This Program’s a Clunker.

CNN Money

What’s another $4,500,000,000.00 between friends?  

If you haven’t heard of this plan yet, the government wants to give $4,500 to a million people to buy new cars.  Of course, there is a catch.  Your old car must get 18 or fewer mpg while your new car must get at least 22 mpg.  So, if you’re like me and have a more fuel efficient vehicle you’re already getting hosed on this one.

This type of idea has been championed by bleeding heart liberals long before the current auto crisis as an environmental piece of legislation.  I use the term “bleeding heart” here for a specific reason.  The environmental impact is simply an illusion they invented in their hearts without actually doing any research in their minds.  This is typical left wing legislation designed to “feel good” without any rational thought behind it.

According to the good people at Scientific American who are not part of Obama’s political class this program would not only cost us billions but actually increase CO2 production in the process.

But the production of a new car is a pretty emissions-intensive process. So to make this program environmentally sound, the fuel efficiency bump between the old and new vehicle has to be sufficiently big enough to justify its manufacture. And that’s not the case with the program as it stands now. And that means this program’s a clunker. – David Biello, Scientific American.

To the left, I guess it doesn’t matter what the actual cause and effect of your legislation is as long as it feels like the right thing to do.

MORE BELOW THE FOLD….

“Every dollar that I’ve proposed, I’ve proposed an additional cut so that it matches.” – Barack Obama

This has been my quote here at RMG for a while now and may stay for a long time.  When I first heard Obama say this I knew he was lying.  This bill, just like all the other new expensive spending bills getting railroaded through congress have no offsets in spending cuts.  It’s just more spending and more government.  Whenever people support new spending we need to ask this simple question:

How is it paid for?

About Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie

This Program Is A Clunker

CNN Money

What’s another $4,500,000,000.00 between friends?  

If you haven’t heard of this plan yet, the government wants to give $4,500 to a million people to buy new cars.  Of course, there is a catch.  Your old car must get 18 or fewer mpg while your new car must get at least 22 mpg.  So, if you’re like me and have a more fuel efficient vehicle you’re already getting hosed on this one.

This type of idea has been championed by bleeding heart liberals long before the current auto crisis as an environmental piece of legislation.  I use the term “bleeding heart” here for a specific reason.  The environmental impact is simply an illusion they invented in their hearts without actually doing any research in their minds.  This is typical left wing legislation designed to “feel good” without any rational thought behind it.

According to the good people at Scientific American (who are not part of Obama’s political class) this program would not only cost us billions but actually increase CO2 production in the process.

But the production of a new car is a pretty emissions-intensive process. So to make this program environmentally sound, the fuel efficiency bump between the old and new vehicle has to be sufficiently big enough to justify its manufacture. And that’s not the case with the program as it stands now. And that means this program’s a clunker. – David Biello, Scientific American.

To the left, I guess it doesn’t matter what the actual cause and effect of your legislation is as long as it feels like the right thing to do.

MORE BELOW THE FOLD….

“Every dollar that I’ve proposed, I’ve proposed an additional cut so that it matches.” – Barack Obama

This has been my quote here at RMG for a while now and may stay for a long time.  When I first heard Obama say this I knew he was lying.  This bill, just like all the other new expensive spending bills getting railroaded through congress have no offsets in spending cuts.  It’s just more spending and more government.  Whenever people support new spending we need to ask this simple question:

How is it paid for?

About Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie