CarTalk.com Blogs Car Info Our Show Deals Mechanics Files Vehicle Donation

Well Folks:

After reading the article by Jim M and the one about clean diesel,I can ascertain 2 things(if I’m buying new)

  1. I wont own a diesel

  2. The only new car in the future I could concievably own would be a lower end sub compact.
    Where has the economy gone?( I know this is sort of a mote point,but since the budget slashing on Capitol Hill,whats instore for the auto market? 0-Kevin

I will never own another diesel vehicle and I don’t buy new because of vehicle depreciation. The economy will bounce back eventually but we still need to get the biggest bang for the buck with our energy dollars. We wasted a lot of money and fuel in years past (myself included) so we don’t need to get back into that habit again.

I don’t see new car sales ever breaking records again. We have several new vehicle dealerships that have closed down permanently in the last few years. The newest ones that did open were multi-vehicle dealerships with several brands under one roof. The largest has…believe it or not…Ford, Lincoln, Chevrolet, GMC, Buick and Cadillac. I never thought I would see the day when that would happen.

???

" After reading the article by Jim M and the one about clean diesel,I can ascertain 2 things(if I’m buying new) "

Who’s Jim M ?
What article ?
Please explain how I can read the article.

CSA

“I know this is sort of a mote point,but since the budget slashing on Capitol Hill,whats instore for the auto market?”

The government could easily save $85B from the budget from discretionary accounts. $85B is only a little over 2% of the total budget. But this is political so the administration is going to select the cuts where it inflicts the most damage to the opposing party, that’s just politics.

They could save a lot more money just by changing the rules for advancement where if the size of a persons budget is even mentioned in their evaluations, they will not be eligible for promotions, but any savings in their budget would be allowed and considered a positive. That alone might not wipe out the total deficit, but it would go a long way toward it.

It’s not $85 billion. Only $44 billion through the remainder of the fiscal year, and it’s $44B less projected spending, which actually translates to a $15B increase over FY2012.

"It's not $85 billion. Only $44 billion through the remainder of the fiscal year, and it's $44B less projected spending, which actually translates to a $15B increase over FY2012."

Can you back that up, I have not seen those figures. My understanding is that it is supposed to be $1.2T over ten years which would amount to $120B/year. Since this is only a partial year, $85B seams like a reasonable share of that $120B for this year.

One thing that does have me wondering is that the budget is a three year process, so the budgets for years 4-10 have not even been started. How will they determine that they have cut $120B from the budgets of those years?

@CSA,Jim Motavalli on"latest on Car Talk.com" -Homepage-Kevin

Thanks Kevin, I Read It. It Was An Interesting Article.

It’s kind of scary to think about some points made. I won’t buy or ride in a compact or subcompact car, my choice and my prerogative. I prefer to buy slightly used CPO large cars, but it takes new car sales to replenish the used car pool.

It seems car sales are up, but as the article questions, how many of the new car purchasers actually cannot afford the cars they’re buying now ? With all the new mandates which keep increasing car prices, how long will strong sales continue ? Also, low interest rates are helping to drive sales for people who finance. What happens when interest rates begin to climb ?

Although I can afford to pay cash for new large cars, avoiding interest on payments, I consider it a waste of my money.

I think mandates for back-up cameras, tire pressure monitors, stability control, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, need to go on hold for a while. These features should be optional in order to help keep cars affordable for a struggling portion of our citizens.

CSA

Don’t want the mandates??? Talk to your insurance company…The insurance lobbying group are the ones PUSHING and lobbying hard for these mandates. Tell you congressman/senator to stop taking campaign money from these groups.

" Don’t want the mandates??? Talk to your insurance company…The insurance lobbying group are the ones PUSHING and lobbying hard for these mandates. Tell you congressman/senator to stop taking campaign money from these groups. "

I’ve been doing that for years. There has been no results. How long do you expect I’ll wait before they listen to me ?

CSA

I feel the same way…I HATE most of these mandates…The insurance industry has been behind almost ALL auto mandates over the past 3+ years.

Some are good (seat belts/shoulder harnesses). Some are just plain stupid and add nothing to real safety.

@CSA, personally I dont think it will.Bear with me on this,there was a time,a few dacades ago-when there seemed to be a window of responsiveness.You could write your Congress man and they would respond and actually look into the concerns of the constituiency,no longer it seems.
The “little fish” seem to have lost thier voice and slipped below the radar.Its time to start asking the “Public” their views on matters that affect thier welfare,lack of money can certainly affect peoples"pursuit of happiness"-Kevin

@Mike, I totally agree,we need look no further then Nascar to ascertain what would keep people mostly safe in horrendous crashes-Kevin

The problem with looking at NASCAR is that you will miss some of the accidents that the mandated measures try to eliminate. The backup monitors might save the occasional child or even adult from injury or death, but the real money (that’s what they’re about, isn’t it?) is in those low speed collisions in the parking lot when someone is backing up. Lower payouts mean lower rates. Would you prefer higher rates? You might ask your insurer how much these measures save. Backup monitors are too old to show up in the IIHS/HLDI references. I included others for lane departure and adaptive headlights, which seem to be the rage today.

http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4705.pdf

The Timing Is Bad.
There’s No Question That Most Of This Crap That’s Being Mandated Makes Are Cars Safer And Insurance Pay-Outs Lower, But . . .

. . . there’s also no question it’s driving the price of new cars up and up at a time when the U.S. economy is a stand still and many people are stuggling to afford a car, any car, new, used, or otherwise to get to and from work or to and from endless job searches and interviews.

When the new cars cost more, used cars cost more. As has been pointed out, new cars are pricing some folks out of the market and eventually good used cars are next.

Just like so many other programs to save the people, save the planet, save the wolves, save the whales, etcetera, this just isn’t a good time to increase the cost of living for many people.

Back off, get the economy growing, businesses starting and hiring, and then work the wish list magic.

Many people would rather have food and shelter instead of safe cars right now.

CSA

@CSA, you are telling the wrong people. If you want to affect a change, that is. IIRC, you live on or near the UP of Michigan. If you have not contacted Rep. Benishek yet, let him know what you want. I don’t share your disdain for regulating society. It exists, and we have to figure out how to regulate it. And do you want to know how to get jobs immediately? Have the government(s) accelerate infrastructure repairs. Oops… that’s government involvement. But that’s the fastest way to create jobs. Period.

Interesting article, but I am a little leery of some of the stats. I’m not saying they are wrong, but it appears that they are using allocation of income as their baseline for what people can afford.

Allocation of income has shifted since the 50’s and 60’s. Probably the biggest shifts are occurring with the food and clothing budgets. Thanks to industrial farming and cheap overseas textile factories, a smaller portion of our living expenses are going to these items, that leave more of our budget for things like car payments.

Back then, cars did not last as long and while there were a lot of people that bought a new car every year, most new car buyers kept their car 3 years, which was about the length of the typical car loan then. Today, we are seeing 7 year loans, but the cars last much longer and are now kept for 10+ years (according to the article).

Most vehicles on average get about double the mileage of vehicles back then and the cost of a gallon of gas, adjusted for inflation is slightly less today, but we also own twice as many vehicles and drive each of them about twice as far each year, so our allocation for gas has probably risen a little.

Since the housing crisis has moved so many people into the rental market, allocation for housing has probably dropped some since 2008, many of the people foreclosed on will not be able to buy a house for a number of years yet, they may be using more of their income on vehicle purchases, at least until they can get approved for a new mortgage.

How to make up for lost gas tax revenue, Oregon lawmakers are actually considering a road-usage charge of 1.43 cents – not dollars – per mile for drivers of electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles.

So I take it Oregon doesnt want any electrics on the road?-Kevin