IN THE market for a used car? Good luck finding a bargain: The price of “pre-owned’’ vehicles has climbed considerably over the past year. According to Edmunds.com, a website for car buyers, a three-year-old automobile today will set you back, on average, close to $20,000 — a spike of more than 10 percent since last summer. For some popular models, the increase has been much steeper. In July, a used Cadillac Escalade was going for around $35,000, or nearly 36 percent over last July’s price.
Why are used-car prices rocketing?It is as basic as supply and demand!
Part of the answer is that demand is up: With unemployment high and the economy uncertain, some car buyers who might otherwise be looking for a new truck or SUV are instead shopping for a used vehicle as a way to save money.Supply:
But an even bigger part of the answer is that the supply of used cars is artificially low, because your Uncle Sam decided last year to destroy hundreds of thousands of perfectly good automobiles as part of its hare-brained Car Allowance Rebate System — or, as most of us called it, Cash for Clunkers. That was the program under which the government paid consumers up to $4,500 when they traded in an old car and bought a new one with better gas mileage. The traded-in cars — which had to be in drivable condition to qualify for the rebate — were then demolished: Dealers were required to chemically wreck each car’s engine, and send the car to be crushed or shredded.I foresaw this a over a year ago.
In addition to capturing the massive expansion of government and the overwhelming complexity of new regulations and taxes, the chart portrays:
Brady admits committee analysts could not fit the entire health care bill on one chart. "This portrays only about one-third of the complexity of the final bill. It’s actually worse than this."
Wow.
The House ethics committee on Monday outlined its charges against Rep. Maxine Waters, who is accused of helping a bank in which her husband owned stock secure federal bailout funds.Crooked as a dog's hind leg.
The committee charged the 10-term California Democrat with three counts of violating House rules and the federal ethics code in connection with her effort to arrange a 2008 meeting between Treasury officials and representatives with OneUnited bank.
(08-04) 14:34 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge today struck down Proposition 8, the voter-passed November 2008 initiative that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman.Due process? What process?
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker found that the ban on same-sex marriage violated the constitutional due process and equal protection rights of a pair of couples - one lesbian and one gay - who sued.
The judge ordered an injunction against enforcement of Prop. 8 but issued a temporary stay until he decides whether to suspend his ruling while it is being appealed. The stay means that same-sex couples are still prohibited from marrying.Well, at least the judge didn't completely poke a stick into the eye of the people of California.
"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," Walker wrote in a 136-page rulinWrong! A homo can get married just like a hetro.
The constitutional right to marry, Walker said, "protects an individual's choice of marital partner regardless of gender."Of which right does this nut job speak?
Documents released Thursday evening show that Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and an ethics panel investigating him were constantly at odds over the last two years.So much for the most ethical congress in history.
The contentious relationship between the 20-term lawmaker and the ethics committee that concluded Rangel had violated House rules sheds new light on why a settlement wasn’t reached before Thursday’s public hearing.
The ethics report released Thursday stated, “The inquiry was delayed in several instances by the actions of [Rangel] and his counsel, particularly with respect to the production of documents and a forensic accountant’s report.” ...
Green and Bonner indicated that the lack of cooperation was so bad that investigators needed to issue a subpoena to Rangel.Crooked as a dog's hind leg. Guilty as sin. To the bitter end.
Investigators appeared especially irritated with Rangel’s statement to the press on June 6. At the time, he said, “…If they’re so confused after 18 months that they can’t find anything, then that is a story.”Lying to his constituents right up to the bitter end.
Green and Bonner wrote, “That statement was made nine days after the Investigative Subcommittee had transmitted a copy of the proposed Statement of Alleged Violation to [Rangel].”
They added Rangel made another “misleading” statement when he told the media on July 7, “There is no accusation against me doing something wrong except by the press.
“This statement,” Green and Bonner wrote, “was made 21 days after the Statement of Alleged Violation had been adopted by the Investigative Subcommittee and transmitted to [Rangel].”
The lawmakers added that due to the ethics committee rules on confidentiality, “the Investigative Subcommittee was unable to publicly respond to these inaccurate comments.”
