The Cellar

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Cash for Clunkers Program (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=20707)

slang 07-21-2009 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 582943)
So my last car, an '82 Buick Century, isn't eligible.

That looks just like mine Glatt. And mine is a 92'

glatt 07-22-2009 08:08 AM

1 Attachment(s)
yeah, you're right. I did a Google image search and came up with that picture. I didn't have a picture of mine handy. I don't think the picture is an '82. The lights look different, and mine had a padded vinyl top.

This is an '82 and is much closer to the way mine looked. Good comfortable car for road trips, but that's about it. A POS otherwise.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim (Post 582988)
paraphrasing:
'i didn't read the link, but i DID want to misquote some information'

(mean comment deleted before posting)

AS I SAID, I was quoting WHAT I HEARD while watching the bill go through committee. THEN I WENT ON TO SAY... Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snow were working on a much better bill. I hope some of their ideas got incorporated into this one before it passed the full Congress.Geez. :rolleyes:

lumberjim 07-23-2009 05:13 PM

i was just pointing out that you're stupid.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim (Post 583494)
i was just pointing out that you're stupid.

Do you enjoy being an asshole or is it just a gift?

lumberjim 07-23-2009 05:44 PM

sometimes it's both.

understand my perspective. I put up a thread because I'm in the car business, and thought people might want to find out about this program. I offered to answer questions.

Why did you find it necessary to post your incorrect opinion as though it were fact even though i had linked the actual information and offered to clarify any questions?

didn't have enough time to read the link.....you were in a rush? and yet you had time to post incorrect information, and the judgement that this is a bad program.

you're like a stupid version of Aliantha. jesus.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 05:49 PM

This is a chart I remember seeing as well. In fact, I think I posted it somewhere, although it may have been on another site.


Cash For Clunkers – Car Allowance Rebate System Overview
Summary of Car Allowance Rebate System - Cash for Clunkers Voucher Qualifications
Min. Fuel Economy for New Vehicle $3,500 Voucher $4,500 Voucher

Passenger Car 22 mpg * Mileage improvement of at least 4 mpg - $3,500 Voucher Mileage improvement of at least 10 mpg - $4,500

Light-Duty Truck ** 18 mpg * Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $3,500 Voucher Mileage improvement of at least 5 mpg - $4,500

Large Light-Duty Trucks *** 15 mpg * Mileage improvement of at least 1 mpg - $3,500 Voucher or trade-in of a work truck Mileage improvement of at least 2 mpg - $4,500

Commercial trucks ****
Trade-in must be at least pre-2002



http://www.cashforclunkersfacts.com/

I believe that is what I said?

Pico and ME 07-23-2009 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 583077)
yeah, you're right. I did a Google image search and came up with that picture. I didn't have a picture of mine handy. I don't think the picture is an '82. The lights look different, and mine had a padded vinyl top.

This is an '82 and is much closer to the way mine looked. Good comfortable car for road trips, but that's about it. A POS otherwise.

Glatt, whats the deal with that picture? It looks like it could be out of a Cohen brothers movie...:p

sugarpop 07-23-2009 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim (Post 583506)
sometimes it's both.

understand my perspective. I put up a thread because I'm in the car business, and thought people might want to find out about this program. I offered to answer questions.

Why did you find it necessary to post your incorrect opinion as though it were fact even though i had linked the actual information and offered to clarify any questions?

didn't have enough time to read the link.....you were in a rush? and yet you had time to post incorrect information, and the judgement that this is a bad program.

you're like a stupid version of Aliantha. jesus.

According to the chart I just posted, I wasn't wrong AT ALL in the requirments I posted. Even according to the link you provided, I wasn't wrong. And I specifically said I had not read the link YET because I was in a hurry (I have now read the link), and that I was going by what I had I seen in committee.

I am happy you were posting something to help people who might be in the market for a new car. Good for you. I STILL think the bill Feinstein and Snow were working on would have better because it would have benefited more people. Not everyone can afford a new car right now, but many people who can't might could afford a used one. Why is it taboo to say so?

Shawnee123 07-23-2009 06:04 PM

Fargo!

Tan Ciera! Tan Ciera!

:lol:

lumberjim 07-23-2009 06:05 PM

THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarpop (Post 582983)
I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG. BLAH BLAH BLAH.

An SUV is like JEEP.....a Class 2 Truck is like an F350

most people here don't drive heavy pickups

Quote:

(3) the term `category 2 truck' means a large van or a large
pickup, as categorized by the Secretary using the method used
by the Environmental Protection Agency and described in the
report entitled `Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel
Economy Trends: 1975 through 2008';
you do this repeatedly. i've told you about it before. you form an opinion in a blink and then immediately begin to spout it as fact. I don't want you to do that in this thread if you wouldn't mind.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 (Post 583512)
Fargo!

Tan Ciera! Tan Ciera!

:lol:

bwahahahahahaa

Aliantha 07-23-2009 06:14 PM

Looks like lumberjim has found himself a new whipping boy(girl).

Lucky you sugarpop.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim (Post 583513)
THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID:

I didn't go to the link yet to read it because I'm in a rush, but I watched the session in Congress on CSPAN when they first passed it in committee, and it is a bad bill. First of all, you have to buy a new car, you can't get a used one. Second, if you're getting rid of a gas guzzling SUV, you only have to buy a new one that gets ONE MORE MPG, and if it's a car, FOUR MORE MPG.

you do this repeatedly. i've told you about it before. you form an opinion in a blink and then immediately begin to spout it as fact. I don't want you to do that in this thread if you wouldn't mind.

This is the last thing I will post about this. This is from the FAQs page from the link you posted:
If both the new vehicle and the traded-in vehicle are category 2 trucks and the combined fuel economy value of the new vehicle is at least 1, but less than 2, miles per gallon higher than the combined fuel economy value of the traded in vehicle, the credit is $3,500. If both the new vehicle and the traded-in vehicle are category 2 trucks and the combined fuel economy of the new vehicle is at least 2 miles per gallon higher than that of the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $4,500.

The value of the credit for the purchase or lease of a new passenger car depends upon the difference between the combined fuel economy of the vehicle that is traded in and that of the new vehicle that is purchased or leased. If the new vehicle has a combined fuel economy that is at least 4, but less than 10, miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $3,500. If the new vehicle has a combined fuel economy value that is at least 10 miles per gallon higher than the traded-in vehicle, the credit is $4,500.

sugarpop 07-23-2009 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliantha (Post 583518)
Looks like lumberjim has found himself a new whipping boy(girl).

Lucky you sugarpop.

yea. Lucky me.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.