Top Gear, on Cash for Clunkers.

This came from my mate Angry Exile.

I posted on this scheme a while ago when Gillard proposed it. It is apparently also in vogue in England. It is said that a lie makes its way around the world, while the truth is putting its shoes on and it looks like a dumb idea does the same thing. Here is the Top Gear boys take on it:

They make a great point about the waste of energy in an attempt to save fuel.

In many ways the theory of ‘Cash for clunkers,’ is similar to the ‘broken window’ theory in which it is argued that vandalism is good. This assumes that the destruction of property is synonymous with economic revival, (thus wars are good for the economy) by causing the victims to spend money they might have been otherwise too selfish to. The fact that the victims may have had their own aspirations as to what to do with the money they have been forced to spend to get back where they started from is beside the point.

While those who accept this offer are not coerced into doing so the fact remains that the government is encouraging the destruction of productive units at a direct cost to the taxpayers and indebtedness to those who put their feet on Julia’s sticky paper.

5 thoughts on “Top Gear, on Cash for Clunkers.

  1. ‘Journalists’ will hype anything that can destroy capitalism. They hate capitalism and have various utopias in their minds that guides them. They are channeling evil, not just ignorance.

  2. This policy has also failed politically- we traded the clunker called Krudd, but our bright shiny J model gilliard is a new line of red lemons!

  3. the great filtration debate. Ive had a gutful of working with the world wide wait .. china and filtered internet such as not being able to load voip services in Dubai because “it goes against the wishes and morals of the peoples Islamic Republic of Saudia Arabia” and countries with a vested interest in telco businesses and therefore try and stop voice over internet. I understand this is for other means but where does filtration start and stop

  4. What is most amazing about the whole thing is that she expects it will save 1 million tonnes of CO2 emissions, while costing $394 million dollars. A cost of $394 per tonne, yet the true market cost to extract a tonne of CO2 from the air is only $44 per tonne. This is why Julia Gillard is a danger to us all. The fact that the same people who perform the economic calculations behind this want to sit down and decide a ‘carbon’ price is scary.

Comments are closed.