It’s the major daily paper in Minneapolis, for what that’s worth.
So pinko-commie-rag, they did just elect Al Franken afterall.
Maybe, maybe not they also elected Michelle Bachmann and that was local not statewide.
BTW, you people do realize you are arguing with a person who calls themself JoeSixPack and called George W. Bush a “great American”. Somehow, I don’t think facts and reasoned debate will change their mind.
Well, at least it wasn’t California for once. 
Thanks for the cite. It is depressing that companies can be stupider than I imagine - and I can imagine a lot. I stand corrected.
I’m sure someone will show up and say this only happened because the consumers forced them to do it. Or that it shows how those Commie credit unions can’t be trusted.
MSTieing Manos, the Hands of Fate doesn’t make it a great movie either - but sometimes it has to be done.
My thoughts on this subject are: The Government is using our tax dollars to entice people into buy new cars. Incentives and rebates are a good thing. But do this with private money. Don’t use my money to fund them. People are getting loans and taking on debt that they wouldn’t normally have. Some are taking on additional debt that they shouldn’t. I see this as a future problem. You don’t. I won’t change any of your minds and you won’t change mine.
BTW - Gas mileage has nothing to do with it. If America gets better mileage or pays less for gas America drives more. It’s all a wash.
This has nothing to do with changing anyone’s mind, that just doesn’t happen. This is all about me. Me on a soap box. Me feeling morally and intellectually superior. And ooooh, it feels so good. I need a nice easy thread like this to build up the courage to take a beating in the next one.
Prove it.
If you don’t want to debate something, or present evidence that supports your position, what did you hope to accomplish by opening a thread in Great Debates?
And again, my point is that you haven’t thought this through. I get that you don’t like this program, and that you don’t like the government using your tax dollars. That is fine, I commend you for that.
But YOUR thread is about how THIS program is going to lead to ANOTHER real estate debacle. Is it not? I’m currently participating in multiple C4C threads so it’s entirely possible I got mixed up.
Permit me to restate your point, and please correct what I have wrong: The government is encouraging people to buy new cars. That encouragement will cause people to buy a car that they can’t afford. Those buyers will default on their loans causing wide spread problems.
That last italicized part I added because YOU compared it to the Mortgage Meltdown of 2008, right? I currently hear people also comparing it to the Katrina debacle.
So in two separate posts I explained why THIS situation is so completely and entirely different than the real estate debacle, that your conclusion fails.
But as a bonus, I presented to you an alternative government program that COULD lead to a real estate debacle, why aren’t you bothered by that program too? Why did you ignore a rebate program for HOUSES and focus on a rebate program for cars? There is the very real danger that there will be another real estate debacle but you missed it! And you claim you’re in the real estate business!
I encourage you to look up the first time home buyers credit (have you heard of it) and look at the federal tax deduction for mortgage interest, and then start a thread titled, “Is the first time home buyers credit a repeat of the real estate debacle” and I will back you up 100%.
On this you get an F
Maybe I should have added to the title “Only smaller”. I didn’t think anyone on this forum could possibly think that I meant that it was on the same scale. So if I mislead anyone I accept blame for that. I wanted to point out the similarities of the two programs not the magnitude. One of the dissimilarities is that this money doesn’t have to be paid back like the tax credit aid for first time home buyers does. I didn’t have any trouble with that one because we get our money back with interest. We get nothing back on this one and as I said before there is the potential for default here and the repossessed property will be worth less than it’s original value. That is similar to real estate being foreclosed on that is worth less than it’s purchase price. In both instances if someone sold both commodities short on the purchase date (the car and the house) the short seller would make money. Of course on a different scale though but there are similarities.
Do you see the similarities that I see?
So why didn’t you say that? Your title still has the word “repeat.” Clarity is your friend. In any case, I accept your apology.
As I suspected, you aren’t aware of the First Time Home Buyer’s Credit
http://www.federalhousingtaxcredit.com/2009/faq.php
Read No. 8
So now are you angry? It’s a free $8,000 to first time home buyers.
You didn’t read my post. YES the car will be worth less than its original price. NO the car will not be worth less than the loan. Therefor no crisis.
Now that I think of it, the person is getting a $20k car for $15,500 so if, as you predict, everyone defaults, the car could be worth work than $15,500 and the bank could MAKE money. What do you think about that?!
That’s your opinion, and that’s fine - though we have no idea of who is fooling the credit checks and taking on additional debt, and who has the savings to handle it easily. Even I, as a left-winger, think that the average person should be trusted with decision - assuming they meet basic credit standards.
History shows that government intervention is useful in reducing economic swings. You really wouldn’t have wanted to live in the late 19th century, before the Fed, where the tycoons were the ones who tried to bail out the market. No one today, even Gates, has that kind of resources - except the Fed. For me, I’m happy to spend our collective money for the collective benefit of the people of the United States.
Not true. In California, high gas prices led to better average mileage which led to an absolute decrease in gasoline usage, not even considering our increase in population. I don’t think we drove any less (before the recession, anyway) we just did it more efficiently.
BTW, I never thought you were claiming cars would be a problem equal in size to houses. Someone thinking that would have had to seriously misread your post. So you’re good in that respect.
We may be looking at different versions of the tax credit. Here’s the one I was looking at http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=186831,00.html
This is the article I was referring to:
I believe I should clarify the point that I was trying to make on the value of a new car. Yes that $20,000 car will be bought for $15,000 but as soon as the buyer drives it off the lot it depreciates. Loans usually run for up to 5 years. Maybe more now I don’t know. I always pay cash. As we all know the principal on a loan comes down slower in the beginning of the loan. At least on a mortgage it does. As I said I am not familiar how the amortization on a car loan works. So if we take that $20,000 car with a loan of $15,000 and price it a year later I would suspect that it will be worth less than the amount of the balance of the loan. I didn’t think defaults would happen in the show room I give them about a year. I too give the average American recognition for being sincere when promising to pay back a loan but stuff happens. I also think defaults would happen more often when the buyer has no equitable stake in the vehicle. No down payment.
Many an honest businesses and individuals went under not being able to repay loans. As sincere as they were when promising to pay the debt in the end, they didn’t and someone lost money in the deal. That’s what I’m saying could happen with the cash for clunkers scheme and if it does we, the taxpayers loose.
Do not hurl personal insults at other posters in this forum, (or any forum other than The BBQ Pit).
[ /Moderating ]
OP’s argument lost what little credibility it had when this statement appeared.
Say Joe, you didn’t used to be a plumber, did you?
I understand. I also understand when someone is hurling personal insults in my direction and that happened in several of the replies on this thread. Sometimes they come veiled. I’m more direct and I won’t change that so I’ll make that last post . . . my last post.
Voyager, contrary to what you may think - I did enjoy our discussion. I won’t be answering any replies. Not because I am ignoring you. I believe that you are an intelligent person and I like that. I won’t be responding because I am deleting this site from my favorites.
Code red!!! Code Red!!! We need a crash cart in Great Debates!!! Get ready to intubate!!
Damnit man, don’t give up. You’ve never given up on anything in your life!!! Fight damn you! FIGHT!!!
That’s too bad, because your later posts were a lot better thought out than your first one.
I pay cash for cars also, but my daughter got a loan for her first - partially to establish credit. It was for 3 years, and she certainly made a down payment. As far as I’m concerned, sincerity and some ungodly amount of money will get you on the subway. I’ll take a credit check myself - I’m sure lots of those who couldn’t afford their home mortgage were sincere also.
Everything you say about the value of the car relative to the loan is correct - but it is just as correct for normal car loans, before C4C. In fact more so, since the loan is for less than the value of the car, making the underwater period shorter.
In the words of a great American t-shirt:
These colors don’t delete this website from their favorites.