Millions? I don’t think so. There is no investment that would turn $30K or whatever into millions that was safe enough to work for the majority of people. But it would be a significant help.
That being said, for most people, the amount you’d spend to live in a place where a car isn’t needed or constantly paying for ride share or taxis greatly exceeds the amount you’d save by not having a car for the vast majority of people, and that’s not even getting into the ableism issue.
And sure we could get into buying a cheaper, used car or whatever, but in the long term the maintenance costs, having to buy another car sooner, and other financial risks to cars outside of warrantee over a lifetime will add up similarly unless you’re really lucky or can repair your own cars.
Working life is more like 40 years. Those back end years are huge, it goes up to 840k. Which is why you’re supposed to start on your 401k right away. Of course 99% of people don’t get this talk until they’re 40; go through a poverty period after high school; or never make it out of paycheck to paycheck living for other reasons. (Like medical debt)
Very few people get the good pay, good contributions, and consequently the good retirement. We also completely lie to people about retirement. We tell them they have to scrimp and save so they aren’t homeless when they’re 80. In reality half of us will be dead by 75 and half again by 85.
And sure we could get into buying a cheaper, used car or whatever, but in the long term the maintenance costs, having to buy another car sooner, and other financial risks to cars outside of warrantee over a lifetime will add up similarly unless you’re really lucky or can repair your own cars.
Buying a low-mileage used car and even paying for a shop to do the maintenance is almost always cheaper than buying something with $500+ monthly payments. I don’t actually agree for the most part with Dave Ramsey (even about the entirety of this post)…but he’s correct that it is cheaper.
Most Americans have less than $1,000 in savings. So any car for that amount is not going to survive long. So most Americans still get loans for used cars.
And with interest rates so high, a payment of $550 will only get you about $25K. That’s enough for a decent new small sedan, but if you have kids (especially if 3 or more), that’s probably the minimum needed to get a used minivan that will last a while.
Anything else is only going to last a few years at best before needing major repairs.
I just did an autotrader search and in my (very unaffordable) area, there were lots of serviceable cars under 10k. If you live in a place with a garage you can even buy a used EV and eliminate whole categories of maintenance costs.
The whole point is to buy something that requires smaller or no monthly payments, and then bank the savings and eventually buy something better. “A couple of years” can do the trick in some cases.
$10k for a serviceable minivan or other vehicle that would work as a primary car for parents? What about the problem that most households need two incomes and very few can commute together due to different schedules and locations and adding even an extra hour or two of daycare in order to share a car is often as much as a second car payment.
As I said, $25k is probably plenty for a small sedan for a single person who only uses it for commuting and grocery shopping, but not likely for people with multiple children that a small sedan or coupe would not work, households with multiple income earners, households with teenagers who also need a car to work, or all the other scenarios where a single, small, used sedan that’s just good enough for a short daily commute is reasonable.
$550 in car payments for a houshold is not unreasonable for the vast majority of households and usually doesn’t equate to frivolous spending.
$550 in car payments for a houshold is not unreasonable for the vast majority of households and usually doesn’t equate to frivolous spending.
I don’t think I necessarily disagree with this but the reality is that when you buy new you’re always paying more. When you buy new on credit, you’re paying even more than that.
So, like I said in the beginning, I don’t 100% agree with this dude about even this whole post. But it is cheaper to buy used and even pay for the maintenance. It’s a point almost not worth making because of how obviously correct it is.
and that’s not even getting into the ableism issue.
Infrastructure that requires people to drive is far more ableist than the inverse. As many people with a disability can’t drive at all (or driving is a significant challenge).
I didn’t get into that issue, but it’s a major one, and not just for people confined to a wheelchair who might be able to get assistance through government sponsored programs, but also people with certain types of PTSD, Autism, ADHD, anxiety issues, etc., (including lots of veterans) or people with vision issues or other disabilities that aren’t considered “enough” of a disability to get help, but make it difficult or impossible to drive.
The whole, where do you live thing is super important. The last time we moved my wife and I were very adamant about a specific maximum commute length in car, or a length by transit. And getting somewhere to live that was easy to commute from. We compared the price including mass transit commute at the max distance to anything we were getting closer with the commute included from there too.
The differences were absolutely significant. Many places were cheaper to live an hour away, even with car payments, insurance, and gas. That’s absolutely ridiculous and part of so many problems from climate change to motor vehicle deaths.
We need to enforce mixed development, the people who work in an area need to be able to afford living in that area. Pushing the workers out should not be acceptable.
the people who work in an area need to be able to afford living in that area.
I read an article in my local paper that 95% of the workers in my town don’t live in town. And while there are new apartment buildings going up, paying $2000/mo for 300 sq ft without a washer/dryer or even an oven is not going to be attracting much of that 95% back.
That being said, for most people, the amount you’d spend to live in a place where a car isn’t needed or constantly paying for ride share or taxis greatly exceeds the amount you’d save by not having a car for the vast majority of people, and that’s not even getting into the ableism issue.
I disagree with everything else you say, as the other replies to you point out. But this is a really good point.
Millions? I don’t think so. There is no investment that would turn $30K or whatever into millions that was safe enough to work for the majority of people. But it would be a significant help.
That being said, for most people, the amount you’d spend to live in a place where a car isn’t needed or constantly paying for ride share or taxis greatly exceeds the amount you’d save by not having a car for the vast majority of people, and that’s not even getting into the ableism issue.
And sure we could get into buying a cheaper, used car or whatever, but in the long term the maintenance costs, having to buy another car sooner, and other financial risks to cars outside of warrantee over a lifetime will add up similarly unless you’re really lucky or can repair your own cars.
$554 a month at 5% growth is $440k after 30 years. So yeah not millions.
S&P averaged about 10% over the last 30 years. That means it would be over 1.2 million.
Working life is more like 40 years. Those back end years are huge, it goes up to 840k. Which is why you’re supposed to start on your 401k right away. Of course 99% of people don’t get this talk until they’re 40; go through a poverty period after high school; or never make it out of paycheck to paycheck living for other reasons. (Like medical debt)
Very few people get the good pay, good contributions, and consequently the good retirement. We also completely lie to people about retirement. We tell them they have to scrimp and save so they aren’t homeless when they’re 80. In reality half of us will be dead by 75 and half again by 85.
Buying a low-mileage used car and even paying for a shop to do the maintenance is almost always cheaper than buying something with $500+ monthly payments. I don’t actually agree for the most part with Dave Ramsey (even about the entirety of this post)…but he’s correct that it is cheaper.
Most Americans have less than $1,000 in savings. So any car for that amount is not going to survive long. So most Americans still get loans for used cars.
And with interest rates so high, a payment of $550 will only get you about $25K. That’s enough for a decent new small sedan, but if you have kids (especially if 3 or more), that’s probably the minimum needed to get a used minivan that will last a while.
Anything else is only going to last a few years at best before needing major repairs.
I just did an autotrader search and in my (very unaffordable) area, there were lots of serviceable cars under 10k. If you live in a place with a garage you can even buy a used EV and eliminate whole categories of maintenance costs.
The whole point is to buy something that requires smaller or no monthly payments, and then bank the savings and eventually buy something better. “A couple of years” can do the trick in some cases.
$10k for a serviceable minivan or other vehicle that would work as a primary car for parents? What about the problem that most households need two incomes and very few can commute together due to different schedules and locations and adding even an extra hour or two of daycare in order to share a car is often as much as a second car payment.
As I said, $25k is probably plenty for a small sedan for a single person who only uses it for commuting and grocery shopping, but not likely for people with multiple children that a small sedan or coupe would not work, households with multiple income earners, households with teenagers who also need a car to work, or all the other scenarios where a single, small, used sedan that’s just good enough for a short daily commute is reasonable.
$550 in car payments for a houshold is not unreasonable for the vast majority of households and usually doesn’t equate to frivolous spending.
I don’t think I necessarily disagree with this but the reality is that when you buy new you’re always paying more. When you buy new on credit, you’re paying even more than that.
So, like I said in the beginning, I don’t 100% agree with this dude about even this whole post. But it is cheaper to buy used and even pay for the maintenance. It’s a point almost not worth making because of how obviously correct it is.
Infrastructure that requires people to drive is far more ableist than the inverse. As many people with a disability can’t drive at all (or driving is a significant challenge).
Right. That was what I was saying.
I didn’t get into that issue, but it’s a major one, and not just for people confined to a wheelchair who might be able to get assistance through government sponsored programs, but also people with certain types of PTSD, Autism, ADHD, anxiety issues, etc., (including lots of veterans) or people with vision issues or other disabilities that aren’t considered “enough” of a disability to get help, but make it difficult or impossible to drive.
The whole, where do you live thing is super important. The last time we moved my wife and I were very adamant about a specific maximum commute length in car, or a length by transit. And getting somewhere to live that was easy to commute from. We compared the price including mass transit commute at the max distance to anything we were getting closer with the commute included from there too.
The differences were absolutely significant. Many places were cheaper to live an hour away, even with car payments, insurance, and gas. That’s absolutely ridiculous and part of so many problems from climate change to motor vehicle deaths.
We need to enforce mixed development, the people who work in an area need to be able to afford living in that area. Pushing the workers out should not be acceptable.
I read an article in my local paper that 95% of the workers in my town don’t live in town. And while there are new apartment buildings going up, paying $2000/mo for 300 sq ft without a washer/dryer or even an oven is not going to be attracting much of that 95% back.
Unless we get serious about building, that’s all that’s going to be available. Developers love the idea of cubicle sized housing.
I disagree with everything else you say, as the other replies to you point out. But this is a really good point.