Tapscott: Cash for Clunkers Will Become Permanent

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

When it comes to federal teat suckling, Mark Tapscott’s got the inside line. I don’t mean Edmunds and I don’t mean he does it personally; Mark knows a lot about how the beltway boys reach into the taxpayer’s trousers to play pocket pool. So, while Tapscott joins the MSM (and TTAC) in announcing the bogus Cash for Clunkers program’s pre-mature hiatus, he’s out in front re: the C.A.R.S. program’s long term fate. Mark says the bill was secretly written with permanent marker. In other words, the billion dollar (for starters) Cash for Clunker boondoggle’s a keeper. The writer gives five—count ’em five!— reasons for car dealers to be perpetually cheerful about automotive euthanasia . . .

First, anytime Congress and the White House see an opportunity to take tax dollars and give them to somebody who can vote, they will do it . . .

Second . . . [it’s] an irresistible opportunity for the Washington politicians and bureaucrats to expand their power and perogatives over the rest of us . . .

Third, the timing is perfect . . . In just four days, Cash-for-Clunkers has given new life to the whole idea that government spending is the way to stimulate the economy. People are more receptive now than they will ever be to the idea of making a temporary measure permanent.

Fourth, Washington money is like crack cocaine . . .

Finally, the media won’t tell the whole story of Cash-for-Clunkers. Reporting on it will emphasize two things – Happy dealers and buyers getting new cars and trucks, and worried dealers wondering what will happen when the program ends.

What won’t be reported will be the actual cost of the program to the taxpayers, the transitory economic stimulus it provides, and how the most severe consequences will be felt among low-inomes people who must depend on used cars and trucks for their transportation.

No argument here.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 24 comments
  • VLAD VLAD on Jul 31, 2009

    Rod Panhard, If I could look at it like that then I would be laughing my arse off.

  • Rivercat30 Rivercat30 on Jul 31, 2009
    Japans debt is about to hit 200% of GDP. The US is at about 60% debt held by the public. How did things in Japan get so out of hand? They waited too long to before they began their simulus. Maybe, but I don't think that's been established as fact. I've read plenty of analyses that suggest that the failure was due to the general uselessness of the projects themselves and to the standard pork and payola that one expects to accompany a government redistribution of the productive's money. Not saying your assertion is wrong, just that it may be one of a host of factors which determined the outcome of Japan's stimulus efforts. I believe they also raised taxes when they started to get concerned about the deficit, which some believe killed the initial stimulus momentum. Sounds eerily similar to some other things I've heard in the news.......
  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh I'd rather they have the old sweep gauges, the hhuuggee left to right speedometer from the 40's and 50's where the needle went from lefty to right like in my 1969 Nova
  • Buickman I like it!
  • JMII Hyundai Santa Cruz, which doesn't do "truck" things as well as the Maverick does.How so? I see this repeated often with no reference to exactly what it does better.As a Santa Cruz owner the only things the Mav does better is price on lower trims and fuel economy with the hybrid. The Mav's bed is a bit bigger but only when the SC has the roll-top bed cover, without this they are the same size. The Mav has an off road package and a towing package the SC lacks but these are just some parts differences. And even with the tow package the Hyundai is rated to tow 1,000lbs more then the Ford. The SC now has XRT trim that beefs up the looks if your into the off-roader vibe. As both vehicles are soft-roaders neither are rock crawling just because of some extra bits Ford tacked on.I'm still loving my SC (at 9k in mileage). I don't see any advantages to the Ford when you are looking at the medium to top end trims of both vehicles. If you want to save money and gas then the Ford becomes the right choice. You will get a cheaper interior but many are fine with this, especially if don't like the all touch controls on the SC. However this has been changed in the '25 models in which buttons and knobs have returned.
  • Analoggrotto I'd feel proper silly staring at an LCD pretending to be real gauges.
  • Gray gm should hang their wimpy logo on a strip mall next to Saul Goodman's office.
Next