F. George McDuffee wrote:

While it is difficult to project, it appears the reduction in the
amount of foreign exchange needed for imported petroleum for the
new fuel efficient vehicles, over their service life, will result
in considerable cost avoidance, and reduction in the current
account trade deficit.

Difficult to project means nobody can prove it, just like all the jobs
that the stimulus bill have saved. Again, you trot out savings accrued
over the lifetime of the vehicles. Damn hard to do.

In what fields are you an expert in? How about a CV for us?

Given both the "high value added" and the high economic
multiplier of vehicle manufacturing, the limited amount of "Cash
for Clunkers" [ONLY!!! three billion$], was most likely a good
one-time shot of stimulant joy juice.

If this approach is so good, why hasn't deficit spending made our
economy strong? That 3B was extracted through taxes, doled out based on
what the government thinks is needed. Why do we prop up inefficient
businesses that saddled themselves with to many costs? Let the market
decide where to apply resources.