Chevrolet Malibu Forums banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
There are groups of auto enthusiasts that are fighting this legislation tooth and nail. I't not a good thing to have this legislation pass, it will hurt the car collector, hobbyist and purveyors of antiques and such. This legislation is a very POOR attempt from the government to clean up the enivornment, when this won't even make a scratch in it! SEMA is one of the largest groups completely against this and wants to protect the automotive hobbyists from being forced to junk and obviously good car that doesn't get driven much to be removed from polluting the air, this would affect more of the enthusiasts who have projects they are still in the works or are even drivers at best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I understand your point.

But even so if they do pass this as a law I want to take advantage of it and get my government money. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
I don't get it...I used to own a 93 Civic, that got excellent mileage by todays standards, so now I'd get 5000 for it and invest that into a Ford Flex with a 3.5 V6 or Toyota Highlander or Chevy Colorado????

Same goes for my mother's current car - 01 Sentra. That thing can hardly sell for 3500-4000 canadian.

This would make more sense if the list contained a small number of most efficient cars. If I was enticed to get into a Prius or Civic Hybrid or Yaris that would be more logical (although not entirely unquestionable). BTW, we had incentives like that on federal as well as provincial level....But that's gone now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
There are groups of auto enthusiasts that are fighting this legislation tooth and nail. I't not a good thing to have this legislation pass, it will hurt the car collector, hobbyist and purveyors of antiques and such.
That page didn't seem to say anything about having to sell your old car though?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
You must understand this will target cars and trucks over ten years old and older. It's nothing more than a bunch of politicians who think they can clean up the air by getting rid of so called gross poluter cars and trucks, it's their way of enticing you to buy a NEW car for cleaner air, it's not a good pratice and several times over this has been voted down. Check out SEMA and the SANS Network, this is one of the groups that has been fighting this dilema for years, everytime it's brought up by a Senator or House of Representative who thinks they can help clean up the air. In fact even Hot Rod Magazine's Editor, Steve McDonald wrote a letter in the May issue of Hot Rod talking about this bill, check out www.hotrod.com on this or www.sema.com .

Dominogold, you'd get more money for your car on a trade in than this scrappage bill states what would be given to you just to scrap that car. Don't go relying on government for stupid stuff like this, it's a cop out rather than fix a situation that's cause by more factors than they want to admit to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
The legislation I read said that you traded it in.... any car that is 8 years old... for a fuel efficient one. I have a 2001 Lexus SUV ... still running fine that I think would qualify.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
How can I put it to you that this legislation is the worst idea brought about! Let me jut say it simply, people who are cash strapped and can't afford a more fuel efficient car has no choice but to get whatever they can afford. This will also hurt the hobbyist who collect and restore older autos since this bill means that any cars given to this cash for clunkers will end up being crushed, hobbyists don't want to see the availability of old cars or their parts to disappear, some seriously search for parts that no one reproduces. Beside this is a government sponsored bill, who the hell's gonna be paying for it?? Us the taxpayers and NOT the government!!! Think about that very hard before you stand behind something the government cooks up to supposedly help us better our lives or the environment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Malibu Glow --- relax. Look, I don't make the laws! All I'm saying is IF this legislation does get passed, I would use it and cash in my 2001 car. I have not said anywhere I stand behind it at all. Honestly I could care less if it passes or not but I think anything that helps sell cars right now is probably a good thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
glow, i see your point, but the point of the bill is to push people and go get a new one, simple as that.
for example, i dont think theres a huge collector base for 96 blazers with 130,000 miles on them. my dad has one, and it is still in good shape (body wise) but its just getting old and wore out. the dealer will hardly give him anything on trade for it, so in his 'old school' thinking, he will just keep his moldy money it and 'run it into the ground', and buy when the blazer is dead.
where as my mom, and siblings are trying to tell him to give it up and get something new.

the long and short of it is this - he wont get anything worth while on trade for it, but if this bill goes through, he could get a bigger break and buy a new one.

as i said, i understand your point for the collector and hobbyist, and the people who cant afford. the thing is, i know a handful of people who CAN afford a new car, and the old one they are driving is OK, but theyd like to get rid of it, but just dont want to spend their $$$. so if they get a better deal on giving up their old one, theyll buy.

the collectors arent going to be going out and trading in their collector cars. But do you honestly think that someday people will want to be collecting:
2000 Cavalier with 155,000 miles, or
1996 Lumina with 133,000 miles, or a
1996 LeSabre with 100,000 miles?
And my list goes on with peoples cars i know that would like to get rid of the clunker.

No offense, but what cars are you afraid people will be trading in as a clunker thats going to hurt the collectors? Any car that would be turned in on the bill would be just as the bill says - a clunker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
What you don't understand is they'll go after the much older cars that are still out there, over 10 years old, and besides THIS IS GOVERNMENT USING TAX DOLLLARS. Where is it the government HAS money???? They DON'T it's TAXPAYER MONEY they will use, so you think you're getting a DEAL when you ARE NOT. All they are doing is taking money you pay into taxes to give you this so called better deal. It's NOT good business sense, we'll end up getting taxed even more and have less in our pockets so how in the hell do you think some will be able to afford a new car when the government has raised taxes?

WAKE UP, this is a BAD BILL right off the bat, it's not gonna help the economy, you want to get help then the money that was given to the lending institutions should've been given to the people in financial trouble instead of the banks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
What you don't understand is they'll go after the much older cars that are still out there, over 10 years old, and besides THIS IS GOVERNMENT USING TAX DOLLLARS. Where is it the government HAS money???? They DON'T it's TAXPAYER MONEY they will use, so you think you're getting a DEAL when you ARE NOT. All they are doing is taking money you pay into taxes to give you this so called better deal. It's NOT good business sense, we'll end up getting taxed even more and have less in our pockets so how in the hell do you think some will be able to afford a new car when the government has raised taxes?

WAKE UP, this is a BAD BILL right off the bat, it's not gonna help the economy, you want to get help then the money that was given to the lending institutions should've been given to the people in financial trouble instead of the banks!
Ok, so youre worried about them going for cars that are 10+ years old. The cars that are coming to my mind that are in the 10+ group and getting traded in would be mid 80's lesabres, centurys, ford escorts, etc. The cars that would be traded in (IMO) would be junkers of no value! They were probably driven as dailydrivers, and are beat to heck.

Even if they were older than the 80's. The people trading in those vehicles would not have cared for those cars as a collector would have. It's going to be the people with the old daily driver cars that would be trading in. My uncle has a 79 Lincoln Continental Collectors Series. Mint condition. He will NEVER trade that car in. Theres another one in town just like it, thats driven daily by some scum bag, and the crap is beat out of it. If that one gets traded in, its no great loss. Its got bondo all over it, and is just an eyesore. Thats the kind of cars going to be traded in.

And you mention them about "going after". What are the dealers going to do, come knock down your door and steal your old car? If someone is a "car person" they aint gonna go trade in their pride and joy. Not no way, not no how. So i dont understand your "going after" idea.

Check out: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1550
And this here, right from the bill doesnt specifically mention the age of the car.

Amount of Voucher-

(1) VOUCHER REDEMPTION VALUE IF USED TOWARD PURCHASE OF NEW FUEL EFFICIENT AUTOMOBILE- A voucher issued under the Program may be applied to offset a portion of the purchase price of one new fuel efficient automobile meeting the criteria set forth in this paragraph, which portion shall be the amount of--

(A) $4,000 for a--

(i) passenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 27 miles per gallon;

(ii) passenger automobile assembled in North America with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 30 miles per gallon; or

(iii) nonpassenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 24 miles per gallon;

(B) $5,000 for a--

(i) passenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 30 miles per gallon; or

(ii) work truck assembled in the United States registered by the dealer as a registered work truck; or

(C) $3,000 for a nonpassenger automobile assembled in North America with a minimum highway value of 24 miles per gallon.



You mention for us to wake up, it's a bad bill.

Well, Wake up, and Welcome to America. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
But you don't see, in the hobbyist eyes a good majority of older cars before 1970 have been already grabbed up, so what does this leave for an aspiring young enthusiast to grab up to either restore, resto-mod or whatever they want, it will be cars in the 1980's some will look for to work on, it's the hobby that's threatened when legislation like this is brought up and it's legislation the WON'T WORK anyway. California has tried this time and time again besides a few other states, but the eventuality is is doesn't work. WHY? Cause how are you to talk people out of turning in a car for money that will be taken out of the taxpayers pockets! Most cash strapped people will not trade in their older cars caus ethe costs for them to keep their older cars is more affordable to them than a monthly payment that will push their budgets over the limits!

I've owned several old cars over the years and I still have my second vehicle I bought, it is a project vehicle and not driven much. And today these can be found cheap but maybe not in the best of shape To have it where there aren't any of these around for someone like me who envisions building something they'd like to tool around on when they feel like it is, that's waht this bill will do they'll target these and any other older cars to take off the roads when they don't amount to a hill of beans in emissions put out since they are driven ony on occasion. Here's pictures of what is my project I've owned since 87.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
Amount of Voucher-

(1) VOUCHER REDEMPTION VALUE IF USED TOWARD PURCHASE OF NEW FUEL EFFICIENT AUTOMOBILE- A voucher issued under the Program may be applied to offset a portion of the purchase price of one new fuel efficient automobile meeting the criteria set forth in this paragraph, which portion shall be the amount of--

(A) $4,000 for a--

(i) passenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 27 miles per gallon;

(ii) passenger automobile assembled in North America with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 30 miles per gallon; or

(iii) nonpassenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 24 miles per gallon;

(B) $5,000 for a--

(i) passenger automobile assembled in the United States with a minimum highway label fuel economy value of 30 miles per gallon; or

(ii) work truck assembled in the United States registered by the dealer as a registered work truck; or

(C) $3,000 for a nonpassenger automobile assembled in North America with a minimum highway value of 24 miles per gallon.



You mention for us to wake up, it's a bad bill.

Well, Wake up, and Welcome to America. :)
You don't see the problem as I do! Yes the GOVERNMENT will TARGET the older cars and trucks that are still out there, California has tried it but failed. This so called VOUCHER, who's paying IT? What is this from the GOVERNMENT? If that's the case, WHERE'S THE MONEY COMING FROM? YOU THE TAXPAYER! Where is this GOOD? It's not, it will mean YOU THE TAXPAYER will be paying more taxes! And how will that effect you? How many out there are struggling from paycheck to paycheck? Think on that and the effects this bill will have if it is made a law. I don't want to see more taxes, I want less involvement from the government in my life! You let them do this crap and they'll come back later to take more control in your life. I'll keep my older cars and maintain them to keep them running. I'd rather save my money to buy a car on my own, or to get some financing from a bank instead of the government pushing some program that will COST ME MONEY! I'm tired of paying for programs that DON'T WORK! Talk aout wasteful spending and it isn't their money!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
You can't reliably make a list of cars that you think are going to be collectible so you can't really say that certain cars will not be collectible. The other thing a bill like this does is take low cost useable cars off the market that otherwise would be purchased by low income people to get to work, etc. In some areas of the country you see a large number of mid 80s to early 90s cars (especially Detroit made cars) being driven by low income people. The cars don't cost much to buy, don't require a lot of maintenance, get pretty good gas mileage but look terrible.

The problem with any of these bills is the government trying to dictate the market to achieve some noble result. The government tries to do all sorts of good intentioned things but never gets any of them close to being right and usually ends up making things worse.

Bill
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
You can't reliably make a list of cars that you think are going to be collectible so you can't really say that certain cars will not be collectible. The other thing a bill like this does is take low cost useable cars off the market that otherwise would be purchased by low income people to get to work, etc. In some areas of the country you see a large number of mid 80s to early 90s cars (especially Detroit made cars) being driven by low income people. The cars don't cost much to buy, don't require a lot of maintenance, get pretty good gas mileage but look terrible.

The problem with any of these bills is the government trying to dictate the market to achieve some noble result. The government tries to do all sorts of good intentioned things but never gets any of them close to being right and usually ends up making things worse.

Bill
Bill, you're right on the fact that you can't peg certain vehicles as collectables. For the low income they won't ahve a choice but to buy an affordable car and that leaves out new cars for many. In fact even for teenagers just coming into having a drivers license and not really the means of getting a fairly new car they'll be looking at these affordable vehicle that they'll take and personalize in their own tastes.

Most people won't even see the the poor results these kinds of bill will actually have on the economy. Government doesn't have the right to DICTATE what we the US public can do when it comes to transportation, it's not their business to push the public to buy something they can't afford cause the government wants to clean up the environment.

The GOOD NEWS on this BILL is, IT WAS DEFEATED! How do I know I just received my Driving Force News Letter from SEMA Sans Network. In it there was a paragraph about Washington State having a Scrappage Bill; Here's what it said.

On the heels of the DEFEAT of a US Congressional proposal to create a national "Cash for Clunkers" program. SAN helped turn back an effort in the Washington State Legislature that would have implemented a vehicle scrappage program for passenger vehicles more than 15 years old. Under the Bill, qualifying vehicles would have had to be registeredfor a 24-month period and in satisfactory operating condition. Replacement vehicles purchased under the plan would have an EPA highway gasoline mileage rating of at LEAST 30 MPG. Participants in the program were to be granted a sales tax exemption for the first $2000 of tax paid on the purchase price. All trade-in vehicles would have been destroyed, regardless of their historical value or collector interest.

End Quote.

There are more enthusiasts out there than most would think and they are standing up against legislation like this all the time to protect all types of businesses that would be affected by such legislation like this!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
I don't think so! There are more companies that would be affected by a so called Cash for Clunkers than it would help. And where is it that it wasn't defeated, SEMA's SAN's Network have been deeply ingrained in making a stand against bill that are of little use or detrimental to the industry for years since it's initial conception.
Cash for Clunkers is a BAD BILL and should NOT become law, it will be more detrimental to the auto iindustry than it would help, let alone it would be much harder for people struggling to own a car when the only thing they'll be able to afford is an older car, we don't need government FORCING people into doing something when they are strapped!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
493 Posts
This is from SEMA's own site! READ THE LAST FEW PARAGRAPGHS closely.
President Obama and his Auto Task Force initiated a series of actions to help rebuild the U.S. auto industry. In an open letter to the President, SEMA expressed a continued commitment to work with the President and the U.S. Congress toward that goal. SEMA also expressed its opposition to vehicle scrappage programs, also known as “cash for clunkers."

President Obama mentioned a willingness to consider including such a program within his auto restructuring plans.

In the letter, SEMA discussed the need to help consumers, automakers and dealerships with a program to stimulate new car sales. Assistance could come in the form of government-issued vouchers toward the purchase of fuel-efficient new vehicles, and allowing consumers to deduct the car interest payments on their taxes. SEMA, however, strongly opposed tying the vouchers to a scrappage program.

Scappage programs accelerate the demise of older vehicles, which are then typically crushed into blocks of sheet metal. Program supporters focus on a car's age or fuel efficiency rating rather than its actual emissions or how much it is driven. SEMA has consistently warned against wasting taxpayer dollars on a program that may produce an artificial spike in sales, but does not reduce emissions or increase fuel efficiency.

Automakers and dealers need to sell cars in order to survive, but potential buyers have hit the brakes in these tough economic times. Scrappage programs would actually deny vouchers to the majority of people who may want to buy a new car but don’t have an eligible older car to trade. Instead, these programs will be misused by those who own two or three older cars and seek to take advantage of the taxpayer give-away.

Many of these cars aren’t frequently driven, if at all, so destroying them will not clean the nation’s air or make us less dependent on foreign oil.

While supporters tout a similar German program as evidence of success, the European Federation for Transport and the Environment, (the pan-European federation of environmental groups), has urged Germany and other countries to abandon scrappage subsidies because they do more environmental harm than good by artificially accelerating the car life cycle.

Scrappage programs hurt thousands of independent repair shops, auto restorers, customizers and their customers across the country. This industry provides thousands of American jobs and generates millions of dollars in local, state and federal tax revenues.

SEMA encouraged the President to help the entire auto industry with programs that focus the incentive where it counts: on the purchase of new vehicles and not destroying older cars.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
About this Discussion
23 Replies
7 Participants
08LTZ
Chevrolet Malibu Forums
Chevy Malibu Forum is the best place for owners of the sedan to connect with the community and discuss MPG, mods, and more. Join now!
Full Forum Listing
Top