Local Celebrity

I've spent a lot of time ranting on this blog about Cash for Clunkers.  I decided to make my opinions and research a little more vocal and submit a "My View" column to Buffalo News.  Can you guess the subject?  Call our hometown paper left-leaning, they still saw my article worthy of publication.  It  ran this past Wednesday (March 3).  Enjoy it here. 

As a quick aside, every time I get published in "My View" I become somewhat of a local celebrity.  Strangers approach me in public and mention that they read my article.  I'm not exaggerating.  This column, which seeks personal opinion stories from the community, runs six days a week.  (A man named Douglas Turner gets the column inches on Mondays.) 

This leads me to a couple interesting questions:

• Does everyone who gets a run in "My View" become a Buffalo celebrity for a week? 
• Does everyone look as awful as I do when their face is reproduced in newsprint?  (I'd have to think the answer to this one is yes based on some of the awful AP photos I've seen of public figures.) 

Regardless, I'm glad Buffalo News chooses to seek some input from the community for the Op-Ed page. It often makes for some interesting reading.
 
 

CARS Again...

Planes, trains, and automobiles—err, well planes and automobiles anyway—have come to dominate post after post on Buffalo Bloggins lately. From photos of my jet setting during the Fall of 2006, to my opines on the auto industry, it’s safe to say oil-driven, mass-transit machinery has been the talk of my blog lately. So as not to disappoint, I’m going to rail on “Cash for Clunkers” (hereto C4C) some more.

In my February 2009 Car and Driver, a few more details emerged as to some of the more exotic cars we American taxpayers purchased, then only to get screwed by having a government-mandated sodium silicate solution dumped in the crankcases. Rather than just list the cars, you can see photos, MSRP when new, and the number junked through the program right on C&D's website.

I thought an ambitious little research project would be to find out what the current values of these cars would be today. Surely they’re worth more than the maximum $4500 tax credit the government offered. Finding values on Kelly Blue Book for some of these exotic makes is impossible because they don’t exist in KBB’s database.

I did find a 2005 Mazda RX8. Assuming average mileage of 40,000 and “good” condition, the car still returned a value far above $4500. And the thought of listening to that rotary engine scream as the sodium silicate shreds its crankcase is almost more than I can bear to think of.

I checked eBay Motors to see what a few of these exotics may list for. I found one example: a 2001 Aston Martin DB7 lists for over $40,000. Granted, the C4C casualty was a 1997.  Condition:  it had to be in running condition and owned by the tradee for at least one year. I don't think this one was driven by the likes of Agent 007. 

Here are a few examples of more “common” cars I found on KBB. These are private party values, assuming average mileage (considering these probably weren’t daily drivers), standard equipment, and good condition:
• 1990 Mercedes 500SL Roadster, 120,000 miles: $5,575
• 1991 BMW M3, 120,000 miles: $8,785
• 1993 Mazda RX7, 120,000 miles: $8,860
• 1992 GMC Typhoon, 120,000 miles: $9,425

I think my point is made: a lot of these cars—collector’s editions for sure—were worth more than the puny tax credit offered. Why anyone would subject them to the sodium silicate treatment is beyond me. Even in poor shape, many of these could have been restored and gone on for years to adorn collector’s salons, auto shows, and Independence Day parades. Will Americans one day look back regretfully on this mass automotive destruction known as “Cash for Clunkers?”  What if FDR in all his social programming had mandated a Cash-for-Model-Ts program?  Would will still have these historic antiques—a picture of American nostalgia, prosperity, and ingenuity—as tangible relics from the past?

You may find this blog, complete with photos, interesting.  It lists the 10 most exotic cars trashed thanks to Obama and his administration.  If you're an auto enthusiast, be warned:  you may need the box of tissues.

About the Photo:  I shot these exotic European automobiles at the Hard Rock Hotel, Las Vegas, Nevada.  For a [not so] small fee, one of these can whisk you from McCarran Airport to the Hard Rockin' action.  Hopefully none of these were junked in favor of a Prius...

I'm at it Again...Maybe it's Time We Junk the Obama Administration?

Ranting about the government’s controversial “Cash for Clunkers” program is nothing new for me. However, in the December 2009 Car and Driver, columnist David E. Davis Jr. brought to light a few more reasons to hate the Obama administration’s attempt to run the auto industry. Read the full text here.

To give a short synopsis, Davis Jr. basically reiterated the sentiment I expressed months ago that seeing a perfectly good automobile destroyed can be downright painful to watch. It’s as if every car has some personality; it’s not just a heap of steel parts sitting on rubber. However, just like humans, personalities can have a dark side, and there are plenty of cars I wouldn’t mind doing the honors of destroying (such as my gratefully departed 1998 Subaru Outback).

In the developing Third World nations such as those in Asia and Africa, people haven’t been afforded the liberties and economic prosperity that we here in America have enjoyed since at least the 1950s. This post-war era saw automobiles become an attainable luxury and urban sprawl gave way to suburban commuting. Davis Jr. makes the case that instead of blowing up the engines in so-called “clunkers”, perhaps those automobiles could have been given to poorer nations to help them enjoy a piece of the prosperity pie.

Geez, handing out American wealth (at the cost of taxpayers, no less) to poor nations (many of which hate us) sounds like it would be right in line with Obama-esque socialistic values.

Car and Driver, in the January 2010 issue, made mention of some of the vehicles American taxpayers purchased:  Jaguars, various 2008 models, and a rare Buick GNX. C&D editors jest that Nancy Pelosi kept the GNX for herself.  She'd look great cruising around in that, perhaps in her thong.  Sorry.  Back on topic, here. You need only look as far as YouTube to see the famed video of a fine Swede being blown up along with plenty of other still-useful cars and trucks.

To see a place where these clunkers could have made a striking impact, one need not even look as far as Africa or Asia. About 90 miles south of Miami lies Cuba. I know we don’t have diplomatic relations with Castro’s communist regime, but Obama is even trying to fix that. Since the embargo began in the 1950s, Cubans have kept alive as daily drivers many of the cars that today we see only in antique/classic car shows. Romantic as these Dinosaurs of Detroit are, the showroom floor and occasional Independence Day parade is about all they belong in.

Much to the chagrin of classic car collectors, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety plowed a 2009 Chevy Malibu head on into a 1959 Chevy Bel Air. Watch the results for yourself. It’s gruesome, but proves the iron behemoths of the past didn’t exactly offer much occupant protection in the event of a crash.  Oh, but Cuba offers superior socialized healthcare to its citizens, right Michael Moore?  So when Cubans get maimed in a crash, at least they get free hospitalization!  Oh wait, Obama's trying to get us that, too.  (Ok, don't get me started on the healthcare thing). 

Safer, cleaner, more reliable cars could have been redistributed to poorer nations where they’d make far more reliable transportation than the relics that rule the roads. Or how about this? Keep the wealth at home; get the true clunkers—the unsafe, unreliable, smog-belching cars—off the road here in the good old US of A. But as Davis Jr. quipped in his column:

“Not until the government got involved was anyone stupid enough to pour sodium silicate into the engines of the trade-ins on used-car lots and render them utterly useless except as junk to be sold by the pound.” (emphasis added.)

I won’t even go into what user-car inventory could have done for local dealerships, the economy, and those needing a car but unable to afford brand new, even with taxpayer-funded credits.


A Clunker Worth Junking?

Cashing in on Clunkers or Crushing Car Makers?

Congress has approved the “Cash for Clunkers” incentive, potentially doling out one-billion more taxpayer dollars. I can only describe this bill as being pure-Obama in nature. It’s supposed to help restart the economy. It’ll supposedly reduce inventories of older, more polluting used cars. And it may help domestic automakers, of which O’s administration is and/or will be a major stakeholder in two out of three.

In today's Buffalo News, an article announcing Congress' green light of the prgoram also included hopeful talk that this bill could help bankrupt Chrysler and GM start moving new cars onto the streets. And don’t forget the “green” economic “bright side” to this program.

Trouble is, as of the U.S. Department of Energy’s 2009 Fuel Economy Leaders guide, domestic automakers topping any class in fuel economy is rare. Most sedans, two-seaters, and small pickups are dominated by foreign makes. Some are Hondas and Toyotas, while others are Hyundais and Volkswagens.

The only classes where domestic automakers lead are in heavy-duty pickups, SUVs, and cargo vans. No wonder, as these types of vehicles have long been Detroit’s bread and butter. While models like Toyota Tundra and Nissan Titan attempt to fill in the gaps, it seems any die-hard truck lover is going to choose either a Ford, Chevy, or Dodge. Arguing about which of the three is best is a whole different animal.

So it’s funny then: Obama wants to legislate tougher CAFÉ standards and fuel economy requirements. He’s all in favor of Fiat and Chrysler’s marriage, since this will supposedly bring "Euro micro car" technology to the U.S.

Obama’s mandates, if passed, will achieve the following:

• Domestic automakers will be deprived of their highest-profit trucks, SUVs, and heavy-duty vehicles


• The Big Three will be strong-armed into building dinky, fuel efficient cars that most Americans probably won’t take kindly to


• One-billion taxpayer dollars are going to go toward funding a program encouraging cars most people don't want to drive, while destroying the bigger vehicles that have long kept the American automakers alive...

There seems to be a lot of irony in all this. Don’t even get me started on other complications, like who (the taxpayers, of course) is ultimately going to pay for this “Cash for Clunkers” incentive.