For those NOT using Cash for Clunkers

I assume to are obliquely referring to me as I was the one who brought up health care. The purpose of my post was to point out that when the government introduces a program like CFC, there are unintended consequences. "Bashing" is a curious description of my simply pointing out readily observable occurrences such as a reduced Prius supply for those who are ready to purchase without CFC (or in the case of health care, a shortage of medical services when demanded. Socialized medicine was presented to show another obvious example of unintended consequences of government intervention. This has been an accepted economic fact for decades. Any honest scholarly economist would agree, regardless of whether or not he/she supported socialized medicine. These unintended consequences are incontrovertible. And so it is with the CFC program. You may like CFC. Fine. I don't begrudge you your right to an opinion. But there is no denying the unintended consequences, i.e., a greatly reduced availability of the Prius that has adversely affected the ability of non-CFC purchasers to acquire a Prius in a timely manner. For all we know, this may also adversely affect the Prius price for all people as well; at least temporarily.).

Incidentally, if I were "bashing", why would I say that I would take advantage of CFC if I qualified? At that point I would no longer be one of the "Clunker Have-nots" and I would then be theoretically "bashing" myself.

Finally, I suppose one could say that they're surprised at your "implied bashing" of laissez-faire economics and private health care. I would not do that simply because I believe that you (and everyone else) is entitled to express disagreement without having their opinion characterized as "bashing" the opposite view. Everyone appreciates the same courtesy.

 

that penalizes people who cannot get a Prius. my neighbor "should" try for the C4C program. (they probably dont have the money) he is Army, she works at Walmart (been there a while so making "decent" money for her industry).

they have 3 kids so Pri would be very tight fit. drives an old Suburban that is NOT in good shape. he drives a motorcycle. The Suburban is full size probably late 80's early 90's model im guessing (they all look alike to me!!)

i think the fair reinbursement would be based on percentage increase of mileage up to say 40 mpg with additional incentives for the small # of cars in that category.

this makes it fair to someone who cant get a Prius due to their family size.


a sidelight...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/08/world/europe/08germany.html?_r=1&hpw

 

The program has been in the news--tv, radio, internet blogs (including Prius Chat), and reported on by many internet reporters/articles for MONTHS prior to its launch. I don't think you can blame your dealer for this. After all, he probably assumed you were well aware of the program and chose not to go through it.

 

In regards to your original post, I'm assuming you are talking about the increase in price included in the USB connection and Safety Connect?

My understanding is once existing inventory of Non-USB, Safety Connect equipped PKG 4's with Solar Pkg are gone you will indeed be forced to pay for USB and Safety Connect if PKG 4 with Solar is the automobile you want. It's an additional $680.00. Which is a bummer, if you don't want it, or need it.

I'm in a similar boat. Have you put a deposit down? My best advice would be communication with whatever dealer you are dealing with. Tell him you know about the upcoming changes and you would prefer to get a non-usb, non-safety connect equipped model, ASAP. Maybe something could be done. I don't think a dealer really cares who they are selling the automobile to, as long as it's a sale. But PKG 4's with solar are rare anyway, so it might be difficult or impossible, but if you are ready to buy and it can be made available there is no real reason a dealer should, or would sell to a "clunker" customer over a "regular" deal customer.

As for myself, I have resigned to the reality that if I get the Solar Pkg, I'm now going to have to pay for USB and Safety Connect. I'm just hoping that perhaps I'll enjoy the USB Ipod connectivity more than I think I would. In specific regards to a PKG 4 and a Solar Panel equipped Prius, the additional cost almost broke a psychological barrier. I think the forced NAV package is too expensive for what you are getting, but it's also required to get the Sunroof and Panels. I could somehow justify the $3600,00 by telling myself I got NAV, remote control air conditioning, The Panels and a Sunroof....it still seemed steep but I was willing to do it. Breaking the 4 grand ceiling...and adding two things I could easily pass on...ugh...I'm with you I'd rather not, but I'm afraid there will be no choice soon.

Unless of course if you wanted to wait an entire model year or longer to see if the hinted at potential uncoupling of NAV and Solar Package ever develops. I personally can't wait that long for a "maybe" happening.

 

Yes, I think Cash for Clunkers has depleted more of the 2 and 3 inventory. Also though at least locally here, we had many more 2 and 3 packages to sell. Entire Prius inventory is almost non-existent this weekend.

Plus the sunroof issue is a Toyota production issue, but I also think eventually all PKG 4 and 5's will be USB and Safety Connect equipped. Thus you'll be paying for them. Ultimately, I don't think Toyota had too much of a choice. USB connectivity, and IPOD compatibility is becoming a standard on a lot of cars. Since technologically Prius is expected to be on the fore front it was close to ridiculous this wasn't part of the deal from release.

I guess it's not really that big a thing, any way you cut it it's $680.00 and you do get USB connectivity, and the option of Safety Connect.

 

What would make good sense in the long run in decreasing our dependence on foreign oil would be a sliding scale tax credit off of taxes OWED for vehicles owned that get at least, say 38 mpg hwy with an extra bonus for hybrids that save more fuel in city driving. Higher mpg than that = higher tax credit. This would create incentive for people who can afford to drive gas-guzzlers to do otherwise. These are the same people who can actually afford to go down and buy new vehicles.

Poor people who don't owe taxes already have incentive to own used high mpg vehicles because it lowers their monthly fuel bill. However, wealthier people would make sure that they own high mpg vehicles for the yearly tax incentive. This would also put more high mpg used vehicles on the market for poor people in future years, especially if you made the tax incentives decrease with age by percentages.

 

I'm not sure about everyone else, but I did c4c and it was available ONLY for cars on the lot. She told me that they had several more coming in, but that most of them were pre-orders.

As someone else said, it may be the ethics of the dealer, but it also seems that a bird in the hand (purchaser without c4c) is the easier option, all other things equal, since they get their $ right away and don't have to deal with scrapping and waiting for the gov't....

R.