C.A.R.S. clunker program

I don't think being handed someone else's money would be sweet. The cash you would get had to have been taken from someone else. The government can only give to some what it takes from others.

 

What did you trade in?

 

And the only official site for this program is www.cars.gov All the others out there are run by marketing companies trying to collect names and emails they can later sell to dealerships.

 

What about cash borrowed from the Peoples Republic of China?

On a related note, my 70 year old mother has a '91 Caprice Classic which qualifies for CARS (rated at 18 MPG combined when new and registered and insured by her for the last 17+ years) which she plans to trade-in under this program for $4,500.00 off a 2010 Prius.

Now it's up to me to find a CARS participating Toyota dealer with the right 2010 Prius in stock.

Dave

 

So it's ok that our government borrows the money from the Chinese? WE are going to have to pay it back.

This C.A.R.S. thing is more social engineering. Cap and Tax is next.

It's not a consolation to me that your mother is getting a Prius, partially paid for by me. Or... my grandchildren.

 

In a liberals eyes, the money you earned doesnt belong to you. So you didnt pay for anything. So stop complaining.

 

Ford has a site where you can put your car info in and see if your car qualifies.

Let Ford Recycle Your Ride - Find out if you qualify!

 

I understand the reasoning, but personally find it frustrating. I own a 2000 Accord LX. I'm sure I will be offered less then $3,500 in trade. Meanwhile, some one with a 2000 Ford Expedition, with high mileage and all beat up, is eligible. With that said, I've yet to go to Car Max. to see what they would offer. And I know it would be a shame to destroy a perfectly good Accord, but wish it would be worth more in trade.

 

Too bad conservatives do not take the same view when it comes to matters of pollution, war mongering, and corporatism.

Sorry laddie. I have seen conservatism in action, as distinct from the ideological blabber when they are sitting on the sidelines.

 

Perhaps my mom can name her government subsidized Prius after one of your grandchildren? It's the least she could do considering how they're partially paying for it. :welcome:

Dave

 

No, what you've seen is a different branch of the liberal tree. Anyone using their beliefs to affect other people negatively is not conservatism.

The term has been really mucked up.

REAL conservatives have a 'live and let live' approach. Less government, less bureaucracy. If it doesn't affect me personally, or doesn't affect other people (without their consent), then the government has NO business in it.

 

Well, that would be very considerate, thank you!

I don't have children yet, so I'll have to get back to you in a couple decades with the grandkids names.

 

For those interested in taking advantage of the program, here's an update from the cars.gov site:

"While the CARS Act makes transactions on and after July 1 potentially eligible for credits under the CARS program, interested dealers and consumers may want to wait until all of the detailed issues that must be addressed in the implementing regulations are resolved and the final rule is issued. Issuance will occur around July 23.

At that point, NHTSA will have in place detailed provisions about establishing eligibility and a system to ensure the prompt payment of money for credits used under the CARS program.

If dealer choose to structure a transaction before the final rule is issued, they will bear the risks associated with later demonstrating that the transaction meets all of the specifications of the final rule. The dealers should also give the credit to the consumer at the time of such transaction.

The dealer would be reimbursed by NHTSA later if the dealer registers and submits documentation sufficient to demonstrate that the transaction was an eligible one, that the traded in vehicle was properly disposed of, and that all requirements in the final rule were met."

 

So the dealer is fronting the cash for the 'clunker' and then bears the responsibility of proving to the .gov that it fits the correct definition before they are reimbursed?

I foresee many dealers NOT doing this. I wouldn't want to front MY money counting on the chance that a bureaucrat could deny my 'claim'.

 

The risk to the dealer is significant if they take a clunker in trade before July 23rd - or whenever the final rules are established. After that, it should be much less of an issue.