But they were CLUNKERS!
Don’t you realize that the environment is at a tipping point due to global warming?
The seas were going to continue rising if not for Cash for Clunkers. But thanks to Obama and this program, now the seas have stopped rising and the planet has started to heal.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Well, it did give the economy a boost. No credible economist would argue against its effectiveness. Are the White House’s estimates of its effectiveness too rosy? Probably. But if they hadn’t done it, and GDP that quarter was ~1.5% lower, you’d be complaining about that, too.[/quote]
Boosting an economy through taxation and entitlement programs is not sustainable unless you are the USSR, but then again, your avatar says evreything about your politics.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Demand for durables ALWAYS falls during a recession. This is a well-documented phenomenon in the auto-industry.
Who said it didn’t?
Um, YOU DID. You said “the White House “analysis” doesn’t adequately account for ordinary demand for auto sales or the effect of “recession buying”, where consumers who played it safe during the go-go years take advantage of the great deals (cheap financing, lowered prices, etc.) when times are bad.” So unless I’m misreading that, you seem to think that the increase in sales was not primarily due to the program, but rather recession buying. Which means that demand for durables went up (not only that, it shot up during the program, and the fell off again; interesting).
Uh yeah, and “recession buying” is a part of that rising demand. Not all consumers are the same, and “recession buying” on big ticket items is nothing new after an economy has been in a recession for a while and great deals to move inventory begin to emerge.
Yeah, the great deal was the Cash for Clunkers program. Besides that, we’re still in a recession. Where’s the car buying? There are still deals. You’re incoherent.
You can get credit if you are qualified, Sherlock - I don’t know a single person in my neighborhood that has not refinanced their home. Moreover, many places are extending zero interest financing - they are to just have you be a receivable on a glorified layaway plan if they can just move some inventory.
Oh, good thing your neighborhood constitutes the entire country.
Of course you don’t - you are a student with an ATM machine attached to your parents’ pocketbook. enjoying the dividends of someone else’s hard work - how could you possibly know what happens in my universe?
Good idea: try some personal insults to mask your idiocy. It’s a better strategy than trying to debate.
[/quote]
…You quite obviously have no idea what demand is, or you’d know that demand can fall while sales increase. Think about it.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Which means that demand for durables went up (not only that, it shot up during the program, and the fell off again; interesting).
…You quite obviously have no idea what demand is, or you’d know that demand can fall while sales increase. Think about it.
[/quote]
He either does not, or wrote carelessly. From the standpoint of trying to figure out what he was trying to say, I believe he meant “quantity demanded.”
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Well, it did give the economy a boost. No credible economist would argue against its effectiveness. Are the White House’s estimates of its effectiveness too rosy? Probably. But if they hadn’t done it, and GDP that quarter was ~1.5% lower, you’d be complaining about that, too.
Boosting an economy through taxation and entitlement programs is not sustainable unless you are the USSR, but then again, your avatar says evreything about your politics.[/quote]
Part of the reason the USSR crumbles was because they ran out of money.
Margret Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that the people eventually run out of money. The Russians ran out of money chasing “Star Wars”…hysterical.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Demand for durables ALWAYS falls during a recession. This is a well-documented phenomenon in the auto-industry.
Who said it didn’t?
Um, YOU DID. You said “the White House “analysis” doesn’t adequately account for ordinary demand for auto sales or the effect of “recession buying”, where consumers who played it safe during the go-go years take advantage of the great deals (cheap financing, lowered prices, etc.) when times are bad.” So unless I’m misreading that, you seem to think that the increase in sales was not primarily due to the program, but rather recession buying. Which means that demand for durables went up (not only that, it shot up during the program, and the fell off again; interesting).
Uh yeah, and “recession buying” is a part of that rising demand. Not all consumers are the same, and “recession buying” on big ticket items is nothing new after an economy has been in a recession for a while and great deals to move inventory begin to emerge.
Yeah, the great deal was the Cash for Clunkers program. Besides that, we’re still in a recession. Where’s the car buying? There are still deals. You’re incoherent.
You can get credit if you are qualified, Sherlock - I don’t know a single person in my neighborhood that has not refinanced their home. Moreover, many places are extending zero interest financing - they are to just have you be a receivable on a glorified layaway plan if they can just move some inventory.
Oh, good thing your neighborhood constitutes the entire country.
Of course you don’t - you are a student with an ATM machine attached to your parents’ pocketbook. enjoying the dividends of someone else’s hard work - how could you possibly know what happens in my universe?
Good idea: try some personal insults to mask your idiocy. It’s a better strategy than trying to debate.
…You quite obviously have no idea what demand is, or you’d know that demand can fall while sales increase. Think about it.
[/quote]
Did you see his avatar? That’s enough for me. He supports failed communist regimes, you think facts, logic or common sense are going to reach him? You’d have an easier time converting lixy to Judaism.
[quote]pat wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Well, it did give the economy a boost. No credible economist would argue against its effectiveness. Are the White House’s estimates of its effectiveness too rosy? Probably. But if they hadn’t done it, and GDP that quarter was ~1.5% lower, you’d be complaining about that, too.
Boosting an economy through taxation and entitlement programs is not sustainable unless you are the USSR, but then again, your avatar says evreything about your politics.
Part of the reason the USSR crumbles was because they ran out of money.
Margret Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that the people eventually run out of money. The Russians ran out of money chasing “Star Wars”…hysterical.[/quote]
No, it’s “With Socialism, you eventually run out of OTHER peoples money!”