Absolutely heart breaking waste

[maemae]

NO DOUBT! The idea sounded good, but snobs were trading up perfectly good cars to by KIAs and Hyundais That DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to Stimulate American Manufacturing! Really some uptight prick that "clunks" a 2005 Explorer Limited with 34K miles on it to buy a F*cking KIA!??? AHHHH It's enough to make me have a STROKE!

Tell me about it. When my mom traded in her Mazda B2300 for her 2010 Subaru, i was crying cus i was worried it would be clunked. Luckily the engine was to efficient for it to be a clunker. Unluckily she only go 300 in on the trade. That little pickup was a member of the family, sad to see it go.

I'm so sad to see those old Fords go out like that. Why did the government have to destroy perfectly good engines in the clunkers. Whoever though that was a good idea is a complete

 

[mentalbreakdown00]

thank our current administration, you could have given the vehicles to very poor single mothers, or a million other uses, but nope, that just may make sense..

 

[ragajungle]

It was a deal for the rich- that would explain why so may Land Rovers and late model Explorers - even some Cadillac Escalators in the JY.

It was also a trap for the poor, b/c people traded in legitimate clunkers for Korean BS that dealers hiked the price up on! And they can't really afford anyways..........

They should have had limits in place (the car you wanna get must be at least 40% domestic sourced parts & the car you are gonna clunk should have more than 100K miles on it)

Seriously someone clunked and 04 Ford Escape? WTF!?

 

[mentalbreakdown00]

I saw an 04 cobra with 25K miles get clucked here at our ford for a focus......

 

[maemae]

thank our current administration, you could have given the vehicles to very poor single mothers, or a million other uses, but nope, that just may make sense..

Actually, I believe that it was the Bush administration who started the clunkers program. Obama just pulled through with it.
Typical government, doesn't matter which side you are on, they still make horrible decisions.

 

[mentalbreakdown00]

It doesnt really matter, they are all completely out of touch and educated well beyond their intelligence

 

[ragajungle]

Actually, I believe that it was the Bush administration who started the clunkers program. Obama just pulled through with it.
Typical government, doesn't matter which side you are on, they still make horrible decisions.

It was Obama's Admin that came up with the program. It was a good idea, just executed poorly. they should have done it for DOMESTIC only (but everyone screamed "Protectionism!!" And then result is that the rest of the world sat back and said "Sweet, now we are being REWARDED for flooding the American market with cheap crap!" The only thing American made on a Hyundai is the For Sale sign... It's sickening

 

[mentalbreakdown00]

I didn't think anything but farts and beer was made here anymore, heck I havent seen made in america on a tool or part in a few years

 

[ragajungle]

I didn't think anything but farts and beer was made here anymore, heck I havent seen made in america on a tool or part in a few years

Here is a really great site with only 100% USA made products...Pass it on!
http://www.madeinusaforever.com/

Here is another one that good too

http://www.americansworking.com/

 

[Ranger Dave (B25)]

Cash for clunkers is one of another big scams placed on the American people by the government. The people thought they were getting a good deal, getting up to 4500, for their clunker. In reality they got stuck with a brand new foreign "eco" pos, that produced more pollutants being made, then their old clunker engine would of. Im all for going green, but this is completely stupid. The people who traded in that explorer got scammed big time; that's worth way more than 4500.

Ah, another yoonyun fanboi, I'm guessing.

To you and Michowski:

Try to post intelligently, if at all possible: there is not a chance in hell that today's engines create more pollutants than a 5 or 10 year old engine. Hell, even DIESELS are cleaner every year.

Do try to keep up, gentlemen.

 

[Ranger Dave (B25)]

Actually, I believe that it was the Bush administration who started the clunkers program. Obama just pulled through with it.
Typical government, doesn't matter which side you are on, they still make horrible decisions.

Guess again.

It was Zero's baby from day one.

 

[wakingtowinter]

Try to post intelligently, if at all possible: there is not a chance in hell that today's engines create more pollutants than a 5 or 10 year old engine. Hell, even DIESELS are cleaner every year.

The point he's making is that the production of new vehicles (however "green" and eco-friendly their manufacturers claim them to be) is always going to be more enviromentally damaging than reusing older, existing vehicles. He's not talking about the new engines. You could be making an Excursion that gets 80 mpg on water but it doesn't matter if it's being produced with the same infrastructure that was around decades ago. That's what all these fools driving Priuses don't understand - it's the resource extraction, transportation of goods and materials, and massive use of fossil fuel energy that is causing the unstoppable curve of ecological damage. Who is the real polluter? NOT the end user... Why is the US the world's largest energy consumer? Because idiots are made to believe they'll help the environment if they buy a new "green" car every two years. Most of us on here are driving vehicles that are over 10 years old. And that means, what, fluids, tires, the odd sensor or light bulb every now and then? That's a hell of a lot less environmental impact than a whole new vehicle every two or three years.

 

[gwaii]

The point he's making is that the production of new vehicles (however "green" and eco-friendly their manufacturers claim them to be) is always going to be more enviromentally damaging than reusing older, existing vehicles. He's not talking about the new engines. You could be making an Excursion that gets 80 mpg on water but it doesn't matter if it's being produced with the same infrastructure that was around decades ago. That's what all these fools driving Priuses don't understand - it's the resource extraction, transportation of goods and materials, and massive use of fossil fuel energy that is causing the unstoppable curve of ecological damage. Who is the real polluter? NOT the end user... Why is the US the world's largest energy consumer? Because idiots are made to believe they'll help the environment if they buy a new "green" car every two years. Most of us on here are driving vehicles that are over 10 years old. And that means, what, fluids, tires, the odd sensor or light bulb every now and then? That's a hell of a lot less environmental impact than a whole new vehicle every two or three years.

thank you...i was going to post the same basic idea....you said it very well,and saved me a lot of typing.

 

[bd2988]

That is disgusting. These cars could have been given to someone less fortunate (instead of just blowing them up). That is the last thing we need in this economy is running, reliable (and affordable) cars being blown up. Great program. Get rid of all the reliable vehicles that will last forever, for junk that falls apart in 30,000 miles.

Also, why the hell do they destroy the engines. Why don't they just crush the cars if they are so bent on destroying them? Malicious if you'd ask me.

 

[maemae]

The point she's making is that the production of new vehicles (however "green" and eco-friendly their manufacturers claim them to be) is always going to be more enviromentally damaging than reusing older, existing vehicles. She's not talking about the new engines. You could be making an Excursion that gets 80 mpg on water but it doesn't matter if it's being produced with the same infrastructure that was around decades ago. That's what all these fools driving Priuses don't understand - it's the resource extraction, transportation of goods and materials, and massive use of fossil fuel energy that is causing the unstoppable curve of ecological damage. Who is the real polluter? NOT the end user... Why is the US the world's largest energy consumer? Because idiots are made to believe they'll help the environment if they buy a new "green" car every two years. Most of us on here are driving vehicles that are over 10 years old. And that means, what, fluids, tires, the odd sensor or light bulb every now and then? That's a hell of a lot less environmental impact than a whole new vehicle every two or three years.

That is exactly what I was trying to say. Of course a newer engine is going to produce less pollutants, when ran. That is a no-brainer. It is the manufacturing of said engines that produce more pollutants. In fact a Prius is probably one of the most environmentally damaging cars to manufacture due to the batteries. To ranger Dave, i have no idea what a yoonyun fanboi is, but i am not one of them i am actually a girl.