Cash for Clunkers Bill.

[dingdong]

Hey, there may be hope for my Big Ass Car dilema yet. The Cash for Clunkers bill looks like it may pass. Hmmm, what kind of lovely new car can I get for 4500+ 6500(financed)


UMMMM, I think .....nothing!

Damn!

Too bad you can't buy a used one. Don't the freakin politicians know none of us have any money and our credit is crap because we are in a HUGE RECESSION so how the hell we gonna qualify for a new car.

I mean, come on, if you are driving a "Clunker", it is pretty obvious you can't afford a new car, otherwise you would have purchased one by now with the stupid gas prices they way they are.

They need a Cash for Clunkers for the economically disadvantaged, where you can use the 4500/3500 towards a used car with better mileage.

Sheesh! Live in the real world you stupid legislators!

[JRScott]

I have similar opinion.

Even with the clunker voucher I couldn't afford a new car, I possibly could afford a newer used car (my current car is 19 years old) if allowed to use it that way.

[dingdong]

Maybe we should start writing letters to our legislators. Perhaps if they saw the real world implications, that people who actually drive the clunkers cant afford new cars, but could afford a newer used car, which would still help improve gas efficiency/emissions and get the clunkers/gas eaters off the road, they might allow a trade on a used car.

I realize they are trying to help stimulate new car sales and help the auto industry, but they need to realize there are quite a few of us who can't afford to spend 20,000 on a new car.

[Ifonly]

Every time I read "Big Ass Car" in your posts, I crack up

You're absolutely right and one thing my husband and I have decided (having always bought new cars) is that we will never buy a new car again. It is simply a waste of money. Buy a used car for $8,000 - $13,000, drive it into the ground is our new motto.

And they need to do something about financing for people like us in BK. I told my lawyer that every time I told someone on a car lot that we were in an active CH13, they would look at the ground as if I had just performed some deviant sexual act in front of them, LOL. It's crazy.

[dingdong]

My Big Ass car reference came from my dealings with a Big Ass Cookie.

When you take the pre-made cookie dough you get from Pilsbury in those logs and smush it into an old Marie Callenders pie pan and then bake it.

Voila-Big Ass Cookie! YUM!

I ask the kids, do ya want me to make a BAC?

Hell yeah!

[LuciluS]

Dingdong:

Was headed for Nite Nite but that I would check this forum. You have again got me to laughing. You are Such A Riot

My Toyota Sienna Van was 10 yrs. on May 12th & has around 96,500 miles on it. Put new tires on it, had the back rear seats taken out (still has 4 captain's seats), & 2 yrs. ago had a remote controlled lift put in for my scooter. Both the front and rear AC works. Only thing I've had done is new tires & oil changes. Wanted to get the 90,000 mile maintenance work done, but running out of money before BK. I'm going to drive it until as they say, 'the wheels fall off of it' hehe.

You are such a Sweetie and your posts are so uplifiting. Wish you could get rid of that BAC & you are so right about our politicians. Wish each of them had to spend just one week with some of us. Betcha some laws would be different.

Hmm, had a friend spend the last 3 days/night with me cleaning my house from Top to Bottom and she had on a show called 'Wife Swap'. That's the ticket. Let Husband or Wife move in with a politician's husband/wife and vice versa. Betcha there would be MANY laws changed then
hugs,

luci

[twuoo]

Politicians are the people who HAVE the money. They pretend to care about the rest of us so they can sleep good at night I think.

[LuciluS]

Politicians are the people who HAVE the money. They pretend to care about the rest of us so they can sleep good at night I think.

And probably with a clear conscience! If I were a politician, the ONLY way I would be able to sleep good at night would be, if I created and voted the way the MAJORITY of People in my District/State/Area wanted me to & not because a Constituent or Lobbyist told me to

Luci

[dingdong]

Awww- You guys, thanks!

Glad I can provide a little comic relief now and then. What is life w/o a little humor?

I think the politician swap is a good idea. Many times ideas look great on paper but when applied to the real world and brought to fruition, they just don't work as intended.

How about that 13/wk stimulus tax credit. Thanks, but 13/wk is hardly noticeable, however a 400.00 lump sum payment would have probably helped a whole lot of folks out more. At least with a 400.00 check, you could have actually done something with it, paid a utility or bought groceries or applied it to a mortgage or rent, or even bought something ( yeah, who has the money to do that).

$13/week means you can drive your car a few extra miles while out job hunting!

Politicians need to live at poverty level or at least at average income for the state they represent for a year to understand what it is like in the real world.

The current salary (2009) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year.

Try living on 40,000/yr Mr/Mrs Congressman and see what life is like. Then write your laws based on that.

Ya think you are gonna qualify for a new car with your 3200.00/mo take home, a mortgage/rent payment of probably 1500.00 or more/month and health insurance/food/utilities?

Nope.

Most people can't afford health insurance and if you work, you can't get any govt subsidized health plans, so they take the incentive out of working for most people if they need health coverage.

I know a girl who works 3 shifts a week, maybe 20/hrs a week AT THE MOST gets section 8 housing subsidy so her part of the rent payment is 250.00/mo. She gets Medi-Cal for health insurance because she chooses to work only minimal hours so she can qualify, she gets a babysitting subsidy for childcare, which is an additional 400.00 month in benefits, and food stamps.

She gets to go out and spend money, goes up to the lake frequently on weekends with her kids, goes to the movies, etc.

Now I am all for giving a helping hand when needed, but there is absolutely no reason she can't work more. But the way the legislation is written, she has absolutely no incentive to work more. If she does, she pays more for rent, loses the childcare subsidy and foodstamps, So working more actually costs her money, her disposable income is higher on these programs.

You can't really blame her ( I know you can, and that is a moral/ethical issue, but when faced with the choice, what would most people do? They would probably take the easy way out that provides in some way some stability), that is how the programs were written.

This girl is my old neighbor. When I am driving 150-200 miles a day to work two jobs 7 days a week, she is packing up the car to head to the lake for the weekend.

There is absolutely no incentive for her to get asecond job.

Now, I am a bed wetting liberal. I support giving people a helping hand when it is warranted. If you just lost your job or can't get a job that pays more than it costs to put your kid in daycare because your husband/boyfriend left you high and dry with the kids ,so you can work, hell yeah, I'll support any programs that will get you out of that mess and get you working.

But they need to put some incentive into working so these people have a reason to get off these programs.

I recently sent a letter to my states representatives and OBAMA about the Section 8 housing voucher program. Specifically addressing all the foreclosures in my area .

If the govt bought these gazillion FC, and offered them to the section 8 renters with a type of guaranteed loan program, where the current renter who is on Section 8, was offered a chance at homeownership if the increased their income by working more.

The plan went like this.

Hypothetically. You have a rent payment of 1500.00

Section 8 pays 1100.00 of it, tenant currently pays 400.00 out of pocket.

Sec 8 renter gets on a program, where if they increase their income by working more and can qualify for the mortgage payment. After a year of on time payments at 1500.00 the amount to govt was subsidizing (1100.00/mo) is used as a down payment ( kept in an esrcow account for the year) and applied as equity to the price of the home.

So if a Sec 8 renter used the program, they would have a 13,200.00 down payment ( which the govt was basically throwing away in subsidy anyway), they would be issued a guranteed loan for the balance ( say they bought a house for 150,000.00, their mortgage payment would be about 1000.00/month

They have some equity and an incentive to stay and take care of the home. They have an incentive to work more ( home ownership). Foreclosures are taken off the market as the govt buys them for the program. The govt is saving 1100.00/mo ( or whatever they were subsidizing) and one more person is working more and contributing the economy more.

If you could own a home , have a chance of stability and building equity instead of just staying on the dole, wouldn't you go for it?

Basically in the scenario above, the Section 8 recipient would have to increase their income by maybe 1300.00/month to cover insurnace, repairs. For a two person income earning household that is about 20hrs a week each at minimum wage.

Most Section 8 tenants are underemployed, some by choice, some not and others on other programs like SSI, SS, and some veterans benefits.

There are some that it wouldn't work for , like the disabled who can't work more, and really that is what these programs should be for, people w/o the capacity to work or need a short term helping hand. Currently there is no time lmit for how long you can be on Section 8.

PS, I wrote my senior project on the Section 8 voucher program when in college, and it can be a real "trap" for benficiaries of the program. They have tried modified versions of getting a recipient to move to home ownership, but the simple fact is, these recipients can't qualify during the underwritng process and it was rare that a Section 8 tenant moved to homeownership through the program. The programs have stopped, basically they were a version of a downpayment assistance program which a recipient had to sign up for and there was limited availability, so they had a few "spots" open, when they were full, no one else was allowed to apply. It basically failed. The down payment increased and was tied to the renters share of the rent. So if your income increased, thus increasing your share of the rent by 200/month, you were liable for the extra 200.00 ( taken off the subsidy) and the 200.00 went into an escrow account for up to I believe it was 5 years, if you didn't qualify for a mortgage during that 5 year period, then the escrow account just went bye bye.

Most people on Section 8 don't have great credit, and they were unable to qualify credit wise and income wise.

With guaranteed underwriting, with a year of proven on time payments equal to the cost of a mortgage payment ( w/o the risk of losing your subsidy) renters on Section 8 would have an incentive to work more.

The year probabtionary period would work similar to a rent to own situation, where if the renter proved they could make the payments and maintain the home, that year of payments would be applied to the mortgage and the mortgage would begin at the time they started the program retroactively.

Obama or my state representatives have yet to get back to me.

I am not holding my breath.

I think my "plan" would potentially save tons of money and get people off the section 8 program. But who knows. There, I am sure, are potential problems with it, like the guaranteed underwriting ( not score driven, but income/ability to pay driven) but with the probationary year of payments, it should weed out those who don't have the intiative to make it work, and it is not all that different from FHA in the guaranteed portion of it.

The govt is dolng out the money in subsidies anyway, so the funds are there. And it would actually save money as the subsidies aren't paid during the trial year long period. ( and after if the tenant qualifies)

So there is my little rant for the day.
Come on HUD, read my posts!


DD

[twuoo]

Is there a link for updated requirements for this voucher? I've only been able to find info that dates to May. Does the car have to be brand new or can it be newer certified?

thanks

[OregonMom]

When I started reading you post I busted up laughing since my husband currently working on my "clunker" a 1974 Postal Jeep. I use it to deliver mail in and since I have to use my own vehicle this could come in really handy. According the the news brief I found I would be able to get $4,500 for my SUV since it only gets 6mpg when delivering mail. I also noticed the an add on TV for a new Kia Spectra (similar to Corolla) you can get one for $14,200 pluse $3,000 from them cash back and then my $4,500 I have a new care warrantied for 100,000 miles for $6,700!! This I would definately try and do if the bill passed. It didn't say you had to buy american, unless I missed that part. Here is my clunker, think they would laugh when I showed up with it??? ( I have owned two kia's a car and suv and loved both of them)

[dingdong]

Hey, if you can't get "Clunker" status for that, than you better call the Prez!

That should qualify, almost anything gets better than 6MPG!, just make sure you keep it registered until the law passes so you don't fall through some dumb loophole for the usage requirements ( I believe it was in use for one year)

I thought my 12mpg BAC was bad!

Clunker owners unite!

Ooooh! Do you get to use the cool light on top in the back. Bet ya could scare some naughty teenagers pulling up behind them at night with the light flashing!

[JRScott]

Ding Dong what we need to to do is stop the free give outs. These people on public assistance who are not disabled or elderly should be out there working. There is no reason they could not perform 8-16 hours community service a week in exchange for their benefits. (Without being paid for the work of course.....their benefits are their pay). This could be used to free up state budgets by supplementing the work force they have to pay for.

As for the clunker rule only can get new cars with it

My 1990 Buick LeSabre gets around 15mpg.

[twuoo]

I was reading there might be around 1 million vouchers, but they think about 3 million people will want them???

If it passes, it'll be first come and first served.

I was debating on buying a clunker and then turning it in....but you have to have had the car in your name for at least a year. Poo!

[OregonMom]

Hey, if you can't get "Clunker" status for that, than you better call the Prez!

That should qualify, almost anything gets better than 6MPG!, just make sure you keep it registered until the law passes so you don't fall through some dumb loophole for the usage requirements ( I believe it was in use for one year)

I thought my 12mpg BAC was bad!

Clunker owners unite!

Ooooh! Do you get to use the cool light on top in the back. Bet ya could scare some naughty teenagers pulling up behind them at night with the light flashing!

I have had this thing registered and in my name for over a year now and yep the light works! I sub on three different routes for the post office and it makes it back every time! I haven't driven it around in the dark yet, but scaring teenagers might be fun!
So does anyone have any idea if this new bill is really going to happen? How would you get your voucher? At trade in time, by mail or? I am seriously thinking about this one. My other klunker a 1989 Jeep cherokee is going to be traded in as soon a possible, can barely keep the thing running. Can you get two vouchers for two different cars?