C4C sure dried up the unlimited supply of crasher Galants. My rig of choice.
C4C sure dried up the unlimited supply of crasher Galants. My rig of choice.
oldsaw wrote:92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:NOT racist, but it's always good the throw the "card" to disguise what is obviously a "commie" plot.Aeromoto wrote: Hoopties for Homeez is ignorant and even a bit of a racist statement. I don't know your neighbor's financial situation, but if you remember at the time, no one could get financing unless you had stellar credit, or had the means to pay cash for the car like we did. I doubt there were too many "Homeez?" that took advantage of C4C.How is that racist? "Homeez" isn't a race...Bottom line - it was a stoopid plan that benefitted a few people but not enough of them to justify the ROI. It felt good, though.
Would C4C let you take the 22's off the box Chevy before you traded it in?
Don't forget the banks.. $4000 spent by the gov. Ended up putting 20-25k+ worth of financing on banks.
Datsun1500 wrote:Aeromoto wrote: Hoopties for Homeez is ignorant and even a bit of a racist statement. I don't know your neighbor's financial situation, but if you remember at the time, no one could get financing unless you had stellar credit, or had the means to pay cash for the car like we did. I doubt there were too many "Homeez?" that took advantage of C4C.Wrong. Over 90% of the cash for clunker deals were finance deals. It was a huge boost to the dealers for a short time.
I din't say they weren'y fiinanced, but you had to have above average credit at the time to buy a car/house/whatever.
We did a Clunkers For Cash " deal made a killing what a media blast that we took advantage of . Still got the banner and and the memories of the sales
the worst part about the whole program was the jerkoff dealer employees going out and making vids for youtube of them laughing while they destroyed vettes, camaros, mustangs, and other cars that the guys here would love to get their hands on for cheap track cars, not the mention all the big block 3/4 ton 4x4 suburbans that we could use to tow them with.
aussiesmg wrote: That and the added 91% increase in fuel prices since the day he was inaugurated.
Huh? Highest gas prices I ever paid were under GW Bush
Aeromoto wrote: Hoopties for Homeez is ignorant and even a bit of a racist statement. I don't know your neighbor's financial situation, but if you remember at the time, no one could get financing unless you had stellar credit, or had the means to pay cash for the car like we did. I doubt there were too many "Homeez?" that took advantage of C4C.
apparently you don't know poopshovel either. he's half black.
ThePhranc wrote: The worse part about C4C isn't that I had money taken from me and given to some one else so they could buy a car I couldn't afford, its the waste of so many cars and car parts.
That's the lousiest argument ever, I am sure some other peoples tax dollars go to fund things that make YOUR life better. Stop being so selfish, we live in the best country in the world and everyone should have a good life including some luxuries. All of the "wellfare" that has people up in arms can be paid for by the spare change the military has in its couch cushions. Lets stop wasting money on new weapons that don't make any sense in today's global political climate. We could have the welfare and pay our debts.
AngryCorvair wrote: apparently you don't know poopshovel either. he's half black.
O'rly?
SupraWes wrote: Lets stop wasting money on new weapons that don't make any sense in today's global political climate. We could have the welfare and pay our debts.
That's a pretty strong contention, Wes. Got any hard numbers about spending on speculative weapons systems and how cutting that funding covers welfare costs and pays down the debt?
SupraWes wrote: ...we live in the best country in the world and everyone should work to have a good life including the luxuries they can afford.
FTFY
Sorry, pursuit of happiness doesn't mean you actually get it, just that you can try.
SupraWes wrote:aussiesmg wrote: That and the added 91% increase in fuel prices since the day he was inaugurated.Huh? Highest gas prices I ever paid were under GW Bush
Gas prices are 91% higher today than when Obama took office in Jan 2009.
Aeromoto wrote: Hoopties for Homeez is ignorant and even a bit of a racist statement. I don't know your neighbor's financial situation, but if you remember at the time, no one could get financing unless you had stellar credit, or had the means to pay cash for the car like we did. I doubt there were too many "Homeez?" that took advantage of C4C.
You should probably know what the berkeley you're talking about before you call someone ignorant, and should probably have the tiniest bit of a clue what the berkeley you're talking about before you call someone a racist.
Google "Van Jones" since you obviously don't know anything about your pimp. My bad. "Hoopties for Hybrids" - His words, not mine, describing his program, which you benefitted from. If racism offends you, read his book and get a good feel for what he thinks about white folk.
By the way, the Integra still comes hard in the paint (you may have to google that one too.) Enjoy the PT loser.
"Homeez" couldn't take advantage of C4C because they've got no cash and their credit's berkeleyed up? Is that what you're saying? Or did I miss something?
HiTempguy wrote:AngryCorvair wrote: apparently you don't know poopshovel either. he's half black.O'rly?
He must at least be brown... you know, from the poop. 
Joe Gearin wrote:Otto Maddox wrote: In reply to poopshovel: How is this different than people who bought new air conditioners with a huge energy efficiency tax credit. I didn't need one at the time. My sister's just happened to die that year, so she made out great. I am not saying I like these kinds of credits. I am just saying I don't have a problem with people taking advantage of them.Well said.......don't hate the player, hate the game. It is perfectly acceptable to think C4C was a misguided, or inappropriate program. It is not fair to demonize those that took part in a legal governmental program regardless of what your opinion of that program was. They didn't break the law, they didn't "steal" your money, they did what they thought was best for themselves and their families. For instance--- A buddy of mine has 5 kids. He works his ass off, plays by the rules and is raising a great family of hard-working, respectful kids. He doesn't get food stamps, he isn't on welfare, and he is about as far from being a drain on society as you can be. His family had a worn out old full-size van that they traded on a new GMC Acadia. Because of the C4C he got a screaming deal. This was good for him and his family. If you don't like the law, change the lawmakers. Don't paint those that follow the law as the criminals. geez.....
100% on board with the "Don't hate the player, hate the game" mentality, but I wonder how many people receiving welfare say the same thing regarding wealthy people taking advantage of subsidies and loopholes. Hint: Even if they knew what either of those things were, it would cease to be a "Don't hate the player...." scenario.
My argument was in response to whoever effectively said "Chalk one up for the little guy!" or whatever. This was a fail/fail move. I'm glad it worked out for your buddy. It did not work out for me, and I paid for it. Smart play on squishing one running, gas guzzling POS (presumably) GM product for another. Pretty sure that's awesome for the environment, at least according to Van Jones, who's a really smart, productive member of society.
Sorry but Van Jones is not on my radar. And who is my "pimp"? I'll assume you're speaking of Obama? I didn't vote for Obama, nor am I an Obama supporter. I am not a republican or democrat, nor am I a conservative or a liberal.
If I had to best describe my politcal views, it would be this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
And if you don't believe this ^^^ is the truth, good luck to you all.
And as far as the PT, it came with a full warranty for as long as we care to own it, so if it's a p.o.s., it's really Chrysler's problem, not mine.
'Hoopties for Homeez.' That's a GREAT idea for a LeMons theme!
SupraWes wrote:ThePhranc wrote: The worse part about C4C isn't that I had money taken from me and given to some one else so they could buy a car I couldn't afford, its the waste of so many cars and car parts.That's the lousiest argument ever, I am sure some other peoples tax dollars go to fund things that make YOUR life better. Stop being so selfish, we live in the best country in the world and everyone should have a good life including some luxuries. All of the "wellfare" that has people up in arms can be paid for by the spare change the military has in its couch cushions. Lets stop wasting money on new weapons that don't make any sense in today's global political climate. We could have the welfare and pay our debts.
It's selfish to want to keep my money so I can provide for my family? Is it also selfish to want others peoples money because you don't provide for your family?
I'm more than happy to pay taxes for common use services but not to prop up other people who don't hel p them selves. I've been dirt poor and homeless and didn't take one penny of government funds that is taken by threat of force. What I did do was work every day at a Labour Ready site scrapping and clawing my way out of poverty and into the ownership ranks of society.
What do you think will happen when the US stops building a military? Seriously have you actually thought that through? We don't need the welfare as its not a Constitutionally mandated part of government like defense is.
Walfare, sadly, is a by product of civilized society. What shall you do with the people on welfare it it's ended tomorrow? Deport them? Put them in ovens or gas chambers?
Same deal with the "mandatory drug testing for welfare" issue that's all the rage now. Sure, it sounds great and makes you fell all warm and fuzzy in a patriotic Glen Beck sorta way. But, lets explore the realities: Ok, so a welfare recipient is drug addicted. You cut off their welfare money. Do you think the drug use stops? Uhhmm, no. They will then start stealing for their drug money. They will break in your children's window at night looking for 20 bucks to feed the monkey, they will mug your wife at the mall, they will become a burden on law enforcement, and ultimately they will enter the prison system at a cost of $60k per year each, and all of a sudden that $15k a year they were getting on welfare doesn't seem like that bad of a deal.
So unless you think our culture is ready to accept 30 million more people in our prisons or digest death camps, you might want to get over the whole welfare thing. Welfare will be here as long as this country can sustain it, which may or may not be much longer.
Aeromoto, king of the extremes.
Aeromoto wrote: Walfare, sadly, is a by product of civilized society. What shall you do with the people on welfare it it's ended tomorrow? Deport them? Put them in ovens or gas chambers? Same deal with the "mandatory drug testing for welfare" issue that's all the rage now. Sure, it sounds great and makes you fell all warm and fuzzy in a patriotic Glen Beck sorta way. But, lets explore the realities: Ok, so a welfare recipient is drug addicted. You cut off their welfare money. Do you think the drug use stops? Uhhmm, no. They will then start stealing for their drug money. They will break in your children's window at night looking for 20 bucks to feed the monkey, they will mug your wife at the mall, they will become a burden on law enforcement, and ultimately they will enter the prison system at a cost of $60k per year each, and all of a sudden that $15k a year they were getting on welfare doesn't seem like that bad of a deal. So unless you think our culture is ready to accept 30 million more people in our prisons or digest death camps, you might want to get over the whole welfare thing. Welfare will be here as long as this country can sustain it, which may or may not be much longer.
Welfare is not a product of civilized society it is a product of 20th century "progressivism".
You take the people on welfare and put them on workfare after they pass a drug test.
For the losers in life who will steal to get their fix you simply allow people to protect them selves from criminal scum. No need to be a burden on anyone but the crematorium. No one is mugging my girlfriend in the mall and getting away with it unscathed.
Prisons wont be over crowded when the inmates die off from their occupational hazards.
Your realities are just fear-mongering tripe in a lame attempt to paint people as helpless and in need of the government to take care of them.
phranc- as far as "progressivism", it's what we have arrived at, like it or not, and we're not going back. "Workfare" will never happen in this country.
Your idea of "I'm a tough guy and I'm gonna kick criminal ass" and "sending them to the crematorium" is about as founded in reality as a Fast and Furious movie.
.
...and as far as "workfare"? Work where? and with who? These are people who have some sort of dysfunction, as well as having no education, skills, work ethic, or ambition. I don't know what any of you people do for a living, but are YOU willing to hire them and/or work side by side with them? Or is it someone elses problem to hire and deal with them?
I've worked in 3 industries in my life- heavy equipment, motorsports, and now aviation, all industries where you often have to trust your co workers with your lives. I can't tell you that there's no room for these people in any of those industries, and not to mention there aren't enough jobs for the people who want to work and are capable to hold a job.
Sir, I'm afraid YOUR realities are in fact founded in an America that exists nowhere outside of a Toby Keith video
Aeromoto wrote: Same deal with the "mandatory drug testing for welfare" issue that's all the rage now. Sure, it sounds great and makes you fell all warm and fuzzy in a patriotic Glen Beck sorta way. But, lets explore the realities:
Question, why do I have to piss in a cup to get a job anywhere, and welfare folks don't have to piss in a cup to receive government monies?
Seems pretty berkeleying stupid to me.
And as far as the whole "they'll start stealing" argument goes, most of the people around here either on welfare or who qualify for it are already berkeleying stealing. The dude who broke into my mothers house to steal copper had six goddamn kids and hasn't worked in years, in addition to belonging to a family of scum.
Petty crime and E36 M3 for drug money already happens, knocking some people off the dole because they aren't pissing clean isn't going to turn millions of shiny happy people into criminals, it's going to stop giving E36 M3heads tax money until they either clean up or die.
And to circumvent your inevitable "heartless conservative" nonsense, I haven't paid taxes since 2004, haven't worked since 2006 and am berkeleying BROKE. I still think piss tests for welfare is a good idea.
Aeromoto wrote: ...and as far as "workfare"? Work where? and with who? These are people who have some sort of dysfunction, as well as having no education, skills, work ethic, or ambition. I don't know what any of you people do for a living, but are YOU willing to hire them and/or work side by side with them? Or is it someone elses problem to hire and deal with them? Sir, I'm afraid YOUR realities are in fact founded in an America that exists nowhere outside of a Toby Keith video
Worked HVAC with a guy on parole, used to like the nose candy and stole to support his habit, he cleaned the berkeley up and was doing his damndest to turn his life around. I've done plenty of side E36 M3 and actual jobs with people with criminal records and plenty of people who should have criminal records.
Not having work ethic or ambition is their own berkeleying fault and they shouldn't get any goddamn special treatment because they're lazy.(and yes, no ambition = lazy)
I'm a high school dropout and never had an issue finding a job. Only reason I'm not working now is because I have to find something I can do with a bum knee, and that knocks most of my usual choices out the window.
Try going to a field where someones life doesn't rely on your coworkers and you'd be surprised at the kinds of people who can get a job if they give a little effort.
You'll need to log in to post.
