As much bitching as you heard from Republicans about the program, seems like Joe the Plumber-types were the ones using it most...

WASHINGTON - The most common deals under the government's $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program, aimed at putting more fuel-efficient cars on the road, replaced old Ford or Chevrolet pickups with new ones that got only marginally better gas mileage, according to an analysis of new federal data by The Associated Press.

The single most common swap — which occurred more than 8,200 times — involved Ford F150 pickup owners who took advantage of a government rebate to trade their old trucks for new Ford F150s. They were 17 times more likely to buy a new F150 than, say, a Toyota Prius.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

If the Democrats complain about the Bush tax cuts, do all registered Democrats write checks to the IRS for the difference? Of course not... even if you don't support a policy you are entitled to use it.

At first I wondered about policies that allowed trucks to be traded for trucks. But if the fuel efficiency of the new F150's is that much better than the old ones, why not allow it? The dual goals of economic stimulus and mpg benefit are still met.

Eligible new pick ups had to get at least 15 MPG (combined city and highway.) They were justified because they met much higher emission standards than the old pick-ups.

EDIT: Just because someone drives a pickup doesn't make them "Joe the Plumber."

BUT, "Joe the Plumber" types that need pick ups were just as entitled to the program as a suburban office worker that drives a hybrid.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2009 10:25AM by eesh.

My point being that the Republicans at first derided the program and then claimed American vehicles were being dumped in favor of Japaneses vehicles. The fuel mileage increase was marginal. But the real value of the program was to get inventory off of car lots. I can live with that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My point being that the Republicans at first
> derided the program and then claimed American
> vehicles were being dumped in favor of Japaneses
> vehicles.


The argument about consumers buying Japanese cars over domestic brands is very ignorant. Ever since the nineties, only a fraction of Hondas, Toyotas, etc. are made overseas.

Buying a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord has more American labor than say, a Chevrolet Malibu, which uses Mexican and Chinese labor. Many GM engines are now made in China. Buying Japanese still supports America.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My point being that the Republicans at first
> > derided the program and then claimed American
> > vehicles were being dumped in favor of
> Japaneses
> > vehicles.
>
>
> The argument about consumers buying Japanese cars
> over domestic brands is very ignorant. Ever since
> the nineties, only a fraction of Hondas, Toyotas,
> etc. are made overseas.
>
> Buying a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord has more
> American labor than say, a Chevrolet Malibu, which
> uses Mexican and Chinese labor. Many GM engines
> are now made in China. Buying Japanese still
> supports America.

It supports non-unionized shops.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> The argument about consumers buying Japanese cars
> over domestic brands is very ignorant. Ever since
> the nineties, only a fraction of Hondas, Toyotas,
> etc. are made overseas.
>
> Buying a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord has more
> American labor than say, a Chevrolet Malibu, which
> uses Mexican and Chinese labor. Many GM engines
> are now made in China. Buying Japanese still
> supports America.

Unless you are like me and only buy cars with Japanese VIN numbers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Well - good for Joe the Plumber and all the Joe-the-Plumber types.

If the Government is giving away money, Joe and everyone else should take advantage of it.

If someone wants to cheat the IRS - good for them. I don't do it only because I'm afraid I'd be caught and be subject to fines and possibly imprisonment, like Wesley Snipes, e.g. If someone wants to risk that, well good for them; go for it!

On the other hand, I also support the Government not giving away money and not taking money from me.

So what?

Union made Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> It supports non-unionized shops.


I'm sorry, but car manufacturer unions are worthless. Way back when, unions were great for defending workers' rights and welfare, but they have evolved into political organizations that only hurt production and drive up costs for the employer.

Just look at GM and Chrysler compared to Toyota. Japanese companies have excellent employee benefits and workplaces. Unions at the domestic manufacturers only create "us versus management" attitudes.

With modern labor laws, there is zero need for unions.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Union made Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > It supports non-unionized shops.
>
>
> I'm sorry, but car manufacturer unions are
> worthless. Way back when, unions were great for
> defending workers' rights and welfare, but they
> have evolved into political organizations that
> only hurt production and drive up costs for the
> employer.
>
> Just look at GM and Chrysler compared to Toyota.
> Japanese companies have excellent employee
> benefits and workplaces. Unions at the domestic
> manufacturers only create "us versus management"
> attitudes.
>
> With modern labor laws, there is zero need for
> unions.

Sounds like a talking point from Ken Cuccinelli and the rest of the "right to work" crowd.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Union made Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
>
>
> I'm sorry, but car manufacturer unions are
> worthless. Way back when, unions were great for
> defending workers' rights and welfare, but they
> have evolved into political organizations that
> only hurt production and drive up costs for the
> employer.


Look for the union label, when you are buying a coat, dress, or blouse.
>
> Just look at GM and Chrysler compared to Toyota.
> Japanese companies have excellent employee
> benefits and workplaces. Unions at the domestic
> manufacturers only create "us versus management"
> attitudes.
>
> With modern labor laws, there is zero need for
> unions.

Union Made Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Sounds like a talking point from Ken Cuccinelli
> and the rest of the "right to work" crowd.



I guess you have reasons on why unions are so good?

UAW is a parasite on General Motors. The UAW costs GM about $2,500 on each car sale, and the average costs of benefits is 50% higher than Japanese competitors.

It is these unions that make companies go to Mexico and Asia, which only hurts American labor in the long run.


Bottom line: You can have great job security and benefits without a union breathing down the management's back. Unions do not benefit America.

Unions destroy everything they touch. They insist on concessions that wipe out their companies, then the employees are unemployed. The unions destroyed Detroit, they would not budge on major issues that would possibly have kept GM afloat. So GM went into bankruptcy so those union contracts could be voided.

The steel workers did the same thing and made American steel manufacturing noncompetetive. The textile unions did the same for clothing factories and now they are all overseas.

Yet non-unionized car manufacturers in the US thrive. I wonder why??

------------------------------------

twitter @EyeAmU

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Unless you are like me and only buy cars with
> Japanese VIN numbers.


LOL Supposedly you can tell what day the car was made from the VIN. I was told by a service rep one time to avoid cars made on Mondays and Fridays as the workers rushed the cars together (sloppy workmanship) and if you buy American, avoid cars made in Detroit factories, as they have the worst reliability of any factory in the U.S.

I believe what the service rep said, but according to this there is no date in the VIN:

http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/driving/articles/43004/article.html

Vehicle Identifier Section


The letter or number in position 11 indicates the manufacturing plant in which the vehicle was assembled. Each automaker has its own set of plant codes.


The last 6 digits (positions 12 through 17) are the production sequence numbers. This is the number given to your car on the assembly line.


I think this is how someone would tell what day it was manufactured.

The dealer could probably access production records and see the manufacture date.

Thanks for the link BTW.

Blessed are the murderous.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Union Made Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> >
> > Sounds like a talking point from Ken Cuccinelli
> > and the rest of the "right to work" crowd.
>
>
>
> I guess you have reasons on why unions are so
> good?
>
> UAW is a parasite on General Motors. The UAW costs
> GM about $2,500 on each car sale, and the average
> costs of benefits is 50% higher than Japanese
> competitors.
>
> It is these unions that make companies go to
> Mexico and Asia, which only hurts American labor
> in the long run.
>
>
> Bottom line: You can have great job security and
> benefits without a union breathing down the
> management's back. Unions do not benefit America.

Don't let Vince see you say that. Oh.. never mind - too late.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University