile on wheels. The ability to commute opens employment opportunity exponentially, among other things. This bill would cripple the blue-collar end of the economy.

The $100 car becomes a $2500 one overnight.

 Reply

Does it say it has to be registered in CA for at least 120 days? Mine is still registered in Iowa to avoid smog.

By the way, does the $2500 have to be used buying a new car? Can't I just have the $2500 so I can squander it hotrodding my other car??

If you MUST use it towards a new car, I say fuck this shit.

 Reply

1. Take a look at the LeMons grid, most of those cars would be ineligible under this program as they're pre-heavy-ass safety equipment and thus get more than 18 MPG.

2. The "global warming" and fuel saving arguments might be bunk but I'd sure love to see a lot fewer mid '80s - early '90s FWD shitboxes spewing putrid black smoke... some places still have no emissions controls, and woe be to anyone who gets stuck behind these vehicles.

3. It won't work. The people who are still running beaters are too broke for $2500 or even $4500 to make the difference between being able to afford an '04 or newer car. Most people don't drive an '87 Buick because they want to, they drive it because they can't afford to replace it and the damn things will never completely die (so it's reliable transportation to and from their sub-minimum-wage job).

 Reply

This was done in Greece several years ago and a lot of great old Alfas, Lancias and other cool cars were lost forever. Air pollution continued to get worse with no other measures in place and the economy suffered because people were trading in their paid off but usable beaters for new cars they really couldn't afford.

Make safety inspections mandatory, build efficient and fairly priced automobiles and the problem will be resolved while future collectable cars will be protected. We need a paradigm change, not the industry equivalent of a single shot of crack cocaine.

 Reply

* Vehicles must be in drivable condition;

* Be currently registered in the U.S.; and

* Have a when-new fuel economy rating of less than 18 miles per gallon (as reported by the original manufacturer for purposes of CAFE compliance)."

 Reply