Zero2Cool
12 years ago

It was? Adding in the administrative costs, what did it cost again?

$24,000 per car? $45,000 per car? More?

Ahem.

It was about as dumb a boondoggle as there is.

Fortunately, as such things go (see, e.g. "quantitative easing"), it was a small program.

Kevin, Kevin, Kevin. You're such a smart guy in general. I just don't understand how you do not see how stupid His Highness's economic policies are.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Those numbers are invalid and unverified. Watch, I can do that too.

Adding in all costs...

$11,500 per car and contributed to consumers paying less at the gas pump OOOH YOU FORGOT THAT HUH



(i really have no dog in this fight, other than proving some of you are too bias and fail to think of all aspects before slamming a view/perception) 😇
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
12 years ago

Those numbers are invalid and unverified. Watch, I can do that too.

Adding in all costs...

$11,500 per car and contributed to consumers paying less at the gas pump OOOH YOU FORGOT THAT HUH



(i really have no dog in this fight, other than proving some of you are too bias and fail to think of all aspects before slamming a view/perception) 😇

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



1. Average put on a clunker per year: between 10,000 and 25,000. Take the high number.

2. Average MPG (clunker turned in): 15-18 MPG. Take the low number.
Average MPG (new car): 25-30 MPG. Take the high number.

3. Gallons of gas to drive #1 if clunker: 25,000 /15 = 1667 gallons.
Gallons of gas to drive #1 if new car: 25,000/30 = 834 gallons.

4. Average per gallon of gas: $3.25 - $4.00. Take the high number.

#3 x #4 (amount less paid at pump per car): $3,336.

5. Total number of clunkers turned in under program: 700,000.

6. Total number of clunkers that would have been turned in anyway as trade in on new car: 575,000.

7. Total number of "extra" clunkers turned in thanks to Cash for Clunkers program: (#5 - #6): 125,000.

8. Total amount spend by Feds on the program: $3 billion.

9. Cost per car (#8 divided by #7): $24,000.

Secondary source: CNN  . (Original study by Edmunds.com.)

10. Maximum amount received by owner of clunker for turning it in: $4,500.

So, to save a maximum of $3,336 + 4,500 = $7,836, the US Government spent $24,000.

This was a good idea how?

Yes, I am biased against government. I've never denied that. But I'm biased *because* of the evidence I've seen over the years, not despite it. Count the costs precisely, and you find this kind of "return" over and over again.

It isn't surprising since one of every two dollars spent by the US Government is what I call PeterPaul expenditure, or what is technically called "transfer payments," spending that simply takes from one pocket (robs Peter) and puts it in another (pays Paul). Don't believe me? Go to the government's own numbers, bea.gov, and find the figures for total government spending and transfer payments.

Bah.








And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Porforis
12 years ago

1. Average put on a clunker per year: between 10,000 and 25,000. Take the high number.

2. Average MPG (clunker turned in): 15-18 MPG. Take the low number.
Average MPG (new car): 25-30 MPG. Take the high number.

3. Gallons of gas to drive #1 if clunker: 25,000 /15 = 1667 gallons.
Gallons of gas to drive #1 if new car: 25,000/30 = 834 gallons.

4. Average per gallon of gas: $3.25 - $4.00. Take the high number.

#3 x #4 (amount less paid at pump per car): $3,336.

5. Total number of clunkers turned in under program: 700,000.

6. Total number of clunkers that would have been turned in anyway as trade in on new car: 575,000.

7. Total number of "extra" clunkers turned in thanks to Cash for Clunkers program: (#5 - #6): 125,000.

8. Total amount spend by Feds on the program: $3 billion.

9. Cost per car (#8 divided by #7): $24,000.

Secondary source: CNN  . (Original study by Edmunds.com.)

10. Maximum amount received by owner of clunker for turning it in: $4,500.

So, to save a maximum of $3,336 + 4,500 = $7,836, the US Government spent $24,000.

This was a good idea how?

Yes, I am biased against government. I've never denied that. But I'm biased *because* of the evidence I've seen over the years, not despite it. Count the costs precisely, and you find this kind of "return" over and over again.

It isn't surprising since one of every two dollars spent by the US Government is what I call PeterPaul expenditure, or what is technically called "transfer payments," spending that simply takes from one pocket (robs Peter) and puts it in another (pays Paul). Don't believe me? Go to the government's own numbers, bea.gov, and find the figures for total government spending and transfer payments.

Bah

Originally Posted by: Wade 



One flaw in your math: You only take into account a year of gas savings. However, I think it balances out considering the fact that I think the 25k/year mileage figure is quite high, even for a "high" figure. And it doesn't really change your end conclusion, it just weakens the comparison a bit. If you hold onto the car for 10 years and you want to argue that if not for cash for clunkers you wouldn't have gotten rid of the clunker anyways within the next 10 years? Ridiculous argument but that's about the only way you could argue that this was cost-effective.
alharrisdude31
12 years ago
I just heard one from an older member of my family, but its not exactly the most appetizing bar joke I've ever heard....
Anyway here it goes


So a man walks into a bar with a 12" man on his shoulder, the man sits down and orders a beer. The 12" man jumps off his perch and continues to run down the bar knocking down each and every beer, comes back, and jumps back on the man's shoulder. The bartender, obviously enraged, asks the man what this is all about? So the man replies, "sir, I was walking down the beach one day and found a bottle with a genie in it. He told me he would grant me one and only one wish." Ashamed, the man continued "I wished for a twelve inch prick..."
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (5h) : @AaronNagler · 2m Both Jordan Love and Malik Willis were Limited participants at Packers practice today.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Johnson didn't make it until 2020. Ring 2023. 🤷 Personally, he should have been in years prior to Hall.
Zero2Cool (7h) : HUMP DAY
beast (8h) : Guys that have a good shot at making the NFL Hall of Fame usually get into their teams pretty fast
beast (8h) : Yeah, but is Kampman and the others in the NFL Hall of Fame?
Zero2Cool (8h) : Johnson was Hall of Fame, 2020. Should haev been in Ring a year later, not three years.
Zero2Cool (8h) : I could be wrong there though
Zero2Cool (8h) : Guys like Kampman, Tim Harris, Al Harris, etc all over 15 years. Hall of Fame is 5 year wait
Zero2Cool (8h) : I guess I see players in Packers Hall come way later
beast (8h) : Yeah, usually teams hall of fames are a much lower bar than the NFL
Zero2Cool (8h) : is it uncommon for Hall before Ring?
Zero2Cool (8h) : S Xavier McKinney named first-team All-Pro by NFLPA
beast (10h) : I missed it, sorry, but he got into the NFL Hall of Fame years before that
Zero2Cool (10h) : Jones took his sweet ole time!
Zero2Cool (10h) : Yeah, he's in the ring of honor, just saw video and his name is up there
Zero2Cool (10h) : Didn't they have a thing in 2023 for Jimmy's ring of honor? I swear I saw it
beast (10h) : Though if they're legitimately trying to re-sign MM, then it makes sense.
beast (10h) : Jerry Jones still hasn't put Jimmy Johnson in the Ring of Honor, but he's in the NFL's Hall of Fame, Jones is petty
Mucky Tundra (22h) : Unless the Cowboys are planning an extension, seems kinda petty
beast (8-Jan) : Cowboys denied Bears request
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : From what I'm reading, MM is under contract through the 14th of January; after that he's free game
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : McCarthy let go or not extended??
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Chicago Bears have asked the Dallas Cowboys permission to interview Mike McCarthy for head coaching vacancy
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : The winners page that is
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : I was not hoping for that. It messes up the page lol
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats beast on 2024 !
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats porky on winning 2023 pick'em! (oops sorry)
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Packers have $60M+ of 2025 cap space on paper TODAY.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Missed FG into a Lions TD; that'll do pig, that'll do
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : That might be it for the Vikings
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Oh so the refs do know what intentional grounding is
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : what the hell was that Goff?! Not much pressure and he just air mails it to Harrison
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : They really need to to get rid of the auto first down for illegal contact
Martha Careful (6-Jan) : watching the Vikings and Lions it's understandable why they swept the Packers. So much better product
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Even when GB got pressure he was throwing darts; vs no pressure on that last pass he just air mails an open guy
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : didn't have guys in his face ... pressure makes difference
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Where was this Darnold vs GB?
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : BALL DON'T LIE
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : how was that not a safety? Goff throws it at an offensive lineman
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Zero, I thought that was a given! ;)
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Zero I looked through earlier and noticed the same thing. Bonkers year. I just wonder if beast put any money on games
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : I'm hoping for BLOODBATH. Pummel one another.
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : 8 people in pick'em would have won any year with their total lol
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : I'm rooting for the Lions to lose.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : God help me but I'm rooting for the Vikings to...Vikings to...Christ I can't say it
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : 4 td for Rodgers
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Chiefs got shutout
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2m / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

4m / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

21h / Around The NFL / beast

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

7-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

6-Jan / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

3-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.