The Many Faces of US Politics...

[tyssam5]

THE RESULTS FOR OBAMA'S CASH FOR CLUNKERS DISASTER;

The person who calculated this bit of information has been a professor at The University of West Virginia in Morgantown,  West Virginia for the last forty some years.

A clunker that travels  12,000 miles a year at 15 mpg uses 800 gallons of gas a year.
A vehicle  that travels 12,000 miles a year at 25 mpg uses 480 gallons of gas a  year.
So, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce gasoline  consumption by 320 gallons per year.
The government claims 700,000 clunkers  have been replaced so that's 224 million gallons saved per year.
That  equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.  5 million barrels is  about 5 hours worth of US consumption.
More importantly, 5 million barrels  of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars.
So, the  government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million.
We  spent $8.57 for every $1.00 we saved.

How do ye like them apples?

I'm pretty sure they'll  do a better job with our health care though...... 

Whatever about the figures on gas prices, was the program not intended more to stimulate the auto industry?
The 3 billion versus 350 millions comparison makes no sense. The payout was by the government, the 'saving' was not 'us' it would have been the end users of the new vehicles.

[Keyser soze]

So whilst I agree with the sentiment from TO that it was a complete nonsense program- the numbers are out...

today's price of gas, 3.14 per g
280m * 3.14= 0.879B USD saved, and only 2.77Bn spent (there's a phrase I like- only 2.77BN)
so closer to 3:1 still not what they would call awesome...

So it will take 3 years for the programme to pay for itself. Is that your point?

[heganboy]

the savings on gas to the customer over the course of three years more or less is the same of the cost of the program to the tax payer.

The point of the program was stimulus to the auto industry and reduction of pollution from the clunkers apparently. It was a reasonably good idea IMHO- however the execution of the program in the form that made it into law was a disgrace...

[muppet]

1) 25mpg is industry standard here
2) ok so we'll go with the barrell of oil at $100
That's 500 million saved instead of 350 million...WOW 
Its still 3 billion spent to save 500 million..right muppet?
3) what has the price of gas at the pump have to do with this idiocy
Of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies

Because you calculated the total based on the price of oil. No one uses oil. It must be refined first and that costs money therefore the savings are higher again.

As for 25mpg being industry standard, was that the objective? Merely the most inefficient industry standard in the western world? They could have aimed higher.

I don't know anything about Obama's 'clunkers scheme', in fact I never heard of it till I read your post but I can see holes in the figures and that suggests to me someone is telling porkies.

Sorry not buying that...you were simply caught out trying to be a smart ass
Yet again with limited knowledge of the point being made!

I have stated that until I read your post I had no knowledge of the point being made. However I could still punch holes in your professors figures while knowing nothing about it.

[Tyrones own]

Whatever about the figures on gas prices, was the program not intended more to stimulate the auto industry

The only auto industry stimulated was the Japanese industry 
Obama didn't have the cop on to limit the plan to American made cars 

The 3 billion versus 350 millions comparison makes no sense. The payout was by the government, the 'saving' was not 'us' it would have been the end users of the new vehicles

*shakes head

[Tyrones own]

So whilst I agree with the sentiment from TO that it was a complete nonsense program- the numbers are out...

today's price of gas, 3.14 per g
280m * 3.14= 0.879B USD saved, and only 2.77Bn spent (there's a phrase I like- only 2.77BN)
so closer to 3:1 still not what they would call awesome...

So it will take 3 years for the programme to pay for itself. Is that your point?

When have you ever known a government programme to pay for itself

[Tyrones own]

1) 25mpg is industry standard here
2) ok so we'll go with the barrell of oil at $100
That's 500 million saved instead of 350 million...WOW 
Its still 3 billion spent to save 500 million..right muppet?
3) what has the price of gas at the pump have to do with this idiocy
Of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies

Because you calculated the total based on the price of oil. No one uses oil. It must be refined first and that costs money therefore the savings are higher again.

As for 25mpg being industry standard, was that the objective? Merely the most inefficient industry standard in the western world? They could have aimed higher.

I don't know anything about Obama's 'clunkers scheme', in fact I never heard of it till I read your post but I can see holes in the figures and that suggests to me someone is telling porkies.

Sorry not buying that...you were simply caught out trying to be a smart ass
Yet again with limited knowledge of the point being made!

I have stated that until I read your post I had no knowledge of the point being made. However I could still punch holes in your professors figures while knowing nothing about it.

Case in point...you don't need to be stuck in every post pretending to know all about everything...you've no business coming at me in an effort to educate me
on a subject you admittedly know nothing about 

[muppet]

1) 25mpg is industry standard here
2) ok so we'll go with the barrell of oil at $100
That's 500 million saved instead of 350 million...WOW 
Its still 3 billion spent to save 500 million..right muppet?
3) what has the price of gas at the pump have to do with this idiocy
Of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies

Because you calculated the total based on the price of oil. No one uses oil. It must be refined first and that costs money therefore the savings are higher again.

As for 25mpg being industry standard, was that the objective? Merely the most inefficient industry standard in the western world? They could have aimed higher.

I don't know anything about Obama's 'clunkers scheme', in fact I never heard of it till I read your post but I can see holes in the figures and that suggests to me someone is telling porkies.

Sorry not buying that...you were simply caught out trying to be a smart ass
Yet again with limited knowledge of the point being made!

I have stated that until I read your post I had no knowledge of the point being made. However I could still punch holes in your professors figures while knowing nothing about it.

Case in point...you don't need to be stuck in every post pretending to know all about everything...you've no business coming at me in an effort to educate me
on a subject you admittedly know nothing about 

You put up figures on a public website to pursue your usual agenda. I am as entitled as anyone else to point out the holes in them.

As usual you hide behind straw man arguments.

Fear not those who argue but those who dodge 

[stew]

Whatever about the figures on gas prices, was the program not intended more to stimulate the auto industry

The only auto industry stimulated was the Japanese industry 
Obama didn't have the cop on to limit the plan to American made cars 

The 3 billion versus 350 millions comparison makes no sense. The payout was by the government, the 'saving' was not 'us' it would have been the end users of the new vehicles

*shakes head

correcto, the japanese made out like bandits, the Prez didnt even have the wit to stop senior executives from getting their fat bonus checks when he handed out billions in bailout money, and they thought Bush wasnt fit for the jab. 

FDR Obama is not.

[Tyrones own]

1) 25mpg is industry standard here
2) ok so we'll go with the barrell of oil at $100
That's 500 million saved instead of 350 million...WOW 
Its still 3 billion spent to save 500 million..right muppet?
3) what has the price of gas at the pump have to do with this idiocy
Of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies

Because you calculated the total based on the price of oil. No one uses oil. It must be refined first and that costs money therefore the savings are higher again.

As for 25mpg being industry standard, was that the objective? Merely the most inefficient industry standard in the western world? They could have aimed higher.

I don't know anything about Obama's 'clunkers scheme', in fact I never heard of it till I read your post but I can see holes in the figures and that suggests to me someone is telling porkies.

Sorry not buying that...you were simply caught out trying to be a smart ass
Yet again with limited knowledge of the point being made!

I have stated that until I read your post I had no knowledge of the point being made. However I could still punch holes in your professors figures while knowing nothing about it.

Case in point...you don't need to be stuck in every post pretending to know all about everything...you've no business coming at me in an effort to educate me
on a subject you admittedly know nothing about 

You put up figures on a public website to pursue your usual agenda. I am as entitled as anyone else to point out the holes in them.

As usual you hide behind straw man arguments.

Fear not those who argue but those who dodge 

Fire away...you questioned the price of a barrel of oil which I give you
But even if we go with HB's figures, what's your take on the 3:1 short fall
on American tax payers money while stimulating the Japanese auto industry...or is that another straw man question? 

[muppet]

1) 25mpg is industry standard here
2) ok so we'll go with the barrell of oil at $100
That's 500 million saved instead of 350 million...WOW 
Its still 3 billion spent to save 500 million..right muppet?
3) what has the price of gas at the pump have to do with this idiocy
Of stepping over dollars to pick up pennies

Because you calculated the total based on the price of oil. No one uses oil. It must be refined first and that costs money therefore the savings are higher again.

As for 25mpg being industry standard, was that the objective? Merely the most inefficient industry standard in the western world? They could have aimed higher.

I don't know anything about Obama's 'clunkers scheme', in fact I never heard of it till I read your post but I can see holes in the figures and that suggests to me someone is telling porkies.

Sorry not buying that...you were simply caught out trying to be a smart ass
Yet again with limited knowledge of the point being made!

I have stated that until I read your post I had no knowledge of the point being made. However I could still punch holes in your professors figures while knowing nothing about it.

Case in point...you don't need to be stuck in every post pretending to know all about everything...you've no business coming at me in an effort to educate me
on a subject you admittedly know nothing about 

You put up figures on a public website to pursue your usual agenda. I am as entitled as anyone else to point out the holes in them.

As usual you hide behind straw man arguments.

Fear not those who argue but those who dodge 

Fire away...you questioned the price of a barrel of oil which I give you
But even if we go with HB's figures, what's your take on the 3:1 short fall
on American tax payers money while stimulating the Japanese auto industry...or is that another straw man question? 

HB answered that better than I can.

Stew, the bailout was Hank Paulson's baby, on Bush's watch.

[Tyrones own]

HB answered that better than I can.

No shit
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge
*You're starting to actually make myles sound intelligent 

[johnneycool]

The only auto industry stimulated was the Japanese industry 
Obama didn't have the cop on to limit the plan to American made cars 

what, like these?

[muppet]

Whatever about the figures on gas prices, was the program not intended more to stimulate the auto industry

The only auto industry stimulated was the Japanese industry 
Obama didn't have the cop on to limit the plan to American made cars 

The 3 billion versus 350 millions comparison makes no sense. The payout was by the government, the 'saving' was not 'us' it would have been the end users of the new vehicles

*shakes head

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-05-11-chrysler-gm-cash-clunkers_N.htm

One minute on Google punches a hole in this.

Q: What's wrong with environmentalists' idea that the new car or truck should get much better fuel economy than the House bill currently requires?

A: Opponents say the environmentalists' fuel-economy improvement thresholds are so high that foreign brands benefit disproportionately, because their lineups tend now to have more small, fuel-efficient vehicles.

But the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy complained in a statement criticizing the House bill that the proposal as it stands now is way too lenient.

The council charged that the bill "aims primarily to clear Detroit's unsold inventory from the storage lots," rather than to seriously cut fuel use.[/i]

The reason they limited the incentive to very modest fuel economy improvements was to protect the inefficient US auto industry. If they insisted on truly economic cars the scheme would have benefitted the foreign manufacturers disproportionately.

[Tyrones own]

The degree of effort you'll go to to find an angle in an attempt to justify a complete disaster like this on tax payers takes any confusion I've had on how Ireland found itself in the financial situation it's in 

Funny how your ideas on waste from inept politicians differ so much depending on whether the discussion is on the US or Ireland 
Pathetic!