3 ms·

Food costs have increased dramatically for a number of people, so the idea that car-free people were largely unaffected doesn’t really play out. While you could

Food costs have increased dramatically for a number of people, so the idea that car-free people were largely unaffected doesn’t really play out. While you could blame a lot of this on externalities like an ‘inefficient’ food supply, or people just not being happy enough with beans and rice, the situation is a real challenge for lower income earners. Also, dismissing cars as ‘vanity’ items is likely not to resonate broadly. While self-branding is a thing, some people just genuinely like the cars they can and aspire to buy. I love the inefficient cars I own, and the vast majority of people who know me have no idea or interest that I own them. If anything, vanity dictates humility in my circles. I also get negative responses on HN for owning ~500hp ICE cars (although my cumulative emissions are lower than ever due to reduced driving.)

acdha 4y ago
> Food costs have increased dramatically for a number of people, so the idea that car-free people were largely unaffected doesn’t really play out. This not a claim I made. Fuel costs are obviously going to affect most of the economy but note that I said “especially badly” — that’s because many Americans live in areas which were designed only for car travel, and if you live in one of those areas you don’t have a choice about buying a car when your current one dies because you can’t function without one. When cars are selling way above the previous market rates, that means your costs are either unaffected (driving a car with plenty of life left) or massively inflated (when the dealer is telling you it’ll be 18 months unless you’re paying 20% over). This shows up in other areas but with different outcomes: for example, beef production is dependent on fuel costs. When that goes up, many people will switch to a different protein because there’s almost no cost to doing so. Same underlying problem, completely different level of impact. > Also, dismissing cars as ‘vanity’ items is likely not to resonate broadly. While self-branding is a thing, some people just genuinely like the cars they can and aspire to buy. I grew up in Southern California suburbs, you don’t need to explain car culture to me. If you note, however, my comment referred to “inefficient vanity vehicles”. If you really like having a sports car, that’s fine as long as you treat it like a hobby and can afford it (a friend of mine joked that he had a BMW M3 habit and should’ve saved money by switching to illegal drugs). I was referring to the much larger group of people who make financial stretches to have a late model SUV or luxury sedan because that’s the image they’re aiming for, even if they’re leasing it to make the numbers work at all. If you remember over the summer when the local TV News couldn’t run enough stories about gas prices, notice how it was always some dude putting 20 gallons of premium into a huge truck or SUV. People who are actually poor don’t buy those because everything about them costs more than they can spend, which is why I mentioned that distinction.

acdha 4y ago

> Food costs have increased dramatically for a number of people, so the idea that car-free people were largely unaffected doesn’t really play out. This not a claim I made. Fuel costs are obviously going to affect most of the economy but note that I said “especially badly” — that’s because many Americans live in areas which were designed only for car travel, and if you live in one of those areas you don’t have a choice about buying a car when your current one dies because you can’t function without one. When cars are selling way above the previous market rates, that means your costs are either unaffected (driving a car with plenty of life left) or massively inflated (when the dealer is telling you it’ll be 18 months unless you’re paying 20% over). This shows up in other areas but with different outcomes: for example, beef production is dependent on fuel costs. When that goes up, many people will switch to a different protein because there’s almost no cost to doing so. Same underlying problem, completely different level of impact. > Also, dismissing cars as ‘vanity’ items is likely not to resonate broadly. While self-branding is a thing, some people just genuinely like the cars they can and aspire to buy. I grew up in Southern California suburbs, you don’t need to explain car culture to me. If you note, however, my comment referred to “inefficient vanity vehicles”. If you really like having a sports car, that’s fine as long as you treat it like a hobby and can afford it (a friend of mine joked that he had a BMW M3 habit and should’ve saved money by switching to illegal drugs). I was referring to the much larger group of people who make financial stretches to have a late model SUV or luxury sedan because that’s the image they’re aiming for, even if they’re leasing it to make the numbers work at all. If you remember over the summer when the local TV News couldn’t run enough stories about gas prices, notice how it was always some dude putting 20 gallons of premium into a huge truck or SUV. People who are actually poor don’t buy those because everything about them costs more than they can spend, which is why I mentioned that distinction.