Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
Life After Brown
I've noticed that most drivers don't own premium cars that they can afford. Why?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="purplesky" data-source="post: 1207925" data-attributes="member: 23628"><p>It actually sounds like the improved <strong>FUEL EFFICIENCY OF THE NEW CARS PURCHASED MADE CASH FOR CLUNKERS A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM</strong>.<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /> </p><p></p><p><strong>I REMEMBER ALL THE REPUPLICANS BITCHING ABOUT OBAMA TRYING TO FORCE BETTER MPGs ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE</strong>. <strong>I AM GLAD OBAMA PUSHED( IS STILL PUSHING) AMERICA FOR BETTER MPGs ON NEW VEHICLES.</strong></p><p>Here are some statistics from the Department of Transportation’s <a href="http://www.cars.gov/files/official-information/CARS-Report-to-Congress.pdf" target="_blank">CARS Report to Congress</a>:</p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">677,842 vehicles were turned in under the CARS program</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">$2.85 Billion was paid out in rebates for these vehicles</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">New vehicles purchased had an average MPG of 24.9</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Old vehicles turned in had an average MPG of 15.7</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong>$2.8 Billion in fuel savings based on the early retirement of less efficient vehicles</strong></li> </ul><p>The report also estimates that roughly half of the sales spurred by the program were incremental sales that would not have occurred otherwise. <a href="http://www.edmunds.com/about/press/cash-for-clunkers-results-finally-in-taxpayers-paid-24000-per-vehicle-sold-reports-edmundscom.html?articleid=159446&" target="_blank">Edmunds.com performed a more conservative analysis</a> showing that only 125,000 incremental sales occurred as a result of the program.</p><p>Using Edmunds’ more conservative 125k number, and an average sales price (after rebate) of roughly $25,000, Cash for Clunkers generated $3.125 Billion in incremental vehicle sales. These incremental sales added directly to US GDP, and this more conservative analysis shows less than half the economic impact of $7 Billion estimated by DOT.</p><p>Combining the fuel savings and GDP benefit yields a total benefit to American taxpayers of roughly $6 Billion for a program that cost the government roughly $3 Billion to operate! If only more government programs could fail like this! Even using the more conservative fuel savings calculations provided below, the program would have provided over $5.5 Billion in benefit against a $3B investment. Far from being shut down, the Cash for Clunkers program should have been expanded.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="purplesky, post: 1207925, member: 23628"] It actually sounds like the improved [B]FUEL EFFICIENCY OF THE NEW CARS PURCHASED MADE CASH FOR CLUNKERS A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM[/B].:wink2: [B]I REMEMBER ALL THE REPUPLICANS BITCHING ABOUT OBAMA TRYING TO FORCE BETTER MPGs ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE[/B]. [B]I AM GLAD OBAMA PUSHED( IS STILL PUSHING) AMERICA FOR BETTER MPGs ON NEW VEHICLES.[/B] Here are some statistics from the Department of Transportation’s [URL="http://www.cars.gov/files/official-information/CARS-Report-to-Congress.pdf"]CARS Report to Congress[/URL]: [LIST] [*]677,842 vehicles were turned in under the CARS program [*]$2.85 Billion was paid out in rebates for these vehicles [*]New vehicles purchased had an average MPG of 24.9 [*]Old vehicles turned in had an average MPG of 15.7 [*][B]$2.8 Billion in fuel savings based on the early retirement of less efficient vehicles[/B] [/LIST] The report also estimates that roughly half of the sales spurred by the program were incremental sales that would not have occurred otherwise. [URL="http://www.edmunds.com/about/press/cash-for-clunkers-results-finally-in-taxpayers-paid-24000-per-vehicle-sold-reports-edmundscom.html?articleid=159446&"]Edmunds.com performed a more conservative analysis[/URL] showing that only 125,000 incremental sales occurred as a result of the program. Using Edmunds’ more conservative 125k number, and an average sales price (after rebate) of roughly $25,000, Cash for Clunkers generated $3.125 Billion in incremental vehicle sales. These incremental sales added directly to US GDP, and this more conservative analysis shows less than half the economic impact of $7 Billion estimated by DOT. Combining the fuel savings and GDP benefit yields a total benefit to American taxpayers of roughly $6 Billion for a program that cost the government roughly $3 Billion to operate! If only more government programs could fail like this! Even using the more conservative fuel savings calculations provided below, the program would have provided over $5.5 Billion in benefit against a $3B investment. Far from being shut down, the Cash for Clunkers program should have been expanded. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
Life After Brown
I've noticed that most drivers don't own premium cars that they can afford. Why?
Top