Overhaulin'

Why aren't people upset that their tax money is going to give people $4500 in the Cash for Clunkers program?

This is a direct government hand-out to get people to buy new cars. Why aren't people upset about their tax money being used this way as they are about their tax money being used to pay for someone else's health care?

Public Comments

1. Because most of that money came from rich people. I'm just saying that it came from rich people not really the people buying the cars, so it doesn't upset them. I'm just as upset with a stupid program as it is, the free market can't work properly with this program.
2. We are!!
3. Turd..It dosnt make it right if it comes for rich people..They worked for their money too..God that nonsense annoys me..
4. it's not a check it's a deduction from the price of the car they buy
5. Probably because they understand it's part of the stimulus package to get the economy going again via way of selling more cars with the bonus of making our country more green.
6. It pisses me off because I have never spent $4000 for a car in my life despite being able to write a check for about any car I want. I buy the clunkers for cash and then laugh at people who cry about how high their car payments and insurance payments are
7. I am upset. About both. I think the whole tax system needs to be revised. How can we invent and pay for new programs when we can't pay for old programs?
8. Because it's too late! People need to get upset about the whole government spending thing and stop re-electing the incumbents who vote for this drivel.
9. We were upset at the whole bill, this is just one little part, and about the only part that puts money back with people in some sense.
10. It was part of the stimulus bill. The stimulus bill was a bailout of the unions and all of the liberal special interests groups that helped to get the Obama elected. This one is for the UAW. There was also money in the stimulus bill for taxpayer funded advertising for the upcoming healthcare reform battle. Isn't it great that your tax dollars are paying to advertise FOR the Healthcare Reform bill?
11. Get your facts straight and lay off the kool aid. The $4500 is a tax credit. Not cash. If you buy a car and the dealer keeps the credit he gets the tax credit not you. In a way it's a tax cut for dealers. BTW, did you know we spent $1 billion a month in Iraq under GW Bush. Every dime of that went into debt. The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy also went into debt. Someday, someone will have to pay up on that debt.. BTW, Democrats use pay-go and the Repubs. never did use pay-go.
12. I think it is a great program and it doesn't upset me at all.
13. We are upset! This whole country is focused on the "have nots" Ever hear of "level the playing field"? Right out of Obamas mouth....
14. Its not a check that you get, its a deduction from the sticker price. Cars and trucks are purposely marked up so that dealers can offer you incentives to buy their product and thus making it look like you are getting one over on them. Say for example the total cost to make a car is 12k, well, the MSRP is marked up to 19k so that the dealer makes money, the manufacturer makes money and an incentive can be offered giving you the consumer the impression you are making out. Now say there is a down payment required to purchase a vehicle. That is extra money that goes into the pocket of the dealership and salesmen to pay the salesman's commission, the dealerships overhead and so forth. That same down payment money comes off the sticker price giving the effect that it is going toward the vehicle when actually it is going elsewhere. The money you mention of though has already been paid for by the automakers bailout which has come from our tax dollars.
15. We are upset about it. You should be watching Fox Business News. If your cable provider does not have it, you should demand it.
16. Probably because it's a tiny amount -- in federal budget terms. It's not "to get people to buy new cars" (though that would help the economy), but to get a bunch of the most polluting and wasteful cars off the road. but then, health care reform is only in tiny part about getting more people health care; it's mostly about reducing the rate of sky-rocketing costs, and improving quality of care.
17. The best I can do is take a guess at this since I can't read everyone's mind. Since about 1 in 10 people in the US are below the poverty line I suspect they own (drive) a clunker. So, those people are unlikely to be upset about money to help them buy a more fuel efficient car, although few of them can afford to take advantage of the program anyway. The rich automobile dealer owners (many that have lost franchises through GM and Chrysler restructuring) are unlikely to complain about any effort to improve sales. New car sales (along with new home sales) have long been an indicator of the economy (better sales better economy) so many people want to see these markets improve so the rest of the economy improves (for example CD's for the new car, maintenance for the new car, hiring of more mechanics, sales people, etc.) Unfortunately this program has not been targeted or select enough. Bill Gates can get the 4500 just like you and I and the car only has to improve by 10 MPG. Also, this is hidden in the stimulus package (that is full or worse things) and many people support anything having to do with stimulating the economy these days. Psiexploration
18. Pascha, this program is a joke. Buying a car at its inflated MSRP is STUPID --- getting a reduction from the inflated number is like reducing 1,000,000 to 999,995,000 -- see link. This is pure disinformation --- developed by Congress to be able to claim that they are doing something on both helping sell cars and are friends of the environment --- two things that does not need Congressional help. To Jacko_-- PAYGO has not been mentioned by the current Democratic Congress and is another example of smoke and mirrors in that every dollar spend is supposed to be assigned to a dollar of taxes --- You cannot taxes at 100% even though you would like to do so. So they extend the balance budget over a moving ten year cycle. Assume that your 10^9 expense for the war is true. Those funds paid for troops (US Citizens), weapons (US Jobs and material), Supplies to rebuild IRAQ (more US jobs), technology (jobs and supplies) those drones are not from you local hobby shop. So those funds were employing American directly