What “Cash for Clunkers” Was Really All About (Obama lie, are you surprised?)
(www.ericpetersautos.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (61)
sorted by:
Some statistics on the number of clunkers destroyed would have been good, and especially to show what percentage of older cars were removed. The author makes it seem like we just can't find cheap used cars any longer and so that is the sole reason why young people have no incentive to drive.
I maintain that this is BS. I can go on Craigslist or FB Marketplace and find a good selection of cheap cars. Additionally, the population of expensive cars get downgraded to cheap cars in just a few years, replenishing the cheap population. The greater reason that so many young people don't want to drive is sheer laziness and lack of ambition. They are perfectly content accomplishing nothing, with their faces pasted to games and social media on the phones or on the computer. They are complacent and comfortable living at home with parents, having all their needs met. This has nothing to do with availability of cheap cars.
I agree that Obama's goal with Cash for Clunkers was to remove affordable cars and possibly to remove low-tech cars that can be easily maintained. But everything Barry did was to weaken the country. As with many things that Obama did, he failed. We will come roaring back and Barry will be brought to justice.
Agreed; it's a well-known trope that the automobile was an integral part of the post-war American spirit; gradually whittling down the influence of cars is very much in the globalist's interest.
I always thought it was to remove "dumb" cars that couldn't be remotely manipulated and replace them with expensive upgraded cars that owners had less sovereignty over. Like "owning" a cell phone...
I agree, there are many places out there where someone can buy "clunkers", but most people can't fix them themselves anyway. Not to mention, the government and insurance companies are going to slowly increase the cost of ownership on these old cars to the point where you can't afford to own them, anyway.
I'm not implying CASH FOR CLUNKERS didn't have a sinister intent. I'm sure it did. I'm just offering-up an additional consideration that might have been overlooked: our ability to continue to own, repair and drive older vehicles. Lack of capability to repair them. Lack of spare / replacement parts. Etcetera. How long before they shut down the spare / aftermarket parts industries? How long before they make it difficult / illegal to work on your own vehicles? How long before they force the integration of new technology into old(er) vehicles in order to track / control your movements? How long before they will stop licensing your older vehicle because it doesn't meet the latest safety standards? How long before the insurance industry stops insuring your vehicle because the liabilities on them are so high?
They make these moves under the guise of safety or THE COMMON GOOD, but it's nothing but a slow and gradual power grab to manipulate and control you.
Never forget to look deeper than the face value.
Insurance is expensive, gas is expensive, rent is expensive... In my experience (observation), in a group of X amount of friends one will have a car and they all split the costs of owning/operating. I'm not in a populated area but public transportation is more available and cheaper now too. It's not about laziness or any of that, it's economics and convenience. It's adaptation to the world "they" have created. That is the point to be discussed. Not laziness or ambition.