Congress

Cash4Clunkers

|

can't touch this

In today's Washington Examiner, Bret Jacobson writes a coherent sentence that finally unites the dream couple of Henry Waxman and M.C. Hammer, while offering a snappy analysis of the idiocy of the "cash for clunkers" program intended get old, dirty cars off the road:

The business model for the As-Seen-On-TV phenomena is simple: Convince individuals to give up something of value and give back something of considerably less cost. In the marketplace, that cost is often justified through added value. In this instance, [Cash4Gold] provides an easy method of liquidating a commodity, gold.

In the political world, however, there's a reverse effect. Instead of MC Hammer and Ed McMahon offering to buy your old jewelry for a fraction of the price, it's Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA, and Rep. John Dingell, D-MI, offering to pay more than your clunker's worth. And hey, who needs catchy pitchmen when you're throwing around "free" money, right?

Read the whole thing here.

NEXT: John Conyers' Radio Tax

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. give back something of considerably less cost. In the marketplace, that cost is often justified through added value.

    Your definition of “coherent” is not the same as mine, apparently.

  2. Big man, pig man
    Ha ha, charade you are

    Yo, fuck Henry Waxman and fuck his snout.

  3. As they say, politics is show business for ugly people.

  4. Why doesn’t he just GIVE me (my money back) a 4k tax credit to purchase a new car? Oh right. I won’t buy a car from Obama Motors and the act won’t be wrapped up in ‘GREEN’.

    Ruby Rhod: SuperGreen

  5. Not much ‘better’ than places where your vehicle can be ‘taken’ by the local government for not being in just the right shape. Commonly known as “clunker laws” I think.

    OT (other than it is a car thing): DC, in addition to parking-ticketing cars in people’s own driveways is now going to ticket people who do not move their cars for street sweepers, with a street sweeper cam system.

    Outrage over the new policy boiled over outside the L’Enfant Plaza Metro Station Wednesday. After city workers booted his truck, an immigrant known as ‘Zack’ pulled a knife and started cutting his own truck tires. In the process he somehow cut off part of his finger.

    Sorry OLS, Zack is Syrian.

  6. Sorry OLS, Zack is Syrian.

    No, Zack is a moron.

  7. Waxman is so fucking ugly that I literally can’t think straight when I see his horrific visage. Luckily, my superficiality is correct in this case because he’s an even huger piece of shit than his appalling honker and its demonic nostrils. They’re Lovecraftian in their ability to swallow your soul.

  8. Wouldn’t an “Old Clunker”, by definition, be off the road in a few months, anyway?

    Hey, I’m just askin’

  9. Wouldn’t an “Old Clunker”, by definition, be off the road in a few months, anyway?

    Not by their new definition. They are really talking about anything that is not a hybrid or plug-in.

  10. T,

    Zack is a moron.

    That too.

  11. Zack is a hardcore tax protester.

    I want to have his baby.

  12. It’s *possible* that this just isn’t Jacobsen’s best work; however, based on this piece, I must say he is an excellent candidate for the Steve Chapman Memorial “Do Not Read” Bin.

    As always, Congress can suck every trace of sense or usefulness out of any sensible idea.

    The crunchy nugget of truth in this concept is that the marginal cost of reducing some “unit” of pollution is extremely high, for new cars. Current technology has wrung something like 97% of the “bad stuff” out of automobile tailpipe emissions. Much more bang for the buck can be attained by retiring older cars.

    That said, the plan currently working its way through the sausage emporium is bad. Not just garden-variety awful, but spectacularly awful.

  13. Epi, do you suppose he snorts while he forces unfortunate pages to give him prostate massages?

  14. If they’re going down this road, just make slushboxes illegal and mandate stick shifts.

  15. So I can turn in my crappy Camaro? And get money for it? Sweet! Suck it taxpayers!

  16. For all Waxman’s evil, at least he got something good stuck in my head.

  17. If they’re going down this road, just make slushboxes illegal and mandate stick shifts.

    You must have gotten confused and thought you were in a country where people knew how to drive.

  18. “You must have gotten confused and thought you were in a country where people knew how to drive.”

    Exactly. That law would not only improve fuel economy and make cars more fun to drive, but remove all the dipshits from the road.

  19. Now I feel guilty. I took advantage of a program like this in California, and got back $1000 for a car that cost only $300. Of course, I’m not completely guilty, because California won’t let you drive a car that can’t pass their stringent smog test (mine couldn’t).

  20. Epi, do you suppose he snorts while he forces unfortunate pages to give him prostate massages?

    Dude, you’re making me sick. I think he uses those orifices for sexual purposes. His craigslist ad says “fuck my schnoz”.

  21. So I’m gonna give up my perfectly wonderful, loaded with options, 20 year old car that cost me $1,000 and still gets 30 mpg on the highway with 3 people and luggage (and would pass emissions even in Cal), so that I can saddle myself with more debt in a less comfortable vehicle?

    What’s not to love?!

  22. John Dingell’s career makes a strong case for term limits.

    In 10 years 95% of these of crap autos will be off the roads anyway. If a problem is going away without doing a goddam thing, maybe we should, I dunno, not do a goddam thing?

  23. If they’re going down this road, just make slushboxes illegal and mandate stick shifts.

    Screw that noise. I drove a stick for 20 years and DC’s shitty traffic forced me to give it up for a 6-speed auto. I wouldn’t mind having a stick again, but not until I live somewhere else.

    Exactly. That law would not only improve fuel economy and make cars more fun to drive, but remove all the dipshits from the road.

    Many of the newer automatics get better mileage than their stick counterparts now. As to dipshits on the road, sorry, switching out the tranny won’t help you. That will take high explosives and/or frame-mounted .30 cals.

  24. Waxman is all the evidence you need to teach your kids to not pick on the really ugly and weak kids at school. They will grow and up and seriously avenge their ill treatment at your hands.

    Instead of beating them up, be kind to them and help them to become productive members of society. Save a kid today, prevent a congressman tomorrow.

  25. So I can turn in my crappy Camaro? And get money for it? Sweet! Suck it taxpayers!

    Naga-

    Only if you want to go to an approved manufacturer’s dealer and buy a brand new (approved) car from him.

    Speaaking of new cars…

    I drove one of those new Malibus (a rental) several hundred miles, last week. If anybody thinks that shitbox will save GM, I have some bad news for them.

    It sucked.

    SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSuuuuuuucked!

    Don’t any of those “design gurus” ever actually sit in the driver’s seat and look out? Outward visibility is fucking abominable. The top of the dash throws a reflection on the inside of the windshield you can hardly see through; I had a raging headache after the first fifty miles. If you try to turn your head and back the thing up, you have no idea at all where the back of the car is (if you can see anything but the headrest, that is).

    Turn out the lights, and lock the doors, Fritz.

  26. I drove a stick for 20 years and DC’s shitty traffic forced me to give it up for a 6-speed auto.

    Same here (only it was Dallas). Stick shift + stop-and-go traffic = not good.

  27. That will take high explosives and/or frame-mounted .30 cals.

    You’re on to something there.

  28. Preview is your friend. Preview is your friend.

    I drove one of those new Malibus (a rental) several hundred miles, last week. If anybody thinks that shitbox will save GM, I have some bad news for them.

    That’s because it’s a Vauxhall Vectra. The boys at Top Gear mock it whenever they can.

  29. Same here (only it was Dallas). Stick shift + stop-and-go traffic = not good.

    Ice storm in 2000. 4.5 hours of curb-to-curb, bumper-to-bumper, stop and go traffic all the way home. Never again.

    I wanted to chew my left leg off at the 3 hour mark.

  30. “Same here (only it was Dallas). Stick shift + stop-and-go traffic = not good.”

    I have been driving a stick for 35 years in just about every major city from DC to San Francisco. You either have it or you don’t.

  31. i have it

  32. I’ve driven sticks and automatics. Driving a stick makes you neither cooler nor a better driver.

    Real men are secure enoughto let a machine shift for them.

  33. Driving a stick *WHILE SMOKING* makes you cooler.

  34. Real men are secure enoughto let a machine shift for them.

    Whereas metrosexuals like paddle shifters.

  35. Automatics are for towing shit or for creeping along in heavy traffic.

  36. Driving a stick *WHILE SMOKING* and chewing a toothpick as you drink a can of beer makes you cooler.

  37. I’d PAY cash to see Waxman loaded into a clunker and run through a car crusher.

  38. Automatics are for towing shit or for creeping along in heavy traffic.

    I learned how to drive stick in a tow truck. You will see very few automatics in tow trucks.

    But yeah, they rule for heavy traffic and for highway BJs too.

  39. I guess I need to turn in my libertarian card, cause I never saw the value of Stripes.

  40. wrong thread

  41. I learned how to drive stick in a tow truck. You will see very few automatics in tow trucks.

    Sticks in big diesel rigs, yup.

  42. I guess I need to turn in my libertarian card, cause I never saw the value of Stripes.

    Yes, kinnath, you Warty and phalkor must all stimulate the prostate of Henry Waxman as punishment.

  43. Every time I see a picture of Waxman I think of Hans Moleman, even though Hans has a much smaller nose.

  44. Current technology has wrung something like 97% of the “bad stuff” out of automobile tailpipe emissions.

    More like 99.95%. One smoker is worth literally thousands of new cars emissions-wise. The when-warm emissions is essentially zero on new cars. Nevertheless, California is researching more sensitive emissions testing apparatus since the current ones aren’t good enough given modern emissions controls. That proves to me it’s not about the environment. If it were, we’d stop bothering with improving auto emissions, that battle is won. No, it’s about hating cars and the freedom they give you.

  45. The crunchy nugget of truth in this concept is that the marginal cost of reducing some “unit” of pollution is extremely high, for new cars. Current technology has wrung something like 97% of the “bad stuff” out of automobile tailpipe emissions. Much more bang for the buck can be attained by retiring older cars.

    Yes, the nugget of truth is for regular old emissions. There, it’s absolutely correct that the advancements over the years are so enormous that getting old cars off the road and replacing them with any new car would be a big savings.

    Here, though, they’re talking about gasoline MPG, which is far different. There have been big improvements in engine technology, but they’ve generally gone towards squeezing more horsepower out of engines with the same fuel consumption, rather than keeping horses the same but increasing MPG.

    Naturally, this is because there are smaller tradeoffs with regular tailpipe emissions. No one wants that, and they’re pretty satisfied in letting those go down at some moderate cost. But there’s no real way around the tradeoff between fuel consumption and horsepower. People have generally been satisfied with their fuel consumption and pushed for more power. Only way to change that, if you want, is higher fuel prices. This plan is a sideshow.

  46. “More like 99.95%. One smoker is worth literally thousands of new cars emissions-wise. The when-warm emissions is essentially zero on new cars. Nevertheless, California is researching more sensitive emissions testing apparatus since the current ones aren’t good enough given modern emissions controls. That proves to me it’s not about the environment. If it were, we’d stop bothering with improving auto emissions, that battle is won. No, it’s about hating cars and the freedom they give you.”

    Bingo – that’s exactly right.

    I read a recent story about several counties in the area where I live being “out of compliance” with emission standards and would have to be taking remedial action.

    Why are they out of compliance? Not becuase the actual air quality is gettting worse. No it’s because the government changed the standards and made them more stringent.

    They keep constantly changing the goalposts to try and force everyone to change their whole lifestyle.

    Government is supposed to be the servant of the people – not the master of them.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.