| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
HEARTBURN-OMO
Spammer wannabe
|
 Posted - Nov 04 2009 : 13:20:02
|
If you traded in a clunker worth $3500, you get $4500 off for an apparent "savings" of $1000.
However, you have to pay taxes on the $4500 come April 15th (something that no auto dealer will tell you). If you are in the 30% tax bracket, you will pay $1350 on that $4500.
So, rather than save $1000, you actually pay an extra $350 to the feds. In addition, you traded in a car that was most likely paid for. Now you have 4 or 5 years of payments on a car that you did not need, that was costing you less to run than the payments that you will now be making.
But wait, it gets even better: you also got ripped off by the dealer.
For example, every dealer here in LA was selling the Ford Focus with all the goodies including A/C, auto transmission, power windows, etc for $12,500 the month before the "cash for clunkers" program started.
When "cash for clunkers" came along, they stopped discounting them and instead sold them at the list price of $15,500.. So, you paid $3000 more than you would have the month before. (Honda, Toyota, and Kia played the same list price game that Ford and Chevy did).
So lets do the final tally here:
You traded in a car worth: $3500
You got a discount of: $4500
---------
Net so far +$1000
But you have to pay: $1350 in taxes on the $4500
--------
Net so far: -$350
And you paid: $3000 more than the car was selling for the month before
----------
Net -$3350
We could also add in the additional taxes (sales tax, state tax, etc.) on the extra $3000 that you paid for the car, along with the 5 years of interest on the car loan but lets just stop here.
So who actually made out on the deal? The feds collected taxes on the car along with taxes on the $4500 they "gave" you. The car dealers made an extra $3000 or more on every car they sold along with the kickbacks from the manufacturers and the loan companies. The manufacturers got to dump lots of cars they could not give away the month before. And the poor stupid consumer got saddled with even more debt that they cannot afford.
Obama and his band of merry men convinced Joe consumer that he was getting $4500 in "free" money from the "government" when in fact Joe was giving away his $3500 car and paying an additional $3350 for the privilege.
|
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/sgxwpvxvjk--I-wipe-my-own-ass |
Country: USA
| Posts: 4252 |
|
|
Expired-OMO
OMO groupie
|
Posted - Nov 04 2009 : 16:01:33
|
Dude your math wouldn't work around here because the cars I saw traded in were worth no where even close to $3500. I neighbor swapped his old van in for a new one and he got the $4500 where a couple of months before the program he tried to trade it in and they offered him $900 so try and tell him that. ROFL
|
Always take your Med's
 |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1063 |
 |
|
|
Stingray
frequent visitor
|
Posted - Nov 04 2009 : 16:39:06
|
Yeah, I preferred 0% and a crap load of discounts Dodge offered up this past February. Bought a mini van with that deal.
Though some cars were worth 3500 some were worth much less. Either way, once you do the actually math the deal isn't as good as other incentive programs car manufactures were offering this past winter/spring.
|
 |
|
Country:
| Posts: 623 |
|
|
|
Fossil-OMO
Moderator
|
Posted - Nov 04 2009 : 19:21:32
|
I bought a Ford Mustang only because they didn't accept the Govt Bail out money and low and behold they made a billion dollar profit, guess a lot of other people felt the same way.
I heard a lot of the dealerships still haven't got paid by the govt yet. Can't wait until they take over Health car Lolz.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1469 |
|
|
|
Petrified-OMO
Taxing Patience
|
Posted - Nov 04 2009 : 21:04:42
|
Well, I think the lesson we should all have learned by now is quite simple: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. Otherwise known as: TANSTAAFL. Sure, one person may get a deal, but someone else, somewhere else, is definitely paying the cost for them.
People think they get something for free, like, say free health care, forgetting that someone pays for it. Like raising the Minimum wage, it sounds great until companies have to raise their prices to stay in business or competitive. So government is giving you something? Who are they getting it from? Will that person pass it on back to you? And if they are prevented from doing so, then what happened to their Freedom? Oh, wait, it was already lost when what they had was taken from them and given to someone else who did no work for it.
You know, its the whole "Spreading the wealth" thing, the whole "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Socialism; Communism, at it's very root. The ideal is not one of voluntary sharing, but forced taking for the sake of redistribution. It is not Biblical, as Liberals try to make it out in an effort to sucker people, it is the opposite of Biblical. Christ said that the poor will always be with us just as he said that one who was given ten talents did not have them taken away to be given to the one who only had one but was given ten more.
My point is this: an individual works hard and receives according to their work. What right does another person have to take the fruit of their labors away and give it to someone else who did not work for it? People are free to share, to give freely, and they should be encouraged to do so, but taking from another by force and giving it to others is not charity; nor generosity.
When one really thinks about it: the people who are asking the most to be taken from those who earn their money, are quite wealthy yet they do not share their wealth. Perhaps then, they feel guilty about what they have earned and guilty about being greedy so they take from other people to then give to the 'poor' they themselves will not help. Like Obama and his family in Kenya. He won't send a $20.00 from his own wallet but he is more than happy to take your money and send it.
Facism and Communism/Socialism are two sides of the same coin. In the end they result in the same thing: totalitarian governance and the impoverishment of the people under the rule.
The best thing for this country is a Conservative revolution. One which guts the fat pig of government so that the citizens can finally bring the bacon home.
ok... that was corny. But the point is valid: only with a government that is dedicated to protecting the nation from threats to freedom rather than taking freedom away in an effort to enrich a few while taking away from many to give a few less than the many an illusion of betterment.
TANSTAAFL
Everything has a price. The price for being taken care of by government is losing your freedoms.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 7782 |
|
|
|
Bloody
OMO groupie
|
Posted - Nov 05 2009 : 06:52:01
|
I bought a Ford Edge before the C for C thing and think I got a better deal with 0% and a pretty big discount. I too decided to go Ford cause of no bail out money being taken and cause I have had great luck with all the Fords in the past I have bought.
Another word on Cash for Clunkers came out yesterday from the AP. If you remember, part of the C for C sales pitch to congress was that it would take older gas hogs off the road and replace them with newer high mile vehicles. Well, the study showed that just wasn't the case. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091105/ap_on_bi_ge/us_cash_for_clunkers
|
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 1212 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Clunker Program Math Lesson.....
