[AMC-list] Subject: Re: cash for clunkers

["Thomas Garner" <Tgarner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't care for the law, but I have different reasons. BESIDES the fact that it gave me more work(I'm lazy.), I disagree with Government getting involved with much of anything. Seriously, now what DOES the government manage well besides war?? lol

 As for 80's vehicles, well I guess your right. I can see that 50 years from now, the Ford Escort(just an example, lol) being a collectible.
 I personally haven't seen alot of action on the "Cash 4 clunkers" forms that we have put up on lost of sites. (We have a little over 2,000 dealer websites all over the country, but I can't estimate how many has the "Cash 4 clunkers" form for lead submission)

I better go out an buy myself an Escort and a Chevette before the value shoots through the roof huh?



Message: 5
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:40:22 -0400
From: "Dan Strohl" <DStrohl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-list] cash for clunkers
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
	<03F9EBBBEEE1224F813E61CDA169C036013AAF8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Count me among the dissenters. Among my other beefs with cash for
clunkers (crush a perfectly good, running, useable vehicle for the sake
of new car sales?), is that it threatens not the collector car hobby
now, but the collector car hobby of the future.

The people who agree with this law claim that only worthless cars that
will never become collectible will be turned in under this program, thus
it poses no threat to the collector car hobby. 

But let's look at the Model T, any Edsel, 1970s Japanese cars and, yes,
Ramblers and AMCs. They were all considered throwaway, uncollectible
cars at some point in time. In the 1940s, nobody could have predicted
that people will continue to debate how to properly restore a Model T
sedan 60 years into the future. In the 1960s, people were laughed at for
driving fuddy duddy old Ramblers. And today? Try going to an all-makes
show without seeing any one of the above cars. Heck, nobody ever thought
four-doors or station wagons would serve any purpose outside the demo
derby arenas, but plenty of people collect, preserve and restore those
cars.

Can we predict what will become collectible in the future? No, not at
all. Maybe first-generation minivans? Maybe early SUVs? Maybe the last
of the rear-drive GM G-bodies? Or, let's drive this home: How many
Eagles will this program crush?

Nor can we predict what the next generation of car collectors will want
to buy, preserve and restore when they reach the age when they can do
so. If we unwittingly crush the exact vehicles they will eventually
desire, then we risk losing an entire generation of car collectors and
car enthusiasts, which should frighten the bejesus out of anybody in the
collector car hobby who sincerely worries about attracting younger
people into the hobby.

I'm not arguing every vehicle should be saved, restored and put back on
the streets. I know that's impossible. But to artificially shorten the
natural lifespan of an automobile (new car -> used car -> clunker ->
cult favorite -> collector car) will do our automotive heritage a great
disservice.

I also know that car collectors are a vast minority when stacked against
the auto industry and the green movement, which is why I was greatly
surprised by the 1984 cutoff that SEMA managed to get inserted into the
program. But it drives me nuts when I see people in the collector car
hobby - people who should appreciate older cars - claim that this
legislation won't affect them.

Sorry for the rant.

dan


_____________________________________________________________
Are you prepared for your exam
4TestsMail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://www.4testsmail.com/
_______________________________________________
AMC-list mailing list
AMC-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://list.amc-list.com/listinfo.cgi/amc-list-amc-list.com