Craig Brown

AIG Talks, The Market Walks Away

Unfortunately I fear I doth protest too little. Time will tell.


On Aug 21 12:38 PM User 474862 wrote:

> Mr Brown doth protest too much, methinks.

Bloomberg Reports Extreme Recession: I'm Shocked

I agree that the program, which touted its prime objective as gas mileage/environmental, needed a much wider differential between the clunker gas mileage and the new car mileage. I am thinking at least 7 miles per gallon and perhaps as many as 10. Seriously, if you have a clunker at 17 miles per gallon, you can have good impact moving up to 27 or so, combined. And so goes most compromises between Democrats and Republicans. Two competing objectives, when compromised to achieve resolution, achieve no well defined result. Sad but true - though sometimes we like it that way.


On Aug 04 01:45 PM delta 777 wrote:

> Cash for clunkers is hardly a fair or equitable use of taxpayer dollars-people
> usually own clunkers for two reasons: either they are too poor to
> buy a better car (and therefore are too poor to buy an new car),
> or-if they are wealthy- they have kept the clunker as a secondary
> back-up car because it was worthless to sell or trade it in. Cash
> for clunkers selectively rewards the second group, while providing
> no benefit for those owners who were either prudent or sufficiently
> conscientious to dispose of a clunker as soon as possible. A possible
> third group: those who are wealthy enough to have given/sold their
> clunker to their kids, and now are wealthy enough to arrange an upgrade.
>
> In all cases, despite the immediate gratification boon this gives
> to auto makers, this program will quickly reflect in future lower
> auto purchases.
> It is also obvious from actual sales information that, in general,
> the new vehicles purchased under this program are far from being
> true economy cars.
> Cash for Clunkers constitutes investment of taxpayer dollars to a
> select few individuals for consumable items; as opposed to using
> this taxpayer money to create infrastructure that will be of lasting
> benefit to the taxpayer that pays for it. (in addition to the obvious
> immediate creation of broad-based jobs)