# Cash for clunkers



## Pvt. Cowboy (Jan 26, 2005)

I'm kinda surprised I haven't seen or read anything on this forum about this yet. I was actually hoping to see the opinions of you guys and gals about the program...

Anyway, if anyone has been watching/reading the news, the program has been halted. There was funding for $1 billion towards the program, and now, due to a massive backlog and the success(though I completely disagree) of the program, the "G" now has to ask for more money to continue funding and continue the program. 

I happen to see massive "Anti-American Car Company" flaws with the program. All it has done is spur incredible numbers in foreign car business, whereas the American car companies are the ones that needed the help. A complete joke, as it also requires inane levels of paperwork to back up the rebate amounts given back by the "G."


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

I like this comment:



> "If they can't administer a program like this, I'd be a little concerned about my health insurance," car salesman Rob Bojaryn said.


----------



## mr.anttrax (May 24, 2006)

The House just approved an additional $2B for the program. On to the Senate next. 

I guess all you have to do is say that you're out of money and they will vote and you get more! :jump:


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

It's nice to control the house, the senate, the presidency, and soon the supreme court and that the Pubbies roll over like the wimps that they are.


----------



## KNL86 (May 28, 2009)

F*CK! thats the main thing that comes to mind when this issue comes up


----------



## Boston Irish Lass (Feb 13, 2009)

Wolfman said:


> If more US made cars need to be sold then it's up to the automakers, not the .gov, to make cars that people *want* to buy at a price they can afford. If they can't then they must be allowed to fail.


That says it all right there.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

*Popular 'Clunkers' Deal Gets 2nd Round Of Funding*

*House Approves $2 Billion More For 'Cash For Clunkers' Program*

WASHINGTON (AP) ―The House voted overwhelmingly Friday to rush $2 billion into the popular but financially strapped "cash for clunkers" car purchase program, heeding calls from consumers eager to keep taking advantage of thousands of dollars in trade-in incentives.

House members approved the measure 316-109 within hours of learning from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood that the program was running out of money.

President Barack Obama said he was encouraged by the House action to keep alive a program that had "succeeded well beyond our expectations." Senate action is likely next week, ensuring the program won' be affected by the sudden shortage of cash.

*MORE INFORMATION ON THE PROGRAM*


About The Program: What You Need To Know
The Government's CAR Web Site
List Of Vehicles Eligible For Rebate 
Auto Sites: Edmumds | Kelly Blue Book | Auto Trader
The Estimated New EPA Miles Per Gallon Ratings
The Big 3's Take On Deal: Chrysler | GM | Ford
Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y., said of the program: "This is a test drive, and people bought it big time."

Called the Car Allowance Rebate System, or CARS, the program is designed to help the economy and the environment by spurring new car sales. Car owners can receive federal subsidies of up to $4,500 for trading in their old cars for new ones that achieve significantly higher gas mileage.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said the new money for the program would come from funds approved earlier in the year as part of an economic stimulus bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the cars purchased under the program were much more fuel-efficient than the bill requires.

"Consumers have spoken with their wallets, and they've said they like this program," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis.

Some Republicans argued that Democrats were trying to jam the legislation through. A number of lawmakers also complained that many dealers have been left to contend with a chaotic government-run program.

"The federal government can't process a simple rebate. I've got dealers who have submitted the paperwork three times and have gotten three rejections," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich. "What is a dealer supposed to do?"

There had been a $1 billion budget for rebates for new car sales in the program that was officially launched last week and has been heavily publicized by automakers and dealers.

The program offers owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward new, more fuel-efficient vehicles, in exchange for scrapping their old vehicles.
In the Senate, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., had proposed a plan that would have required the new vehicles to be vastly more fuel-efficient. When Feinstein supported the $1 billion funding plan in June, she said she received "absolute assurance" from Senate leaders that if the program continued beyond November it would be modeled after her bill.

Feinstein and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, asked the Transportation Department Friday for more details on how the program has worked. "Congress needs this data in order to determine if the fleet modernization program delivered significant fuel economy gains and oil savings," Feinstein and Collins wrote.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the administration assured lawmakers that "deals will be honored until otherwise noted by the White House." But he suggested that "people ought to get in and buy their cars."

At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs sought to assure consumers that the program was still running and would be alive "this weekend. If you were planning on going to buy a car this weekend, using this program, this program continues to run."

It was unclear how many cars had been sold under the program.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said about 40,000 vehicle sales had been completed through the program but dealers estimated they were trying to complete transactions on another 200,000 vehicles.

John McEleney, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said many dealers have been confused about whether the program will be extended and for how long. Many had stopped offering the deals Thursday after word came out that the funds available for refunds had been exhausted.

The clunkers program was set up to boost U.S. auto sales and help struggling automakers through the worst sales slump in more than a quarter-century. Sales for the first half of the year were down 35 percent from the same period in 2008, and analysts are predicting only a modest recovery in the second half.

With so much uncertainty surrounding the program, North Palm Beach, Fla., dealer Earl Stewart said he planned to continue to sell cars under the program but would delay delivering the new vehicles and scrapping the trade-ins.

"It's been a total panic with my customers and my sales staff. We are running in one direction and then we are running in another direction," he said.

House Approves $2 Billion More For 'Cash For Clunkers' Program - wbztv.com


----------



## 8MORE (Nov 25, 2008)

[nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=965Alxl5b_U[/nomedia]
We are almost here, Just a few years later than they thought.


----------



## cc3915 (Mar 26, 2004)

Wolfman said:


> I hope everyone is also aware that when a "clunker" is traded in, it does not go to an auction, or sold as used. A solution is poured into it to seize the engine and it is scrapped. This means that no spare parts are taken from it to maintain and repair other old cars and it also removes thousands of operable used cars from circulation - cars that many low-income people could have purchased.
> 
> So, if you're low income and trying to do the right thing you get kicked once in each nut and one more for good measure: You can't get the parts to fix your shitbox that is your only source of transportation, you can't buy an affordable used car to replace it, and even if you traded your "clunker" you can't afford a new car (especially since if sales go up, so will prices - seller's market). Here's your choice: New car or no car.
> 
> But look on the bright side - when your clunker finally shits the bed and you wind up having to walk to the welfare office and bread line, you'll be breathing nice clean air.


I'll bet there's a bunch of Cubans still driving '55 Chevy's down in Habanna who are pretty pissed right now.


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

Not that anyone cares, but I did benefit greatly from the CARS program...traded in my piece of sheet SUV that barely made it to the dealer and got a brand new 25k car for about 17k...American. Honestly the timing could not have been better. Just wanted to voice something positive about the program on masscops.


----------



## 7costanza (Aug 29, 2006)

> Not that anyone cares, but I did benefit greatly from the CARS program...traded in my piece of sheet SUV that barely made it to the dealer and got a brand new 25k car for about 17k...American. Honestly the timing could not have been better. Just wanted to voice something positive about the program on masscops.


Im happy for YOU WaterPistola.....but the program still is a huge failure.


----------



## LGriffin (Apr 2, 2009)

Can we trade in our cruisers?


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2009)

Had an issue this morning with attached plates. The operator was NOT the purchaser and none of the sales paperwork reflected a "trade". When I contaced the owner he stated that he sold the vehicle to the dealer via the Cash for Clunkers program but wasn't given any documentation. Hopefully he is FOS and these dealers are not sending people on their way with no proof os "loss of possession". Just an FYI. Anyone else had a similar issue?


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

No doubt in my mind that some of these dealers are going to
resell the trade ins.


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy (Jan 26, 2005)

Alright kids... as the dirty sleazeball used car salesman that I am... (Not really, but lets just go with stereotypes..)

First, we CANNOT resell the cars. If we did, the G wouldn't pay us the amount for the car. We actually have to seize the engines as Wolfman has posted. We must render them inoperable, then obtain a certificate from a junker saying the car WAS in fact crushed. Then we have to scan all the documentation, i.e. purchase and sale agreement, certificate, copies of registration from the clunker, proof of insurance for an entire year, and send the scans off to the "G." They then, within 10 days, they hopefully pay us. The paperwork collection process is absurd.

Sniper, just an FYI from my standpoint, I would *DEFINITELY* call BS on what you encountered. We *must* list the clunker as a trade on the documentation for the purchase for the gov't to give us our cash back. Part of the transaction ALSO mandates that the person who owns the clunker, can only use that car for their purchase. I.E. my brother has a 92 Bronco, he can't trade it towards a purchase I make.

You having trouble with people driving cars through the mall again??

You guys should seriously see the massive pieces of shit these guys are trading. I had an 87 Dodge Caravan with 217k, in primer gray, fastfood wrappers everywhere, not even hubcaps. The car is seriously worth $1. They managed to get the 4500 for it.

With situations like this, it's not even worth trying to screw around with possibly making an extra buck on the trades. The process and situation is already a complete mess and needs a complete unfucking. We're completely content with just getting reimbursed for the money we gave the customers, no need to try and raise up any uneccessary red flags that would cause us to NOT get our money back.


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

Wolfman said:


> Domestic, import doesn't matter, there's a bigger picture here. It should not apply *at all* with taxpayer money. If more US made cars need to be sold then it's up to the automakers, not the .gov, to make cars that people want to buy at a price they can afford. If they can't then they must be allowed to fail. Cut this subsidy horseshit and bring back a true free market.


:dito:


Pvt. Cowboy said:


> I happen to see massive "Anti-American Car Company" flaws with the program. All it has done is spur incredible numbers in foreign car business, whereas the American car companies are the ones that needed the help.


With all that said, I'm not all that big on isolationist trade arguments, but the line between domestic and foreign car companies in relation to how their sucess benefits the country is completely blurred.

Just look at all the Toyota and Hyundai plants in the deep south, and the GM plants in Mexico and Canada.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2009)

Pvt. Cowboy said:


> Alright kids... as the dirty sleazeball used car salesman that I am... (Not really, but lets just go with stereotypes..)
> 
> First, we CANNOT resell the cars. If we did, the G wouldn't pay us the amount for the car. We actually have to seize the engines as Wolfman has posted. We must render them inoperable, then obtain a certificate from a junker saying the car WAS in fact crushed. Then we have to scan all the documentation, i.e. purchase and sale agreement, certificate, copies of registration from the clunker, proof of insurance for an entire year, and send the scans off to the "G." They then, within 10 days, they hopefully pay us. The paperwork collection process is absurd.
> 
> ...


I spoke with the sales MANAGER after I posted who told me that the program did not ALLOW them to list its as a trade and that it would be listed as a REBATE only in the break down. They had no idea why I was making a big deal out of it. I further explained that at some point Good Ole Coupe Deval would be looking for excise taxes from these people if they did not have proof of losing possession as well. Anyways, he faxed a letter to the PD from the dealership which broke down all the pertinent info including the VIN. DISASTER !


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

Wolfman said:


> Well, as a gainfully employed taxpayer who paid for his own car out of his own pocket from his own earnings, I'm just glad that I could help subsidize yours as well.
> 
> You know, I could really use a 6.8SPC upper for one of my AR's. $50 would be a good contribution. You want to mail me a check or is my PayPal OK?


It's not like I do not pay taxes, and do not have a job...if you put into the system, you should be able to get something out. Isn't that why we pay taxes? ha not for new cars I know... oh and the check is in the mail. resent:


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

WaterPistola said:


> It's not like I do not pay taxes, and do not have a job...if you put into the system, you should be able to get something out.


So when my car breaks down in a few years, is this program gonna cover me? Nope, doesn't even cover the guy who buys a car today.

In fact, my dad needs a new pick-up truck right now. But his 1995 Ford Ranger doesn't qualify under the gas milage standards of the program. So because he choose to be economically responsible to himself and his family and enviormentally friendly, he's SOL. Oh, and he pays taxes, too.


WaterPistola said:


> Isn't that why we pay taxes?


Taxes are taken on the principle that we pay money to the government for them to maintain and do for us collectively what we can't do for ourselves individually, i.e., national defense, public safety, roads, education, etc.

Last time I checked, there are millions of examples of people who were able to puchase vehicles on their own without any help from my paycheck.

This about sums up my feelings: http://www.masscops.com/forums/blogs/officerobie59/21-col-david-davy-crockett-not-yours-give.html


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy (Jan 26, 2005)

Sniper said:


> I spoke with the sales MANAGER after I posted who told me that the program did not ALLOW them to list its as a trade and that it would be listed as a REBATE only in the break down. They had no idea why I was making a big deal out of it. I further explained that at some point Good Ole Coupe Deval would be looking for excise taxes from these people if they did not have proof of losing possession as well. Anyways, he faxed a letter to the PD from the dealership which broke down all the pertinent info including the VIN. DISASTER !


That sales MANAGER is an idiot. He's going to cost his company shitloads of money. As the finance MANAGER for my dealership, I'm positive he's doing it wrong. I don't know why we're capitalizing "manager" either...

Either way, we're out of cars that qualify for the program... Unless you have a class 2 truck. We have PLENTY of those that qualify.


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

OfficerObie59 said:


> So when my car breaks down in a few years, is this program gonna cover me? Nope, doesn't even cover the guy who buys a car today.


I don't know what to tell you or your dad. I was in the market and it just all worked out. I didn't ask for it... but I would be a fool to pass it up.


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2009)

Pvt. Cowboy said:


> That sales MANAGER is an idiot. He's going to cost his company shitloads of money. As the finance MANAGER for my dealership, I'm positive he's doing it wrong. I don't know why we're capitalizing "manager" either...
> 
> Either way, we're out of cars that qualify for the program... Unless you have a class 2 truck. We have PLENTY of those that qualify.


probably for the same reasons you capitalized PLENTY......


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

WaterPistola said:


> I don't know what to tell you or your dad. I was in the market and it just all worked out. I didn't ask for it... but I would be a fool to pass it up.


I don't fault you for doing what's best for you and your family; I probably would have done the same thing--I find much less blame with those who take advantage of such programs than I do with those who made them available in the first place. To expect someone to be idealistic over pragamatic when it comes to thier own wallet is foolish.

Apparently, expecting the government to do the same with my own wallet is just as foolish.



> "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." - P.J. O'Rourke


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

My son needs a new car, but his did not qualify (we are not above taking your money if the government says it's legal - although I think income redistribution is unconstitutional, but the supremes will never rule for that so I guess it's legal - immoral, but legal. The good news is that his old car and other old cars that did not qualify are now worth more as a trade because so many have been scrapped. Anyway, Wolfman post your paypal address - as long was we are giving money away to everyone else we might as well throw a little your way. (although if you don't get a paypal email from me, check your junk/spam mail folder - although it probably won't be there either ).


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

> The progressive / welfare mantra.


 Not really since the the welfaristas don't pay anything in. They only take from you and me. As long as it is being taken from us, we can justify getting some of our money back while at the same time working toward not having it taken from us in the first place.


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

OfficerObie59 said:


> I don't fault you for doing what's best for you and your family; I probably would have done the same thing--I find much less blame with those who take advantage of such programs than I do with those who made them available in the first place. To expect someone to be idealistic over pragamatic when it comes to thier own wallet is foolish.
> 
> Apparently, expecting the government to do the same with my own wallet is just as foolish.


true...I did not expect a government "hand out" if you will. It wasn't until I stumbled across a car research site did I find out about it. I'm just saying I was in the right place at the right time with the right vehicle. Redistributing wealth is Un-American...I completely agree.


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2009)

you beggars better hurry up..............

*Administration: Clunker deals could end by Friday*

By KEN THOMAS, Associated Press Writer Ken Thomas, Associated Press Writer 17 mins ago

WASHINGTON - The government's wildly popular "cash for clunkers" program, offering $4,500 rebates to customers who trade in gas guzzlers, is likely to end Friday if the Senate doesn't approve $2 billion more for it, the White House says.
"If it doesn't happen this week, it's unlikely that we'll make it to the weekend with a program that can continue," said President Barack Obama's spokesman, Robert Gibbs.
He said Monday the $2 billion would fund the program through September.
The House approved the money by a nearly 3-to-1 margin last Friday before recessing for the month of August.
But the legislation faces a tougher fight in the Senate, where conservatives deride it as the latest in a series of taxpayer bailouts for the auto industry and environmentalists want to wring out more fuel efficiency. The Senate plans to take a four-week recess beginning Friday, after it votes this week on Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the average fuel economy of new vehicles purchased through the program is 9.6 miles per gallon higher than for the vehicles traded in for scrap. Buyers of new cars and trucks that get 10 mpg better than their trade-ins get the $4,500 rebate. People whose cars get between 4 mpg and 10 mpg better fuel efficiency qualify for a smaller $3,500 rebate.
LaHood said some 80 percent of the traded-in vehicles are pickups or SUVs, meaning many gas-guzzlers are being taken off the road. The Ford Focus is a leading replacement vehicle.
Ford Motor Co. reported its first U.S. sales increase in nearly two years on Monday, and other major automakers said sales showed signs of stability. Chrysler Group LLC posted a smaller year-over-year sales drop compared with recent months, also helped by "clunkers" deals.
"The program is working the way Congress intended it to work," he asserted on MSNBC. But it was not intended to run out of money nearly so quickly, nor create such confusion at dealerships.
The administration pressed hard for an additional $2 billion after serving notice over the weekend that the program could expire as early as this week unless the Senate acts.
Senate Republicans appeared to be in no rush Monday. "We were told this program would last for several months," GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said in remarks prepared for a Senate floor speech. "It ran out of money in a week, prompting the House to rush a $2 billion extension before anybody even had time to figure out what happened to the first billion."
McConnell said, "It's not a bad idea to look for a second opinion. All the more so if they say they're in a hurry."
The administration collected information on 80,500 vehicle transactions logged into the government's operating system through Saturday afternoon. An official said the fuel efficiency improvements would save a typical customer $700 to $1,000 a year in fuel costs. The new vehicles were getting 25.4 miles per gallon on average, a 61 percent increase over the models traded in, said the official, speaking on condition on anonymity because the figures had not been released.
The data were aimed at appeasing lawmakers such as Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, who have questioned whether the program's environmental benefits go far enough.
"We're encouraging senators to listen to their car dealers and the people they represent," LaHood said. "If they do that, it will pass the Senate."
The administration has been coy about just how long dealers would be reimbursed for rebates of up to $4,500 per vehicle, after saying Sunday that the program would have to be suspended if the Senate failed to act.
Fierce lobbying for the program came from other quarters: The National Automobile Dealers Association and the American International Automobile Dealers contacted thousands of dealerships, telling them to bombard the Senate with phone calls and e-mails.

"This is the one true stimulus that seems to be working out of all the things that have been tried in the last few months," said Cody Lusk, president of the international group. The Senate narrowly approved the initial money in June. But some lawmakers who voted for the plan, including Feinstein and Collins, have said the additional dollars should push consumers to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles and allow people to buy fuel-efficient used vehicles. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., has said he was concerned with the way the House paid for the extension, shifting $2 billion from a renewable energy loan program.


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

Well unlike Waterpistola we were guilty in mind and attitude only and not in fact. The cash for clunkers is the least of our worries. It is actually one of the better stimulus ideas, although I think they passed it under the mistaken impression that it was needed to avert global warming. We need those fools to keep spending enough of our money and increase taxes to the point where there will be nothing left to fund the ultimate, irreversible disaster - universal health care and the people will wake up and revolt. You guys can't arrest us for faulty thinking can you?


----------



## Guest (Aug 4, 2009)

Wolfman said:


> Unlike the government, we're here to help.


hahahaha


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

Well you chastise away, but Waterpistola should go directly to jail and not collect $200 or $4500 or whatever it is.


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

LongKnife56 said:


> Well you chastise away, but Waterpistola should go directly to jail and not collect $200 or $4500 or whatever it is.


so you can get hit up even more for my care while in jail? I'm more productive and valuable to society on the outside.


----------



## HistoryHound (Aug 30, 2008)

Did it ever occur to these senators & congressmen/women what is going to happen when the program ends? Car sales are going to crash faster than a pre-schooler coming off mountain dew & pixie stix. The success of this program has only proved that the auto makers are outpricing the market. If a $4500 "rebate" is enough to make a new car affordable to this many people; then, the automakers need to re-evaluate their pricing structure. They need to drop prices so that they will fall within people's price points. The manufacturers who figure out how to do this & turn a profit will survive while the ones who don't will fail. It's economic Darwinism.


----------



## OfficerObie59 (Sep 14, 2007)

HistoryHound said:


> If a $4500 "rebate" is enough to make a new car affordable to this many people; then, the automakers need to re-evaluate their pricing structure. They need to drop prices so that they will fall within people's price points.


I don't necessarity think that's the case.

Many people are buying cars simply because there is a deal to begin with. It's like the person who blows all sorts of money on stuff at the supermarket regardless if he needs it or not simply because he has a coupon for it.

Plus, to feed the liberals a bit of their own medicine about what OTHER people should be doing, many of the people who are driving clunkers probably shouldn't be buying brand new cars anyways. Think about it...if you turn in a 15 year old clunker, chances are you haven't had a car payment in years, your insurance is low because you have no collision coverage, and you're probably not that well off to begin with or you would have purchased a new car beforehand anyways. It will seriously affect one's monthly cash flow. I wonder if this program encourages people who can't afford a new car or those that don't need one to go out and get one.

Either way, my tax money has no business helping other people buy cars.


----------



## LongKnife56 (Sep 9, 2008)

Waterpistola - how's OUR new car doing? Did you wash and wax it yet?


----------



## Boston Irish Lass (Feb 13, 2009)

Pretty scary stuff.

[nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOBlqUqUZ8[/nomedia]


----------



## LGriffin (Apr 2, 2009)

HistoryHound said:


> Did it ever occur to these senators & congressmen/women what is going to happen when the program ends? Car sales are going to crash faster than a pre-schooler coming off mountain dew & pixie stix. The success of this program has only proved that the auto makers are outpricing the market. If a $4500 "rebate" is enough to make a new car affordable to this many people; then, the automakers need to re-evaluate their pricing structure. They need to drop prices so that they will fall within people's price points. The manufacturers who figure out how to do this & turn a profit will survive while the ones who don't will fail. It's economic Darwinism.





OfficerObie59 said:


> I don't necessarity think that's the case.
> 
> Many people are buying cars simply because there is a deal to begin with. It's like the person who blows all sorts of money on stuff at the supermarket regardless if he needs it or not simply because he has a coupon for it.
> 
> ...


That said, who here has ever paid sticker anyway? I have always factored at least $5000 off sticker before we even begin to talk about the trade.

This program is yet another that makes me wonder what the hell is in that Kool-Aid.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

*Cash For Clunkers Program Will End Monday*

WASHINGTON (CBS) ― The Obama administration plans to end the popular $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program on Monday, giving car shoppers a few more days to take advantage of big government incentives.

The Transportation Department said Thursday the government will wind down the program on Monday at 8 p.m. EDT. Car buyers can receive rebates of $3,500 or $4,500 for trading in older vehicles for new, more fuel-efficient models.



Official CARS Web Site
Cash For Clunkers Drives Up Used Car Prices
EBay, GM To Start Selling Cars Online
The Estimated New EPA Miles Per Gallon Ratings
"It's been a thrill to be part of the best economic news story in America," Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement. "Now we are working toward an orderly wind down of this very popular program."

Full Story:

Government Sources Reveal That Cash For Clunkers Program Will End Monday - wbztv.com


----------

