Cash for Clunkers Petition to improve vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce pollution

[madnessspirit]

I hate the idea of taxing gas more to make us use less, and good luck convincing any politician that wants to serve more time in office to sign off on that one.

I've got a better idea. Get rid of oil subsidies, give tax credits for vehicles that are very fuel efficient, and eliminate the tax on used goods, especially cars. While we are at it, tax the crap out of imports, and eliminate the loopholes for businesses that shift assets overseas to avoid paying their fair share. Give that money to states so states can reduce sales taxes and people will buy more sh...tuff that they need, which will hopefully be made in America because it won't be cheaper to pay some person in a third world country to make it, and will make everyone richer. Then maybe this country won't have to borrow so much money or spend so much supporting the people who can't get work because all the jobs making the awesome stuff we used to make in this country are in India and China.

I remember back when being green meant reduce, reuse, recycle, not buy some new crap to replace perfectly good old crap. Look at how much oil is used in the production of those new cars, from making the plastics, to transporting it to the dealer's lot. If people in this country had more money, they wouldn't spend it on the disposable crap that everyone makes because no one will buy a vacuum cleaner that lasts longer than a year anymore. How many TV and Appliance repair places have gone under in the last 30 years? Think about it. Those are jobs that are lost to some guy in mexico who is assembling a toaster that will last 18 months before you are off to Walmart to spend 10 bucks on a replacement. This country and its economy did pretty good back when everything we owned wasn't disposable and the working man made a good wage and benefits since he didn't have to compete for his job with Abdar (or as he is known on the tech support line, Ted from American Kansas), and we have been slowly rolling downhill since the 80s.

Also, just for the record. While I am not a mother, my two year old is the most adorable little boy on the planet. Just want to be clear on that so that you know that all those mothers are lying.

[Jay2TheRescue]

I know exactly what you're saying about quality products, and how long things last now. My toaster is a 50's model Sunbeam Radiant Control unit, and it works better than the best toaster available now at any price. My waffle iron is a Toastmaster model from the 30's, and makes perfect waffles every time. My vacuum is a Kirby Legend II from the very early 90's that I converted to HEPA filtration and have been extremely pleased with.

Most Americans will buy a vacuum for $150 from Wal-Mart, and when it breaks in ~2 years, go to Wal-Mart and buy another $150 piece of junk. Same with toasters. Go to Wal-Mart and buy another $10 toaster when your 3 year old toaster breaks.

I can go on and on, but as for me, I prefer to have the older, higher quality items in my home. The only items I have purchased new were my TV, laptop, and cell phone. Everything else in the house is at least 30 years old.

[theclencher]

Cash for Clunkers 1 = FAIL. THAT was supposed to get people out of inefficienct vehicles and into more efficient ones... you know what happened right? People with perfectly good used pickups used CforC to get... new pickups! Correction: new COMMUTER pretty-boy pickups. Not economical cars.

FAIL.

This version has FAIL written all over it too.

You want the national fleet to have better fuel economy? Remove govt petrol subsidies and let the motorists pay the true cost. Oh yeah, that would be the wake-up call that's been missing all these decades.

Your premise about the pollution is off base too. Just about everything on the road these days is already EFI and cat converter equipped, so they aren't that bad. You want to do something about pollution, get the govt to stop paying people to reproduce, and tighten up the borders while they're at it.

[Jay2TheRescue]

I was wondering when you would chime in on this... you must have been fighting the urge since this thread started...

[trollbait]

People with perfectly good used pickups used CforC to get... new pickups!

Not defending CforC here, in fact, this is a strike against it, but they might have only been able to get truck under the program. Those wanting to trade in a 3/4 ton or larger were stuck buying within those size classes. It's assumed the newer truck was more efficient and cleaner, but these vehicles are still exempt from EPA testing. I don't recall the specifics with 1/2 tons or smaller

[Jay2TheRescue]

I guess it depends on what state you're in. I have to get my 1 ton an emissions inspection every 2 years.

[madnessspirit]

You guys do realize that under c4c, the vehicle they traded had to get below a a combined mileage of 18mpg and the ones they got had to get above 22mpg?

Just saying, the way some of you are talking, it sounds like you think people traded in a 16mpg pickup for a shinier 16mpg pickup. Not defending the program, because I don't think it was THAT effective, but it wasn't totally ineffective either. Worked better than some other direct stimulus methods the government has tried, but still not very well.

[Jay2TheRescue]

The problem was that there was nothing wrong with most of the vehicles turned in. The people with the truly crappy vehicles that were not running right, grossly polluting and wasting fuel cannot afford a new vehicle, even with the subsidy.

[theclencher]

I haven't stopped in for a few months so I didn't have to exercise any restraint...

[trollbait]

I have to get my 1 ton an emissions inspection every 2 years.

I meant to say they are exempt from from CAFE.

You guys do realize that under c4c, the vehicle they traded had to get below a a combined mileage of 18mpg and the ones they got had to get above 22mpg?

Just saying, the way some of you are talking, it sounds like you think people traded in a 16mpg pickup for a shinier 16mpg pickup.

I'm no longer familiar with the details, but that might only apply to cars. Those numbers would exclude new trucks with EPA estimates, and they wouldn't do that.

In the case of 3/4 ton or larger trucks, a person very well may have traded in a 16mpg for a newer 16mpg one. These trucks are exempt from CAFE, and don't require any fuel economy testing. I do think the trade in had to be of a certain age to make it more likely the new one had better emissions and fuel economy. The real shame was that owners of these trucks couldn't use CforC to downsize into a 1/2 ton or smaller truck or even a car. They were stuck with getting a large truck.