Cash for clunkers: Early on I came close to buying a PT Cruiser.

http://ww2.startribune.com/user_comments/comments.php?d=asset_comments&asset_id=54400982&section=/business

My newer vehicle is a 2005 Ford Ranger with 18K miles. My "clunker" is a 1993 Chev S-10 4x4 with a max towing package and 177K miles. I could have gotten a 2009 PT Cruiser for $10K even with cash for clunkers. Very tempting. I could have paid for it out of savings. My brother, who is a very good mechanic talked me out of it. He says that mechanically the S-10 is very good and I think he likes having the "max towing" package available.

I read that of the 700,000 cars sold, analyst estimated that 200,000 were "disgressionary" buyers, basically people who have money because they didn't spent it. I'm one and love a bargain but with 18K miles on the Ranger I don't need a new vehicle.

Basically, if we are to do a "cash for clunkers" program the goal should be to "shake the money out from "under the mattresses" so to speak. I would specify that there could be no leases or loan liens on the new vehicles. I would also specify that the current owner must keep the vehicle for a period of three years or more with an early sale pro-rated at (let's say) $100 per month. The only exception to this would be a sale due to the death or disability of the owner resulting in permanent loss of driver's licence. ........

First the no loans or lease. Many people have a lot of debt. Admittedly with "clunkers" discount there is a lot less repo loss but debt or lease is still a debt obligation. A lot of the "savers" have money "in the bank/under the mattress". This is the money a stimulus program should be flushing out. I give the $100 per month penalty for early sale to avoid the "resale loophole" that seemed to exist with the current program. Many of the buyers under my scheme would be elderly so the exclusion for death or medically related drivers licence surrender would reassure them. I would exclude a repay exemption for sale after a licence revocation caused by a DUI or other traffic offenses or non-driving related imprisonment.

How come I can figure this out and those Washington lawmakers and bureaucrats can't?

....I will cross post at my http://fourfiftygas.com