'Cash for Clunkers'

[dnno1]

Snopes, the most trusted name in news!..

Did you read the article at Snopes? If you did, you would have seen the last paragraph ther which read:

In short, ther was once a poorly-worded privacy statement on the CARS.gov site, but it never applied to ordinary customers visiting the site (just dealers), and it has since been changed. Consumers visiting the CARS.gov web site do not (and never did ) have to agree that the federal govenment can own or take control of their computers.

If you are trying to imply that Snopes is not relyable then you mean to say that the above statement is not true. Once again, I ask someone to show me where it says that the government will own your computer on the CARS (or for that matter any other government) website.

Frankly, it could have been that they were trying to take more control over us or they were just that stupid to write something like that. Either way, its not a good indicator for us. This is coming from the White House that wants us to forward them joke e-mails about healthcare It isn't surprising that they would possibly want access to your computer. They also changed the wording of that so either they did **** up or they were surprised that they got caught.

Actually it was coming from the Department of Transportaion. The CARS (Cash for Clunkers) program was actually a suggestion from economist Alan Binder and had already been tested in California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Texas, Virginia and several Canadian provinces. The bill was drafted with the help of organizations like the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the CAP Action Fund, and SmartTransportation.org. These are certainly not affiliated with the White House. As far as whether or not the government did screw up or not about the disclamer, it is neither here nor there since it did not apply to consumers anyway.

These are the same people that are writing health care reform bills If they can't even get a user agreement right, what makes you think we are going to be better off when the over thousand page health care bill rolls out? They already screwed up the Stimulus Bill and so our future looks grim.

The same people that know that health care costs are steadily increasing, there are 75 million people who are under insured, and that have been working on a solution for the past 40 years or more. What they are doing is certainly better than the 24 page alternative that the opposition is proposing. An opposition that now wants to propose luxury jets for themselves to go on globetrotting vacations.

 

[chaseter]

Did you read the article at Snopes? If you did, you would have seen the last paragraph ther which read:

So one of my two scenarios were right That makes them idiots for not being able to clearly define a user agreement. Now, lets see them tackle health care!!!

If you are trying to imply that Snopes is not relyable then you mean to say that the above statement is not true. Once again, I ask someone to show me where it says that the government will own your computer on the CARS (or for that matter any other government) website.

How do you know what the government is or isn't doing? How does Snopes know? We don't. I haven't done the cash for clunkers deal so I don't know what information you have to provide and what information the dealers have to provide to the government for each of their customers.

Why did they change that user agreement then? If it didn't mean anything then why quickly change it? I never thought that they would physically own your computer but what is to stop them from getting information off of it? Bush did wire taps, what is so crazy about this

Actually it was coming from the Department of Transportaion. The CARS (Cash for Clunkers) program was actually a suggestion from economist Alan Binder and had already been tested in California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Texas, Virginia and several Canadian provinces. The bill was drafted with the help of organizations like the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the CAP Action Fund, and SmartTransportation.org. These are certainly not affiliated with the White House. As far as whether or not the government did screw up or not about the disclamer, it is neither here nor there since it did not apply to consumers anyway.

The bill has to be introduced to congress who then revise it and sign off on it. This is a good idea, it has just been completely mismanaged. Yes, the Department of Transportation is part of the government and they wrote the user agreement that applied to this bill. They cannot even write a paragraph user agreement correctly and they cannot even guesstimate the funds to properly appropriate to this thing. Also, they didn't even think about adding in a little amendment about only being able to buy US cars Some geniuses in Washington I say And guess what! The majority of the top 10 cars being bought are from foreign makers! The majority of the top 10 being traded in as clunkers are Detroit models!

The same people that know that health care costs are steadily increasing, there are 75 million people who are under insured, and that have been working on a solution for the past 40 years or more. What they are doing is certainly better than the 24 page alternative that the opposition is proposing. An opposition that now wants to propose luxury jets for themselves to go on globetrotting vacations.

Who has been working on a solution the last 40 years Oh right, each administration has tried to come up with their own little plan and has failed each time

The stimulus bill was a wretched mess, CARS has been mismanaged, and now Obama wants to rush through comprehensive health care reform. Imagine how ****ty it would have been had he got it through before the August recess like he wanted. YES! That to me sounds like a great idea! Make the public seem like they are in trouble with scare tactics and then rush something so huge through that we don't have time to stop it. We need reform, he don't need a complete overhaul on a system with a few problems. If one of your lights goes out on a light fixture, do you replace all the bulbs and the fixture or do you just go find a new working bulb?

 

[BlackLantern]

I have a friend who works at a dealership, the criteria they are going by is age of the car (my car is a 96 and doesnt qualify), MPG, and as long as you have had insurance on the car for 1 calendar year...you're pretty much set..the rest of it would be just making the purchase on the new vehicle

 

[chaseter]

I have a friend who works at a dealership, the criteria they are going by is age of the car (my car is a 96 and doesnt qualify), MPG, and as long as you have had insurance on the car for 1 calendar year...you're pretty much set..the rest of it would be just making the purchase on the new vehicle

I was talking about what personal info you have to give like SSN, DOB, phone number, e-mail, sex, etc...

 

[BlackLantern]

I was talking about what personal info you have to give like SSN, DOB, phone number, e-mail, sex, etc...

I don't believe its anything you wouldn't normally provide during a car purchase...proof of insurance and title, Drivers License....they aren't going to let you just drag some hunk in you found on the street and let you trade it in...

 

[Marx]

I don't believe its anything you wouldn't normally provide during a car purchase...proof of insurance and title, Drivers License....they aren't going to let you just drag some hunk in you found on the street and let you trade it in...

Exactly. And you have to be able to prove that you have owned the car for one year.

 

[chaseter]

I know that you have to have a DL and proof of insurance but I am talking about what extra info you have to give!!! Like SSN, race/ethnicity, all that jazz. The government just doesn't hand out money without tracking it...well...I take that back. I would think that they would like to see what kind of person is buying and trading in what kind of car. You know, to be smart about it and not just say...HEY! Here is some money, have fun!

 

[BlackLantern]

I know that you have to have a DL and proof of insurance but I am talking about what extra info you have to give!!! Like SSN, race/ethnicity, all that jazz. The government just doesn't hand out money without tracking it...well...I take that back. I would think that they would like to see what kind of person is buying and trading in what kind of car. You know, to be smart about it and not just say...HEY! Here is some money, have fun!

well, if you are financing the new car along with the trade in, you would have to provide the SSN for a credit check....but I really think thats it...if you're trading in for this program you HAVE to provide the title, proof that you've owned the car over a year and proof of insurance...and the insurance would have your name and address on it...as for race/ethnicity...I have seen it on some credit/loan forms but it is optional to fill out

 

[chaseter]

Yeah but the credit info goes to the banks, not the gov. Unless part of the deal is to send over that info. Who knows. Good idea that has been mismanaged from the get-go.

 

[Kelly]

I would venture to say that you are doing exactly what you would do with any trade in....they do the check, just as you would a trade in......make sure the "i"'s are dotted, and the "t"s crossed....and then they do the financing as they normally would. I doubt anything else is needed. I think a good part of the paperwork is actually after you've driven off the lot, and the dealership has to do it to get reimbursed...

 

[Addendum]

Ive always operated on the assumption that the government is always watching/listening...probably always have been since Nixon was in office

Let me guess, you answer the phone "**** the president, hello?"

 

[BlackLantern]

Let me guess, you answer the phone "**** the president, hello?"

I actually answer it "Welcome to Crazy Dougs'...half off on explosives this week...how may I help you?"

 

[Heretic]

To follow up on this, your rediculous claim had been debunked on Snopes.com. Like I said before, next time do you research first before you start spouting off nonsense.

Ah gotcha...so the government stated that they were claiming ownership of your computer...then they got busted...so they changed the wording...and now it never happened at all.

Gotcha....

So, if I ever get busted admitting guilt to something, I can merely say "Ive changed my mind" and it erases all prior history on the subject.

 

[Addendum]

But the "ownership of your computer" never applied to the customer in the first place

 

[Heretic]

It applied to anyone who hit "I agree" on the site...

and once again, you brush aside that it was wrong to take over ANYONES computer...

Splitting hairs to protect totalitarianism.

I may be the resident conspiracy theorist here...but it sucks that the government keeps proving me right with "poorly worded statements" and eugenics policies disguised as health care plans. It is simple to prove me wrong...simply stop taking our rights away...it does not prove me wrong to justify why we should lose our rights every time or make excuses about how the government meant something different than it said.

 

[Heretic]

It applied to anyone who hit "I agree" on the site...

and once again, you brush aside that it was wrong to take over ANYONES computer...

Splitting hairs to protect totalitarianism.

I may be the resident conspiracy theorist here...but it sucks that the government keeps proving me right with "poorly worded statements" and eugenics policies disguised as health care plans. It is simple to prove me wrong...simply stop taking our rights away...it does not prove me wrong to justify why we should lose our rights every time or make excuses about how the government meant something different than it said.

 

[dnno1]

Ah gotcha...so the government stated that they were claiming ownership of your computer...then they got busted...so they changed the wording...and now it never happened at all.

Gotcha....

So, if I ever get busted admitting guilt to something, I can merely say "Ive changed my mind" and it erases all prior history on the subject.

Wrong, that never did apply to consumers. It only applied to dealers. So the claim that "your computer" would be claimed is false.

 

[dnno1]

It applied to anyone who hit "I agree" on the site...

and once again, you brush aside that it was wrong to take over ANYONES computer...

Splitting hairs to protect totalitarianism.

I may be the resident conspiracy theorist here...but it sucks that the government keeps proving me right with "poorly worded statements" and eugenics policies disguised as health care plans. It is simple to prove me wrong...simply stop taking our rights away...it does not prove me wrong to justify why we should lose our rights every time or make excuses about how the government meant something different than it said.

It was even debunked by Factcheck.org. Even if there was a mistake clicking on the "I agree" button wouldn't forfeit your computer. That is false.

 

[Backdrifter]

Cash for Clunkers is a terrible program. It is counter-productive, economically, to take working cars, melt them down, send them over to China where they remake them into new cars and ship them back all the while taking money created out of thin air from the government and going into more debt by taking out a loan for a new car.

 

[Heretic]

It was even debunked by Factcheck.org. Even if there was a mistake clicking on the "I agree" button wouldn't forfeit your computer. That is false.

I dont care if Jesus Christ debunks it...THE WORDS ON THE SITE claimed otherwise.

You see, this is something Obama has done very effectively...he and his minions say one thing...often repeatedly over several years...and then when confronted they say "dont believe what Ive been saying and writing for years...hope change hope change." and the sheep just toss aside their own words and documents to hope change hope. No thanks...I'll take them on their word...and in this case, it was quite clear what the wors spelled out before they got busted.

 

[Nivek]

It was even debunked by Factcheck.org. Even if there was a mistake clicking on the "I agree" button wouldn't forfeit your computer. That is false.

In the face of overwhelming evidence... "I see nothing but my own opinion!!!" YELLING!!! SOCIALISIM!!! BOOO!!! SCARY, SCARY!"

 

[Majic Walrus]

Cash for Clunkers is a terrible program. It is counter-productive, economically, to take working cars, melt them down, send them over to China where they remake them into new cars and ship them back all the while taking money created out of thin air from the government and going into more debt by taking out a loan for a new car.

Yep.

 

[Marx]

'CASH FOR CLUNKERS' SEES DROP IN INTEREST
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/11/interest-in-cash-for-clunkers-sputters/

 

[dnno1]

So one of my two scenarios were right That makes them idiots for not being able to clearly define a user agreement. Now, lets see them tackle health care!!!

Look, nobody is perfect and nobody's life or liberty was ruined here. The thing is that the old disclaimer only applied to dealers and people like Mr. Heretic are claiming that they are doing this to everybody. That is very misleading.

How do you know what the government is or isn't doing? How does Snopes know? We don't. I haven't done the cash for clunkers deal so I don't know what information you have to provide and what information the dealers have to provide to the government for each of their customers.

You can go to the CARS.com website and find out everything you need to know there. In terms of national security, we probably don't know what the government is or is not doing (for our own good), but for the most part they are our servant and they provide a lot of information and services to the public. They are certainly not our enemy.

Why did they change that user agreement then? If it didn't mean anything then why quickly change it? I never thought that they would physically own your computer but what is to stop them from getting information off of it? Bush did wire taps, what is so crazy about this

But do you even know that it was there to begin with? I don't know of anyone who has been able to produce a snapshot of what the website looked like when it had that disclaimer. As far as I am concerned it was just urban legend.

The bill has to be introduced to congress who then revise it and sign off on it. This is a good idea, it has just been completely mismanaged. Yes, the Department of Transportation is part of the government and they wrote the user agreement that applied to this bill. They cannot even write a paragraph user agreement correctly and they cannot even guesstimate the funds to properly appropriate to this thing. Also, they didn't even think about adding in a little amendment about only being able to buy US cars Some geniuses in Washington I say And guess what! The majority of the top 10 cars being bought are from foreign makers! The majority of the top 10 being traded in as clunkers are Detroit models!

Mismanaged? The program was experimental from the beginning. It was a great success. There was much greater demand than anticipated as to why the program ran out of funds. It could have ended right then and there, but because of the lobbying of the auto dealerships, it was refunded with another $2 billion in cash. If it was mismanaged, there would have been a lot of unhappy parties at all levels.

Who has been working on a solution the last 40 years Oh right, each administration has tried to come up with their own little plan and has failed each time

Over the last forty years we have had Medicare, COBRA, and a lot of other programs related to health care, some of them failed, others pass and are law. Medicare, COBRA, and Health Insurance Portability are programs that still exist and have been successful.

The stimulus bill was a wretched mess, CARS has been mismanaged, and now Obama wants to rush through comprehensive health care reform. Imagine how ****ty it would have been had he got it through before the August recess like he wanted. YES! That to me sounds like a great idea! Make the public seem like they are in trouble with scare tactics and then rush something so huge through that we don't have time to stop it. We need reform, he don't need a complete overhaul on a system with a few problems. If one of your lights goes out on a light fixture, do you replace all the bulbs and the fixture or do you just go find a new working bulb?

What are you talking about? CARS was such a success that they gave it another $2 billion, unemployement decreased this past month, and we still have money left from the stimulus that whe haven spent. What are you basing failure on, nothing?

 

[BatMatt]

'CASH FOR CLUNKERS' SEES DROP IN INTEREST
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/11/interest-in-cash-for-clunkers-sputters/

If so, then I guess the remaining funds shouldn't have a problem lasting till October, as the initial $1 billion had been planned for