Disabling Cars By Remote Control
The only reason the government wants everybody to turn in their old cars is because all the new cars have computer ignitions which can be turned off with a specially-encoded signal transmitted over the RF spectrum. By turning off and disabling cars, the government can trap people in large cities in order to increase the number of victims during a false flag terror operation or to prevent people from fleeing the government's checkpoints and round up zones during a martial law situation. This is all about controlling the population. Whatever you do, get your old car fixed in case you have to run for the hills. - Cash for Clunkers is a New World Order Control Program, Godlike Productions, July 31, 2009Well, EMP would be a problem for any car that is young enough to have a computer in it. The Cash for Clunkers program excludes those older cars. Unfortunately, almost any vehicle made since the mid 80s would be zapped by an EMP. If you want a good conspiracy angle, try going for RFID or GPS tracking. Big Brother is watching! - Dr.3D, Could this be the real reason behind "The Cash For Clunkers" program, Ron Paul Forums, August 1, 2009
The conspiracy theorist in me says that they want all older cars off the road, not because of fuel efficiency, but because the old vehicles don't have the computer chip in them that the newer ones do. The new cars can be stopped (disabled) by the police. Read up on the On-Star thingy that uses a space satellite. I have read where a thief stole a car and it was disabled while he was on the highway, because it had that special chip in it. - Anonymous Coward, Cash for Clunkers Eligible Cars and Stipulations...What a Crock of Sh*t!, Godlike Productions Forum, July 30, 2009
The only reason this is really planned is because those new cars have a built-in GPS, whereby Big Brother can know at any moment where you are! - J_S_Bach, Solar advocates slam Labor's car rebate plan, July 25, 2010
100 Cars Remotely Hacked: The Back-Door in Your Vehicle May Not Be the One You Think
March 17, 2010FutureCrimes.com - Recently in Austin, Texas (United States), over 100 cars were rendered entirely unusable after a hacker gained access to a previously undisclosed “black box” hidden inside the vehicle by the automobile dealership that sold the cars. The purpose of the black box was to remotely disable vehicles for automobile owners who failed to make payments on time to the dealership.
In the ‘good-old days,’ dealers who attempted to repossess cars were faced with the challenge of actually locating the car and towing them away, often in the middle of the night, in a high-risk operation which often resulted in confrontations with the vehicle owners. Now, as the result of technological ‘advances’ a company known as PayTeck has developed a method for “ensuring payment for cars and equipment from customers who may have a less-than-perfect credit rating by installing a controller that allows dealers to disable the starter function of the vehicle in case of delinquent payments.”
In theory, this may have sounded like a fine idea, but as demonstrated below, once one installs a back-door black-box system in a vehicle, one never knows who might eventually access the device. In the Texas case, a disgruntled employee from a local car dealership triggered the hidden back-door devices after being fired from his job. Using the password and account of fellow employee, the individual in question, Omar Ramos-Lopez, had the capability to disable more than a thousand vehicles “protected” with the PayTeck black box. The case originally came to police attention after the dealership, the Texas Auto Center, received hundreds of calls within a few days from angry customers complaining that either their vehicles would not start or that their horns were honking incessantly and could not be turned off. Eventually the Austin Police Department High Tech Crime Unit tracked down and arrested Ramos-Lopez as the primary suspect in the case.
This incident raises a significant number of legal, technological, security and policy questions about the use of such technologies. Firstly, is it a good idea to have these devices installed in automobiles capable of traveling at highway speeds? Could the cars have been disabled while moving at 100 kilometers per hour? What injuries might have been caused? Did the drivers of the vehicle know that such devices were in fact installed in the cars they had purchased? If not, and if the systems were installed surreptitiously, how is this technology different from any other criminal trojan horse program? Without due disclosure, could either the dealership or the manufacturer of the technology be criminally prosecuted for unauthorized access to a computer system?
Today’s vehicles may have up to 50 separate microprocessors on board and are packed with up to 100 million lines of computer code, more than in some jet fighters. The software and processors from these on-board computers control any number of systems including those that unlock doors, adjust seats, start the ignition, manage the powertrain, deploy airbags, determine the correct transmission gears, and optimize fuel efficiency. Together, they represent an exciting new challenge and unexplored frontier for criminal hackers looking to test their mettle and prove their hacking skills.
A 2009 Toyota Prius is vastly more technologically complicated than a 1970 Toyota Corolla. The increased technology has a host of benefits including improved fuel economy, horsepower and a nice connector for your iPod—but at what cost? The more complex the system, the more likelihood for failure. Thus whether through a deliberate hacker attack or an engineering deficiency, the modern automobile is subject to computer system failures.
Significant press coverage has been dedicated to the recent challenges faced by Toyota Motor Corporation and the purported sudden acceleration and braking problems on their vehicles. With nearly ten million vehicles recalled to-date, Toyota is facing considerable expense and lawsuits. What was originally described simplistically as a problem with the vehicle’s floor mats, has instead now been attributed to the car’s electronics and on-board computers. Yet given the complexity of the modern automobile and the amount of sub-contracted parts manufactured by third-party suppliers, how long will it be before such problems plague the rest of the industry?
Recently Ford announced plans to turn its cars into mobile Wi-Fi hot spots, boasting that its customers on their next road-trip to grandma’s house would soon “be able to finish online holiday shopping, while the kids chatted with friends and updated their Facebook profiles.” (Really? The twenty-minute trip to grandma’s requires broadband access to Tweet about what you had for lunch?). That point aside, what will be the effect of millions of new Wi-Fi hot spots in the form of automobiles making their way through highways, cities and towns?
How much harder will it be for investigators to try to locate and identify suspects committing computer crime when ever new car on the road is it own internet cafe subject to war driving? How might these automobile-based Wi-Fi systems connect, intentionally or unintentionally, with the 50 other on board computers? How might Wi-Fi-enabled autos provide an obvious method of attack for computer hackers to go after other auto-based computer systems?
While Utopian plans to bring the infobahn to the autobahn sound enticing, serious consideration must be given to plethora of unanswered legal, privacy, technological and security concerns. While intelligent road systems promising drivers the ability to put their cars on autopilot, the potential damage could be significant should a hacker gain access to an individual cars computer system. Moreover, what are the potential critical infrastructure implications of hundreds of cars suddenly accelerating or stopping due to a remote input command delivered over the Internet?
In the PayTeck black-box case below (next story), what would the effect have been if several thousand cars were disabled simultaneously? What might happen if these or similar devices were installed in police cars, ambulances, fire engines and school buses for the purposes of “protecting” the municipal vehicles from theft? Could the disgruntled insider disable the police force or fire department?
Vehicle on-board assistance systems such as General Motors Onstar have been installed in nearly five million vehicles in the United States of Canada. The systems, which offer an array of vehicle safety and security systems via the mobile telephone and GPS networks, recently upgraded their services to offer remote ignition blocking to slown down stolen vehicles. The service allows equipped Onstar vehicles to be disabled in a fashion similar to the PayTeck technology. Given the vast turbulence, layoffs and restructuring in the automobile industry, could another disgruntled employee issue a command that remotely disabled five million cars? While GM and Onstar would no doubt dispute the possibility, as demonstrated in the Texas case below, a built-in backdoor is just that. One never knows who will walk through it…
Hacker Disables More than 100 Cars Remotely
March 17, 2010Wired Magazine - More than 100 drivers in Austin, Texas, found their cars disabled or the horns honking out of control after an intruder ran amok in a web-based vehicle-immobilization system normally used to get the attention of consumers delinquent in their auto payments.
Police with Austin’s High Tech Crime Unit on Wednesday arrested 20-year-old Omar Ramos-Lopez, a former Texas Auto Center employee who was laid off last month, and allegedly sought revenge by bricking the cars sold from the dealership’s four Austin-area lots.
“We initially dismissed it as mechanical failure,” says Texas Auto Center manager Martin Garcia. “We started having a rash of up to a hundred customers at one time complaining. Some customers complained of the horns going off in the middle of the night. The only option they had was to remove the battery.”The dealership used a system called Webtech Plus as an alternative to repossessing vehicles that haven’t been paid for. Operated by Cleveland-based Pay Technologies, the system lets car dealers install a small black box under vehicle dashboards that responds to commands issued through a central website and relayed over a wireless pager network. The dealer can disable a car’s ignition system or trigger the horn to begin honking as a reminder that a payment is due. The system will not stop a running vehicle.
Texas Auto Center began fielding complaints from baffled customers the last week in February, many of whom wound up missing work, calling tow trucks or disconnecting their batteries to stop the honking. The troubles stopped five days later, when Texas Auto Center reset the Webtech Plus passwords for all its employee accounts, says Garcia. Then police obtained access logs from Pay Technologies, and traced the saboteur’s IP address to Ramos-Lopez’s AT&T internet service, according to a police affidavit filed in the case.
Ramos-Lopez’s account had been closed when he was terminated from Texas Auto Center in a workforce reduction last month, but he allegedly got in through another employee’s account, Garcia says. At first, the intruder targeted vehicles by searching on the names of specific customers. Then he discovered he could pull up a database of all 1,100 Auto Center customers whose cars were equipped with the device. He started going down the list in alphabetical order, vandalizing the records, disabling the cars and setting off the horns.
“Omar was pretty good with computers,” says Garcia.The incident is the first time an intruder has abused the no-start system, according to Jim Krueger, co-owner of Pay Technologies.
“It was a fairly straightforward situation,” says Krueger. “He had retained a password, and what happened was he went in and created a little bit of havoc.”Krueger disputes that the horns were honking in the middle of the night; he says the horn honking can only be activated between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m.
First rolled out about 10 years ago, remote immobilization systems are a controversial answer to delinquent car payments, with critics voicing concerns that debtors could suffer needless humiliation, or find themselves stranded during an emergency. Proponents say the systems let financers extend credit to consumers who might otherwise be ineligible for an auto loan.
Austin police filed computer intrusion charges against Ramos-Lopez on Tuesday.
Disabling Cars By Remote Control
March 18, 2010Schneier on Security - Who didn't see this coming?
Comment posted by karrde:
Well, from my meager experience working at an auto supplier...
The pager messages to the car can be authenticated in one of several ways.
(1) Secret key on car electronics that needs to match pager message. Probably not used, unless it's a public-key/private-key pair. But generating a distinct public/private pair for each of a million units might be too hard.
However, at least one auto company that I have seen has an electronic key-set for doing updates of car-electronics over the on-car CAN bus. The electronic key is a small USB dangle for laptops, and is somehow embedded into the factory programming-tools.
If the data can be sniffed from the transmission channel, the secret key had better be part of a public/private pair. If not, the secret is as secure as the employees of every company that gets to work with the system.
(2) Car will only accept a message from a particular source phone-number. Can pager-style messages be limited this way? How hard is it to spoof?
(3) Car will accept any message sent, with a combination of VIN, Remote-System-ID, and Special Key. This gets around the issue of public/private key pairs shown above, but is still subject to inside saboteurs.
I might think of another couple of ways, given enough time. But I keep running into the fact that insiders would know how to generate the message, and that the companies involved have to trust their employees and contractors.
I'll go back to driving my 10-year-old vehicle which has no remote electronics of any kind on it...Comment posted by Seiran:
TECHNOLOGY: EDR - In addition, most consumers don't realize that most cars built in the last five years have a black box or "Event Data Recorder" that records driving-related data, such as brake deployment, if the crash sensors are activated. This data can be potentially incriminating or embarrassing in the case of a disputed collision accident.
SOLUTION: Most of the new ones are Bosch units integrated with the airbag controller. Please note the warnings about accidental airbag deployment. In the case of a recalled Toyota though, I would leave it alone - the data will be more damning for Toyota than you in the event of "sudden acceleration"...
Late on a Car Loan? Meet the Disabler
March 25, 2009Wall Street Journal - Jamie De Lisle's Buick had been warning her for days, first with a flashing yellow light, then a flashing red light. But the 31-year-old mother of two from Collinsville, Ill., was too busy to heed the distress signals. It was only when Mrs. De Lisle began hearing an incessant beeping that she took notice: If she didn't make her car payment that day, the vehicle wouldn't start the next day.
The repo man has found a new hiding place -- inside your car. Increasingly, used-car dealers are installing remote disabling devices that keep the cars from starting if the buyer gets too far behind on payments.
These so-called disablers, palm-sized devices that are placed under dashboards and wired into ignitions, once were limited to what industry insiders call the "buy here -- pay here" segment: the kinds of small used-car lots that line state highways, strung with lights and multicolored pennants. But as the economic downturn deepens, larger, more mainstream dealerships are using the devices as a condition of financing.
Even as the recession has fueled the used-car market, it has made it harder for auto buyers to obtain credit. Eager to book sales, dealers and finance companies are expanding their own financing operations, and the use of disablers helps them prod customers to make timely payments. Satellite-based locators are often built into the remote systems, though some dealerships say they don't make use of that capability.
The companies that sell the disablers, with brand names including On Time and PayTeck, say that the use of such devices not only expands lending but also helps financially strapped customers change their ways for the better. Don Lavoie, president and CEO of Sekurus Inc., the Murrieta, Calif., company that markets the On Time device calls the starter-disabling technology "a behavior-modification method." The company says sales of the devices rose about 25% in 2008 compared with the year earlier, and it expects sales to double this year.
The Cellphone Principle
Mr. Lavoie points out that few people neglect to pay their cellphone bills because they know the phone will stop working if they do. Applying the same principle to cars helps move auto-loan payments higher on the consumer's list of priorities, he says.
It also helps a broader range of customers qualify for loans, he says.
"Typical customers may have no established credit or they may have dings on their credit," Mr. Lavoie says. The used-car market in the U.S. has ranged between 35 million and 45 million vehicle sales annually in recent years. About 20 million of those go to customers considered subprime because of their credit history, Mr. Lavoie says.Advantage for Repo?
In the past, many dealers weren't willing to take the risk of extending credit to certain customers. But Mr. Lavoie and dealers who have installed his company's disabler say more buyers do pay on time when they have the devices in their cars. Of course, the built-in satellite-based locators could also make it easier for repo men to find the vehicles.
Customers have at best mixed feelings about the systems.
"Sometimes I tell our friends our car is under house arrest," says Michelle Gibbs, a 36-year-old resident of Blue Springs, Mo. Although the remote device on her silver Honda Accord has never actually shut down the car, she compares it to "those ankle bracelets they put on you when you've done something bad."At the same time, she says, the remote kill switch in her car seems like a reasonable price to pay when she doesn't think she could qualify for a car loan elsewhere. The device's persistent reminders, she says, have kept her from missing payment deadlines on a number of occasions.
"For the most part we've liked it, because it has helped us build better credit," Ms. Gibbs says.But consumer-advocacy groups such as the Consumer Federation of America say the devices represent a disturbing new layer of surveillance and could potentially endanger drivers if the devices leave them stranded when the cars get shut down.
John Van Alst, a lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, calls the practice of remote disabling "electronic repossession" and says it represents a kind of intimidation, as well as creating extra hassles for people who are already financially strapped.
"These devices are effective because of the threat they represent," says Mr. Van Alst. He says that some customers who seek financing from used-car dealers have given up on more traditional financing sources too soon.He also is worried that the devices could become more a rule than an exception.
"It could be the way of the future," he says. Now that the devices are becoming common in the used-car business, in time they could turn up on new cars as well. "Maybe they'll put one on my refrigerator," he says, only half in jest.Dealers who sell cars with the On Time hardware are quick to point out that the system doesn't shut down vehicles that are running. After the driver has missed a payment, the device doesn't allow the engine to start once the car is turned off. Still, the dealers say this rarely happens. The disablers can be removed when the cars are paid off; some can also be used as anti-theft devices.
Why Most Customers Pay
Leon Green, owner of Buy Now, a Kansas City, Mo., dealership, says customers have rarely missed their payments since he began installing disablers. The possibility of suddenly losing mobility has proved enough of an incentive to keep most customers paying on time, Mr. Green says. As a result, he says, his company's cash flow has improved, and he's able to acquire better used vehicles at wholesale auctions.
Donald Birger, president of InstaCredit Automart, which sold more than 3,000 vehicles in 2008 through its two dealerships in Collinsville, Ill., and O'Fallon, Mo., says he initially was "leery" of the remote disabling systems, in part because he thought customers might object. But buyers don't seem to mind that much.
"We have not lost a sale due to our use of the device," he says.
Remote-Controlled Repo
April 3, 2009Slate - Car dealers can now disable your vehicle via satellite if you miss a payment. Is that a bad thing?
Jonathan Welsh explains the technology in the Wall Street Journal. It consists of a "disabler" wired into your ignition, plus an optional "satellite-based locator" that can help repo men find the car. Don Lavoie, president of a company that markets the devices, says sales were up 25 percent last year and are on track to double this year.
Sounds like Big Brother, right? Welsh reports that consumer-advocacy groups such as the Consumer Federation of America say the devices represent a disturbing new layer of surveillance. ... John Van Alst, a lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, calls the practice of remote disabling "electronic repossession" and says it represents a kind of intimidation, as well as creating extra hassles for people who are already financially strapped.
"These devices are effective because of the threat they represent," says Mr. Van Alst.Car dealers and disabler makers answer these charges in three ways. First, you owe them money. If you don't pay it, they have the right to deprive you of what you were paying for. Your car should be like your cell phone: If you stop paying, it stops working.
I like this argument. It's simple. Cars, like phones, can now be wirelessly connected. Why should they be treated differently? No quid, no quo.
Second, when a dealer knows he can shut down your car if you don't pay, he's more willing to let you drive the car off the lot. According to Welsh:
"In the past, many dealers weren't willing to take the risk of extending credit to certain customers. But Mr. Lavoie and dealers who have installed his company's disabler say more buyers do pay on time when they have the devices in their cars." As a result, the technology "helps a broader range of customers qualify for loans."Lavoie is right. This is what too many civil libertarians fail to appreciate about remote surveillance and control: The ability to exert power from a distance reduces the need to exert it up close. And the ability to exert it in the future reduces the need to exert it now. I can let you drive this car off the lot right now because I know that if you don't pay as promised, I can shut it off.
One driver likens her disabler to "those ankle bracelets they put on you when you've done something bad." It's an instructive analogy. GPS ankle bracelets are an alternative to confinement. If we can track you and detain you, we don't have to keep you locked up. The longer the leash, the greater your freedom.
Third, the disabler industry says its technology "helps financially strapped customers change their ways for the better." Lavoie calls it "a behavior-modification method."
Behavior modification? You're going to put a remote-controlled disabler in my car to make me a better person?
If the dealers and device makers were serious about that, you'd have reason to be frightened. Fortunately, they aren't. They don't care whether you're a good person. They don't care whether you kick your dog, cheat on your spouse, or steal from your employer. The only thing they care about is getting your payment on time. That's the beauty of capitalism: It keeps invasive technology in the hands of people who, aside from their self-interest, lack motivation to mess with your life. When the people behind the satellites start caring about your character, that's when it's time to freak out.
OnStar: Big Brother’s Eye in the Sky
February 14, 2008TheTruthAboutCars.com - Ever since the Model T hit the silver screen, evading the long arm of the law has been a cinematic theme. From the General Lee outrunning Boss Hogg, to Smokey being outwitted by Burt Reynolds' mustache, the public imagination has always associated fast cars with police pursuit. While the majority of motorists would never dream of trying to outrun the long arm of the law, soon, they won't have to. It'll be resting on their shoulder. Consider OnStar…
OnStar is a telemetry system providing a central data bank with real-time data on virtually every system in your car, including GPS. OnStar's computer knows where you were, when you were there, and how fast you went. It knows if and when you applied the brakes, if and when the air bags deployed, and what speed you were going at the time. It knows if and when your car was serviced.
OnStar operators can determine if you have a passenger in the front seat (airbag detection). All interactions with OnStar's operators are automatically recorded (hence the commercials). By the same token, under certain conditions, OnStar can switch on your GM car's microphone remotely and record any and all sounds within the vehicle (i.e. conversations). But wait, there's more…
As of 2009, customers who upgrade to OnStar's "Safe & Sound" plan automatically receive the "Stolen Vehicle Slowdown" service. (Yes, it's an "opt out" deal.) If the OnStar-equipped vehicle is reported stolen and law enforcement has "established a clear line of sight of the stolen vehicle," the police may ask OnStar to slow it down remotely.
Many customers find OnStar immensely reassuring; their guardian e-angel. No question: OnStar has saved lives and provided its customers with valuable services. Otherwise, they wouldn't be in business. But what if…
The police are investigating a crime. They ask OnStar where your car was on a certain date and time, to corroborate an alibi. Or what if you're in a crash and the other guy's attorney would like to know how fast you were driving when you ran the red light? Would OnStar surrender the information? "OnStar is required to locate the car to comply with legal requirements, including valid court orders showing probable cause in criminal investigations." And OnStar may use gathered information to "protect the rights, property, or safety of you or others."
Imagine the following scenario. The FBI shows up at OnStar master command and tells them your car's been stolen by a terrorist, who may be using it to commit a crime at this very moment. Contacting the owner is out of the question; the owner may also be a terrorist. What does OnStar do? They cooperate with the FBI and give them everything they've got on your car. No warrant needed and no notification to you. Hell, you may not even have the service enabled.
In other words, you not only have to trust OnStar to protect your privacy, you have to trust the police not to ask the questions in the first place.
The Constitution of the United States protects us from the heavy hand of government. However, when it comes to protection from private entities, it does little. Into this void, multiple privacy laws have entered, creating a farrago of local, state and federal laws which provide limited and haphazard protection to citizens. Whatever privacy protection these laws provide are usually nullified when companies violate them in "good faith" (e.g. while assisting the authorities.)
So who is going to stop the government from monitoring your car? The Bill of Rights protects you from an unreasonable search and seizure; the government can not take what belongs to you without a warrant. OnStar owns the information they collect about your car. In short, there is nothing to stop the police or OnStar from using the information you paid for against you.
And the next step is even more insidious. Imagine GPS speed limiters which only allow you to go the speed limit based upon a map uploaded into your car's navigation system. Now Sammy Hagar will only be driving 55 no matter how hard he stomps on the go pedal. This is the ultimate assault on pistonheads. The only place where driving will be fun will be on the track– if OnStar and/or the car's manufacturer (e.g. the Japanese GT-R) let you.
There's only one sensible response to this trend: boycott vehicles equipped with OnStar, even if you don't sign up for the service. (Remember: it can be remotely enabled.) If customers actively avoid vehicles that spy on them, manufacturers will have to stop installing the monitoring software and hardware. And law enforcement agencies and prosecutors will have to get their information and apprehend criminals the old-fashioned way: through legally-sanctioned police work. In short, I don't buy OnStar, and neither should you.
Nissan ECO Pedal System to be Commercialized by 2009
August 4, 2008Nissan Motor Co. - Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., today unveiled the ECO Pedal – a world first technology – designed to assist drivers to become more fuel-efficient. When the eco-pedal system is on, each time the driver steps on the accelarator, a counter push-back control mechanism is activated if the system detects excess pressure, helping to inform the driver that they could be using more fuel than required. An eco-driving indicator integrated into the instrument panel feeds the driver with real-time fuel consumption levels to help improve his/her driving behavior. The ECO Pedal system can be turned on or off according to the driver’s preference.
Nissan plans to commercialize the ECO Pedal during 2009. Research conducted by Nissan has shown that by using the ECO Pedal drive system, drivers can improve fuel efficiency by 5-10%*1, depending on driving conditions.
The ECO Pedal system is fed data on the rate of fuel consumption and transmission efficiency during acceleration and cruising, and then calculates the optimum acceleration rate. When the driver exerts excess pressure on the accelerator, the system counteracts with the pedal push-back control mechanism.
At the same time, the eco-driving indicator incorporated on the instrument panel indicates the optimal level for fuel-efficient driving. Driving within the optimal fuel consumption range, the indicator is green. It begins to flash when it detects increased acceleration before reaching the fuel consumption threshold and finally turns amber to advise the driver of their driving behavior.
In order to achieve reduction in C02 emissions, Nissan takes a “triple-layer” solution that encompasses vehicle technologies, driving behavior and traffic conditions. The ECO Pedal supports the second-layer addressing driving behavior and is among a range of eco-friendly technologies being pursued under the Nissan Green Program 2010. The company’s environmental roadmap aims at developing new technologies, products and services that can lead to real-world reductions in vehicle CO2 emissions, cleaner emissions, and recycling of resources.
Did Obama Announce the End of Used Cars?
June 2, 2009Juan Paxety - In his speech about the GM bankruptcy yesterday, President Barack Obama (from the New York Times) said:
And that’s why I’m calling on Congress to pass fleet modernization legislation that can provide a credit to consumers who turn in old cars and purchase cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars.Turn in old cars. It’s long been a talking point of liberals and environmentalists that cars older than a given age should be removed from the highways. The usual mantra goes:
“The government should buy all cars older than X and pay the owner $750. Then the owner could go out and buy a newer, cleaner, more efficient car.”The advocates for this position either fail or refuse to understand that the owners will not be able to find a car to buy with their $750. Basic economics.
President Obama used the words “turn in” not “trade in.” He will give folks a credit – I suppose that means an income tax credit – for doing this. This sounds like the used cars will go to the government and be removed from the market. No more used cars. You either buy an expensive putt-putt new car, or you go without. It appears that he’s set out to destroy the used car market.
Car Scrappage Scheme Gets Underway in Britain (Cash for Clunkers)
May 19, 2010Haines Watts - The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) has welcomed the introduction of a new car scrappage scheme, which was announced in last month’s Budget.
Under the £300m scheme, consumers who trade in older cars will be offered up to £2,000 off the price of a new model.
38 manufacturers have signed up for the scheme, which is intended to boost consumer confidence and increase demand for new cars.
David Frost, Director General of the BCC, said,
’A scrappage scheme is exactly the sort of policy we need during a recession. It will boost demand and help the environment at the same time’.The scheme will operate until March 2010, or until the allocated funds have been exhausted.
’The automotive industry will be central to driving our economy out of recession, and it employs thousands of highly skilled people producing efficient vehicles for the global market. It would be a tragedy to lose these precious skills during this downturn.’
Related:
