| "Cash for clunkers" should have been used for the purchase of cars manufactured by US owned companies only. |
|
|
|
Asked 3 years ago
by ohmslaw  United States |
|
About
Don't alway take my arguments to heart, I play Devils advocate a lot. :)
|
8 Points
|
Disagree, only because I feel that "cash for clunkers" is a huge mistake. If anything, I would have thought that homeowners about to undergo a foreclosure could maybe have used the money to keep their family in a decent house instead of them driving a new car.
This comment was deleted.
[3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user Reply"Huge mistake" to think that cars are more important than a home that a family may have already invested thousands and thousands of dollars in, which over time will most probably INCREASE in value. A family cant live in a car.
Im not for any handout but its stupid that the government gave people money for cars instead of housing. Im not sure why you are so anti-banking now when you were all in favor of giving banks billions of dollars a few months ago.
This comment was deleted.
[3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user Replyjust pretending:
.
I pay taxes but can't afford to buy a new car but someone who has more money then me ►can◄
so I end up paying for ►HIS◄ car but can't afford to buy my own.
.
Something is wrong with this picture! The poorer being forced to give to the richer by the government. (Not the "Rich" because they don't trade in clunkers)
.
All to support or ►"pay back"◄ the Unions by the democratic administration for support in the election. More money our kids will owe this administration.
Cash for clunkers is a great idea. Anyone against it is just a whiner. It is like getting direct tax credit on your car purchase4. This time instead of it being on Hummers, it is for cars which use less fuel and it gets the old ones off the road.
This is one area the Govt has been very practical.
We want to reduce our fuel dependence,DONE
we nee more fuel efficient cars on the road,DONE.
We want to spur economic growth.DONE. (Up to about 30+% of Western economies is based on the motor cars) DONE
As to whether it should be used to pay for US owned companies. Bad idea.
US companies can have most of their parts produced overseas and foreign companies can have their cars made in the USA. This a very gray area.
This comment was deleted.
[3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[-3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyI don't necessarily agree with the program, but it is successful for sure and It is achieving something positive. Discussing the merits is not the question here. It would not be good to limit it to US cars, because we live in a global economy and we can't go back. Many Americans are involved in foreign companies that make and sell foreign cars.
Agreed about the global economy. There are some foreign manufacturers that assemble cars in the US.
That includes a Toyota plant 15 miles from my house and five parts plants building American parts going into these Toyota's. All within 10 miles of the main plant by rail or truck.
This comment was deleted.
[1 point] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[2 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[-1 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThere are foreign car companies in the US that manufacture cars in the US. Therefore, I disagree with the question.
This comment was deleted.
[-3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[2 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[-3 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[0 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyI have owned GM, Ford and Chrysler vehicles. Now I own a Toyota. There is no rebate that would make me consider downgrading back to any of those 3 again.
This comment was deleted.
[0 points] 3 years ago by deleted user ReplyThis comment was deleted.
[1 point] 3 years ago by deleted user Reply