- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Cash for Clunkers an even bigger lemon than originally thought
Posted on 8/11/14 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 8/11/14 at 2:50 pm
4
Posted on 8/11/14 at 2:51 pm to Quidam65
Rabble rabble...FoxNews...rabble rabble...racist...rabble harumph
Posted on 8/11/14 at 2:55 pm to Quidam65
Ahhhh good ol' Fox News, only 6 days behind the Wall Street Journal this time.
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:08 pm to Quidam65
quote:
But the Texas A&M University study, for the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows the program may have actually created a drag on the economy. While the program’s fuel-efficiency restrictions led to the purchase of more fuel-efficient cars, Americans ended up buying cheaper cars than they otherwise would have, the study found.
Causation? Correlation? Could it be possible that people bought cheaper cars because the economy was in the shitter? Or that people who actually have clunkers are more likely to buy cheap cars than the average consumer?
quote:
They found buyers who participated "spent an average of $4,600 less on a new vehicle than they otherwise would have."
During the two months of the program, the frequency of purchasing a new vehicle was around 50 percent higher for those who qualified for the program compared with those who did not. But after the program ended, the researchers found, car-buying habits returned to normal.
What complete shite reporting.
Sales increased 50% but people bought cheaper, more fuel effecient cars. Sound horrible. End of the world. Complete disaster. Thanks Obama.
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:14 pm to Quidam65
Makes sense. With the fuel efficiency standards of the program anyone who bought a new car likely bought a foreign car. American cars are neither cheap nor fuel efficient.
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:16 pm to a want
quote:
the frequency of purchasing a new vehicle was around 50 percent higher for those who qualified for the program compared with those who did not.
.....is not the same as:
quote:
Sales increased 50%
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:16 pm to a want
quote:
Causation? Correlation?
read it again. They dont imply causation, the note the correlation. quote:
During the two months of the program, the frequency of purchasing a new vehicle was around 50 percent higher for those who qualified for the program compared with those who did not. But after the program ended, the researchers found, car-buying habits returned to normal.
What complete shite reporting.
Wow, is that really what you took away from the segment?
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:25 pm to a want
quote:That's beside the point. The point of cash for clunkers was stimulus.
What complete shite reporting.
Sales increased 50% but people bought cheaper, more fuel effecient cars. Sound horrible. End of the world. Complete disaster. Thanks Obama.
It didn't stimulate anything, and actually hurt instead of helped.
It may have helped individual consumers who wanted a new car, but that wasn't what cash for clunkers was about.
Posted on 8/11/14 at 3:41 pm to PrimeTime Money
quote:
The point of cash for clunkers was stimulus.
It didn't stimulate anything
Wrong, look at the numbers it without a doubt stimulated the japanese auto market. Was a great plan for Japan's economy.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News