Wednesday, October 07, 2009


I'm not the only one doing the math on Cash For Clunkers.

Irwin Stelzer, an economist at the Hudson Institute says that, at best "the reduction in gasoline consumption will cut our oil consumption by 0.2 percent per year, or less than a single day's gasoline use."

So, you could hardly justify the program based on reduced gas consumption, although that is exactly what the president did.

What about overall benefit, environmental improvements and the benefit to car buyers and companies? Take that and subract the overallcost of the program. Is it a postitive benefit for America or just a negative cost? (and did the President do any of this math?) Burton Abrams and George Parsons of the University of Delaware calculate a net cost of roughly $2,000 per vehicle. That means the program made the nation $1.4 billion poorer.

I do not really think the President did the math or even cared about the math. I think he wanted to look like he was doing something. And, the people who got the cars, and the people who want to redistribute wealth in this country, like it and will support him in it. I think the President wants to distribute wealth. Hillary Clinton did and said it. This guy is more careful and charming with his words, but maybe less truthful.
Post a Comment