Now that the Cash for Clunkers program is over, your tax dollars will begin funding the Cash for Refrigerators and Appliances program later in 2009. The Cash for Refrigerators and Appliances plan will be funded by the Energy Department, and is an effort to get people to move to more energy efficient appliances.
Steven Chu Introduces Cash for Refrigerators
As reported here, the government will be offering a Cash for Refrigerators and Appliances program so you can trade in your old energy-consuming refrigerator, washer/dryer, etc. for a new efficient one. Steven Chu, the Secretary of Energy, will oversee the program.
How much money are we talking about? It’s $50 to $200, depending on the appliance that you’re turning in. The whole program will run about $300 million, considerably less than the $2 to 3 billion that the Cash for Clunkers program cost you.
$50 to $200 may not sound like much, since it’s not as much as the $4500 the government was offering for old cars in the Cash for Clunkers program. However, considering that most old appliances are worthless and can’t be sold for anything, the government is essentially offering something for nothing.
The payments will be rebates to purchase new appliances. While it’s been dubbed “Cash for Refrigerators” by the press, it also applies to other appliances, most importantly washer/dryers, which consume a huge amount of energy.
Is another government program what we need here? Will this really get job creation going? So far nothing that Obama has done has gotten people working again.
This is the wrong approach. Government welfare in the long run does not do the economy any good. Get people working, get them paychecks, create an environment that encourages innovative products, and then people will buy appliances again.
The only thing this encourages is a bigger waste of your tax dollars.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Well, I do need a new washer and dryer ….
Thanks y’all!
August 24th, 2009 at 11:07 am
these people are insane.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:12 am
Why don’t we just have cash for sex.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Why don’t they just look at everybodies credit card debt and give us a percentage of the balance(s)?
This would alleviate debt and help people out.
My family really needs this.
Frank
August 24th, 2009 at 11:19 am
charles - I’m afraid they’d want to do cash for no sex. That way they would keep us from procreating and being punished with a baby.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Wow Frank - that’s a fantastic idea! My family needs it too. Maybe we can propose that to our Representatives! Heh! How far with those trillions of dollars go towards paying off our debt??
August 24th, 2009 at 11:23 am
And people are objecting to this why? Remember, in the house there was a HUGE call for Cash for Clunkers to be given MORE funds, including from most of the GOP. Those are your right-wing reps speaking!
August 24th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
I don’t think it’s such a bad idea to give an incentive to buy an appliance that saves you money and also saves the Earth. As far as decreasing your debt… what about the people who have little or no debt? How would that help them? And a baby is a blessing, not a punishment. I would deffinitely agree, however, that too many people are having babies irresponsibly and living off the system, sucking our tax dollars to fund their poor decisions, which bites for the rest of us.
August 24th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
The idea that these sorts of programs “save the Earth” is a complete fallacy. It’s pretty simple: every object on the market requires some expenditure of energy to produce it. If we’re throwing out working cars, or refrigerators, or whatever else, we’re throwing out the energy used to manufacture (and dispose of) those products.
So before we even start to realize a net gain, the unit must run long enough for the incremental savings on running energy to total up to the total initial energy expenditure involved with manufacturing the new unit. For the CARS program, most estimates I’ve seen of that “break-even” point are further out than the typical lifespan of the vehicles being bought, making it a negative-sum game in terms of energy usage. My guess is that same is true for the appliances.
So if they want to pose it strictly as some sort of stimulus, that’s one thing. I don’t agree with the methodology, but at least it’s logically consistent. But they are insulting our intelligence when they position is as a way to help the environment.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I think this is a great idea. I need a new refrigerator and dryer. Unlike the cash for clunkers, this gets people into the stores where they might buy other things. It also moves product off the floor and into the homes.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Rhayader, I heard the same numbers being tossed around. These are mere stop gap measures.
I heard that some car companies are hiring thousands back to replenish inventory. Then what? I see these people getting laid off again in the near future. Is this administration manipulating the employment numbers to show progress?
They’re borrowing from future generations who will eventually have to pay the tab.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Yeah I agree flyingmonkey; it’s misguided, desperate, and temporary. Maybe that’s why they need to sugar-coat it by falsely claiming that this helps the environment.
August 24th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Mr. Peepers LIVES!
August 24th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I need a new oven and fridge. Do I have to call it a clunker? :S
August 24th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Beth your probably right.
August 24th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
The real irony with these clunker plans is that what people are buying is not American-made. Most of the cash for clunkers vehicles sold were foreign, and most of the fridges and appliances people will be buying are not made in the US either. Perhaps the administration and congress should get back to the real world and figure out how to use all that federal debt to create jobs instead of supporting foreign markets.
http://www.newsy.com/videos/cash_for_clunkers_was_it_worth_it
August 24th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Frank, your idea is by far the best I’ve heard!
Oh how I wish…….
August 24th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Free ice cream for everyone! Whee! This is nuts. I just got back from a town hall and there was mostly liberals chanting “health care is freedom.” I got into a debate, but it’s like talking to a wall with these people. I just posted the audio and photos in a YouTube video.
http://www.streetwisepundit.com/health-care-town-hall-arlington-heights-august-24-2009.php
Good post Frank. I hope we take both sides in 2010. We can put the brakes on much of this…
Madcap
August 24th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
MJ
“The real irony with these clunker plans is that what people are buying is not American-made. Most of the cash for clunkers vehicles sold were foreign”
Remember Chairman Mao with his “melt your wok” program? Everyone starved…
August 24th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Hey Frank and all you others that think the government should pay off the credit card debt you incurred upon yourself should get a life. You dug your own hole not get yourself out of it. Those of us who are responsible and cut our life styles or don’t foolishly squander our resources should not be picking up the credit card debt for those of you who chose to sell yourselves to the banks for temporary fun or reprieve. And don’t give me all your hard luck “had to use a credit card to survive” stories. I have had plenty or “hard times” and “reckless spending habits” as a youth and guess what I did? I got off my bum and worked it off to pay off my debt. We need the government to “stimulate the economy” by leaving it alone. When capitalism comes to full fruition and people do not have the false belief that the government will protect, they will finally have no excuse or crutch to allow them to be lazy and stupid. I believe this nation as a whole would be smarter and individually wealthier without a government that coddles them. Oh God, don’t get me started on the unions. You only deserve what you are willing to go out and earn.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Here’s a definition for those who need it:
Sarcasm–the use of irony to mock or convey contempt
and to further clarify:
irony–the expression of one’s meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Well, the government is sort of helping you pay off your credit card debt, because Obama just signed a bill to put some restrictons on the credit card industry, right? So they can’t just jack up the interest rate wihout telling you, or whatever, right? So in a way, that is going to help pay them off.
I don’t have any credit cards, myself.
August 25th, 2009 at 5:03 am
So, lets spend more money we don’t have to support businesses that send their labor out of our country so they don’t have to pay Americans living wages and add the cost to our credit card debt - which the government has done nothing to ease - for what. The banks take federal bail-out money (our tax dollars) then jack up interest rates, increase minimums which the gov’t allows because they tell us and they start charging fees - talk about reaching into both pockets. …and of course there’s health care. Let’s let the feds play with that too. NO WAY! 2010 is coming soon.
August 25th, 2009 at 6:00 am
I think cash for clunkers & appliances r both great ideas. People do have money, but they’re holding onto it out of fear. Thus, they’re not buying & the economy is crashing. Funds for cash4clunkers were all but depleted. Consumers came out of the woodworks to get n2 more debt. Vehicles, as well as appliances r so expensive these days, & most of the vehicles were small, compact sized vehicles. No one with a reasonably sized family could get n2 those cars. I do, however, applaud the govt. for attempting 2 not be dependent on foreign fuels. My refrigerator is about 15-20 yrs old. I bought it used 8 yrs ago for $200. While shopping for a new one, I’m noticing that the price for the size I need is between $900 & $1100. I don’t want to buy another old, used fridge, but the prices are high.
The point is, the vehicles, appliances, gas, food, pet supplies, water, & even air for your tires are expensive. Maybe if the focus was on lowering some of the prices on some of the merchandise, consumers would be more confident about investing in the economy. People have resorted to more conventional methods to get by.
I just think that the focus should be on energy efficiency. The focus should also be cost, consumer confidence and the effect that these things have on the economy.
People can come out & buy new cars & appliances
August 25th, 2009 at 6:03 am
I think cash for clunkers & appliances r both great ideas. People do have money, but they’re holding onto it out of fear. Thus, they’re not buying & the economy is crashing. Funds for cash4clunkers were all but depleted. Consumers came out of the woodworks to get n2 more debt. Vehicles, as well as appliances r so expensive these days, & most of the vehicles were small, compact sized vehicles. No one with a reasonably sized family could get n2 those cars. I do, however, applaud the govt. for attempting 2 not be dependent on foreign fuels. My refrigerator is about 15-20 yrs old. I bought it used 8 yrs ago for $200. While shopping for a new one, I’m noticing that the price for the size I need is between $900 & $1100. I don’t want to buy another old, used fridge, but the prices are high.
The point is, the vehicles, appliances, gas, food, pet supplies, water, & even air for your tires are expensive. Maybe if the focus was on lowering some of the prices on some of the merchandise, consumers would be more confident about investing in the economy. People have resorted to more conventional methods to get by.
I just think that the focus should be on energy efficiency. The focus should also be cost, consumer confidence and the effect that these things have on the economy.
People will come out & buy new cars & appliances if they were confident in the economy. Where will consumers be when these programs are long gone?