Sounds to me that most vehicles turned in under this program will be trucks, vans, and muscle cars. Older vehicles are safer as they are made of solid metal instead of tin foil. Trading in a van for a smaller vehicle will require two cars to transport larger families. That doesn't help reduce pollution and probably doesn't help keep families together either. Trucks are needed for many jobs, and with U.S. car companies starting to go bankrupt, it will soon be harder to get a new truck. Do these old cars go to the junkyard where they can be purchased, are they made into spare parts, or are they being destroyed? If they're destroyed, it isn't going to make U.S. car owners happy as the car parts industry is in trouble and used parts may be their only option to fix up their car, especially for car brands that are no longer being made.
Seems to me that this is yet another way to use our money to take away our choices. Want a cheap, used car? Too bad. They've been destroyed. Need parts to fix up your older car? Too bad. The company no longer makes parts for it since the brand went out of business and the used cars that had the needed parts were all destroyed. I guess you'll have to buy a new little clown car that gets 100 miles a gallon that only seats one third of your family and can't haul any cargo. At least it will be good for the environment to retire large cars to the dumps before they stop working. Not. It means an entire car has to be made early to replace the old one and landfills will fill up at an accelerated rate. At least it will reduce the amount of "poisonous" CO2 in the air and help fight global warming. Not. Manufacturing a new car to replace the old car will cause pollution which will include pollutants far worse than CO2. If you think you can stop global warming by reducing CO2, hold your breath. At least you'll know how the plants will feel if there is no more CO2.
If it hasn't been made clear already, I believe in a free market economy. I know what I need better than a beauracrat and am against anything that takes away my choices. I'll decide what doctor I want, what car I buy, how much money I'm willing to earn, what lightbulbs I use in my home, what type of knives to buy, what battery chemistry I use in my flashlights, and I don't mind being a pain in the butt to anyone who tries to take away my choices. Taking away your freedom of choice is the same as being forced to do something. Once you're left will only one option, it's not a choice, it's an order. It's like boiling a frog slowly versus putting the frog in boiling water. If you put the frog in boiling water, he'll hop out. If you raise the temperature slowly with the frog in the water, he'll get cooked to death. That seems to be the strategy here. Take away our options slowly, one at a time, and nobody will notice until we have no options and our freedoms are gone.