• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Govt to suspend Cash for Clunkers program

***yawnn*** obviously I wasted my time again, trying to engage you. Oh well.

You just made an argument that gas guzzlers and junkers should remain on the roads so that small businesses can repair them and sell them gas. You certainly are not afraid of looking foolish, I'll give you that.
 
You just made an argument that gas guzzlers and junkers should remain on the roads so that small businesses can repair them and sell them gas. You certainly are not afraid of looking foolish, I'll give you that.




Please cease the personal attacks, and stop trying to put words in my mouth.

My point is, that its a lateral move. Obama is taking my money, to get others to buy cars, that will affect other businesses who rely on servicing these older cars....

There is no economic benefit from this free lunch program.
 
I do not see a parallel with this cute story. the government is offering a cash incentive to owners of vehicles known to be the worst polluters. The cash incentive represents only about 10% of the value of a new car. The stimulus is sufficient to encourage people to buy new cars, helping the economy, and also junk their polluting vehicles, which also helps the economy in the long run.
As a libertarian, I understand you would be against any sort of government involvement whatsoever under any circumstances, but perhaps even you can recognize this program is doing some good.

You need to ask yourself where the government got the cash to offer. It comes from you and me. Our government feels they know better how to use that hard earned cash from our wallets than we do.

The other question you need to ask yourself is, what will the car companies and dealers do when the program is over? What will be peoples incentive to buy cars then? I would guess that there are a lot of people that just participated in this program that were considering buying a new car in the next few months or year from now but with then incentive bought it now. That takes even more future sales away.

Mark my words, Obama and the liberals or the car companies will be coming back to congress in a few weeks or months asking for yet more money for this program.
 
You need to ask yourself where the government got the cash to offer. It comes from you and me. Our government feels they know better how to use that hard earned cash from our wallets than we do.

The other question you need to ask yourself is, what will the car companies and dealers do when the program is over? What will be peoples incentive to buy cars then? I would guess that there are a lot of people that just participated in this program that were considering buying a new car in the next few months or year from now but with then incentive bought it now. That takes even more future sales away.

Mark my words, Obama and the liberals or the car companies will be coming back to congress in a few weeks or months asking for yet more money for this program.

Apparently Government isn't gonna suspend clunker program. Faux is hammering away on that program. Like their, and Republican, criticisms that Guvnamint run health care will bring ruin, the gang that says NO is copping large amounts of green in their efforts to gain traction against a program that is obviously building buyer confidence and sending product flying out the door.

Like their Health care hand wringing and dooms saying they are lying and being hypocrites at the same time. With their health care claim they were offered the chance to vote against Medicate, a single payer government run health care program and they ran the other way voting 100% in favor of Medicare.

Now, when offered the opportunity in the House of Representatives to vote their consciences about half of the republican minority voted to add funds to the Clunker program.

Way to go guys.
 
You just made an argument that gas guzzlers and junkers should remain on the roads so that small businesses can repair them and sell them gas. You certainly are not afraid of looking foolish, I'll give you that.

Yeah! How foolish to want those jobs to survive, so they can pay taxes on those salaries. That's completely foolish, when we can kill those jobs and raise taxes on everyone else that does have a job, then turn around and take that same tax revenue and pay unemployment to those who have lost their jobs. Works for me!

Why is it that most Libbos don't have a clue about how things work in the real world?
 
Apparently Government isn't gonna suspend clunker program. Faux is hammering away on that program. Like their, and Republican, criticisms that Guvnamint run health care will bring ruin, the gang that says NO is copping large amounts of green in their efforts to gain traction against a program that is obviously building buyer confidence and sending product flying out the door.

Like their Health care hand wringing and dooms saying they are lying and being hypocrites at the same time. With their health care claim they were offered the chance to vote against Medicate, a single payer government run health care program and they ran the other way voting 100% in favor of Medicare.

Now, when offered the opportunity in the House of Representatives to vote their consciences about half of the republican minority voted to add funds to the Clunker program.

Way to go guys.

Government give-aways aren't going to build consumer confidence.
 
Yeah! How foolish to want those jobs to survive, so they can pay taxes on those salaries. That's completely foolish, when we can kill those jobs and raise taxes on everyone else that does have a job, then turn around and take that same tax revenue and pay unemployment to those who have lost their jobs. Works for me!

Why is it that most Libbos don't have a clue about how things work in the real world?

Oh, because I want Hummers off the road means I want to kill small business? Please, how can I even have a conversation with someone who makes such ridiculous claims?
 
Oh, because I want Hummers off the road means I want to kill small business? Please, how can I even have a conversation with someone who makes such ridiculous claims?

Well, if what you want puts people out of work, then what you want doesn't mean jack. I'm one of those idiots that, for some crazy reason, wants this country to prosper and for the economy to grow...call me crazy, but I actually live off the economy.

Let explain it to you like this: if you remove a product from the market, then the people who produce that product no longer have a job. There goes your beloved tax revenue that you want to use to support the Welfare Class.
 
Well, if what you want puts people out of work, then what you want doesn't mean jack. I'm one of those idiots that, for some crazy reason, wants this country to prosper and for the economy to grow...call me crazy, but I actually live off the economy.

Let explain it to you like this: if you remove a product from the market, then the people who produce that product no longer have a job. There goes your beloved tax revenue that you want to use to support the Welfare Class.

So if we add cars to the market, then we add jobs? Thanks for the support!:2wave:
 
So if we add cars to the market, then we add jobs? Thanks for the support!:2wave:

No, simply adding cars to the market doesn't creates jobs. Producing goods and services that meet market demands creates jobs.
 
...remove a product from the market, then the people who produce that product no longer have a job. There goes your beloved tax revenue that you want to use to support the Welfare Class.

...die from cancer produced by polluted air caused by a product removes a jobholder and an income from the economy.

There goes your beloved ideal that unlimited free market economy can do no harm.

What makes a welfare class?

Other's Greed!

:doh
 
No, simply adding cars to the market doesn't creates jobs. Producing goods and services that meet market demands creates jobs.

Creating demand for products creates jobs.
 
...die from cancer produced by polluted air caused by a product removes a jobholder and an income from the economy.

To much drama in that one. I don't think that it's credible to say that car ehaust causes canser, yet.



What makes a welfare class?

Other's Greed!

:doh

Lazy ass people who are encouraged to live on the government tit, creates a welfare class. You're really reaching, if you say that people are on welfare is the fault of rich folks.
 
No, simply adding cars to the market doesn't creates jobs. Producing goods and services that meet market demands creates jobs.

I didn't realize new cars were invincible. Our kids are going to be paying for the stimulus package right? If all of the cars on the market are breaking down now (providing jobs for contemporary mechanics) but new cars don't break down, you're proposing having less jobs for our children? Since the next generation is going to be paying for the stimulus package, why not set them up with jobs in the future when the cars we sell today are going to be breaking down?
:spin::spin::spin:
 
What spin? I don't care if I support Muslims. I'm not threatened by buying items from China or buying oil from the Middle East. It's a global economy and I don't believe that every Muslim is some radical extremist trying to kill me. The way some Conservatives feel about Muslims though...

Excuse me, you stated earlier "Keep supporting those Muslims you care so much about in the Middle East" or something to that affect. Now when analyzing that statement you either ment A) Keep supporting the Radical Muslims or B) Keep supporting the average Muslim. I am going to assume the poster you were attacking worries about the radical faction, you know the ones who attacked us on 9/11? Not the average, sane, normal peace loving muslim, you know the "non radicals"?

You basically ridiculed the poster for using a SUV that gets money from Saudi Arabia, than when he says "you do the same thing, aka with a computer" you say "i'm not afraid of supporting Saudi Arabia or the radicals" Pretty much in a nutshell. By the way, I have met retarded liberals, conservatives, libertarians, Independants, whites, blacks, etc etc, there are dumb racist people everywhere you look so don't think it's just conservatives.
 
Creating demand for products creates jobs.

You can't create demand. Now, that is foolish. Only consumers can create demand



I didn't realize new cars were invincible. Our kids are going to be paying for the stimulus package right? If all of the cars on the market are breaking down now (providing jobs for contemporary mechanics) but new cars don't break down, you're proposing having less jobs for our children? Since the next generation is going to be paying for the stimulus package, why not set them up with jobs in the future when the cars we sell today are going to be breaking down?
:spin::spin::spin:


Well, you got the, "spin, spin, spin", part right.
 
Last edited:
Creating demand for products creates jobs.
The government cannot "create demand" for a product. They can promote a produce thru incentives, but they cannot create demand.

The consumer market creates demand based on a number of factors. Need, cost, the amount of disposable income available and the value one places on the good or service in question are factors involved in creating product demand. Having the government confiscate money from one group of people and then offering it to another group of people to guide their product choice is not creating demand. It is incentivizing a market already with a demand with confiscated money.
 
To much drama in that one. I don't think that it's credible to say that car ehaust causes canser, yet.





Lazy ass people who are encouraged to live on the government tit, creates a welfare class. You're really reaching, if you say that people are on welfare is the fault of rich folks.

Rich folk aren't to blame. They pray and tithe. They are the good guys. Its those who who don't look right, don't act right, don't eat right, aren't educated, they're to blame.

If there are ten items and there is money enough to buy nine items what is the expected outcome if the field is a fair one?

At least one guy doesn't get an item. Is he lazy because he either hasn't the money or the item? Or is the supply demand ratio such that some must be without items.

Some things don't require generated demand, the demand is constant. If it is rigged that some are favored for positions is is not reasonable to conclude that some of those not favored will not get jobs if since there cannot be enough supply in a market economy.
 
You can't create demand. Now, that is foolish. Only the market can create demand

.

Dude "you" ARE the market. Who would have bought a million ShamWOW's without some idiot creating demand?
 
The government cannot "create demand" for a product. They can promote a produce thru incentives, but they cannot create demand.

The consumer market creates demand based on a number of factors. Need, cost, the amount of disposable income available and the value one places on the good or service in question are factors involved in creating product demand. Having the government confiscate money from one group of people and then offering it to another group of people to guide their product choice is not creating demand. It is incentivizing a market already with a demand with confiscated money.

If I confiscate enough money from one individual to provide 1000 people with enough money to meed their needs (demands) I am generating demand from taxes. Your model fails because you don't correct for units (buying and using).
 
Rich folk aren't to blame. They pray and tithe. They are the good guys. Its those who who don't look right, don't act right, don't eat right, aren't educated, they're to blame.

If there are ten items and there is money enough to buy nine items what is the expected outcome if the field is a fair one?

At least one guy doesn't get an item. Is he lazy because he either hasn't the money or the item? Or is the supply demand ratio such that some must be without items.

Some things don't require generated demand, the demand is constant. If it is rigged that some are favored for positions is is not reasonable to conclude that some of those not favored will not get jobs if since there cannot be enough supply in a market economy.
The only rigging of the supply and demand chain is by our government. All things being equal and without government interference, the laws of supply and demand work. If there is a demand for an item with resources available to purchase the item, the market will respond by producing more of the item.

However, when you introduce government incentives or disincentives into the picture, you are artificially tipping the scales of supply and demand in the favor of a product or service that best suits a political agenda as opposed to the wants and needs of the market.
 
Rich folk aren't to blame. They pray and tithe. They are the good guys. Its those who who don't look right, don't act right, don't eat right, aren't educated, they're to blame.

If there are ten items and there is money enough to buy nine items what is the expected outcome if the field is a fair one?

You buy nine items. It's called, "prioritizing", which means if you have to choose between a can of beans for supper and a 6-pack of beer, you buy the beans.

At least one guy doesn't get an item. Is he lazy because he either hasn't the money or the item? Or is the supply demand ratio such that some must be without items.

Some things don't require generated demand, the demand is constant. If it is rigged that some are favored for positions is is not reasonable to conclude that some of those not favored will not get jobs if since there cannot be enough supply in a market economy.


It's called, "personal responsibility", and at some point every living person has to take their share. I'm not educated, I don't eat right and some times don't act right and I've been quite successful. And, why? Because I got off my ass, out into the big bad world and worked like hell to get what I have. I'm white and male, so I didn't get any special breaks from anyone. Who the hell are you to tell me I don't deserve it, or that I need to give it to someone else who doesn't have anough ambition to pay their own light bill?

It appears that your answer, is to make everybody poor, then that way the playing field will be equal, in your mind.
 
Dude "you" ARE the market. Who would have bought a million ShamWOW's without some idiot creating demand?

Probably not. However I would have bought bread, meat, milk, vegatables, energy, shelter, without someone 'creating' demand. I'm wondering what idiot(s) came up with the idea that it was good business over produce farm products just because he wanted to gain advantage by driving prices down so others would have to sell their land to him.
 
If I confiscate enough money from one individual to provide 1000 people with enough money to meed their needs (demands) I am generating demand from taxes. Your model fails because you don't correct for units (buying and using).

That's an idiotic and suicidal policy.
 
Back
Top Bottom