C4c

[BlueStreak]

Yes, yes, now everything is an "attack on the poor".......... And this coming from the party that has been talking trash about "the poor" for decades. Rightwing pundits running their mouths day and night, telling us we shouldn't have any empathy for the poor because they "......did it to themselves.", blah, blah, blah...on and on---ad nauseum. The current crop of Republicans are a bunch of Randian Objectivist dicks who don't give a flying f**k about the poor, never have and ever will. So, spare us this BS.

Regards,
Dave

[merrylander]

Probably why Les Miz is enjoying a revival, that shining city on the hill did not last very long and we are heading right back to the feudal era.

[piece-itpete]

C4C hurt the poor. It took the cheap cars off the road, and greatly lowered the amount of used parts available. Keeping that old Lincoln running (Bob I won't buy a new car anyway ) I do have reason to see this.

So, subsidize the middle class at the expense of the poor.

And damage the enviroment anyway?

Dave the Dem machine here has kept a pretty nice boot on Cleveland's poor folks necks. As long as the votes come in.

Pete

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

C4C hurt the poor. It took the cheap cars off the road, and greatly lowered the amount of used parts available. Keeping that old Lincoln running (Bob I won't buy a new car anyway ) I do have reason to see this.

So, subsidize the middle class at the expense of the poor.

And damage the enviroment anyway?

Dave the Dem machine here has kept a pretty nice boot on Cleveland's poor folks necks. As long as the votes come in.

Pete

But remember how effectively the concept was sold. Breaking a window is never good economically and anyone with a modicum of knowledge knows it despite what the local glazer may claim.

[icenine]

Originally Posted by bhunter

But remember how effectively the concept was sold. Breaking a window is never good economically and anyone with a modicum of knowledge knows it despite what the local glazer may claim.

Where have you been broken windows have been running this economy since after WW II...have you not heard of built in obsolecence?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by bhunter

But remember how effectively the concept was sold. Breaking a window is never good economically and anyone with a modicum of knowledge knows it despite what the local glazer may claim.

Breaking a window or crashing a car or getting sick or even dying generates economic activity. That's just a fact. Glaziers, body and fender men, doctors and undertakers make money.

And then they spend it.

John

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by bhunter

But remember how effectively the concept was sold. Breaking a window is never good economically and anyone with a modicum of knowledge knows it despite what the local glazer may claim.

If energy is escaping through the existing window, and more effective windows are available to more efficiently insulate the house, the old window will likely need to be broken in order to install the new one.

Regards,

D-Ray

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by bhunter

But remember how effectively the concept was sold. Breaking a window is never good economically and anyone with a modicum of knowledge knows it despite what the local glazer may claim.

Typical Republican. "Oooooh! Save that old single pane window, we can use it forever and never have to spend money on a new one!"

Then he can't figure out why the local window factory sits empty, no longer creating any jobs. "Must of been something the treehuggers did........ Meh, who cares? Those people had it too good anyways. F**k'em."

I know, a grossly oversimplified scenario. But, really not far off the mark. Stop spending money.....no demand....no jobs. Trust me, no one, no where runs a factory just to fill up warehouses.

Regards,
Dave

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

C4C hurt the poor. It took the cheap cars off the road, and greatly lowered the amount of used parts available. Keeping that old Lincoln running (Bob I won't buy a new car anyway ) I do have reason to see this.

So, subsidize the middle class at the expense of the poor.

And damage the enviroment anyway?

Your argument might have some validity if Cash For Clunkers removed all or most of the affordable used cars from the market, even temporarily. It didn't.

As for used parts, some were generated by the program. Can you establish that the market could have absorbed more?

Did it damage the environment? I don't know. Even if there was some level of pollution generated in the process of recycling the cars, when balanced against the reduction in polluting vehicles on the road, was it still a net negative?

Knee-jerk wingnuttery.

John

[icenine]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

C4C hurt the poor. It took the cheap cars off the road, and greatly lowered the amount of used parts available. Keeping that old Lincoln running (Bob I won't buy a new car anyway ) I do have reason to see this.

So, subsidize the middle class at the expense of the poor.

And damage the enviroment anyway?

Dave the Dem machine here has kept a pretty nice boot on Cleveland's poor folks necks. As long as the votes come in.

Pete

forgive me but I somehow missed out on the Great Shortage Of Auto Parts For The Poor under Emperor Obama's First Reign.....

your kidding right Pete?