Heck of a job there Brownie

[ArlJim78]

They tried to bury this story (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/24/AR2009122401588.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR) by releasing it late on Christmas Eve. Incredibly the Obama administration has given a blank check to Freddie and Fannie. They don't even bother to go to congress anymore because they are "bailout weary".

Oh and the best part is after railing against executive pay in the private sector all year, they've authorized bonus packages of $42 million for 12 of the top executives at Freddie/Fannie. Its truly another Festivus Miracle!
__________________________________________________ ____
U.S. promises unlimited financial assistance to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

By Zachary A. Goldfarb (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/articles/zachary+a.+goldfarb/)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 25, 2009


The Obama administration pledged Thursday to provide unlimited financial assistance to mortgage giants Fannie Mae (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/post200/2007/FNM/) and Freddie Mac (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/post200/2007/FRE/), an eleventh-hour move that allows the government to exceed the current $400 billion cap on emergency aid without seeking permission from a bailout-weary Congress.

The Christmas Eve announcement by the Treasury Department means that it can continue to run the companies, which were seized last year, as arms of the government for the rest of President Obama's current term.

But even as the administration was making this open-ended financial commitment, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac disclosed that they had received approval from their federal regulator to pay $42 million in Wall Street-style compensation packages to 12 top executives for 2009.

The compensation packages, including up to $6 million each to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's chief executives, come amid an ongoing public debate about lavish payments to executives at banks and other financial firms that have received taxpayer aid. But while many firms on Wall Street have repaid the assistance, there is no prospect that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will do so.

[Steve 'StatMan']

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ao-QRR7Ifmg

[OntheRail]

:mad: This shit has got to stop... And no way in hell is any Freddie or Fannie employee worth or earned a 6 mill bonus. :bang: :bang:

[ElKabong]

This is the reason lefties like Sec and rrpic6 don't show their faces in here anyomre.

BO feigned anger over big bonuses for Wall Street fat cats (and knew all along it would continue). Now, look at this story above & lump it in w/ his other outright lies. BO has been outed as the biggest liar in the history of the white house & he has 3 yrs to go.

If I voted for BHO I'd be seriously disappointed and disillusioned. People from Illinois warned us about this assclown that's at the wheel now. An empty suited liar with no skins on the wall. Where is the transparency he promised? This story, and the Nebraska Compromise, and the back room deals behind closed doors for Arkansas and Louisiana (and VT?), this is the shadiest admin I've ever seen when it comes to taxpayer funds.

[ArlJim78]

someone correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't this the very same model that got us into the debt crisis of '08?

message to executives from uncle sam: write all the bad loans you want, the losses are on us. and as long as you keep making all those bad loans for us we'll make sure you're compensated very nicely.

how does this not amount to digging the hole deeper? once its known that uncle sam will prop up anything they do, where is the incentive to properly qualify borrowers?

[DJofSD]

Some one with some balls needs to challenge this. That is striclty unconstitutional.

[boxcar]

This is the reason lefties like Sec and rrpic6 don't show their faces in here anyomre.

BO feigned anger over big bonuses for Wall Street fat cats (and knew all along it would continue). Now, look at this story above & lump it in w/ his other outright lies. BO has been outed as the biggest liar in the history of the white house & he has 3 yrs to go.

If I voted for BHO I'd be seriously disappointed and disillusioned. People from Illinois warned us about this assclown that's at the wheel now. An empty suited liar with no skins on the wall. Where is the transparency he promised? This story, and the Nebraska Compromise, and the back room deals behind closed doors for Arkansas and Louisiana (and VT?), this is the shadiest admin I've ever seen when it comes to taxpayer funds.

We're witnessing fascism at work. The only two winners in this system are corporations and the state. Both of these squeeze all the money out of the people that they can possibly get. Essentially, we're caught in a vice (bad pun intended).

Boxcar

[PhantomOnTour]

Sorry for the previous error. Hit the wrong key.

What do you mean by Brownie?

[ArlJim78]

i wasn't sure if everyone would get that reference, remember when Bush made a statement of support for his FEMA chief during the Katrina disaster? the guys name was Michael Brown and Bush said something like "you're doing a heck of a job brownie", and was mocked for it, rightfully so.

this story reminded me of that, lavish government support for people running failed programs.

[boxcar]

this story reminded me of that, lavish government support for people running failed programs.

As usual liberalism gets it all backwards: Reward the Failures and Penalize the Successful. That's the name of their game.

Boxcar

[Tom]

I'm sure someone here will make the most of this and post us a logical reason why this is a good thing. :rolleyes::D

[boxcar]

I'm sure someone here will make the most of this and post us a logical reason why this is a good thing. :rolleyes::D

Because "they're too big too fail" is the standard refrain. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Oh, my bad.....I was under the impression they had already failed. That must have been Obama.


btw, did you hear the idiot called a radio station the other day and identified himself as BARRY? :lol: He didn't have the balls to call Rush or Beck, though.

[JustRalph]

i wasn't sure if everyone would get that reference, remember when Bush made a statement of support for his FEMA chief during the Katrina disaster? the guys name was Michael Brown and Bush said something like "you're doing a heck of a job brownie", and was mocked for it, rightfully so.

this story reminded me of that, lavish government support for people running failed programs.


I got it,,,,,,,,,,,and it was a perfect analogy!! Dead on!

[lsbets]

As usual liberalism gets it all backwards: Reward the Failures and Penalize the Successful. That's the name of their game.

Boxcar

Your comment reminded me of something I read this morning:

John Galt, the industrialist hero of Rand’s 1957 masterpiece, Atlas Shrugged, refers to those in power who stripped men of their minds, wealth and freedom, as mystics. The mystics of spirit were the religious leaders of centuries past who proclaimed that faith is superior to reason. Galt is no fan of these mystics but it is the mystics of muscle—the progressives who force us to submit to their version of the common good—that Galt despises.

And Barack Obama is a mystic of muscle in its purest form, able to corral the worshipping media, the always superficial Hollywood elites, America hating academics, state-sponsored capitalists (e.g., Goldman Sachs), and grant hungry “scientists” & environmentalists hoping to cash in on a trillion dollar loot of the American people called global warming. These are the pillars of deceit Obama used to get elected. This was how he convinced enough of us to give up our minds for the the mystical concept that Rand called the collective. True to form, Barack, master of the mystics of muscle, has used his power mightily to loot from the producers, and hand it to the parasites, crooks and undeserving (read; SEIU, ACORN, UN Climate Fund, General Motors).

John Galt leads a revolt by the productive class and outlines Rand’s philosophy in his 60-page radio address. Here, he explains how human beings—alone among life forms—can choose to be mindless:

A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and destroy the mind.

Sad to say, for a movement powered by the mindlessness, there is plenty of fuel to sustain “hope and change”:

* Who but the mindless can believe that government run health care will reduce costs and improve care while covering more people?
* Who but the mindless can believe that this President is now serious about reducing the deficit after shattering spending records during his first year?
* Who but the mindless can take seriously the sham “jobs summit” held by a President whose every policy is a lesson in job destruction?
* Who but the mindless can believe Obama’s lie that “Cash for Clunkers” which cost taxpayers $24,000 per car was successful?
* Who but the mindless would not outraged that our government has reneged on its promise pay back the unused TARP fund to taxpayers?
* Who but the mindless would not question the morality that the world’s finest health care, which has extended and improved human life in unimaginable ways—conceived and produced by countless unsung heroes in the private sector—should magically be transformed by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi into a “human right”, taken over by the state and rationed out as they please?

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/24/lessons-from-john-galt/

[boxcar]

Your comment reminded me of something I read this morning:

John Galt, the industrialist hero of Rand’s 1957 masterpiece, Atlas Shrugged, refers to those in power who stripped men of their minds, wealth and freedom, as mystics. The mystics of spirit were the religious leaders of centuries past who proclaimed that faith is superior to reason. Galt is no fan of these mystics but it is the mystics of muscle—the progressives who force us to submit to their version of the common good—that Galt despises.

And Barack Obama is a mystic of muscle in its purest form, able to corral the worshipping media, the always superficial Hollywood elites, America hating academics, state-sponsored capitalists (e.g., Goldman Sachs), and grant hungry “scientists” & environmentalists hoping to cash in on a trillion dollar loot of the American people called global warming. These are the pillars of deceit Obama used to get elected. This was how he convinced enough of us to give up our minds for the the mystical concept that Rand called the collective. True to form, Barack, master of the mystics of muscle, has used his power mightily to loot from the producers, and hand it to the parasites, crooks and undeserving (read; SEIU, ACORN, UN Climate Fund, General Motors).

John Galt leads a revolt by the productive class and outlines Rand’s philosophy in his 60-page radio address. Here, he explains how human beings—alone among life forms—can choose to be mindless:

A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and destroy the mind.

Sad to say, for a movement powered by the mindlessness, there is plenty of fuel to sustain “hope and change”:

* Who but the mindless can believe that government run health care will reduce costs and improve care while covering more people?
* Who but the mindless can believe that this President is now serious about reducing the deficit after shattering spending records during his first year?
* Who but the mindless can take seriously the sham “jobs summit” held by a President whose every policy is a lesson in job destruction?
* Who but the mindless can believe Obama’s lie that “Cash for Clunkers” which cost taxpayers $24,000 per car was successful?
* Who but the mindless would not outraged that our government has reneged on its promise pay back the unused TARP fund to taxpayers?
* Who but the mindless would not question the morality that the world’s finest health care, which has extended and improved human life in unimaginable ways—conceived and produced by countless unsung heroes in the private sector—should magically be transformed by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi into a “human right”, taken over by the state and rationed out as they please?

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/24/lessons-from-john-galt/

Great post, LS! You would certainly get my vote for best post of the year. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

The bible, throughout, basically uses another term for "mindless". Substitute this term with "blind" and it wouldn't change the meaning of the above paragraphs one iota. The megabytes of irony is that all the "enlightened", "progressive", "open-minded" people see only what they want to see, but are too self-deceived to realize it.

Boxcar

[Tom]

OK, that was a cue for the mindless here to reply..........:lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

Sorry for the previous error. Hit the wrong key.

What do you mean by Brownie?You're not trying to make this into some sort of racial thing, are you?

Because honest-to-God, that didn't come to me at all when I read this thread...the only thing I thought about when I read the title of this thread was this:

RO2xi0uLnj8

[cj's dad]

Oh, my bad.....I was under the impression they had already failed. That must have been Obama.


btw, did you hear the idiot called a radio station the other day and identified himself as BARRY? :lol: He didn't have the balls to call Rush or Beck, though.

WTOP in DC - he was on hold for 40 minutes - Imagine the POTUS being onn hld for that long of a time- this guy is a 100% idiot.

[mostpost]

OK, that was a cue for the mindless here to reply..........:lol:
Up till now, it's been nothing but the mindless in this thread.

[Tom]

That all you got?
Can't address a single item?
It's worse than I thought when even you can't logicate this stuff.

[PhantomOnTour]

[QUOTE=PaceAdvantage]You're not trying to make this into some sort of racial thing, are you?

Not at all. I honestly didnt get the reference. Its pretty clever now that its been explained though.

[mostpost]

That all you got?
Can't address a single item?
It's worse than I thought when even you can't logicate this stuff.
That's about all I've got. Unlike some, I don't like to comment unless I have all the facts and understand the subject. I read that the gov. has pledged unlimited resources to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But does that mean they will keep throwing money at them, or is it just a precaution in case they need to go over the authorized amount? What would be the consequences if FM & FM were unable to fulfill their charters? How would it affect the housing market? How would it affect mortgages holders? How would it affect people holding securities based on those mortgages? How would problems in those areas affect the overall economy?
I don't know the answers to any of those questions. So I will just say, they know what they're doing. unless they don't.

[bigmack]

Up till now, it's been nothing but the mindless in this thread.
Pysch 101: Globetrotters/Generals. Always the contrarian.

Swim against the current MP.

Justify a reason for the bonuses.

Swim like you've never swum/swam before...

[boxcar]

So I will just say, they know what they're doing. unless they don't.

Mindless is as mindless says. (They know what they're doing, but maybe not? ) :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Show Me the Wire]

It is so much easier to let other people think for you. :)

[boxcar]

It is so much easier to let other people think for you. :)

That, sir, is the warp 'n' woof of statism: When you allow the state to think for you, you have relinquished control over your life. Who said slavery was abolished?

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Pysch 101: Globetrotters/Generals. Always the contrarian.

Swim against the current MP.

Justify a reason for the bonuses.

Swim like you've never swum/swam before...
I do not support for the bonuses. Never said I did. My comments were in regards to should the treasury continue to back up FM & FM financially. My response was that I don't know but we need to consider the overall effects before making a decision. You may say that treasury should provide no money if any of that money goes towards bonuses. I won't argue with that.

[bigmack]

I do not support for the bonuses.
This is a perfect issue for you to express your displeasure.

Give us an extended soliloquy on this one.

[mostpost]

I just found the Goldfarb article which ArlJim78 referenced at the beginning of this thread. Interesting what he left out. From reading his excerpt, one would get the idea that the federal government was planning on providing money in excess of the $400B originally agreed to. ($200B from Bush; $200B more from Obama) In fact the two FMs have received $111B to date, and estimates of the total needed stand at $171B plus. The purpose of the Christmas eve announcement was to send a reassuring message to the markets.
I still don't like the idea of the bonuses, but I note from the full Golfarb article that they were approved by a Federal regulator. My question is; is this "federal regulator" an independent entity from the department which is controlling the bailout funds. I do not know the answer to that.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/24/AR2009122401588.html?nav=emailpage

[mostpost]

* Who but the mindless can believe Obama’s lie that “Cash for Clunkers” which cost taxpayers $24,000 per car was successful?
I heard that the maximum reimbursement was $4500 per car. Please explain the other $19,500.

[bigmack]

My question is; is this "federal regulator" an independent entity from the department which is controlling the bailout funds. I do not know the answer to that.
We know you're resourceful. Get to the bottom of this caper.

Don't obfuscate because of party line. Big undeserved bonuses are your specialty. Bring us the 'right' in this potential wrong.

[mostpost]

Your comment reminded me of something I read this morning:

John Galt, the industrialist hero of Rand’s 1957 masterpiece, Atlas Shrugged, refers to those in power who stripped men of their minds, wealth and freedom, as mystics. The mystics of spirit were the religious leaders of centuries past who proclaimed that faith is superior to reason. Galt is no fan of these mystics but it is the mystics of muscle—the progressives who force us to submit to their version of the common good—that Galt despises.

And Barack Obama is a mystic of muscle in its purest form, able to corral the worshipping media, the always superficial Hollywood elites, America hating academics, state-sponsored capitalists (e.g., Goldman Sachs), and grant hungry “scientists” & environmentalists hoping to cash in on a trillion dollar loot of the American people called global warming. These are the pillars of deceit Obama used to get elected. This was how he convinced enough of us to give up our minds for the the mystical concept that Rand called the collective. True to form, Barack, master of the mystics of muscle, has used his power mightily to loot from the producers, and hand it to the parasites, crooks and undeserving (read; SEIU, ACORN, UN Climate Fund, General Motors).

John Galt leads a revolt by the productive class and outlines Rand’s philosophy in his 60-page radio address. Here, he explains how human beings—alone among life forms—can choose to be mindless:

A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and destroy the mind.

Sad to say, for a movement powered by the mindlessness, there is plenty of fuel to sustain “hope and change”:

* Who but the mindless can believe that government run health care will reduce costs and improve care while covering more people?
* Who but the mindless can believe that this President is now serious about reducing the deficit after shattering spending records during his first year?
* Who but the mindless can take seriously the sham “jobs summit” held by a President whose every policy is a lesson in job destruction?
* Who but the mindless can believe Obama’s lie that “Cash for Clunkers” which cost taxpayers $24,000 per car was successful?
* Who but the mindless would not outraged that our government has reneged on its promise pay back the unused TARP fund to taxpayers?
* Who but the mindless would not question the morality that the world’s finest health care, which has extended and improved human life in unimaginable ways—conceived and produced by countless unsung heroes in the private sector—should magically be transformed by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi into a “human right”, taken over by the state and rationed out as they please?

http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/24/lessons-from-john-galt/
Who but the mindless can believe that a provision in the Health Care Bill(s) which provides for the payment of voluntary consultations about how a patient might want to handle end of life issues is really a nefarious plot to kill old people.
Who but the mindless can believe that a provision in the same bill(s) which provides a means for the electronic payment of bills, (The same type of payment we use everyday for cable TV and car payments and credit card payments) is really a plot to give the government access to our accounts.
Who but the mindless can believe that the sitting POTUS is an alien, in the face of overwhelming documentation to the contrary.
Who but the mindless can believe that the HC bill(s) covers illegal aliens when a provision of the bill clearly and unequivicably says it does not.
Who but the mindless can believe that respect for other cultures and nations and for their opinions is a sign of weakness.
Who but the mindless can believe that concentrating our efforts in the war against terrorism on the origins of that war is a bad strategy.
Who but the mindless can believe that the best strategy for ending our recession is to give carte blanche to the very people that caused it.

There is a "Who but the mindless" list that has the added advantage of being true.

[lsbets]

I heard that the maximum reimbursement was $4500 per car. Please explain the other $19,500.


The Cash for Clunkers program gave car buyers rebates of up to $4,500 if they traded in less fuel-efficient vehicles for new vehicles that met certain fuel economy requirements. A total of $3 billion was allotted for those rebates.

The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009, according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/index.htm

Of course you will go on living in fantasy land, believing that what you post is the truth when it is nothing but the reality that you have bought into the lie of the "progressives" and have chosen to make yourself mindless.

[boxcar]

Just another great example of how anything the government touches turns to gold -- fool's gold that only fools think is the real deal.

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

What? You mean to say all that glitters is not gold? Oh my.

[mostpost]

The Cash for Clunkers program gave car buyers rebates of up to $4,500 if they traded in less fuel-efficient vehicles for new vehicles that met certain fuel economy requirements. A total of $3 billion was allotted for those rebates.

The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009, according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/index.htm

Of course you will go on living in fantasy land, believing that what you post is the truth when it is nothing but the reality that you have bought into the lie of the "progressives" and have chosen to make yourself mindless.



It's always cool when I can use something you link to to prove my point.
The CNN Money dot com article says that Edmonds used traditional relationships between sales of different classes of cars to determine that many of the sales would have happened anyway. I maintain that the situation last summer and fall was quite different from a traditional situation and without the incentives people would have held off from purchasing a new car.
But that is hard to prove either way. A more important point is that the Cash for Clunkers program provided about half of a 3.4% increase in the GDPin the third quarter.
From the article:
Still, auto sales contributed heavily to the economy's expansion in the third quarter, adding 1.7 percentage points to the nation's gross domestic product growth.
Also from the article an opinion by George Pipas. Mr. Pipas is a sales analyst for Ford Motor company. HE IS NOT A GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL.

Edmunds.com's estimate of the ultimate sales increase generally matches what industry experts had thought, said George Pipas, a sales analyst with Ford Motor Co (F, Fortune 500). But that misses the point, he said.

"The whole purpose of the program was to provide some kind of catalyst to kick-start the economy," he said, "and by all accounts the extra production that was added this year was a boost to the economy
Also by Mr. Pipas:
While auto sales in September were hurt because auto dealership inventories were drained of products by the program, sales this month are already back on track or better, Pipas said. "I think the October sales results will show Clunkers is behind us and there's no more payback or inventories issues."

Cash for Clunkers and the other stimulus measures are responsible for a change in GDP growth from a negative 6.5 in the first quarter 2009 to a positive 3.4 in the thirdd quarter as is detailed here.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/29/news/economy/gdp/index.htm?postversion=2009102912

[lsbets]

Umm, mosty - growth was revised way down from 3.4%. You know, since you like to claim you post the truth :lol: :lol: I thought you might be interested in that little tidbit.

So, your darling little program cost taxpayers 24K per car. Yeah, that's efficiency. :lol: :lol:

[ArlJim78]

I maintain that the situation last summer and fall was quite different from a traditional situation and without the incentives people would have held off from purchasing a new car.

held off perhaps, but they would have bought new cars at some point WITHOUT the $4500 rebate. CFC was just a shell game, a gimmick, a political stunt, and a waste of resources. It didn't create anything more than a brief unsustainable spike in auto demand.

[mostpost]

Umm, mosty - growth was revised way down from 3.4%. You know, since you like to claim you post the truth :lol: :lol: I thought you might be interested in that little tidbit.

So, your darling little program cost taxpayers 24K per car. Yeah, that's efficiency. :lol: :lol:
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2009/pdf/gdp3q09_3rd.pdf
According to the above the figure was 2.2 % which was indeed lower than the 3.4% I quoted. Still it was much higher than the negative 6.5% of quarter 1.
Also from the above:

Motor vehicle output added 1.45 percentage points to the third-quarter change in real GDP.
In my original I stated that Auto sales had been responsible for 1.7% of a 3.4% gain in GDP (or 50% of the increase.) The final figures show that auto sales were responsible for 1.45% of a 2.2% gain in GDP (or 66% of the increase.) AN EVEN BETTER RESULT. You can't beat me. And you can't beat my teammates Meadowlark Lemon and Curley Neal...........I mean NJStinks and H'Cap. :lol: :lol:

[mostpost]

held off perhaps, but they would have bought new cars at some point WITHOUT the $4500 rebate.
That could be said about most any product. At some point everything has to be replaced. The question is how long do you wait. Boosting the economy in 2011 or 2012 does no good to the problems we had in 2009.
The CNN article states that car sales were downin September, but that was more due to a lack of dealer inventory than a lack of consumer demand. ALso according to CNN October sales were close to normal.
While auto sales in September were hurt because auto dealership inventories were drained of products by the program, sales this month are already back on track or better, Pipas said. "I think the October sales results will show Clunkers is behind us and there's no more payback or inventories issues."

[lsbets]

In my original I stated that Auto sales had been responsible for 1.7% of a 3.4% gain in GDP (or 50% of the increase.) The final figures show that auto sales were responsible for 1.45% of a 2.2% gain in GDP (or 66% of the increase.) AN EVEN BETTER RESULT. You can't beat me. And you can't beat my teammates Meadowlark Lemon and Curley Neal...........I mean NJStinks and H'Cap. :lol: :lol:

If you think that a shell game of a government program giving an artificial boost to GDP is something to be proud of then I won't even try to beat you. You truly are mindless.

[ArlJim78]

That could be said about most any product. At some point everything has to be replaced. The question is how long do you wait.

but it's a question that each person answers differently in terms of a car, and not a question for government planners to decide. some people probably would have bought in that same month anyway, others were likely were not planning to buy a car at that time, choosing to save or spend their money on other goods, but were enticed into redirecting that money towards a car because of the government rebate. that means less money for savings or for other products. products that when purchased also contribute to the GDP.

nobody is questioning whether the government can borrow money and artificially stimulate demand for something like auto sales which can be measured via GDP.
the question is whether it was a wise use of money, was any real demand created, or simply shifted from other things. the answer in this case is clear.

that the government enticed people to tap into savings to buy cars is not a good thing.

[ElKabong]

[url]And you can't beat my teammates Meadowlark Lemon and Curley Neal...........I mean NJStinks and H'Cap. :lol: :lol:

More like Shawn Bradley and Chris Webber.

[OntheRail]

I heard that the maximum reimbursement was $4500 per car. Please explain the other $19,500.
Well we can't say what the cost per car is as we don't have the figures for the administrative cost... to run each clunker thru the system. Plus the interest to china that the bill will accrue. I'm still pissed that I'm forced to help pay for someone's car and kick in for their house to boot.:bang: