Disclaimer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 People never learn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 ROFLMAO"Omg we need to do something! Shit it worked... Ummm did we account for this actually working guys? No? Why do I pay you?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f4isvt Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Im just glad I got my500 mud slut before the guy traded it in for 4500 bucks altough it probably should have been crushed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbrjess0815 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 And it is over! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 suspended...not necessarily over... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serpentracer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 I wish the government would just butt out of the economy and let it crumble into dust.I heart rush limbaugh(that's sarcasm to you idots) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serpentracer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 the sad thing is it's gonna hurt the poor anyway, they can't afford a new car and they won't be able to afford the parts now because there will be fewer parts out there... this program is about freaking stupid!!!have you been to a junk yard lately? they look up the prices on a computer that gives them the national average going price for parts.it's not like the old days when the guy that works there just throws out a price off the top of his head.I went to one and they wanted $150 for a egr valve. a brand new one is $200.so there went your theory of affording parts from even a junkyard.try bitching to the parts industry that has a 500% markup on parts. but wait, I'm sure you are on their side because after all this is a free market.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChickOn2 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Well.. they wanted to stimulate the automotive industry... they succeeded. They did it without a "bailout", but instead gave a rebate to the everyday taxpayer.... taxpayers who are now driving around in a 2010 whip of their choice, that they can afford with the tax rebates and dealer incentives.Before they are crushed, the dealer removes any salvageable parts for resale. The rest is turned to scrap metal and recycled. Sounds like one less car to sit up on blocks in my neighbors' front yard, to me. ("Project car" my ass. It's been sitting there for 5 years.)So... what's the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serpentracer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 the problem is nothing except people who don't know the real details of anything but sit on a forum and on tv and make a big deal out of nothing because they lost an election.when in reality all they seem to really prove is they don't like to see the usa succeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 I hope nobody has to have their new car taken away in 6 months.You know SOME will...but hopefully this little stunt made an affordable payment for some people...the program still sorta pissed me off (kinda like the mortgage bailout)those of us who are financially responsible get boned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Sounds like one less car to sit up on blocks in my neighbors' front yard, to me. ("Project car" my ass. It's been sitting there for 5 years.)Don't get me started on neighbors with hoopdees that don't run and park in their yard - true story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Have you guys complained to the proper people? I can't believe that a car' date=' in a yard, on blocks can't be removed without intervention from Capital Hill. [/quote']you'd rather city hall do it?is that any better? Who's to say they can't have random pieces of metal and concrete on their property? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Have you guys complained to the proper people? I can't believe that a car' date=' in a yard, on blocks can't be removed without intervention from Capital Hill. [/quote']I've had my ideas, but really, what can I do? I'm walking a thin line here. I could get some recourse through the city, but at what cost? Pissing off my neighbors... which doesn't make for good living.It also doesn't help if they want to spin it around and play the race card on me. That's something I definitely don't need.Ideally, I could man up and talk to them, respectfully request they DO something with the vehicle, but it's not on my property, and I don't want to start a pissing match over something that's an annoyance.My only argument is that it looks tacky, and is potentially dragging down the value of the neighborhood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Here's the statute: 521.10 PUBLIC NUISANCES. (a) Notice to Abate; Compliance. (1) No person shall suffer, permit or allow to exist within the City any act, thing or condition of a kind which has been or may hereafter be defined by ordinance as a public nuisance. (2) Whenever a public nuisance exists, the Safety-Service Director shall direct the appropriate City department or division to cause the owner, tenant or person in charge of such property upon which such public nuisance exists to be served with a notice to abate the public nuisance. Compliance shall be required within not less than three days after receipt of such notice. Such notice shall be personally served upon the owner, tenant or person in charge of the premises. If such notice is not able to be served personally on the owner, tenant or person in charge, such notice shall be posted in a conspicuous place in or about the premises affected by the notice and such notice shall be mailed to the person who did not receive personal service by certified U.S. Mail, return receipt requested, and regular U.S. Mail, evidenced by certificate of mailing, to his or her last known address. Such service shall be deemed received three days after posting or three days after mailing, whichever is later. Service of such notice in the foregoing manner upon the owner's agent or upon the person in charge of the premises shall constitute service of notice upon the owner. (3) Whoever fails to comply with such notice shall be deemed guilty of a minor misdemeanor and each day of such noncompliance shall constitute a separate offense. A second offense for violation of this section within six months is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree and each day of such noncompliance shall constitute a separate offense. (Ord. 97-102. Passed 5-19-97.) (b) Public Nuisance Defined. The following shall be deemed to constitute a public nuisance within the City: (1) The erection, continuance, use or maintenance of a building, structure or place for the exercise of a trade, employment or business, either upon public or private property, or the keeping or feeding of any animal which, by causing noxious exhalations or noisome or offensive smells, becomes injurious to the health, comfort or property of individuals or of the public; (Ord. 74-174. Passed 6-17-74.) (2) The storage of a motor vehicle unlicensed or three years old or older, extensively damaged, such damage including but not limited to, missing wheels, tires, motor or transmission, apparently inoperable and having a fair market value of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00) or less upon public or private property for more than five days without being stored within an enclosed garage or obscured from public view. The notice required by division (a) of this section shall also be posted in a conspicuous place upon the motor vehicle. The appropriate City department or division directed by the Safety-Service Director to serve such notice shall be deemed to have permission to enter upon such premises to post the notice upon the motor vehicle. Posting of such notice upon the motor vehicle shall be deemed service upon the owner and the person having possession of the motor vehicle. Three days after service of notice as provided in division (a) of this section, such motor vehicle shall be deemed to be stored without permission of the person having the right to possession of the property and "a nuisance motor vehicle" under this section, subject to being impounded as provided in Section 303.08. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 at what point does a motor vehicle become random motor vehicle parts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serpentracer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Wow.. yeah. I'm completely distraught because we didn't get McCain. It has nothing to do with 'sour grapes' but rather an historical account that government intervention doesn't stimulate an economy. It chokes it. Here's an article from 'Forbes'' date=' but I'm sure these guys are idiots, too. [url']http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/14/yaron-economy-regulation-oped-cx_ybr_0214yaron.htmlso you don't remember anything from history class about the great depression? how the government spending money that pretty much single handedly stopped it.no, I'm not making this up off the top of my head either.you guys watch fox news and listen to rush limbaugh too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmagicglock Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 so you don't remember anything from history class about the great depression? how the government spending money that pretty much single handedly stopped it.no, I'm not making this up off the top of my head either.you guys watch fox news and listen to rush limbaugh too much.what history class did you take? I think it was government intervention that prolonged the great depression. The depressions of 1907 and 1920 were over within a year because there was NO government intervention and they let the markets play out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 what history class did you take? I think it was government intervention that prolonged the great depression. The depressions of 1907 and 1920 were over within a year because there was NO government intervention and they let the markets play out.This has already been addressed... twice, on here:http://www.ohio-riders.com/showpost.php?p=149098&postcount=42http://www.ohio-riders.com/showpost.php?p=155835&postcount=23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmagicglock Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 well now its been discussed 3 times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shittygsxr Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 This program did not stimulate the automobile industry there were approx 250,000 cars sold to exhaust the $1 billion program. At best dealers are no longer sitting on excess inventory. Although I am tired of tax dollars pissed away , if I had to choose between the money going to the rich or poor, I would rather see it go to the "less fortunate". Now that the hoods are full of new cars maybe its residents will be less inclined to fuck with other peoples cars Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Now that the hoods are full of new cars maybe its residents will be less inclined to fuck with other peoples carsanother good side effect...if it works Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmagicglock Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 what if the majority of the cars went to rich bastards who traded in their gas guzzling SUV's LOL. I'm not sure what the gvt is thinking by pushing more fuel efficient vehicles, because essentially they're going to lose tax revenue from fuel consumption and have to increase the taxes on fuel thus raising the price of gas and making the whole thing a wash for the consumer. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for reducing carbon footprint, getting off foreign oil... but I'm not sure if this is the right sol'n. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shittygsxr Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 what if the majority of the cars went to rich bastards who traded in their gas guzzling SUV's LOL. I'm not sure what the gvt is thinking by pushing more fuel efficient vehicles, because essentially they're going to lose tax revenue from fuel consumption and have to increase the taxes on fuel thus raising the price of gas and making the whole thing a wash for the consumer. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for reducing carbon footprint, getting off foreign oil... but I'm not sure if this is the right sol'n.in theory reducing consumption would reduce gas prices, therefore a tax increase could be implemented without financially affecting the end user Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zach Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 (edited) Don't get me started on neighbors with hoopdees that don't run and park in their yard - true story.I've had my ideas, but really, what can I do? I'm walking a thin line here. I could get some recourse through the city, but at what cost? Pissing off my neighbors... which doesn't make for good living.It also doesn't help if they want to spin it around and play the race card on me. That's something I definitely don't need.Ideally, I could man up and talk to them, respectfully request they DO something with the vehicle, but it's not on my property, and I don't want to start a pissing match over something that's an annoyance.My only argument is that it looks tacky, and is potentially dragging down the value of the neighborhood. you live in the city limits?351.19 PROHIBITED FRONT YARD PARKING. (a) No person shall stop, stand or park any motor vehicle for any purpose upon or in the front yard area of any parcel of land within residential districts in the City, which is not within the confines of any building, garage, carport or improved driveway. "Improved driveway," as used herein, means a paved or otherwise surfaced area of a durable, pervious or impervious material. "Front yard," as used herein, means that portion of any parcel of land extending from the City right of way, between the side lot lines, to the building set-back line.edit for more info (if the car is in the driveway):521.10 PUBLIC NUISANCES. (2) The storage of a motor vehicle unlicensed or three years old or older, extensively damaged, such damage including but not limited to, missing wheels, tires, motor or transmission, apparently inoperable and having a fair market value of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00) or less upon public or private property for more than five days without being stored within an enclosed garage or obscured from public view. The notice required by division (a) of this section shall also be posted in a conspicuous place upon the motor vehicle. The appropriate City department or division directed by the Safety-Service Director to serve such notice shall be deemed to have permission to enter upon such premises to post the notice upon the motor vehicle. Posting of such notice upon the motor vehicle shall be deemed service upon the owner and the person having possession of the motor vehicle. Three days after service of notice as provided in division (a) of this section, such motor vehicle shall be deemed to be stored without permission of the person having the right to possession of the property and "a nuisance motor vehicle" under this section, subject to being impounded as provided in Section 303.08. Edited July 31, 2009 by Zach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmagicglock Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 in theory reducing consumption would reduce gas prices, therefore a tax increase could be implemented without financially affecting the end userthats why i said "its a wash for the consumer" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.