Comments on: Stimulus Was a Clunker

By: Barbara M

Barbara M — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 12:17:37 +0000

And another follow-up to the outcome of the Cash for Clunkers program is; the assessment on your old car has gone up, for tax purposes. They claim due to the program, used cars are at a premium, so now your estimated value on your vehicle, has increased, mine went from $18,800 to 22,500, which increased my annual property tax by $130. Since when, in history, did a vehicle GAIN value, unless it became a classic, after 20+years? I guess the government didn’t think about the rest of us who kept our used cars!

By: A Friend

A Friend — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 23:57:20 +0000

Dave G., the data is from line 81, Automobile and other motor vehicle dealers, seasonally adjusted, from the website you link to. As you point out, if you don’t use seasonally adjusted data, the trend is useless. If you graph the data from 2009, you get the chart Coyote presented, so the chart is certainly accurate. The analysis of course, is a guess. Supporters of C4C say it stimulated the economy. Detractors say it just moved sales around to capture a temporary incentive. Looking at the other years, to me it certainly seems to have had an effect, and that effect seems to be merely moving sales around. I guess the other intrepretation you could make is that it had no effect. Neither looks good for the program. It certainly didn’t net increase the production of cars over a longer term, which was it’s stated goal.

By: Dave G.

Dave G. — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 23:20:10 +0000

I don’t see how you get that graph from the data quoted. http://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/excel/mrtssales92-present.xls seems to be the source, but it just doesn’t match.

Also interesting – if you look at the data in excel since 1992, September appears to frequently be about 10,000 M less than August, and August is very frequently the top month of the year.

I’m not saying the program was great or even good, but the chart appears to be inaccurate and the analysis is flawed.

By: andrej

andrej — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 22:34:28 +0000

It’s a sad sad world where an leftist economy ignorants can rule. The same car scrap madness went through all Europe too.

By: sportutegirl

sportutegirl — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 22:18:51 +0000

Ordinarily when a car is traded in on a newer, more efficient model, the older car is sold to someone with an even less fuel efficient car. Perhaps this car is then sold to someone with an even worse beater, thus continuing a line that ends when a truly awful, polluting, inefficient, oil burning piece of muck is finally removed from the road. This means that a truly awful car was removed and ‘replaced’ with a new fuel efficient one. CFC stopped this efficient chain of events at the first link.

By: DerHahn

DerHahn — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 20:58:39 +0000

The ‘people bought compacts with C4C cash’ meme is a joke. Rather than aggregating the data by base model, the government reported data is slivered into illogical segements divided by trim line and engine/transmission type. Since compacts generally aren’t sold with multipe engine sizes the way trucks and SUVs are, this (probably deliberately) obscures what base models were the most often purchased. IIRC Edmunds aggregated the data and reported the F150 as the vehicle most often purchased with C4C cash.

By: Wild Bill Ohio

Wild Bill Ohio — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:36:03 +0000

I traded my old Ford van during the program for a new Subaru. I look at it as a tax refund, even if darn little of the hundreds of thousands I’ve paid over the years.

By: A Friend

A Friend — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:27:13 +0000

nb, I looked at the source data as you suggested. The chart Coyote showed is of the adjusted numbers. Most of the other years look very different. Your argument that people were deferring sales hoping the program would come back is interesting, but basically supports the same point coyote is making: sales were shifted in time, mostly.

By: nb

nb — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 15:11:48 +0000

Roux, I’m not sure what you’re talking about. All liens had to be cleared before the government would offer a rebate on the car. This just makes sense.

By: Roux

Roux — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 14:56:48 +0000

C4C wasn’t good for anyone. I spoke with a car dealer and he said that one of the things that hurt was when a C4C customer had a gov’t lien the rebate went to the gov’t instead of the dealer. They lost money on a lot of the deals.