(05-29-2015 08:40 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: (05-29-2015 07:54 AM)EverRespect Wrote: (05-29-2015 07:48 AM)vandiver49 Wrote: (05-29-2015 07:18 AM)EverRespect Wrote: (05-28-2015 11:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: My bad guys, I only partially clarified what I meant.
Today, decent is less for your money than it was 15 years ago. The reason I say that is because given what is available in the industry the "decent" under 30k cars have no more real equipment than they did 10-15 years ago. Way more is available and yet the average Joe is forced to pay more for the same level of equipment, or rather a car at the same or lower percentile in terms of where it places in the industry as a whole.
That is because they keep adding technology that most people don't care about or need. A new car with 1990s technology and no bells and whistles would probably cost about $5,000. I'd buy that.
Well you are getting a better performing, more fuel efficient engine, like the I-4 in the Buick Regal than can get 270 hp. But I do agree that a lot of tech is being added that most people would probably prefer to customize on their own. I'm the process of replacing my rides radio and CPU display with a tablet.
I'd rather pay $5,000 for a vehicle that will get me 100,000 miles and 20 MPG and I can perform my own maintenance on than pay $20,000 for a vehicle that will get me 200,000 miles and 30 MPG if I take it to the dealership to get worked on every 3-6 months. Maybe it is just me, but simpler is better. Would be nice to at least have the option.
I agree that they are taking that option away from you because keeping it would endanger the entire automotive business model.
Um, not necessarily. I have a 20 year old Honda with 300,000 with a 16-valve vtec racing engine that gets 35/43 mpg to this day. Kept it all these years, and runs/looks great. Gets better mileage than most new cars today, even many of the hybrids, and costs way, way less to run. Plus, it's been paid for for over a decade.
I admit to looking at new cars occasionally, but every time my thought is "Why would I throw money away on something I already have that I can maintain and works great? I have much better things to spend my money on, like my kid, than a car." Wash and wax regularly, regular maintenance, timing belt and clutch every 100,000 miles or so, and I'm way, way ahead of those on the leasing treadmill. Plus, I can put as many miles on it as I want with no restrictions.
I've had three cars in my adult life. Two Hondas and an Audi sportster. The first Honda I traded in for a newer model after five years. With the second, I decided in advance to keep it for at least a decade so I'd have time off the payments treadmill. Now going on 21 years and counting. The Audi was my toy. Thing looked beautiful, but had electronics issues from near the beginning. I admit, the Audi was fun to drive, but once it got out of warranty, it was a money pit. Tires were $1,000 for four. Insurance was ridiculous. I came to my senses and got rid of it. I pawned it off on a sucker after five years and kept my Honda. To me, the ol' Honda has been by far the most "decent" car I've had. Way better than the Buick I drove in college that the engine fell out of driving back home. Last American car I drove.
It is not lost on me that most people in America don't actually "own" most of what they have. Their cars and their houses, especially, but also buying most everything on credit. That's the very foolishness that's made America a debtor nation, and made us weaker and less productive as an economy, more susceptible to wild economic swings.
There's wants and there's needs. Sure, it's great to have some fun when you've got it. But there are way too many people making 6 figures in this country that don't have a dime to their name are are up to their ears in debt. To me, that's just stupid. Yeah, taxes are way too high, but what else are you doing that you can't really afford? Don't be like the government. You can't print your own money to cover your butt like they keep doing.
