What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history – the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
85 Comments
- CTK14A, on 07/17/2009, -5/+43"Jim Kelley says:
July 17, 2009 at 1:28 am
My 92 f-150 ford truck gets 13 combined mpg…I want a 2009 hummer h3t that gets 16 combined mpg…Will that qualify? Thanks"
Hey Jim Kelley, set yourself on fire, thanks - ClarkLab, on 07/17/2009, -2/+22Forget the stupid flow chart, there qualifications are available on the official govt site and are very straightforward:
* have been manufactured less than 25 years before the date you trade it in
* have a "new" combined city/highway fuel economy of 18 miles per gallon or less
* be in drivable condition
* be continuously insured and registered to the same owner for the full year preceding the trade-in
* The trade-in vehicle must have been manufactured not earlier than 25 years before the date of trade in and, in the case of a category 3 vehicle, must also have been manufactured not later than model year 2001 - ghatid, on 07/17/2009, -3/+23Well, for one thing, putting a working car in the junkyard is a huge waste (and very bad for the environment). In my opinion, throwing away a car is more wasteful than saving a few mpg (a minimum of 4mpg?). One problem with Americans is that we throw everything away even if there's nothing (or very little) wrong with it. We don't fix appliances, we just throw them away. It's like that with every part of our lives.
Why don't they take these cars and do something with them...the way it is right now, it's just a money sink. - seinman, on 07/17/2009, -0/+15My 1994 vehicle gets about 16 mpg in practice, but is rated at 21 so I'm not eligible. Super lame.
- Richandler, on 07/17/2009, -1/+12It furthers Americans to buy cars, take on more debt all while destroying used cars, which, especially in a recession are the most affordable option for first time car buyers, college students and lower class people.
- Decoy84, on 07/17/2009, -1/+12http://www.cars.gov/rollout.html
Go there for the official word. On another note someone needs to fire that web developer because apparently he never validated it in FF. - bmcnally, on 07/17/2009, -1/+10How about taking out loans/extra debt when that was what got us into the problem in the first place? Many of these "clunkers" can last for a longer period of time - with good maintenance, a car will last 14+ years (going off of my old car - 200k+).
- Richandler, on 07/17/2009, -3/+11Destroying used cars. Cars that the young or poor people of this world buy is such a horrible idea. Broken window fallacy in every regard. This is an example of destroying wealth not creating it.
- funkedup, on 07/17/2009, -4/+11more consumption...just what America needs.
- cygnus2112, on 07/17/2009, -2/+9You know... maybe it's just me.. but a vehicle that has better than 18 mpg, is drivable, and is newer than 1984 isn't really a clunker.
I think they have a skewed definition of what should be considered a trade-in clunker. - Barackalypse, on 07/17/2009, -2/+9I'll make it even simplier:
Borrowed money ---> people who didn't earn it - crazzy88ss, on 07/17/2009, -1/+8So they'll give you MORE money to buy a car that uses less gas, which means LESS TAX money for them?
Hmm... doesn't seem to work too well in the long run. - CTK14A, on 07/17/2009, -0/+7Planned obsolescence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence# ... - TdiFFRob6876, on 07/17/2009, -2/+8More like you failed to read the FAQs page
- Madrigalian, on 07/17/2009, -3/+8This program is a scam to prop up the auto industries highly inflated car prices. In this economy cars and houses are trying to find their true value within the market. The true value of a new car is somewhere around a third of what the sticker price is telling you and even if you don't realize that consciously, many people are making the intuitive leap that a used car is quite simply a better value in the long run. There's much less depreciation vs what you pay for new and often these so called "clunkers" are in very good shape to last the buyer another 10 years. The point is people are buying many more used cars than they are buying new cars. The dealers must lower their new car prices to compete with the huge inventories of good, working and relatively cheap used car market. Wait, cut costs?? No way! Let's use tax payer money to scrap as many used cars as possible, keep the value of new cars artificially high and in the process reduce customer options against anything but a shiny new depreciation machine. We must keep prices high, paying those auto union pensions for Obama's unionized socialist friends don't ya know.
Call it what you want to, color it with a green brush all you want. What this is in fact is a Government sponsored, tax payer funded, price fixing scheme designed to stave off deflation of cars the same way they are bulldozing perfectly good homes to artificially prop up home prices that are also way too high. Still. - inactive, on 07/17/2009, -2/+7boo hoo your dad is gonna buy a $50k car and doesn't get a better rebate because he wants to buy a V8 muscle car - that car gets 18 mpg combined according to the EPA - that and his minivan gets too good of mileage to qualify
- mattomondo, on 07/17/2009, -0/+5I think this program is a nice idea, but the fuel economy requirement of 22 MPG for the new car is too low. Even though 22 MPG is significantly better than what many of the trucks and SUVs out there get, it is still pretty mediocre as far as fuel economy goes. Plus, the fact that it's possible to receive a $3500 credit for switching from 18 to 22 MPG is pretty ridiculous. 30 MPG would be a better requirement. People would have fewer cars to choose from, but a higher credit such as $5000 or more would make up for it.
- EdDiggEd, on 07/17/2009, -1/+6Yeah, I was looking to trade in my Jaguar to buy a new Gulfstream, and this stoopid chart says I don't qualify for a government handout! That's outrageous!!!
- Diggnabbit, on 07/17/2009, -0/+5Isn't that the point? If it has 18 mpg, then it's NOT a clunker and does not qualify for the program.
- wc3452, on 07/17/2009, -2/+6Yeah, in a sagging economy, increased consumption is the best cure.
- numberneal, on 07/16/2009, -4/+8my hooptie - rollin, tailpipe draggin, heat don't work and my woman be naggin - sir mixalot
- MacEnvy, on 07/17/2009, -1/+5It's not a junkyard, it's a scrapyard. The cars are parted out or recycled and sold for their steel. It's not like they're just going to rust away in a heap - it's not a dump.
- j3nnings, on 07/17/2009, -0/+4Tempting, but I don't want to start making car payments while in college. Think it would be possible to take advantage of this a few years in the future?
- inactive, on 07/17/2009, -2/+6Well this is a tremendous waste of money.
At least the government is consistent. - yacks, on 07/17/2009, -0/+4This program sucks for people who looks for used cars.. A) it gets rid of perfectly good cars (unless the cars they trade-in dont run) .. decreases the supply, hence raising the price.. it's good for people selling used cars though.. which reminds me.. anyone want to buy a used 1995 Isuzu Rodeo for $1500?
- wilhoitm, on 07/17/2009, -1/+5All of the old guys at work make over 100K and they drive clunkers, I would not call them all poor, maybe just smart! The money could be better spent on something else, maybe invested, a car is a depreciating asset.
- Lane, on 07/17/2009, -0/+4Tempting but no way in hell they are demolishing my camaro, it would be a crime against humanity!
- pinchduck, on 07/17/2009, -1/+5What is a mystery is how Congress feels it is the government's duty to buy new cars and set top boxes for everyone who wants one. We're broke, Congress. You should be cutting back spending on everything until our budget is balanced. Save the bread and circuses for an expanding economy when we have no debt or deficit and a positive trade balance.
- ghatid, on 07/17/2009, -1/+4Though I agree with you, to be more politically correct (since this is the internet and we all should be PC) you should call them socioeconomically retarded people, not lower class.
Oh, I almost forgot to include /s. I'm kidding! They're just poor! - Ascus, on 07/25/2009, -0/+3I quiet annoyed that my kids 94' Grand Prix didn't qualify, supposedly it gets 21 MPG, I never gotten 18 MPG out of that piece of crap. But the Chrysler Town & Country does, but try to find a mini-van that gets 22 MPG to qualify for even $3500 reward, and if a van run's its worth more than $3500.
They should have called this the SUV forgiveness program. Its abiout the only thing that applies. - Sagags, on 07/17/2009, -1/+4My grandparrents wanted to take advantage of this program, but their 1990 Toyota pickup is rated at 20-24mpg (even though after all these years im sure the MPG is lower) and there other car is a 1980 Mercedes. I guess the won't be buying a new car under this program.
- newsmonster, on 07/22/2009, -1/+4A simliar scheme in the UK has been working really well, it's on a first come first served basis and is due to run out much quicker that expected.
- Johnbinarystar, on 07/17/2009, -0/+3Talk about yer corporate welfare. It rewards car companies for doing nothing at all except greasing a few palms in DC. It rewards people with a history of making bad economy choices in the past. It penalizes people with a history of making good fuel economy choices. It should be NET+. If the new vehicle gets better milage period, it qualifies.
You can just hear the GM and Ford lobbiest telling the congressperson "Hey the average smuck, that walks into our showrooms, is driving a gas hog we convinced them to buy 10 years ago, lets reward him (an get us our sale). Never mind that in order to fund this we may have to curtail basic services in many communities, this is Korporate Fascism USA, where the average and the weak deserve to starve in the gutter!" - Elranzer, on 07/17/2009, -0/+3INFOGRAPHIC
Stop using this word. - EdDiggEd, on 07/17/2009, -0/+3hmmm, it's almost as if they're being sincere..
- ghatid, on 07/17/2009, -0/+2Just because you're recycling it doesn't mean you aren't wasting the resources it took to build the car and to recycle the car.
We think that recycling is going to save the world. The best way is to keep using old things instead of "recycling" and then buying something new. My dad hates environmentalists (due to their retarded-ness and their control of the Californian gov't...he's owns a small farm and is constantly in battle with retarded environmentalist and their regulations, etc., but that's a story for a different time) but he is the type of person who is actually good for the environment (as opposed to the environmentalists who drive around in their SUVs with their air-conditioning blasting and drinking bottled water, who come by and bother farmers). He uses things until they break, then he fixes it up and uses it some more. When he bought his farm 30 some odd years ago, there was a massive pile of junk in the back; over the years, he's used all that junk to fix up various parts of his farm. He rarely buys anything new...and if he does it's only because there's nothing he can do about it any more. - inactive, on 07/17/2009, -1/+3guess what even if it is a clunker - it probably doesn't qualify for this. I just bought a new car and traded in a 2000 v6 mustang. It got 12 - 15 miles to the gallon at best. too bad the EPA thinks my previous piece of ***** gets 21 mpg.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSi ... - wilhoitm, on 07/17/2009, -2/+4$4,500! I could almost get a Mac for that! I am turning in my clunker today!
/s - kanojo1969, on 07/17/2009, -1/+3I'm not sure if it's just to limit the number of eligible people, but the 18mpg requirement on the old car is too steep; practically anything that's not a V8, and built in the last 25 years, will have a 'new' combined rating of 18mpg or less, disqualifying them from the program.
Given that the primary purpose of this is to get people buying new cars, and the environmental benefits are second, why bother? Make it 10mpg or just get rid of the MPG restrictions entirely.
Same with the 'must be insured in your name for a year' thing. Obviously this is to stop people going out and buying clunkers to get the free money, but if it results in new cars being bought, who cares? Just limit it to one per SSN and be done with it.
At the end of the day, there may be people who get into car payments because of this, that they wouldn't have by themselves. Maybe some of those will default. But this isn't mortgages, people aren't saddled with life-ruining debt on a single car. Foreclosures on houses are bad news all around but defaulting on a car payment doesn't hurt the loan company at all, and it doesn't ruin the resale value of every else's cars either. - wrrock, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2Good in theory, if it worked like the graphic, but the unintended consequences make it a lemon: http://butasforme.com/2009/07/17/cash-for-clunkers ...
- lcg9q3, on 07/17/2009, -0/+2The whole program is a waste of money. This is probably the laziest way to appear to care about the environment. That being said, I'm pissed my '92 Corolla doesn't qualify b/c of the MPG requirements. There's no way it still gets over 18 MPG. Really sucks b/c I'm already planning on getting a new car in the next 6 months and this would have helped big time!
- cbdgr, on 07/17/2009, -1/+3where is the step of are you planning to buy a new or used car?
- lalalalamppost, on 07/17/2009, -0/+2I love how it penalizes people who bought fuel efficient cars by rewarding only those who bought ***** efficiency cars. FTW !
- chuckiej, on 08/05/2009, -0/+2How is tricking broke people into buying new cars on their already overdrawn credit and destroying perfectly useful vehicles a good idea?
- PopcornDave, on 07/17/2009, -0/+2You're just reading the "little people's" chart.
/s - Rethcir, on 07/17/2009, -0/+2"Wait... I'm confused..."
- Elranzer, on 07/17/2009, -0/+1It has to be new. "New" stimulates the American economy. That's what this is all about.
- MacEnvy, on 07/17/2009, -1/+2I had a 2003 V8 Mustang and I got better than 12 mpg. Maybe you're just a ***** driver.
- smmakira, on 07/17/2009, -0/+1THANK YOU! This flow chart is silly.
-
Show 51 - 90 of 90 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is