The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers Trade-Ins: 1. 1998 Ford Explorer 2. 1997 Ford Explorer 3. 1996 Ford Explorer 4. 1999 Ford Explorer 5. Jeep Grand Cherokee 6. Jeep Cherokee 7. 1995 Ford Explorer 8. 1994 Ford Explorer 9. 1997 Ford Windstar 10. 1999 Dodge Caravan The Top Ten Cash for Clunkers New Cars: 1. Ford Focus 2. Honda Civic 3. Toyota Corolla 4. Toyota Prius 5. Ford Escape 6. Toyota Camry 7. Dodge Caliber 8. Hyundai Elantra 9. Honda Fit 10. Chevy Cobalt
Yeah it is just too bad that those foriegn cars you referenced are made in the good olde USA. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,465005,00.html
First you cannot take profit anywhere as it is a theorical number pulled from the realm of accounting theory. So you cannot touch profit, you cannot eat profit, nor can you invest profit. You can take cash and move it, trade it, invest it but cash is not profit. And j ust because cashflow is increased, it does not mean the cash is repatriated. It is frequently left in the country of origin and reinvested. Two, since manufacturing for those cars occurs in the US, the US economy directly benefited. It was American workers who made those cars. And it was Americans who recieved the value of the dollars spent on the Cash for Clunkers program. The bottom line is the dollars spent on Cash for Clunkers stayed in the US and it sustained jobs which was the goal of the program.
Fascinating. We have been taking profit from our partnership company in the form of cash for the last 10 years and it seems to be OK with the IRS. And we are eating the profit! imagine that...My friend in India has an office in the USA and he takes his profit back home so that he can expand his workforce and believe it or not eat and buy a BMW! What are you talking about?
No, I was asking why only the automobile companies getting all the money, why not spread it around instead of giving it to only 2 or 3 auto companies?:shrug:
Cash for Energy Efficient Appliances is next! http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/08/21/energy-efficient-appliance-rebates-ready-to-roll/
Profit is equlivant to earnings on the income statement. Earning/profits are a device of accounting. You cannot spend or eat profits as originally stated. Companys have gone bankrupt all the time earning profits. One of the major objectives of accounting is to recognized costs when associated revenue for those costs are recognized. And if you are familar with business you know that costs and revenues do not always occur in the same reporting period. That is why profit is a therorical number. The methods used to match revenue and cost are often driven by other things like politics, taxes, etc. So agan profit is a theoritical number. Cashflow is a real number. You can eat cash, touch cash. You cannot touch or eat profits.
Buffy, not an original thought in your whole drivel. When will you stop listening to Fow News talking points??? 1. It was a success that's why they ran out of money. 2. You trust the military to be run by the government, so why not health care? Oh, you are a moron...