Skip Navigation
Derek Thompson

Derek Thompson - Derek Thompson is a senior editor at The Atlantic, where he oversees business coverage for the website.
More

He is a visiting research fellow at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget at the New America Foundation. Derek has also written for Slate, BusinessWeek, and the Daily Beast. He has appeared as a guest on radio and television networks, including NPR, the BBC, CNBC, and MSNBC.

The Senate Should Kill Cash for Clunkers

By Derek Thompson
Aug 3 2009, 11:41 AM ET Comment

As Republican senators rush to kill Obama's wildly popular Cash for Clunkers, which gives new car buyers up to $4500 for their old cars, it's time to think seriously about whether we should spend another $2 billion on this giveaway. I wrote a fair amount about this program last week including an FAQ and an update, but now I'm pretty sure that Cash for Clunkers is a bad policy that doesn't deserve a $2 billion double-down.


Cash for Clunkers should be clunked because it's bad for the environment and bad for the tax payer, and because we're paying people to trade up cars that they were going to replace anyway.

Bad for the Environment
The program is designed to help the ailing car industry and the environment by rewarding consumers who want to trade up for an environmentally friendly car. But C4C is much easier on SUV buyers than car buyers. Let's say you want to trade up for either a car or an SUV, both with a 2 MPG improvement. The SUV will qualify for a $3500 rebate. The car won't. So we're still paying people to choose SUVs with worse mileage than cars, even after Detroit's implosion. What's worse, Michigan lawmakers are trying to make it even easier for buyers to trade up for SUVs with the next $2 billion batch. Subsidies distort the market, but a subsidy designed to crystallize Detroit's backward SUV-centric default is a stupid investment in the environment, and a terrible investment in the long-term sustainability of General Motors and Ford.

Bad for the Tax Payer
Cash for Clunkers was designed to last until October. Instead the program ran out of money in less than a week. That's good news for the auto industry, because it confirms what many analysts long suspected: That the pent-up market for cars was historic and primed to go gangbusters. But in all likelihood, these sales were going to happen anyway -- the current age of our auto fleet is at an all-time high. If we should be paying people to trade in cars that they are going to replace in a few months anyway, then the argument for Cash for Clunkers is essentially an argument for government giveaways for any consumer activity. The CEO of Edmunds.com, a new and used car sales website, says he's not convinced Cash for Clunkers will increase yearly sales in any noticeable way.

Obama officials have called C4C the most effective stimulus program they could have dreamed up. But the point of public stimulus spending is to replace demand that does not exist, not to spend billions of dollars to take three months worth of sales and cram them into a frenzied week.
Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Which of Today's Pop Newcomers Will End Up One-Hit Wonders? Which Pop Newcomers Will Be One-Hit Wonders?
Egypt Votes: A Primer on the Arab World's First Free Presidential Election What's Next for Egypt, After Today's Historic Vote?
The New Economics of Happiness The New Economics of Happiness
Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV? Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV?
The Sorry Six-Day History of Facebook, Inc: A Glitch, a Snitch, and a Tumble The Sorry Six-Day History of Facebook, Inc.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

The American West, 150 Years Ago

May 24, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)