- Kirk Lindstrom sent this new picture with these comments. Whoohoo, very nice, Kirk!!
- "For the guys...
2009 Ford E150 Cargo Van
4.6L EFI V8 "Flex Fuel"
Elec. 4sp Auto O/D transmission
Power windows, doors & mirrors
Electronic keyless doors, cruise control
"Commercial Van Package" - shelves, etc... need to remove to windsurf.
Towing package"
Jeff is on the line from the sunshine state.
[Jeff] Hi Bob. Thanks for taking my call. I want to talk to you about the cash for clunkers program. You had an earlier caller who said it only applied to cars built in 1984 or later. Well that is correct Bob. I checked it out at the government website. You said you thought it should apply to cars that don't have catalytic converter. I thought, there you go again, making one of your bizarre statements. You know like last week when you said Prop 13 was responsible for the lousy school system in California and when you told that caller that only people making more than $250.000 would be seeing a tax increase.
I owned a 1975 Cadillac and it had a catalytic converter. I knew that cars in America have all had catalytic converters for a long time. I looked it up and no cars were allowed to be manufactured without them since 1975. You are talking about cars that have been on the road for over 34 years. I don't see many cars that old except for collector cars and many of them have been restored. Most of these cars are worth as much and often more than new cars. The owners have no desire to trade them in.
Last night on the local news there were two dealership talking about all the cars they were selling because of this government program. They said they were swamped. I wanted to ask you how you thought this would effect our trade deficit?
[Brinker] I am sorry Jeff but I don't see the connection between the cash for clunkers program and the trade deficit.
[Jeff] Bob the two dealerships selling all these cars were a Toyota dealership and a Hyundai dealership. Is this a stimulus plan to help the auto companies in Japan and Korea?
Oh one more question Bob. You noted that California ranked 47th in education. You claimed that prop 13 was part of the problem. I noticed that your state Nevada ranked below California. Is that because you don't pay any state income tax?
August 3, 2009 1:56 PM [LINK]