The backlash I've experienced has basically come from two distinct groups of people.

Those whose cars didn't qualify under the MPG standard to C4C their cars. "Where's my free $4,500 from the government?" type stuff. Sorry about your luck, I was getting 14 MPG in my '92 F150, you're getting 25 MPG in you late '90's/ early 00's vehicle, that if I had been getting all along, I wouldn't have qualified for the C4C program either.


Then there are the guys who spend all day listening to talk radio while working. I'm not gonna change their mindset, so I just ignore them for the most part.

I've never really worried about what people who don't know me think of me anyways.

It's all good.

 

People bitch, that's what they do. Too much, not enough, too expensive, too cheap, x isn't fair for reason y, whatever. You didn't game the system (as far as I know) to exploit a loophole for your benefit. You took advantage of a legit program available to you.

Enjoy your car, be happy you got a smoking deal. You also helped keep a salesperson's job and feed their family, a dealership to keep it's lights on to serve you in the future, put money in a manufacturers hands to allow them to continue to invest in the development of great vehicles, paid a significant amount of taxes that allow your sweet new car to ride on paved roads (although that also helps pay for the popo to write you tickets), with a % going to the federal government to pay for too many programs to count.

You played a part in the system that makes our world go around by spending a lot of cash. Feel good about that, shrug off the haters (they're always there), and roll. And when it's your chance to love or hate, choose the former.

Have fun.

 

If those people were driving an average of 15,000 per year, they already got a savings of about $1,000 per year on gas. And if you both had your vehicles for 6 years, you spent $6,000 more on gas than they did. And, they spent $6,000 less on gas than you did.

Roland pointed out a huge benefit of using more gas...yes, there is one, believe it or not. Taxes. What do you think pays for the highway infrastructure?
------

President Herbert Hoover began using the gasoline tax in 1932 as a means of bolstering general revenues and balancing the federal budget. In 1956, Congress decided to establish the Federal Highway Trust Fund. For the next quarter century, all gas tax revenues became the means to finance the nation’s highway infrastructure.



In 1982, Congress decided to allocate a percentage of the Highway Trust Fund to mass transit initiatives. Today, about 15% of tax revenue generated goes towards mass transit. The federal gas tax hasn’t increased from a rate of 18.4 cents per gallon set back in 1993. In real terms, the gas tax sits far below its 1970 value, thereby keeping the Highway Trust Fund perpetually underfunded.
Federal Gas Tax Would Lead To Myriad Benefits | FINalternatives
------

Greenville County will feel the impact of declining gasoline consumption and fuel-efficient vehicles via a $286,000 drop in funding for transportation-related projects.



The Greenville County Transportation Committee usually receives about $5 million in state gas tax revenues or user fees for work ranging from constructing sidewalks to fixing unsafe intersections to road resurfacing and interchange improvements.
Committee Chairman Bob Knight said revenues are down about 5 percent this year, and that's probably indicative of fewer miles being driven and the use of more efficient vehicles.
Gas tax revenues are down 4 percent statewide from this time last year, according to state Department of Transportation spokesman Pete Poore.
The state's gas tax revenue has been flat or declining since 1987, officials said. The issue is the same nationwide.
Local cut of gas tax revenues down | GreenvilleOnline.com | The Greenville News
------

I still think all people (especially politicians) should be required to play the original Sim City. LOL! More people demand more jobs, more housing, more shopping, more roads. If the tax rate is too high, people leave. If the tax rate is too low, the roads go to crap. People don't want to commute far, and if industry is conveniently close, they then complain about pollution. They demand more housing, create large buildings, which then go to hell from a high crime rate, but they don't want to pay for the police to eradicate the crime.

In a way, the mix of fuel efficient and gas guzzling vehicles balance each other. One pollutes, but pays more in taxes for the roads. One doesn't pollute, but pays less in taxes. They help each other...

But the costs of gas (and all that other stuff easily learned in Sim City) do force people into a tough spot, so they save on gas today in a newer car, but will have to pay more eventually in gas taxes to compensate for the fact they aren't using as much gas.

Seen this before? The True Cost of Driving calculator:
The True Cost of Driving
------

The other idea in the works is a cost per mile tax, the more you drive, the more you pay, which helps maintain the roads:

More than $200 billion a year is needed to maintain and improve the nation's highways and transit systems, according to the report by the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission. That's three times what's collected now, mostly by the federal gas tax.


The 18.4 cent-a-gallon tax hasn't increased since 1993. Inflation has eroded its buying power by a third. "A commuter using the Eisenhower Expy. pays 15 percent of the cost through the gas tax," says Robert D. Atkinson, commission chairman and president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation in Washington. Urban expressways are expensive to build and maintain. Hidden are costs for time-killing congestion and vehicle emissions.


Raising the gas tax is an obvious response. But the economics of road construction are so pressing and our auto economy is in such flux -- hybrids and other gas-sipping cars reduce gas tax revenues -- that a longer-term solution is required.


One idea is the vehicle-miles-traveled tax. Sun-Times transportation writer Mary Wisniewski reported Monday about a federal study using Chicago area drivers to test the concept. Atkinson's panel recommended the VMT tax in its 234-page "Paying Our Way" report.


A device mounted in your car would use the satellite-based GPS navigation system to track how many miles you drive. When you filled your gas tank, a retrofitted pump would download your mileage and you'd pay the VMT tax. Another method would have to be devised for all-electric cars, but annual vehicle registration would catch any plug-in drivers who tried to evade the VMT tax.


A penny-a-mile charge would bring in as much as the current federal gas tax, Atkinson says. Three cents a mile would be necessary for the highway maintenance and improvements his panel says the nation needs. State and towns could add on to pay for their road needs.


The VMT tax is a user fee. You don't drive, you don't pay it, except to the extent the cost of truck-hauled goods are factored into consumer prices. An Oregon VMT pilot project showed that when drivers know how much auto trips cost, they reduced their travel by 9 percent, relieving road use and congestion.
Pay-per-mile fee a fair way to fix highways :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Steve Huntley
------

Realize that is a fairer way of taxation, rather than a gas tax. Here's why, two cars, same weight, both chew up the road itself the same way. Roads get worn out from traffic.

It doesn't matter to the road surface how many mpg the object gets above it, it matters that the object is there at all.

That includes vehicles that are solar or compressed air or bio-diesel or Back to the Future vehicles that run on rubbish. The car is wearing out the road.

We're all going to have to pay more eventually, all of us, no matter what, to maintain our roads. Those who had/have less efficient vehicles have been putting in more than other people per gallon of gas. In a way, the CARS program gives a bit of a rebate...or evens out the deal on the taxes. Like a tax refund.

But now that money will have to come from somewhere else. That will be a double whammy for those still holding on to less efficient vehicles that also must drive longer distances.

It's another excellent reason to participate if possible in the CARS program. Or to trade in that vehicle that gets 25 mpg for one that gets 30 or 40 mpg, to help offset any future gas taxes or Pay-Per-Mile taxes. That helps other people to trade in their 20 mpg car and get your old 25 mpg car. And so on.

Each person on the fuel efficiency ladder can help the person next down, if they themselves can bump up.

P.S. Have I mentioned that I have been called a human computer? Half the time I can't pass the Turing test either.

 

You should try showing your Honda this summer during local car shows. The imports are getting hated on in a major way. I went to a show in
a rural area of WV and actually had someone spit tobacco on my car. I heard all day that, my car was what killed Detroit. We have gone to two shows where they gave out a Tuner/Import awards and a few weeks ago they gave a stang the tuner award. It makes me sick to see the You Tube videos of cars that are being blown up when they were traded in on this program. Perfectly nice cars that a poor family could use or could be used for parts but they are trashed and then crushed.

Cat :x

 

uhhh... NO. most of the manufacturers that are going under definitely do not make wat i want.

dont twist my words around taffetawhite. loose the arrogance. you know wat i meant.
you definitely write too much for a simple post.

 

I don't see a way to send you a private message. So please to refer to these posts:
https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/2nd-...tml#post726258

And:
https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/2nd-...tml#post726285

I could also mention a particular rep that specifically stated that the person agreed with my analysis on the "wanted v. needed".

It is not, in any way, shape, or form, putting YOU specifically down. Some of us want reliable, dependable, good mpg cars. But then there's this odd group that likes advantages. Those advantages being profit, CAFE standards, gas guzzler loopholes, etc.

The best example I have for all of that is the nearby pizzeria owner who bought a Hummer for pizza delivery. I kid you not. It wasn't because it made sense. It was because of greed, tax write-offs, that were offered at the time.

Like this:

As a result of a quirk of federal tax law, business owners are allowed to depreciate SUVs and pickups more quickly than cars. The discrepancy has been around for nearly two decades, but it is getting new attention amid the soaring popularity of SUVs and pickups as suburban people-movers. As the end of the year approaches, the tax break gets particularly popular, since business owners often are in the market for ways to cut their taxable income.
The deduction stems from the long-standing and somewhat bizarre classification of SUVs as "light trucks" rather than "cars." That means a tax break that was at least partly intended to help farmers buy pickup trucks is now being applied to today's quintessential suburban passenger vehicle.
The law gives people who qualify an immediate deduction of as much as $24,000 -- which grows to $25,000 next year -- off the price of an SUV. Plus, until 2004, there is a bonus deduction of 30 percent of the rest of the cost of the truck. Both these deductions are on top of the regular five-year depreciation that would apply to light trucks bought as business transportation.
The only catch: To get all these breaks, you have to buy a truck that weighs over 6,000 pounds. The Chevy Suburban makes it, but the Chevy Blazer does not.
It adds up to a significant price cut. Ford Motor Co.'s Land Rover Range Rover, for instance, has a list price of $71,865, but the combined tax breaks effectively knock $21,560 off the price, over the course of five years, assuming a tax rate of 30 percent.

Loophole Gives SUV Buyers a Tax Break
--------


More here:
Buy a Hummer, Get a $25,000 Tax Break - ABC News


Think people are enjoying a $4,500 rebate? How about $25,000 the first year?



THAT is what I meant by "building what people want".



YOU might not want it, but some people obviously did use that loophole for the benefit of getting a massive, expensive, gas-guzzling vehicle at a sizable discount.

 

Reading the last post re: the tax breaks for SUV's If you ever listen to the CarTech podcast from CNET, Brian Cooley went on that rant a week or so ago about business owners working that clause for the bigger break on their SUV. . I hadn't heard of it before that.

I'm sure those types of "benefits" are all over the place for someone, or some organizations gain.

 

"It makes me sick to see the You Tube videos of cars that are being blown up when they were traded in on this program. Perfectly nice cars that a poor family could use or could be used for parts but they are trashed and then crushed.

"

if your car is worth less than 4500 (or 3500) it's no deal for some poor family.. it's a money sink.. from it's horrible gas mileage to it's need of repair, it's trash.

Outside of the engine, the cars can be parted out.
Some places are doing that, some aren't.

 

It's a HUGE, involved drama.

You can read many pages of a book titled High and mighty: the dangerous rise of the SUV

By Keith Bradsher
here:
High and mighty: the dangerous rise ... - Google Books

The entire cost of the luxury SUV could be written off for business owners over a 5 year period (page 73-74).

Those large vehicles were also not taxed as luxury vehicles, no matter the cost, as they were considered "trucks".

Cars were crafted to eliminate pollution, but trucks did not have the meet the same requirements.

It's fascinating to read about, to find all the different puzzle pieces that created the SUV trend.

A couple more links to read if you wish:
Bit of history on CAFE standards and the SUV:
Cars, Light Trucks and CAFE Standards

New CAFE standards from Obama for 2016:
Will the new CAFE standards kill the SUV?

 

Agreed. My former car wouldn't be dependable, reliable transportation for anyone.

I like to think of it this way, "Today's new cars are tomorrow's used cars".

All the top cars being sold in the CARS program are pretty darn good cars. Those cars will eventually make it to lots somewhere as used cars. And I would gladly take any of them as a used car over the kinds of things that are being traded in as clunkers.

There will be larger numbers of more efficient vehicles on used car lots as a result of this program. It does no one any favors to give them a car that sucks gas, and requires extensive maintenance and repairs.

 

No backlash here. I mainly got the opposite..."It's about time you got rid of that piece of junk!"

Even the dealer (who had to drive it from the parking area to the "clunker" area) asked me, "how the hell do you get around in that thing?"

 

i say what ever to all the people talking BS....i traded in my 1999 ford explorer for my FIT......the CLunkers bill was to stimulate the automotive industry as a whole...and also to help people getting screwed with the price of gas and poor fuel economy!!!. it will leave extra money in peoples pockets, which will be spent in other places which will improve our economy as a whole!!!.......i love my FIT!!!! ive owned several american cars, i have paid my dues!

 

There is no irony to it. Maybe you are just ignorant.

I have worked with UAW workers and they are some of the most unskilled, uneducated, lazy, cheating people I have ever met. Most (with exception to the highly educated engineers) used ghosting to only work 2 or 3 days out of a week, but yet they got paid for 5. This is very common. If you worked in a UAW plant, you literally needed a request to unplug a 110v plug to move a small piece of equipment. This then required an electrician or a specialist, all of what you are paying for with each American car.

As for them being cheaply made, I used to be a mechanic for 9 years and worked on many cars before and after that. I know first hand how crappy US cars are compared to Japanese. Very poorly engineered and designed, which still carries true to today.

As for the buy american, it shows that they have no clue what a global economy is. It is nothing but ridiculous flag waving crap. Build a car that has value and people will buy it, if not, don't bitch when they buy something with value.

 

wow, i never occured to me how many members traded in their clunkers for the Fit. Thats awesome. On the downside, if I would have waited until now to buy my Fit. I would have gotten 1500 more for my 9mpg offroad monster. LOL. But than again on the downside, if I did wait until now I'd be driving around in a GE. jk. But yeah about your caddy forum friends complaining. I mean if your caddy was a DD, than it made alot of sense to trade it in.

And for the member that traded in their explorer. It appears that the there were 3 or 4 editions of the ford explorer made the #1 to #4 spots on the top 10 most traded in. LOL. If my gf waited until now to buy her car, she would have gotten $3700 more for her trade in(which was a 95 explorer btw).

 

Also! It seems like the #1 car purchased through Cash for Clunkers was the Focus. So maybe you should tell them that. I dont think the Fit even made the top 10. So maybe that will make them happy. LOL

 

I have paid my dues as well...my last new car was a 05 Caddy SRX and it was nothing but problems the dealer was great but it had a rattle in the panoramic sunroof the dealer couldn't fix after a few tries that I sued GM and won, a small amount but still....

 

As of Tuesday:

1. Toyota Corolla
2. Honda Civic
3. Ford Focus
4. Toyota Camry
5. Toyota Prius
6. Hyundai Elantra
7. Ford Escape (front-wheel-drive)
8. Honda Fit
9. Nissan Versa
10. Honda CR-V (four-wheel-drive)


Top 10 vehicles bought by people trading clunkers


Yes, the Fit did make the TOP TEN! Woo hoo! And it's been in the top ten all along.



But there's more to the story...see, they separate out different models, like with Ford's Escape:


However, the government statistics separate different models of the same vehicle, such as front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive. The government's list identifies the front-wheel drive Escape on its list.
Under a formula computed by carbuying website Edmunds.com, the Escape is the top vehicle sold when including its various versions. Edmunds.com says the Escape has 4.8 percent of the market share of vehicles acquired under the Clunkers program, ahead of the Focus, ranked second at 4.5 percent.
“The Escape has a broad range of base prices and equipment, including front-wheel drive, all-wheel drive and hybrids,” said Scott Oldham, editor of Edmunds Inside Line. “That makes it appealing to a large group of consumers. There’s still a good portion of the public out there that wants a roomier vehicle with SUV capability. It’s a nice-performing, fuel-efficient vehicle.”


Website: Ford Escape tops among clunker buyers | Dollars & Sense

 

Hey, I think if the Gov't is offering...and as a US Citizen you have the right to take advantage of the Cash for Clunkers. Screw what anybody else thinks...if you want to do it...Do it! Do your Cadillac buddies have to pay your bills or look for parts for you when you need them?? You gotta do what is best for you.

I have two Hondas, an 87 Civic (Elsie, old in yrs, young in miles, 140,000 and still going strong. I also call her "Old Reliable"), and a 2000 Honda Civic EX (that one is the Money Pit). Between Elsie and The Money Pit I have spent $1000 in the last 30 days on payments, maintenance, and rust repair to pass inspection on Elsie. That figure does not include gas...which is like $40-60 a month max. I have wanted a new Fit for the last year. I TRIED to get rid of Elsie with C4C, being that old, she still gets 23-26 combined mpg, so she didn't qualify. I paid $2000 for her 6 almost 7 yrs ago. I'm not complaining. I figured $3500 for Elsie...I would have my new Fit. Nope, not so. Besides if I'm gonna be spending $1000 a month towards a car...I want to be driving the Fit of my dreams...and only pay for one car. GRR.

As far as the whole American vs. Import debate. I'm sorry...Import all the way. Here's my hierarchy: Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, VW. If American cars were made as well as Hondas, Toyotas...don't you think we would see more old American made cars as daily drivers on the road NOT just old hotrods and muscle cars at car shows. Please don't get me wrong I have a healthy respect for those old muscle cars...cameros, corvettes, mustangs. But let's get real here. I drive a classic car with the original engine (1500, Automatic, Sedan) still looking decent...a little rust here and there, but not eating up my car...and she's only left me sit once because of mechanical failure. Once in the 6+ yrs I've owned her. When was the last time you talked to someone with an American made car said that!? Even my ex-boyfriend called her a granny mobile...and I told him to go ahead, make fun of me, cuz when his 95 GMC Jimmy let him sit, my Civic would still be going strong...and I was right.

Okay, I'm done with the semi-rant. I love my Hondas...and I want a new Fit. There. Done.

 

I totally agree with you. I have an antique car a 77 Caddy...great car...love it...but would i rely on it? Not a chance. First of all its old. When I was in college i had a beat up 78 Caddy that was my money pit...when I graduated college I bought a mint one that 77...still a money pit but more pleasing to look at...I've had 4 Hondas...my first was a 89 Accord Lxi Coupe that i got when I was 16...which the parents sold when my grades went down in High school..and guess what when I ran the car fax on it 3 years ago when I bought my 91 Clunker Caddy trade...it was still registered with well over 190k miles. They are great cars, this time around I want to keep the Fit as long as I can. I am loving the gas mileage...the fact its easy to park and I can parallel park in some tiny spaces with this little miracle of a car...I LOVE IT :-)
Oh btw....I ran my 77 Caddy last weekend....used a 1/4 tank and that cost $30 to bring back to full ( i have to use premium) but then when I had to fill up my Fit..it was $13 from half tank!!...(NJ turnpike prices yay! they are cheaper).

 

Oh wow I havent seen that list. The one I saw had a majority of domestics. very cool =]