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
Zero2Cool (3h) : Good deal too
Martha Careful (4h) : Maxx Crosby resigned by Raiders
Zero2Cool (13h) : Chargers release Joey Bosa
Zero2Cool (4-Mar) : Appears Jets released Adams. It'll be official in few hours.
Zero2Cool (3-Mar) : We have re-signed LB Isaiah McDuffie
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Jets taking calls for Davante Adams. That $38m cap number hurting lol
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Guess it's not official until the 12th
Zero2Cool (2-Mar) : Deebo went for a 5th to Commanders?
Martha Careful (1-Mar) : Just like my late husband!!
Zero2Cool (1-Mar) : Once fired up, it should be good
Zero2Cool (1-Mar) : Sometimes, the first page load will be slow. it's firing up the site.
Martha Careful (1-Mar) : The site is operating much faster...tyvm
Mucky Tundra (28-Feb) : It's the offseason and the draft is still nearly 2 months away, what can ya do?🤷‍♂️
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : NFL teams were notified today that the 2025 salary cap has been set at $279,200,000 per club.
Zero2Cool (27-Feb) : sssllllooooow
Martha Careful (27-Feb) : is it just me, or has the website been slow the last couple of days?
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Damnit 2026 2nd rnd pick!
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Packers get Myles Garret and Browns 2926 2nd rnd pick.
buckeyepackfan (26-Feb) : Browns get Jaire, + Packers #1 2025 pick and 2026 3rd rnd pick.
beast (26-Feb) : Rams trying to trade Stafford and Kupp, then signing Rodgers and Adams? Just speculation, but interesting
Zero2Cool (26-Feb) : Packers shopping Jaire Alexander per Ian Rapoport
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst and Jaire Alexander’s agent, John Thornton, are meeting this week in Indianapolis to determine the future of the Packers’ 28-year-
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst says Mark Murphy told him he can trade their first-round pick despite the draft being in Green Bay.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : Packers. 🤦
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team petition NFL to ban Brotherly Shove.
beast (23-Feb) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter
beast (23-Feb) : Campbell is right, he's rich and he doesn't have to explain sh!t... but that attitude gives teams reasons to never sign him again.
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I have some doubt about all that
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I read De'Vondre Campbell's tweet this morning (via the New York Post) Florio says that if he invested his earnings wisely, he will be good
beast (20-Feb) : I haven't followed, but I believe he's good when healthy, just hasn't been able to stay healthy.
dfosterf (20-Feb) : Hasn"t Bosa missed more games than he has played in the last 3 years?
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : He hasn't been too bad when healthy but I don't feel like I ever heard much about when he is
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Felt like he was more interested in his body, than football. He flashed more than I expected
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : When he was coming out, I thought he'd be flash in pan.
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : Joey seems so forgettable compared to his brother for some reason
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : NFL informed teams today that the 2025 salary cap will be roughly $277.5M-$281.5M
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Los Angeles Chargers are likely to release DE Joey Bosa this off-season as a cap casualty, per league source.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : If the exploit is not fixed, we'll see tons of "50 top free agents, 50 perfect NFL team fits: We picked where each should sign in March" lo
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Issue should be solved, database cleaned and held strong working / meeting. Boom!
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : It should be halted now.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : usually spambots are trying to get traffic to shady websites filled with spyware; the two links being spammed were to the Packers website
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : you know when you put it that way combined with the links it was spamming (to the official Packers website)
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yep. You can do that with holding down ENTER on a command in Console of browser
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : even with the rapid fire posts?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I'm not certain it's a bot.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I've got to go to work soon which is a pity because I'm enthralled by this battle between the bot and Zero
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, I see what that did. Kind of funny.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : now it's a link to Wes Hodkiezwicz mailbag
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Now they're back with another topic
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
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
39m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

5-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

4-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

3-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

1-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

28-Feb / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

27-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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