I don't think this is all that surprising. Car prices, car insurance, and maintenance costs are at all time highs, and costs of nearly everything else have risen faster than wages.
Older cars are being held longer, and newer cars aren't offering many advancements to justify the price increases and higher insurance costs.
Personally, I've tried to reduce my car dependency as much as possible. As soon as I had the ability to buy a home along a train line and bike trail into my city's downtown, I did so. Then sold my car. The cost of an occasional rental or rideshare was nothing in comparison to car ownership. I saved tens of thousands of dollars over the span of a few years, and then ended up buying my attainable dream car.
The price of car ownership is one that our built society has placed on us as near mandatory, and escaping that dependence is financially liberating for both private and public finances.
In your interview with MegaLag posted in the video, you say something along the lines that civil courts are probably the most likely place any lawsuits would be held (I forget the exact wording used).
If you had used Honey, would you join a civil or class action suit against them?
I believe in class actions as the most efficient way for large groups (of consumers or small businesses) to resolve disputes. Have to think about the specific claim. Yesterday's write-up covers a scheme harming other affiliates (creators, influencers, reviewers, etc.) and also harming merchants and networks. I don't know if users are direct victims of the stand-down violations and concealment.
They should care because they are expensive. If we become dependent on something that is expensive, we have to maintain a certain level of economic productivity to sustain our dependence.
For AI, once these companies or shareholders start demanding profit, then users will be footing the bill. At this rate, it seems like it'll be expensive without some technological breakthrough as another user mentioned.
For other things, like roads and public utilities, we have to maintain a certain level of economic productivity to sustain those as well. Roads for example are expensive to maintain. Municipalities, states, and the federal government within the US are in lots of debt associated with roads specifically. This debt may not be a problem now, but it leaves us vulnerable to problems in the future.
This seems like an assumption that over time would come to bite the banks that overexpose themselves to lending in this manner.
Wouldn't banks want to accurately assess these valuations so these types of "bad loans in actuality, good loans on paper" don't become a large portion of their balance sheet?
Maybe not all at once, but over time it seems like banks would want more accuracy on this.
The article applies to all kinds of loans for property though.
Apartment complexes could also be 50% vacant and still "worth" their original value if the asking rents remain high.
Office buildings that got cleared out after covid, same thing.
Brick and mortar retail are the same.
The article is more of a criticism of how asset values are calculated and loans are managed to avoid foreclosure. Which results in financially valid buildings/loans that are underutilized because the other option is creating economic equilibrium at the cost of lenders and debt holders.
> Lucia Barbato, from West Sussex, says her second-hand Lexus RX450 SUV - a hybrid model - is vital for transporting her large family in an area with limited public transport.
If she needs a car, it is what it is. But her situation specifically is one where a minivan would solve her problems. She says the SUV gets cramped with 3 kids and their sports equipment. This is exactly the problem minivans solved. I think the problem being faced here is more about societal trends and cars as status symbols and expressions of self. SUVs are cool and trendy, minivans are lame and boring.
Another person said they need a Land Rover Defender. Also, minivan solves their specific problems of shuttling people and needing to fit a door on occasion.
Minivans aren't small by any means, but they are much more functional and useable than what most people are buying.
I think many people don't appreciate that large MPVs/minivans are almost exactly the same size as mid-size SUVs like the Lexus RX450h mentioned in the article. The dimensions tell the story:
The Galaxy and S-Max are actually wider than the Lexus, while the Espace is only 7mm narrower. Length differences are minimal, the S-Max is 94mm shorter, the Galaxy 37mm shorter, and the Espace 12mm shorter than the RX.
Beside both the Galaxy and S-Max have been discontinued, and the Renault Espace, the vehicle that essentially created the MPV segment has rebranded itself as a "mid-size crossover SUV" for its sixth generation and follow on generation. The distinction between MPVs and crossover SUVs has largely collapsed.
This is an English thing and I don't really get it, despite being English originally. Our English neighbour imported their Land Rover when they moved here from the UK, all the way to NZ. As far as I can tell their appeal is just for talking about it in-between trips to the mechanic, which is where they'll spend a lot of their time. Said neighbour's one is currently unroadworthy. They're ugly (subjective), inefficient, rattly, unreliable, not super fun to drive. I could understand if it was a nationalistic thing, but LR is owned by Tata motors.
Microvans still exist in Europe too. I can carry driver + 3 + a lot of luggage or driver + 5 with little luggage. Or driver + 2 if the luggage includes a tuba, euphonium and trombone. They're fabulously space efficient. I'm annoyed that you can't buy them in North America ever since the Mazda 5 was discontinued in 2015.
I have a Honda Pilot (full-size SUV) and CR-V (crossover SUV) and I've driven my brother-in-law's Odyssey (minivan) a fair amount.
The Pilot feels like a lumbering beast that begs to roll over. It also has less visibility than the CR-V and the Odyssey.
I don't feel a ton of difference between the CR-V and the Odyssey. I also never worry about the CG in either one. They have a very similar feel. I can definitely see around both of them better than the Pilot (though I think the CR-V has a little bit of an advantage).
The visibility and comfort on road trips is why I'll probably continue to own a minivan even after I don't need it to haul kids around. I can throw 8'x4' sheet goods onto the roof rack and anything smaller fits inside with the seats down.
Yes. And I've structured a decent amount of my life around transportation independence.
My last car will probably be my current car from 2013, which I have replaced the engine in, and plan on replacing the transmission in when that goes, as well as other parts as needed. Rust is basically what is going to kill it and I can stave that off for a long time.
When that day comes, it won't really matter. I live near a quarter mile from a train station, 200 feet from a bike trail that connects to my city's bike network, and 50 feet from a bus stop. No need for a car really ever. Rentals exist for car needs every few months, but there are usually other options.
The key for me was to not be dependent on any singular mode of transportation and to have redundancy so that if any single option isn't working, I have at least one other option to go places.
Older cars are being held longer, and newer cars aren't offering many advancements to justify the price increases and higher insurance costs.
Personally, I've tried to reduce my car dependency as much as possible. As soon as I had the ability to buy a home along a train line and bike trail into my city's downtown, I did so. Then sold my car. The cost of an occasional rental or rideshare was nothing in comparison to car ownership. I saved tens of thousands of dollars over the span of a few years, and then ended up buying my attainable dream car.
The price of car ownership is one that our built society has placed on us as near mandatory, and escaping that dependence is financially liberating for both private and public finances.
reply