Requiem For A Clunker

August 24, 2009

Today marks the final day of the “Cash For Clunkers” program. The program has been touted as being wildly successful, popular, a brilliant example of the government stimulating the economy, etc. Let’s really look at these claims.

Was it successful? Yes, in the sense that something along the line of half a million new cars were sold (I’ve also seen estimates up to 700,000). But is that really the measure of success?

The program was a government giveaway of taxpayer dollars. The essence of the program was simply this: trade in your old car and the taxpayers of the United States will give you up to $4500 dollars towards the purchase of a new car. The fact that people took advantage of this is about as surprising as the fact that children scrambled to pick up nickels thrown by John D. Rockefeller, and that’s actually one of the pernicious aspects of the program: it treats adults like children being rewarded for cleaning out their garages. The program was popular with those who took advantage of it (and took advantage of other taxpayers, by the way). Why wouldn’t it be? They got free money…and a lot of it. Was it popular with the millions of people who did not participate? I haven’t done surveys, but I’ve asked around. A few people I know think it’s a good idea, but the overwhelming majority of people I’ve spoken with are appalled at the entire concept. Judging the popularity of a money giveaway by the smiling faces of those who received the money is not exactly a fair yardstick.

One of the main reasons for the program was to give a shot in the arm to the failing automakers (GM, Chrysler, Ford) and also promote “green” automobiles, but most of the cars sold were foreign cars and standard internal combustion vehicles, so the program failed on both counts. As far as the environment is concerned, the program was, if anything, anti-environmental.

For starters, the program only applied if you bought a new car. Used cars were not allowed. From an environmental standpoint, the cost of producing a new car is considerably higher than the cost of an existing car in the amounts of energy required. A truly environmental agenda here would have required the participant to buy a pre-existing car. Secondly, the law forced the dealership to destroy the turned-in clunker within 48 hours, despite the fact that these cars could have been sold overseas in developing countries and in places like China where people are desperate for cars. The destruction of the cars uses energy, as well. And since the cars were destroyed, and not even allowed to be dismantled and sold for parts, they deprived the auto dealers of a potentially lucrative source of income. There are also many lower-income people in this country who might have jumped at the opportunity of replacing their clunker with a somewhat better clunker.

You also have what I call the “mortgage paradigm” at work. How many lower income people traded in their clunkers for cars they could not afford because the government was willing to give them so much money? Many considerations go into buying a car: the cost of the car, the cost of insurance, the cost of gas, the mileage, etc. Were there people who bought more car than they needed because the government gave them money? This was what happened with the housing crisis…too many people buying more house than they could afford because interest rates were so low. My guess is that the number of recently purchased cars that end up for sale a year from now will be somewhat higher than normal as people sell off their shiny new Camrys and replace them with…used clunkers.

Then there’s this: the program was announced with great fanfare and was going to cost $1 billion dollars and run from August until November. At the end of the day, the program cost at least $3 billion and ran from August until August. There are other additional costs as well. The government has had to hire people and outsource paperwork. The dealers have been working around the clock to try to keep up with the paperwork on their end (and only about 2% of dealers have gotten their money back). Destroying the cars costs money. Being unable to sell the used clunkers either as cars or as parts is a loss of potential revenue. This program has cost at least three times what the government estimated and has ended two months early even as dealers are starting to pull out of the program on their own.

This “wildly successful” program has been an absolute debacle, a shining example of government causing problems and not solving problems.

And when it comes to putting our nation’s health care system into the same hands that brought us this sham of a program, Barack Obama smiles and says, “Trust me.”

Spoken like a used car salesman.


Further reading: Michelle Malkin has additional info here, and news about the next one: Cash For Appliances. Hot Air has the goods on Federal workers being reassigned from the FAA’s air traffic control unit to deal with this program. Over at Liberty Log, J.P. Muhlenberg brings up some of the same concerns.


Rat Patrol, Obama-Style

August 5, 2009

The Administration has responded to the You Tube videos that are currently making the rounds showing Obama in his days before the Presidency advocating a single-payer system. They have posted a video that puts the comments “in context.” Of course, the video is an hour long so nobody except the terminally bored will watch the entire thing. They then show a current video where Obama lies through his teeth about not wanting a single-payer system.

But what’s interesting here is this paragraph:

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.

Now, I’m reasonably sure that they don’t mean any harm here. They’re likely looking to collect the arguments against health care reform so that they can then spin out a rebuttal. But that paragraph looks an awful lot like they’re asking folks to drop a dime on people who send emails against health care reform, or who post things to web sites. Like bloggers. Like…gulp…me.

I can’t help but wonder what the outcry from the Left would have been if the Bush Administration had posted something on the White House web site asking people to email them if they heard “something fishy” from people opposed to the Iraq War. There would have been cries of “Enemies List!” and “McCarthyism!” The Kooky Kos Kids would have demanded an investigation and the immediate repeal of the Patriot Act. The nutjobs at Democratic Underground would have somehow tied it into the government conspiracy to bring down the World Trade Towers. Harry Reid would have taken to the floor of the Senate and told the world that he was “troubled.”

The Right, having more of a sense of humor than the Left, is taking a different tack. Michelle Malkin snitched on herself. I plan on doing so, also, letting them know that they won’t take me alive. Tevi Troy at The Corner on NRO advocates the same. Hot Air posts a list of questions for you to ask at the next Town Hall meeting. Allahpundit suggests sending messages like: “Barack Obama was once caught on video singing the praises of single-payer health care.”

This isn’t the first time the Obama administration has shown a certain ham-handedness on the Web. The Web site for the Cash For Clunkers program originally had this gem of legal-ese on it:

Any or all uses of this system, any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DOT, and law enforcement personnel as well as all authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign. By using this system, the user consents to such interception, monitoring, recording, copying, auditing, inspecting and disclosure at the discretion of CARS or the DOT personnel.

The paragraph has been removed from the Web site after Glenn Beck brought it to light, but what this paragraph clearly says is that by signing onto this Web site, the government is legally allowed to access anything and everything on your computer.

As with the snitch patrol advocated on the health care page, I doubt that this paragraph was written with any sort of devious intention. Most likely it was just some overheated lawyer trying to cover imaginary bases.

Here is the situation: either the Administration really does want total access to your computer and wants you to rat out your friend who’s opposed to health care reform, or they aren’t. If they aren’t, they should be more careful with what they write. If they are, we’ve got a whole other problem here.


UPDATE: Here’s the text of the email I sent to flag@whitehouse.gov:

There’s some crazy-ass blogger out there who posted a video wherein President Barack Obama seems to be advocating a single-payer system! You can find it here: https://blaknsam.wordpress.com/2009/08/03/who-will-you-believe-on-health-care-reform-barack-obama-or-your-own-lying-eyes/ He also posted a link to other videos here: https://blaknsam.wordpress.com/2009/08/03/more-videos-on-health-care-reform/. He even tried to OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT by providing alternative solutions to the health care crisis here: https://blaknsam.wordpress.com/2009/07/23/healthcare-problems-and-solutions/ and accuses President Barack Obama of using SCARE TACTICS here: https://blaknsam.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/the-obama-straw-man/

This guy should be arrested immediately, but a crazy guy like this won’t be taken alive!

Peace and love under Barack,

UPDATE II: Also, Brutally Honest has the details on Operation Go Flag Yourself.