Comment Re:Clunkers is a clunker (Score 1) 594
At least where I live, the 100-year-old houses being torn down still have valuable salvageable parts that are often reclaimed before the structure is destroyed- old woodwork, leaded glass windows, windows and window frames, hardwood floors. Appliances and cast iron sinks and bathtubs are pulled out and recycled, or more often sold used. The lead/iron/copper pipes are pulled out and recycled.
What can be reused or resold, is. Taxpayer money to destroy something completely serviceable, or even salvageable, is a waste.
I have a house built in 1913. The windows are leaky. The insulation is minimal, if there is any. The electrical and plumbing are old. Everything is working, nothing is unsafe, but it is old and inefficient. Would it be a good use of taxpayer money if the government were to offer people like me $45,000 to build a new energy-efficient home, on the condition that my existing home be torched to the ground? It would stimulate the local construction industry, remove an "polluting" home, and replace it with something far more fuel-efficient. How can we lose?