5 ms·

Tangentially, wouldn't it be nice if we could buy a 1990-quality car for the inflation-adjusted price? Poor(ish) people would have a decent shot at actually aff

Tangentially, wouldn't it be nice if we could buy a 1990-quality car for the inflation-adjusted price? Poor(ish) people would have a decent shot at actually affording reliable transportation and climbing up the ladder.

MontyCarloHall 5y ago
With the exception of a few brands (e.g. Honda, Toyota), I’m not sure the dismal mechanical quality of many 1990-quality cars would save people money versus buying a 10 year old used car for the same money. Remember, 1990 is still the era of the 5 digit odometer. Cars have gotten hugely more reliable over the years. A 2010 car hitting 200k miles is routine and expected; a 1990 car hitting 200k miles would be exceptional. Also, no 1990 car would pass modern safety standards. Few would pass emission standards. A big reason for the increase in engine performance (and thus complexity/cost) is due to the weight of all the safety equipment that’s required today.
- lumost 5y ago
  This gives cart blanche to mark the price increases of each car year as hedonic adjustments. The BLS can simply say the price increase is due to enhancements. While some fraction of the increase is due to improvements, at least a portion is due to direct inflation. Further, if the reality is that a 1990 equivalent car cannot be purchased today - then the consumer who could only afford the 1990 accord will instead buy used. Is this person going to feel wealthier than they did in 1990?
  - MontyCarloHall 5y ago
    > The BLS can simply say the price increase is due to enhancements. Hedonic regression actually quantifies the expected year-over-year price changes due to quality changes. It doesn’t give automakers carte blanche to increase prices, because a year-over-year price increase without quality increases commensurate with previous years will increase the residuals of the regression prediction for the current year. > Is this person going to feel wealthier than they did in 1990? Yes, because a 10 year old car in 2021 is still leaps and bounds better than a 1990 equivalent new car. Drive a few miles in a 2010 Civic (an entry level car), then drive a few miles in a 1990 Accord (a midrange car). You’ll be amazed at how much better the 10 year old Civic is in every aspect.
- vgeek 5y ago
  There are so many great cars from Toyota and Honda from that era, too. If only they kept making 1/2G LS/GS, Mk4 Supras, 1G Tacomas, NSX, S2000s, B18 Civics. Way to ruin my day (:D /s) by bringing up their current offerings.
  - ragnese 5y ago
    I just saw a new looking Supra on the road today. I didn't even know they started making them again after then stopped in 2000-ish.
- patrick451 5y ago
  I owned a 95 chevy truck until it hit 270k. My current vehicle is a 98 ford with 220k. Prior to that, I owned an 86 Saab with close to 300k. The odometers on all these had 6 digits. There may be statistics somewhere that say these are all outliers, but my experience has been that 90s vehicle are nowhere nearly as unreliable as you claim. Cars from this era were far easier to work on than those made more recently. That's one reason I keep buying old. So it's not obvious that buying a newer car which is more difficult to fix, and may have to get taken to a mechanic or the dealer is a better deal than an older one which I can fix myself, even if the older vehicle needs fixing slightly more frequently. Viewed this way, newer cars are both more expensive and provide worse value than cars from previous eras.
- ragnese 5y ago
  I hear what you're saying and I don't really disagree. But, at the risk of sounding like I'm not an environmentalist and I don't care about poor people, a new 1990s car today is still going to be better than a lot of what I see lower SES people driving today- if they're able to afford to drive anything. You said it yourself: cars from the 1990s might last 100k miles! You think a poor person today is going to buy any used car that has 100k miles of life left? I highly doubt it. As for the safety and emissions standards- you're right. That's a big part of what has driven up the price of cars. And while I know that they are less safe, were they really that unsafe? I mean, the 90s had airbags, seat belts, ABS brakes (at least some models). At the end of the day, I'm not saying I would be happy that a poor person could only afford the safety of a 1990s car. But what I am saying is that it's still better than what they have access to today. Ideally, we just wouldn't have people so poor that they can't afford safe transportation. For emissions, specifically, I don't want poor people to have to pay the cost of saving our environment. I know a bunch of people who are financially comfortable enough to have multiple cars and/or recreational boats- let them pay for it. I'd be fine adjusting my wish to "1990s standards car + modern emissions standards, as long as the government subsidizes it such that it still would cost 1990s prices".
namdnay 5y ago
Dacia are doing exactly that in Europe. Simple cheap cars made from 10-20 year old Renault parts. Pretty reliable (because by the time they trickle down to Dacia, every component has been tested for several years by millions of Renault drivers) and insanely cheap

MontyCarloHall 5y ago

With the exception of a few brands (e.g. Honda, Toyota), I’m not sure the dismal mechanical quality of many 1990-quality cars would save people money versus buying a 10 year old used car for the same money. Remember, 1990 is still the era of the 5 digit odometer. Cars have gotten hugely more reliable over the years. A 2010 car hitting 200k miles is routine and expected; a 1990 car hitting 200k miles would be exceptional. Also, no 1990 car would pass modern safety standards. Few would pass emission standards. A big reason for the increase in engine performance (and thus complexity/cost) is due to the weight of all the safety equipment that’s required today.

lumost 5y ago
This gives cart blanche to mark the price increases of each car year as hedonic adjustments. The BLS can simply say the price increase is due to enhancements. While some fraction of the increase is due to improvements, at least a portion is due to direct inflation. Further, if the reality is that a 1990 equivalent car cannot be purchased today - then the consumer who could only afford the 1990 accord will instead buy used. Is this person going to feel wealthier than they did in 1990?
- MontyCarloHall 5y ago
  > The BLS can simply say the price increase is due to enhancements. Hedonic regression actually quantifies the expected year-over-year price changes due to quality changes. It doesn’t give automakers carte blanche to increase prices, because a year-over-year price increase without quality increases commensurate with previous years will increase the residuals of the regression prediction for the current year. > Is this person going to feel wealthier than they did in 1990? Yes, because a 10 year old car in 2021 is still leaps and bounds better than a 1990 equivalent new car. Drive a few miles in a 2010 Civic (an entry level car), then drive a few miles in a 1990 Accord (a midrange car). You’ll be amazed at how much better the 10 year old Civic is in every aspect.
vgeek 5y ago
There are so many great cars from Toyota and Honda from that era, too. If only they kept making 1/2G LS/GS, Mk4 Supras, 1G Tacomas, NSX, S2000s, B18 Civics. Way to ruin my day (:D /s) by bringing up their current offerings.
- ragnese 5y ago
  I just saw a new looking Supra on the road today. I didn't even know they started making them again after then stopped in 2000-ish.
patrick451 5y ago
I owned a 95 chevy truck until it hit 270k. My current vehicle is a 98 ford with 220k. Prior to that, I owned an 86 Saab with close to 300k. The odometers on all these had 6 digits. There may be statistics somewhere that say these are all outliers, but my experience has been that 90s vehicle are nowhere nearly as unreliable as you claim. Cars from this era were far easier to work on than those made more recently. That's one reason I keep buying old. So it's not obvious that buying a newer car which is more difficult to fix, and may have to get taken to a mechanic or the dealer is a better deal than an older one which I can fix myself, even if the older vehicle needs fixing slightly more frequently. Viewed this way, newer cars are both more expensive and provide worse value than cars from previous eras.
ragnese 5y ago
I hear what you're saying and I don't really disagree. But, at the risk of sounding like I'm not an environmentalist and I don't care about poor people, a new 1990s car today is still going to be better than a lot of what I see lower SES people driving today- if they're able to afford to drive anything. You said it yourself: cars from the 1990s might last 100k miles! You think a poor person today is going to buy any used car that has 100k miles of life left? I highly doubt it. As for the safety and emissions standards- you're right. That's a big part of what has driven up the price of cars. And while I know that they are less safe, were they really that unsafe? I mean, the 90s had airbags, seat belts, ABS brakes (at least some models). At the end of the day, I'm not saying I would be happy that a poor person could only afford the safety of a 1990s car. But what I am saying is that it's still better than what they have access to today. Ideally, we just wouldn't have people so poor that they can't afford safe transportation. For emissions, specifically, I don't want poor people to have to pay the cost of saving our environment. I know a bunch of people who are financially comfortable enough to have multiple cars and/or recreational boats- let them pay for it. I'd be fine adjusting my wish to "1990s standards car + modern emissions standards, as long as the government subsidizes it such that it still would cost 1990s prices".

namdnay 5y ago

Dacia are doing exactly that in Europe. Simple cheap cars made from 10-20 year old Renault parts. Pretty reliable (because by the time they trickle down to Dacia, every component has been tested for several years by millions of Renault drivers) and insanely cheap