shed a tear for clunkers.. 500e destroyed
Here is the link:
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/24/s...served-better/
(5,000+) Mercedes-Benz including (142) SL, (3) S600, a 1994 E500, a 1992 500E, 1995 C36 and 1999 C43
Trending Topics
This guy will probably get suckered into turning it in. Then again the dealership salesmen are the ones to blame. A-holes!
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Why is the 500e on the list its a sports car?

i hate this kind of stuff. That program was so ridiculous.
Sure, the "clunkers" pollute more that most new cars... But what about the pollution caused by consumption (i.e., manufacturing a new car) and pollution caused by disposing of the old car?
And while I'm still going, it really makes me mad when people like Oprah talk about being green. I don't care if you build a "green" house if that house is 30,000 sq ft. If you compare that to a luxury-made, non-green 1,500 sq ft house, I can promise you that the mansion has far worse of an environmental impact.
Or take the person who drives a Prius to and from work on a 150 mile round trip commute and compare that guy to somebody who drives a V12 5 miles round trip to work. People will look at the V12 owner like he's murdering the planet while they'll think the prius owner is a true humanitarian. What a load of crap.
People focus way to much on the cool new "green thing" and completely ignore consumption! The cash for clunkers is just another example!
/Rant.
It's definitely sad to see those 500's get wrecked. They were probably traded in for toyota camry's!!
Or take the person who drives a Prius to and from work on a 150 mile round trip commute and compare that guy to somebody who drives a V12 5 miles round trip to work.
I agree with the problem of 'consumption', but if people are too stupid to reduce it then they can consume the same amount of miles or square feet that they were going to anyway, but have a smaller impact.
and the clunkers program was for the economic impact first, not environmental, that was just a fortunate side effect and managed to kill two birds at once, sort of. the point was to rescue the us auto industry, and save hundreds of thousands of jobs in a supply chain that touches almost every state in the country. i think it did a good job of doing that, and i'm sure any us auto worker will agree. the people that benefited directly were the tax payers, since the savings went into their pockets, and the us workers who contribute to building and selling these cars. i know a lot of foreign cars were sold too, but the overall impact to the economy and the industry was extremely positive. this same program has been in place in europe, and in fact the uk just extended their program again.
just my $0.02
If people aren't going to lower their consumption, then sure. It's better to go with the more green alternative. But that doesn't really solve the problem: people consume too many resources, green or not.
The cash for clunkers definitely helped the economy temporarily... no doubt about that. Yeah, a lot of foreign cars were sold, but that doesn't bother me a ton. Maybe a lot of the profits generated went to Japanese corporations, but many of those manufacturers do have facilities in the US. So it still benefited the workforce. It also benefited the US dealerships- those profits stay here.
and again, i agree on over consumption. i don't care if you use CFL bulbs... turn the frikkin light off when you leave the room!



