• @Emet
    link
    131 year ago

    deleted by creator

      • Pirky
        link
        131 year ago

        I know you’re being sarcastic but the cash for clunkers, while it worked pretty well, worked a little too well. Since that program it got harder to find cheap, old vehicles. Sure, they were inefficient, but they were cheap. Cheap cars don’t seem to exist much anymore.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          Removing inefficient cars from the roads was literally the point of the program. You’re saying the program worked exactly as intended

          • @Emet
            link
            31 year ago

            deleted by creator

          • RaivoKulli
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Not so fun for those relying for cheap cars for their transportation but there’s bad sides to everything.

        • donuts
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I get it, but old cars are also much less efficient even than modern ICE cars, so if the goal is to facilitate a transition into EVs and hybrids it might make some sense. The obvious issue with that is that there is also an environmental cost to making new cars to replace all the old cars, and I personally don’t know how that pencils out compared to keeping people in older, inefficient cars, even if they have a pretty limited lifespan anyway…

          I guess I’m kind of torn on it. Personally I’d love to move away form my 2014 BMW which makes about 18mpg on average.

        • @JustAManOnAToilet
          link
          11 year ago

          Cash for clunkers was a way to prop up car companies that had already been bailed out.