Comment by maxsilver | Hacker News Reader

Comment by maxsilver | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> but even then, I don't get the emotional association of freedom that previous generations did. I don't know what's different, although I have some guesses. Money, I'm sure, but there's something that's nagging me about it.

I'd argue it's a combination of money and aging infrastructure. Money is the big one (cars used to be a lot cheaper, both to buy and to maintain. Incomes for most used to be much higher). Infrastructure is another, in a lot of places, they haven't meaningfully upgraded any of the public driving transportation infrastructure since the 1950s to 1970s, so a lot of infrastructure is handling car volumes 200% to 600% higher than they were ever engineered for.

In Michigan, there's still very much a lot of "fun/freedom" around cars. But our population has been pretty flat this entire time (+/-2% pop change YoY since the 1960s), so even though the infrastructure is old, it's usually appropriately sized for the population in all but the newest-growth places. If you live in, say Seattle, you very much don't get that experience, public vehicle transit infrastructure has not kept up at all, and so driving is artificially a lot more of a painful burden there.

> (cars used to be a lot cheaper, both to buy and to maintain. Incomes for most used to be much higher)

Cars have inflated at a rate significantly lower than general inflation (typically by about half as much), meaning they've gotten cheaper in real terms. They've also gotten much safer, more fuel efficient, reliable, lower-maintenance, and long-lived.

https://www.in2013dollars.com/New-cars/price-inflation/1980-...

Wages have gone up with inflation where you live?

Yes. I live in the US, where real incomes have generally risen:

Median: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

Lowest quintile: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXU900000LB0102M (before taxes) https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXUINCAFTTXLB0102M (after taxes [which is what is spendable])

In that case I wonder if it's a matter of the essentials costing so much more? Is it possible the cost of housing is taking up the price of a car?

Education, health care, and housing are the unholy trinity of faster-inflating categories.

Well but this is simply not the case. Cars did not get more expensive in the last 30-40 years vs CPI and much more accessible vs median let alone average income. They also last a lot longer so used cars are much more of an option than they were 30 let alone 60 years ago.

> Cars did not get more expensive in the last 30-40 years vs CPI and much more accessible vs median let alone average income.

This is objectively false, cars absolutely did get more expensive in the last 30 years, they cost about double what they did in 1990, even after accounting for inflation. (see https://thesoundingline.com/since-1990-the-price-of-a-cheap-... as just one example of the math on that).

They may "last longer", sure, but that can itself also carry negative impacts (particularly on fuel economy, safety, and air pollution)

Your link shows an extremely outlier case, which is the absolute cheapest car available (not a representative or average car) compared to the median income (which is different from inflation).

It's easy to look up prices for something average though. A 1990 Toyota Camry was $11,588 MSRP [1]. A 2022 Toyta Camry is $25,395 MSRP [2]. That's a nominal increase of 119%. Meanwhile, the CPI increase from 1990 to 2022 was 124%.

So, a Toyota Camry has decreased slightly in price, in real terms. But it's also a better car, e.g. the 1990 one got you 24 MPG combined, while the 2022 gets you 32 MPG combined. Not to mention a host of other improvements over more than two decades.

So your assertion that cars cost double even after inflation doesn't seem to hold up, at least not for an average representative car, from the data I'm able to pull.

[1] https://www.jdpower.com/cars/1990/toyota/camry/4-door-sedan

[2] https://www.kbb.com/toyota/camry/2022/

[3] https://www.minneapolisfed.org/about-us/monetary-policy/infl...

[4] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/6763.shtml

[5] https://www.mariettatoyota.com/2022-toyota-camry-mpg/

Also, the 2022 Camry is a significantly bigger car. The 1990 was a compact, like the Corolla today. The 2022 is a midsize car. Comparing 1990 Camry to 2022 Corolla would make more sense.

> it's usually appropriately sized for the population in all but the newest-growth places.

Hell, a lot of our municipalities have transport infrastructure designed for larger populations. Driving around Flint or Lansing is easy for the most part (Detroit proper can also handle much bigger traffic numbers but the roads will kill your car so that's not easy).

I hated driving in the PNW though. Especially Vancouver, with its refusal to allow highways.

> Money is the big one (cars used to be a lot cheaper, both to buy and to maintain.

That's just not true. Maybe for some outlier car models.

For example my parents bought a base model Toyota Corolla in 1998 for 16K. A 2023 Corolla has MSRP $21,550.

16K in 1998 dollars is $29,366 today.

So, the Corolla has actually become substantially cheaper over the years!

Cheaper, more reliable, more efficient, and they have way more features today.

It’s shocking how much cars have improved in only a few decades.

> Cheaper, more reliable, more efficient, and they have way more features today.

Everything else yes, but more reliable remains to be seen. Cars are way more complex today with tons of more fragile electronics.

That 1998 Corolla I mention above is still going strong, just drove it today. It's a very simple car, so it might well outlast the 2023 model, perhaps.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com