@gungasnake,
gungasnaKKKe wrote:
At this stage I'd rate this one as a rumor although on a scale of one to ten for rumors being likely to turn out right I'd rate this one a 9.5 or a ten, the source is very good.
And I'd rate your ability to rate rumors on their potential truthfullness at 1.2.
gungasnaKKKe wrote:In fact, unless you have relatives who buy and sell used cars at the big auctions like the one up Farmerman's way at Manheim, the situation is even worse. That says that the next time you go to buy a car from Carmax or whatever, THEY will have had to outbid the crusher apriori, and the price to YOU will reflect that, i.e. you'll be paying two or three grand more than you would have otherwise for the same car.
This is such a weird argument it must have come from the lunatic conservative
fringe mainstream. I first heard it in
this clip, where Fox News anchor Trace Gallagher suggested that the "cash for clunkers" program would do nothing except drive up the price of used cars. If it was on Fox News, I concluded, then this must be an official Republican talking point -- and now that
gungasnaKKKe has repeated it, I reckon that makes it official.
I guess the thinking goes like this: the "cash for clunkers" program requires that the car dealers destroy the trade-ins. That means those cars never enter the used car market, which means higher prices for the remaining used cars.
The problem, though, is that this focuses only on the supply side of the equation. Prices are determined by both supply
and demand. Every junked clunker represents one less used car, but it also represents one less buyer potentially in the market for a used car. If supply and demand both fall at about the same rate, then prices should remain relatively stable (all other things being equal). Given that this is the Republicans we're talking about, however, it shouldn't come as a surprise that they don't grasp this fundamental point about economics.