7 ms·

>Were we supposed to trade it in for a crappier car we’d have to make payments on? No, you should have sold the Mercedes because you already had one other car,

by xrange 12y ago

>Were we supposed to trade it in for a crappier car we’d have to make payments on? No, you should have sold the Mercedes because you already had one other car, and two cars and their insurance and upkeep seems like an unnecessary luxury for two unemployed people on food stamps.

mschuster91 12y ago
Two people who want jobs need two cars in America, if the stories on HN about the state of public transport are remotely true. It's bad enough in Germany where nearly every employer expects "mobility" (i.e. driver's license+car), and that with our quite generous mass transit. US is definitely worse.
- xrange 12y ago
  From the byline: >Darlena Cunha is a former television producer turned stay-at-home mom to twin girls. ...maybe someone from the Boston area can chime in on the state of public transportation.
  - Jtsummers 12y ago
    This article is about their situation from 2008/2009.
  - ohashi 12y ago
    You must be confused. Stay-at-home mom doesn't mean can't leave the home. In many parts of America, you cannot go or get anywhere without a car. That includes basic things, like grocery shopping.
    - xrange 12y ago
      I guess I don't want to belabor this too much, and maybe this tags me as an old geezer, but I have personally known families with children, who only owned one automobile. One person can drive the other person to work, and then drive the car around for the rest of the day, and then pick them up after work. Of course we don't know their particular details, like maybe they've got a 50 mile one way commute (which in itself would be crazy for a $25k/yr job).
      - Jtsummers 12y ago
        2 children, just born, underweight. So really, let's just disturb them twice a day so Dad can take Mom to work and home again. Oh, and this is 2008/2009 when lots of people were truly happy to have any job, especially after one of their two incomes just disappeared unexpectedly (layoff, not firing). Mom can't take the car to work herself because Dad might need it for errands or medical issues with the kids. They owned the Mercedes (and no debt was mentioned for the unreliable Honda). Why sell assets that are paying for themselves in terms of actual money (getting her to work), and relieving emotional/financial stress (confidence that they aren't totally fucked if one car fails).
      - HeyLaughingBoy 12y ago
        maybe they've got a 50 mile one way commute (which in itself would be crazy for a $25k/yr job). There are many people here in Minnesota who drive comparable distances to make less money. When you live in the sticks and the closest job is a gas station 30 miles away that pays minimum wage, you're pretty much screwed.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - GabrielF00 12y ago
    The husband had a job in Hartford (about 100 miles from Boston), so I'm assuming that they lived somewhere between Hartford and Boston. I've lived in both cities. Boston itself has very good public transportation for a US city. Hartford has mediocre public transit - it would be very difficult to live in Hartford without a car. If you're living in a suburb between the two cities you absolutely need to have a car.
- greenpresident 12y ago
  As to the employer expectations in Germany: I found this really ridiculous for teachers in training who are expected to own a car to get to the school they work at but are paid 1200€ pre-tax which does not get you very far. You also lose your student ticket for public transport, so going by train is less of an option.
- duaneb 12y ago
  I don't need a car at all for my job, but i live in a city. It depends heavily on your situation, but if you do live in an urban environment with public transit you could even get away with no cars.
  - SheepSlapper 12y ago
    Very few cities in the US have public transit that's "good enough" to not have a car. When I lived in the Bay Area I didn't have a car, which was mostly ok. I would walk 30 minutes to a BART station and then be in the city in no time. The grocery store was only a few blocks away, so as long as I made a few trips a week (since I could only carry so much) it was fine. But I just moved back to Washington, and there's no way you could do without a car here. The busses only cover about half the city, and they're few and far between (and they only run until 10pm). I'm 10 minutes away from a grocery store by car, so walking is out of the question. Cities that aren't packed full of people don't have a reason to invest in their public transit systems, because the payoff isn't worth the cost (there's just too much space to cover for so few people).
briancaw2 12y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfzlbvZ5ZRU#t=52 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfzlbvZ5ZRU#t=52
- hacknat 12y ago
  If you're trying to be ironic you've succeeded. I assume you posted this to draw a line between the woman with a Virginia ham and the woman with the Mercedes, but the rest of the scene is about Tony didn't fully understand his family situation without the whole context.
  - briancaw2 12y ago
    I just look for any excuse to post something from the Sopranos that might be even slightly relevant. I don't know enough about this lady to make any judgement's regarding her financial decisions.
nthj 12y ago
This is statement I take most exception to in the article. Here [1] is a ten-year-old Mercedes on Craiglist for $15K. You can run perfectly serviceable cars like a 2003 Civic for $5-7K. Even if you immediately sock away $2K into a savings account for maintenance costs, and take sales tax into account, you still landed $5K cash overnight and probably have a lower insurance payment. Also, you would not be making payments on the car because, uh, you paid for it in cash with the money from selling the car. I'm extrapolating from incomplete data, of course, but I feel the article's statement deserved far more analysis than the 1-sentence glossover it received. [1] http://sanantonio.craigslist.org/ctd/4530142457.html http://sanantonio.craigslist.org/ctd/4530142457.html
- hacknat 12y ago
  It takes a tremendous amount of energy and time to sell a used luxury vehicle. BTW, just giving us a link to a Mercedes listed for $15k tells us nothing. We have no idea how long it's been listed or what the owner of the vehicle is willing to negotiate down to.
- rayiner 12y ago
  That's an E55 AMG, which new is a $100k car. Since the couple only made $120k before they lost their jobs, it's unlikely that is what they had. More likely, it was something like a C230 Kompressor, which ran ~$30k new.
- garethsprice 12y ago
  Cheap, aging used cars are a risky purchase if you don't have savings to pay for the inevitable repairs. Besides, once they had that cash in hand, they'd no longer be eligible for food stamps (you need to prove you have no savings or assets). They'd either have to stop collecting food stamps and burn up the excess capital on groceries, or commit welfare fraud. Being poor in America is rough. Regardless of the "but the poor still have cable TV!" argument, US culture (and the systems created by that culture) takes an almost punitive approach to poverty, where the poor are seen to deserve it and not be capable of making rational decisions.
freehunter 12y ago
You missed the part where their other car isn't terribly reliable (she mentioned it failed to start, so she had to take the Mercedes). Sounds to me like they should have sold the Honda if anything, and then they would only get a few thousand at most.
post_break 12y ago
From the sounds of it the other car wasn't reliable.
bryanlarsen 12y ago
Note that it's not two people, it's (at least) four.
hacknat 12y ago
I think she made a valid point though. Selling a used luxury vehicle isn't going to make you a ton of money, especially if you have to replace it. In a lot of circumstances it makes a lot more sense to keep a paid off and reliable vehicle. The time and energy it takes to sell a used high-end vehicle in a recession is probably considerable as well. Also, you are being callous, two unemployed people on food stamps, with children, probably need two cars just as much as anybody. They were probably busting ass, continuously, to get a new job, that usually means driving around, a lot.
- ntakasaki 12y ago
  I am interested what the answer would be to the below question. Would she have sold the Mercedes and made do with the Honda they had, to feed their babies, if there were no WIC or food stamps programs? >> In just two months, we’d gone from making a combined $120,000 a year to making just $25,000 and leeching out funds to a mortgage we couldn’t afford. There are many of us who settle for a cheap car instead of a Mercedes and put that saved money in a savings account for a sudden emergency like this. If you don't have atleast 1 year or more of emergency funds, you shouldn't be buying luxury cars and homes and then expect to pass off the burden on taxpayers(many of whom are suffering themselves to make ends meet, renting instead of buying and not going for luxuries) when hard times fall on you.
  - silencio 12y ago
    I don't begrudge them at all. The reality is, no matter how big your emergency fund is, Shit Happens. They weren't expecting a pregnancy, let alone with expensive, high-maintenance twins. They weren't expecting to lose their jobs. They weren't expecting to be stuck for more than one year looking for a job ("The days of unemployment turned into weeks, months, and, eventually, years."). Everyone has a guilty pleasure or two, and it's not always as obvious as a cheapo Mercedes (which is not a bad choice at all if you're looking at long term costs vs a cheap car). A $240k house is hardly "luxury" and may make more sense than renting in that area. Even if they had a 1 year emergency fund (a fairly rare thing to do in itself), they likely would have been back on food stamps anyway. Sure, she could have sold both cars and possibly lose a job as a result. Sure, she could be homeless. Sure, she could do a lot of other really shitty things. I'm glad WIC helped her so she didn't have to give up everything. I only wish SNAP (food stamps) and WIC and other programs could help more people before they feel like they gave up everything they had and then some. My husband and I both make six figures, we manage to save most of it with cheap rent and very little spent on necessities let alone luxuries, and we have Oh Shit savings for more than one year. But this kind of doomsday scenario is why we have yet to buy a house or a car (thankfully half decent public transit in the bay area) and having children requires us to make a leap of faith, assuming that most people like us do it all the time. The "pay rent and bills, food, and other necessities for a few years" fund doesn't look big enough even for one person accidents, let alone anything else... If you find yourself in a situation where you blew through your emergency fund and you're still having problems making ends meet, I sincerely hope that you can find the help you need without judgment.
goodcanadian 12y ago
It is hard to say . . . I don't really support the idea of selling assets for a little current cash flow, especially an old car that won't get a lot of money, Mercedes or not. If things were that dire, it might have been appropriate to park the car and leave it unregistered and uninsured, but I am not convinced that selling it would have made any sense.
Jtsummers 12y ago
They weren't both unemployed. She was employed, at $25k/year, he was unemployed. Read the article.
runamok 12y ago
Right. Except the other car wasn't very reliable apparently. > That’s how I found myself, one dreary day when my Honda wouldn’t start, in my husband’s Mercedes at the WIC office. And unreliable transportation can contribute to losing your job, not being considered for a position because you got to the interview late, etc. The author addresses that: > And even if we had wanted to do that, here’s what people don’t understand: The reality of poverty can spring quickly while the psychological effects take longer to surface. When you lose a job, your first thought isn’t, “Oh my God, I’m poor. I’d better sell all my nice stuff!” It’s “I need another job. Now.” When you’re scrambling, you hang on to the things that work, that bring you some comfort. That Mercedes was the one reliable, trustworthy thing in our lives. I think we all know that when you sell something you generally make pennies on the dollar for what it originally cost. And in a situation like hers you think a return to normalcy is right around the corner. I am sure they told themselves "We have to have two cars so we can go to interviews and take care of the kid, etc."
- nawitus 12y ago
  Atleast they could've sold the Mercedes and bought a cheaper, but just as reliable car.
  - Jtsummers 12y ago
    But the Mercedes was a known quantity. A cheap, used car is not a known quantity. You're talking about trading a known, slightly expensive upkeep, but reliable vehicle for an unknown, cheaper upkeep, but questionable reliability vehicle.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 12y ago
    You've had a car for 10 years. You know it's history. You sell it and buy another car for 3/4 the price on Craigslist. How do you know the car you just bought is reliable?
  - prostoalex 12y ago
    "cheaper, but just as reliable car" are rarely available upfront in used car market (and we're talking 10+ year old cars). While you can dig up the reliability ratings and Consumer Reports reviews for a brand new vehicle, each used car has its own story and a host of potential problems to surface. The economic details of the transaction are such that if you need to unload a used car, you're unlikely to get a very good deal for it, but of course when you buy one, you are expected to pay dealer's repair and upkeep costs as well as markup. Plus sales tax to the state. A few hundred dollars lost on accepting suboptimal offer when selling, a few hundred dollars overpaid to drive another used car off the dealer's lot, a few hundred dollars to the state, and we start talking about some real money wasted.
silencio 12y ago
You should tell that to all the people that come running for openings I've had at my restaurant, to make just above minimum wage. The ones that just took a 2 hour public transit ride one way, the ones that drove for 45 minutes or more, or the ones that just straight up walked because they couldn't afford to pay for the bus and maybe the job will help pay for the bus in the future. Cars break down, cars are often needed for jobs and for interviews for jobs, and two adults looking for whatever they can get are going to want to keep two cars as a _necessity_ in a lot of places. I absolutely understand how a family on food stamps could justify having two cars, especially when one is already paid off. They had jobs during this time, even (not that that changes anything): > In just two months, we’d gone from making a combined $120,000 a year to making just $25,000 and leeching out funds to a mortgage we couldn’t afford.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
exstudent 12y ago
Why would someone making a "combined 120k a year" even own a Mercedes in the first place? That's hardly enough money to waste on a luxury car.
- chiph 12y ago
  The husband bought it before they got married. And it was paid-for. My concern (prior Mercedes owner here) would be the cost of repairs, but it sounds like they got lucky.
- bradleysmith 12y ago
  he made enough previously to buy it. He inherited some money previously and purchased that. He made a bad financial decision, and bought a car outside his means. Whatever the explanation, it was paid off previous to this narrative, was reliable, and this is her justification for not selling it. As user hacknat said, the amount of time and energy it takes to sell an older luxury car is not negligible.
  - exstudent 12y ago
    Indeed. All the more reason not to buy one unless you're in rock solid financial condition (even then...). I guess I'm just having a hard time garnering sympathy for someone who displays such conspicuous consumption especially without the financial means to really pull it off. Their previous behavior is a HUGE part of what's wrong with US culture.
    - bradleysmith 12y ago
      I understand. I share your feeling quite a bit. Upvoted you for clear and friendly discussion on a subject that generally evokes a lot of emotion. I wouldn't argue that the purchase of the car was a good financial decision. As a side note, I don't think buying a C-class Mercedes is EVER a good financial decision. The reactions to this article (or that OP experienced in the narrative) are a testament to the success of Mercedes establishing themselves as a luxury brand even though they sell econo-box line vehicles (top post right now puts this pretty well; this is a symbol of wealth, not actually much of an asset). I think the house was a worse decision, as it implies a longer confidence in earning potential; the car could have been paid off much more quickly, and we don't really know their earning power at the time of purchase (though I doubt it'd help the point of them being fiscally responsible). I think a big part of this article is trying to cast an empathetic light on people that end up in tough financial situations BECAUSE of bad financial decision, despite having come from opportunity. When considered clearly, even those impoverished that did not come from opportunity could be saddled with the blame of 'bad financial decisions', but just have many more justifications (that are more easily empathized with) for making the decisions they did. At some point or another, though, you are following the same mindset of the 'root beer police' in the line at the store, written about in the article. You are drawing a line saying 'you purchasing THAT is not responsible', and you feel justified in doing so because they are using public help. That's sort of the debate at hand here. Is the use of public funds an invitation, or justification, for judgement from others on your consumption? I believe that it is; if you are going to take money from the government, one cost you suffer will be unyielding judgement from others on what you do or do not buy. My point: not selling my old(er) Mercedes in lieu of taking food-stamps while I find another job might ACTUALLY be the best financial decision I can make, for a number of reasons. Whether or not I feel morally reprehensible about this is my own business, really; the assistance programs have their own requirements for eligibility and if I meet them, I meet them. Despite this, it is an invitation for judgement in the cultural climate in which we live, and that's just how that is.

by xrange 12y ago

mschuster91 12y ago

Two people who want jobs need two cars in America, if the stories on HN about the state of public transport are remotely true. It's bad enough in Germany where nearly every employer expects "mobility" (i.e. driver's license+car), and that with our quite generous mass transit. US is definitely worse.

xrange 12y ago
From the byline: >Darlena Cunha is a former television producer turned stay-at-home mom to twin girls. ...maybe someone from the Boston area can chime in on the state of public transportation.
- Jtsummers 12y ago
  This article is about their situation from 2008/2009.
- ohashi 12y ago
  You must be confused. Stay-at-home mom doesn't mean can't leave the home. In many parts of America, you cannot go or get anywhere without a car. That includes basic things, like grocery shopping.
  - xrange 12y ago
    I guess I don't want to belabor this too much, and maybe this tags me as an old geezer, but I have personally known families with children, who only owned one automobile. One person can drive the other person to work, and then drive the car around for the rest of the day, and then pick them up after work. Of course we don't know their particular details, like maybe they've got a 50 mile one way commute (which in itself would be crazy for a $25k/yr job).
    - Jtsummers 12y ago
      2 children, just born, underweight. So really, let's just disturb them twice a day so Dad can take Mom to work and home again. Oh, and this is 2008/2009 when lots of people were truly happy to have any job, especially after one of their two incomes just disappeared unexpectedly (layoff, not firing). Mom can't take the car to work herself because Dad might need it for errands or medical issues with the kids. They owned the Mercedes (and no debt was mentioned for the unreliable Honda). Why sell assets that are paying for themselves in terms of actual money (getting her to work), and relieving emotional/financial stress (confidence that they aren't totally fucked if one car fails).
    - HeyLaughingBoy 12y ago
      maybe they've got a 50 mile one way commute (which in itself would be crazy for a $25k/yr job). There are many people here in Minnesota who drive comparable distances to make less money. When you live in the sticks and the closest job is a gas station 30 miles away that pays minimum wage, you're pretty much screwed.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- GabrielF00 12y ago
  The husband had a job in Hartford (about 100 miles from Boston), so I'm assuming that they lived somewhere between Hartford and Boston. I've lived in both cities. Boston itself has very good public transportation for a US city. Hartford has mediocre public transit - it would be very difficult to live in Hartford without a car. If you're living in a suburb between the two cities you absolutely need to have a car.
greenpresident 12y ago
As to the employer expectations in Germany: I found this really ridiculous for teachers in training who are expected to own a car to get to the school they work at but are paid 1200€ pre-tax which does not get you very far. You also lose your student ticket for public transport, so going by train is less of an option.
duaneb 12y ago
I don't need a car at all for my job, but i live in a city. It depends heavily on your situation, but if you do live in an urban environment with public transit you could even get away with no cars.
- SheepSlapper 12y ago
  Very few cities in the US have public transit that's "good enough" to not have a car. When I lived in the Bay Area I didn't have a car, which was mostly ok. I would walk 30 minutes to a BART station and then be in the city in no time. The grocery store was only a few blocks away, so as long as I made a few trips a week (since I could only carry so much) it was fine. But I just moved back to Washington, and there's no way you could do without a car here. The busses only cover about half the city, and they're few and far between (and they only run until 10pm). I'm 10 minutes away from a grocery store by car, so walking is out of the question. Cities that aren't packed full of people don't have a reason to invest in their public transit systems, because the payoff isn't worth the cost (there's just too much space to cover for so few people).

briancaw2 12y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfzlbvZ5ZRU#t=52 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfzlbvZ5ZRU#t=52

hacknat 12y ago
If you're trying to be ironic you've succeeded. I assume you posted this to draw a line between the woman with a Virginia ham and the woman with the Mercedes, but the rest of the scene is about Tony didn't fully understand his family situation without the whole context.
- briancaw2 12y ago
  I just look for any excuse to post something from the Sopranos that might be even slightly relevant. I don't know enough about this lady to make any judgement's regarding her financial decisions.

nthj 12y ago

This is statement I take most exception to in the article. Here [1] is a ten-year-old Mercedes on Craiglist for $15K. You can run perfectly serviceable cars like a 2003 Civic for $5-7K. Even if you immediately sock away $2K into a savings account for maintenance costs, and take sales tax into account, you still landed $5K cash overnight and probably have a lower insurance payment. Also, you would not be making payments on the car because, uh, you paid for it in cash with the money from selling the car. I'm extrapolating from incomplete data, of course, but I feel the article's statement deserved far more analysis than the 1-sentence glossover it received. [1] http://sanantonio.craigslist.org/ctd/4530142457.html http://sanantonio.craigslist.org/ctd/4530142457.html

hacknat 12y ago
It takes a tremendous amount of energy and time to sell a used luxury vehicle. BTW, just giving us a link to a Mercedes listed for $15k tells us nothing. We have no idea how long it's been listed or what the owner of the vehicle is willing to negotiate down to.
rayiner 12y ago
That's an E55 AMG, which new is a $100k car. Since the couple only made $120k before they lost their jobs, it's unlikely that is what they had. More likely, it was something like a C230 Kompressor, which ran ~$30k new.
garethsprice 12y ago
Cheap, aging used cars are a risky purchase if you don't have savings to pay for the inevitable repairs. Besides, once they had that cash in hand, they'd no longer be eligible for food stamps (you need to prove you have no savings or assets). They'd either have to stop collecting food stamps and burn up the excess capital on groceries, or commit welfare fraud. Being poor in America is rough. Regardless of the "but the poor still have cable TV!" argument, US culture (and the systems created by that culture) takes an almost punitive approach to poverty, where the poor are seen to deserve it and not be capable of making rational decisions.

freehunter 12y ago

You missed the part where their other car isn't terribly reliable (she mentioned it failed to start, so she had to take the Mercedes). Sounds to me like they should have sold the Honda if anything, and then they would only get a few thousand at most.

post_break 12y ago

From the sounds of it the other car wasn't reliable.

bryanlarsen 12y ago

Note that it's not two people, it's (at least) four.

hacknat 12y ago

I think she made a valid point though. Selling a used luxury vehicle isn't going to make you a ton of money, especially if you have to replace it. In a lot of circumstances it makes a lot more sense to keep a paid off and reliable vehicle. The time and energy it takes to sell a used high-end vehicle in a recession is probably considerable as well. Also, you are being callous, two unemployed people on food stamps, with children, probably need two cars just as much as anybody. They were probably busting ass, continuously, to get a new job, that usually means driving around, a lot.

ntakasaki 12y ago
I am interested what the answer would be to the below question. Would she have sold the Mercedes and made do with the Honda they had, to feed their babies, if there were no WIC or food stamps programs? >> In just two months, we’d gone from making a combined $120,000 a year to making just $25,000 and leeching out funds to a mortgage we couldn’t afford. There are many of us who settle for a cheap car instead of a Mercedes and put that saved money in a savings account for a sudden emergency like this. If you don't have atleast 1 year or more of emergency funds, you shouldn't be buying luxury cars and homes and then expect to pass off the burden on taxpayers(many of whom are suffering themselves to make ends meet, renting instead of buying and not going for luxuries) when hard times fall on you.
- silencio 12y ago
  I don't begrudge them at all. The reality is, no matter how big your emergency fund is, Shit Happens. They weren't expecting a pregnancy, let alone with expensive, high-maintenance twins. They weren't expecting to lose their jobs. They weren't expecting to be stuck for more than one year looking for a job ("The days of unemployment turned into weeks, months, and, eventually, years."). Everyone has a guilty pleasure or two, and it's not always as obvious as a cheapo Mercedes (which is not a bad choice at all if you're looking at long term costs vs a cheap car). A $240k house is hardly "luxury" and may make more sense than renting in that area. Even if they had a 1 year emergency fund (a fairly rare thing to do in itself), they likely would have been back on food stamps anyway. Sure, she could have sold both cars and possibly lose a job as a result. Sure, she could be homeless. Sure, she could do a lot of other really shitty things. I'm glad WIC helped her so she didn't have to give up everything. I only wish SNAP (food stamps) and WIC and other programs could help more people before they feel like they gave up everything they had and then some. My husband and I both make six figures, we manage to save most of it with cheap rent and very little spent on necessities let alone luxuries, and we have Oh Shit savings for more than one year. But this kind of doomsday scenario is why we have yet to buy a house or a car (thankfully half decent public transit in the bay area) and having children requires us to make a leap of faith, assuming that most people like us do it all the time. The "pay rent and bills, food, and other necessities for a few years" fund doesn't look big enough even for one person accidents, let alone anything else... If you find yourself in a situation where you blew through your emergency fund and you're still having problems making ends meet, I sincerely hope that you can find the help you need without judgment.

goodcanadian 12y ago

It is hard to say . . . I don't really support the idea of selling assets for a little current cash flow, especially an old car that won't get a lot of money, Mercedes or not. If things were that dire, it might have been appropriate to park the car and leave it unregistered and uninsured, but I am not convinced that selling it would have made any sense.

Jtsummers 12y ago

They weren't both unemployed. She was employed, at $25k/year, he was unemployed. Read the article.

runamok 12y ago

Right. Except the other car wasn't very reliable apparently. > That’s how I found myself, one dreary day when my Honda wouldn’t start, in my husband’s Mercedes at the WIC office. And unreliable transportation can contribute to losing your job, not being considered for a position because you got to the interview late, etc. The author addresses that: > And even if we had wanted to do that, here’s what people don’t understand: The reality of poverty can spring quickly while the psychological effects take longer to surface. When you lose a job, your first thought isn’t, “Oh my God, I’m poor. I’d better sell all my nice stuff!” It’s “I need another job. Now.” When you’re scrambling, you hang on to the things that work, that bring you some comfort. That Mercedes was the one reliable, trustworthy thing in our lives. I think we all know that when you sell something you generally make pennies on the dollar for what it originally cost. And in a situation like hers you think a return to normalcy is right around the corner. I am sure they told themselves "We have to have two cars so we can go to interviews and take care of the kid, etc."

nawitus 12y ago
Atleast they could've sold the Mercedes and bought a cheaper, but just as reliable car.
- Jtsummers 12y ago
  But the Mercedes was a known quantity. A cheap, used car is not a known quantity. You're talking about trading a known, slightly expensive upkeep, but reliable vehicle for an unknown, cheaper upkeep, but questionable reliability vehicle.
- HeyLaughingBoy 12y ago
  You've had a car for 10 years. You know it's history. You sell it and buy another car for 3/4 the price on Craigslist. How do you know the car you just bought is reliable?
- prostoalex 12y ago
  "cheaper, but just as reliable car" are rarely available upfront in used car market (and we're talking 10+ year old cars). While you can dig up the reliability ratings and Consumer Reports reviews for a brand new vehicle, each used car has its own story and a host of potential problems to surface. The economic details of the transaction are such that if you need to unload a used car, you're unlikely to get a very good deal for it, but of course when you buy one, you are expected to pay dealer's repair and upkeep costs as well as markup. Plus sales tax to the state. A few hundred dollars lost on accepting suboptimal offer when selling, a few hundred dollars overpaid to drive another used car off the dealer's lot, a few hundred dollars to the state, and we start talking about some real money wasted.

silencio 12y ago

You should tell that to all the people that come running for openings I've had at my restaurant, to make just above minimum wage. The ones that just took a 2 hour public transit ride one way, the ones that drove for 45 minutes or more, or the ones that just straight up walked because they couldn't afford to pay for the bus and maybe the job will help pay for the bus in the future. Cars break down, cars are often needed for jobs and for interviews for jobs, and two adults looking for whatever they can get are going to want to keep two cars as a _necessity_ in a lot of places. I absolutely understand how a family on food stamps could justify having two cars, especially when one is already paid off. They had jobs during this time, even (not that that changes anything): > In just two months, we’d gone from making a combined $120,000 a year to making just $25,000 and leeching out funds to a mortgage we couldn’t afford.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

exstudent 12y ago

Why would someone making a "combined 120k a year" even own a Mercedes in the first place? That's hardly enough money to waste on a luxury car.

chiph 12y ago
The husband bought it before they got married. And it was paid-for. My concern (prior Mercedes owner here) would be the cost of repairs, but it sounds like they got lucky.
bradleysmith 12y ago
he made enough previously to buy it. He inherited some money previously and purchased that. He made a bad financial decision, and bought a car outside his means. Whatever the explanation, it was paid off previous to this narrative, was reliable, and this is her justification for not selling it. As user hacknat said, the amount of time and energy it takes to sell an older luxury car is not negligible.
- exstudent 12y ago
  Indeed. All the more reason not to buy one unless you're in rock solid financial condition (even then...). I guess I'm just having a hard time garnering sympathy for someone who displays such conspicuous consumption especially without the financial means to really pull it off. Their previous behavior is a HUGE part of what's wrong with US culture.
  - bradleysmith 12y ago
    I understand. I share your feeling quite a bit. Upvoted you for clear and friendly discussion on a subject that generally evokes a lot of emotion. I wouldn't argue that the purchase of the car was a good financial decision. As a side note, I don't think buying a C-class Mercedes is EVER a good financial decision. The reactions to this article (or that OP experienced in the narrative) are a testament to the success of Mercedes establishing themselves as a luxury brand even though they sell econo-box line vehicles (top post right now puts this pretty well; this is a symbol of wealth, not actually much of an asset). I think the house was a worse decision, as it implies a longer confidence in earning potential; the car could have been paid off much more quickly, and we don't really know their earning power at the time of purchase (though I doubt it'd help the point of them being fiscally responsible). I think a big part of this article is trying to cast an empathetic light on people that end up in tough financial situations BECAUSE of bad financial decision, despite having come from opportunity. When considered clearly, even those impoverished that did not come from opportunity could be saddled with the blame of 'bad financial decisions', but just have many more justifications (that are more easily empathized with) for making the decisions they did. At some point or another, though, you are following the same mindset of the 'root beer police' in the line at the store, written about in the article. You are drawing a line saying 'you purchasing THAT is not responsible', and you feel justified in doing so because they are using public help. That's sort of the debate at hand here. Is the use of public funds an invitation, or justification, for judgement from others on your consumption? I believe that it is; if you are going to take money from the government, one cost you suffer will be unyielding judgement from others on what you do or do not buy. My point: not selling my old(er) Mercedes in lieu of taking food-stamps while I find another job might ACTUALLY be the best financial decision I can make, for a number of reasons. Whether or not I feel morally reprehensible about this is my own business, really; the assistance programs have their own requirements for eligibility and if I meet them, I meet them. Despite this, it is an invitation for judgement in the cultural climate in which we live, and that's just how that is.