There go the "cash for clunkers" lobbyists again...

[keiser31]

Man, I HATE when they start talking about doing that, again.

[poci1957]

Yeah, me too, bad news.

[charlier]

I wonder how long it will be before the lobbyists for makers of small gas engines push for their own version of cash for clunkers.

That would help sell millions of new lawn mowers, garden tractors, weed wackers, chain saws, electric generators, etc.

I laugh when some people justify the cash for clunkers for cars using "cleaner air" and ignore the small gas engine machinery that also negatively impact air quality as well.

[joe_padavano]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the Fast 'n Furious movie franchise has caused the scrappage of more vintage iron than any government Cash-for-Clunkers effort? Why aren't we worried about that?

(And don't even get me started about 1969 Chargers...)

[Dandy Dave]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(And don't even get me started about 1969 Chargers...) </div></div>

Ooooh them Dukes them Dukes.... Dandy Dave!

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: keiser31</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Man, I HATE when they start talking about doing that, again. </div></div>

How about a link to something so we can see what you are worried about?

Yeah, I know they are trying again, but without details, what is the point of posting about it?

[ted sweet]

its in the new federal budget proposal.

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ted sweet</div><div class="ubbcode-body">its in the new federal budget proposal. </div></div>

Not something I read on a daily basis.

Again, if this is something requiring discussion here, then a link or an excerpt should be provided so people are discussing facts instead of posting random, useless comments. So far, this thread is a waste of space and not what I was expecting when I came here.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bill_Haegele</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Again, if this is something requiring discussion here, then a link or an excerpt should be provided so people are discussing facts instead of posting random, useless comments. </div></div>

Here's a start for you Bill.........

[Guest Bluesky636]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bill_Haegele</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Again, if this is something requiring discussion here, then a link or an excerpt should be provided so people are discussing facts instead of posting random, useless comments. </div></div>

Here's a start for you Bill......... </div></div>

Thank you. Some good stuff there.

Here is SEMA's letter to President Obama and leaders of Congress:

http://www.semasan.com/images/pdf/2009-Letter-to-President-Obama.pdf

I am surprised that SEMA has not sent something about this out to their members and newsletter subscribers.

[2doorcoupeman]

Just watched a CBS reports about how in Europe,cars that are 9 years or older are turned in for cash.The reporter said it might be a way to increase new car sales.How about producing a vehicle that the public wants.From what I have read the Chrysler corporation does not want to build too many challengers so to save the value of the car.hmm.The car with proper financing sells great.Product drives sales.

[Guest Bluesky636]

What no one bothers to explain or even consider, is how a person who can only afford an older car could suddenly afford to buy a $20K - $30K new car after getting a $3K voucher for turning in their old car. Did I miss something? Did monthly car payments suddenly disappear?