25 ms·
one could also argue having to use a car once or twice a week means you are using it more than 95% rule. back garden doesn't fit the rule as well since you are
by puppymaster 6y ago
one could also argue having to use a car once or twice a week means you are using it more than 95% rule. back garden doesn't fit the rule as well since you are using it 100% of the time to park your motorbike.
it really comes down to how you interpret the arbitrary 95% stated in the article. I agree with both the article and you. I need to sell that mandolin which I play maybe once a month but the patio sofa is here to stay even if I sit on it once a month because they are really nice to look at every day during golden hours. That's 100% usage for me.
- bartread 6y agoAs I pointed out to another poster, I'm not using my car at all for more than 95% of the time: it just sits on my driveway. To spend 5% of my waking time using my car I'd need to drive for 48 minutes every day, which I'm not even close to. I think it's unfair to count time when I'm asleep as time when I could possibly be using something (other than my bed!). I think all of this debate points to one thing: the article is written from, and generalising from, a very myopic perspective, and shouldn't in any way be given serious consideration by many people for whom it doesn't and can't apply.
- Zenbit_UX 6y agoTime asleep should be counted towards the 95%, the car still exists and depreciates while your eyes are closed.
- olyjohn 6y agoWhat's the fascination with deprecation on a car that you own? You don't get anything back at all when you return your rental car, or take transit. When you sell your car you at least get something back, even if it's a fraction of what you paid...