Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
$5,000 is mostly going to be jalopy territory. Say you buy a jalopy for $5,000, keep it for two years in which time you put some repairs into it, maybe $2,000 since it wasn't in great shape when you bought it. Just little things going out here and there. Then after two years there's a major mechanical problem and it's worth scrap value of $1,000. And then you buy another $5,000 jalopy and start over.
Cost is $3,000 per year.
Or you buy a new car. Take the Mazda3 I bought in 2008 and kept for six years. Total repairs was $800.
Blue book at 12k/yr private party is $8,600 (very low, mine sold quickly for $6,000 with over 150k) and I paid just under $18k new. Loss of dividends isn't relevant as I didn't pay cash and 0-.9% financing is readily available on new cars.
Cost is under $2,000 per year in depreciation and $133 per year in repairs.
Just looking at the Mazda3 (not the most common car) under $5k within 500 miles of me,
2006 2.0 sedan w/ 125k and salvage title, $4,600
2004 2.0 sedan w/ 188k unknown title, $3,850
2004 2.3 sedan w/ 215k and clean title, $4,995
2005 2.0 sedan w/ 201k and clean title, $4,750
There's a few other 2.0 sedans as well. 2.0 sedan was $3,000 less than my 2.3 hatch (~$15k/new). They're mostly 10-year-old cars that have done ~20k per year. They've depreciated a bit over $1,000 per year in the timeframe, aside from the salvage one.
It really depends how long you hold the car. If you're talking about buying a new car every two or three years, yes, jalopy is probably less expensive. The average new car is only held for four years, so two to three isn't outside the realm of normal. But someone who buys a new car every two years isn't really someone who is concerned with cost of ownership or would ever consider a $5,000 jalopy. If you buy and hold for a longer period, jalopies do often end up being more expensive than buying new.
Of course, that's apples to apples. The numbers will look different comparing a $30k 2015 Accord V6 EX-L w/ navi to ten-year-old jalopy Mazda3 with around 200k on the clock. Also ability/willingness to do your own wrenching is a big factor in that.
This is the important point.
If the first 2 years of a car's life are more expensive than the jalopy, while the first 6 years are not, that's because the years 3-6 are much less expensive.
In that case, why buy the car new, and not at 2 years old?
If the first 2 years of a car's life are more expensive than the jalopy, while the first 6 years are not, that's because the years 3-6 are much less expensive.
In that case, why buy the car new, and not at 2 years old?
May not be worthwhile. There's 80 listings (50 miles), 250 (500 miles) for 2012-2013 Toyota Prius Two (car I just recently bought). Average listing is $19,000. Taking the cashback instead of 0% offer from Toyota, the Prius Two was a hair under $21k.
The outliers are:
'12 w/ 74k for $16k
'12 w/ 48k for $17k (and a few others similar)
Not worthwhile in my opinion. Say the Prius has a useful life of 300,000 miles. On a straight-line basis, that means every mile consumes 7 cents of the vehicle's value. So you can save $5,000 on a car that has done 74k. No real savings there. You're paying $5,000 less than new on a car that's used up $5,180 of its expected value. The one with 48,000 miles is the better deal. You can save $4,000 on a car that (again, straight-line basis) has used up $3,360 worth of its expected life, a savings of $640.
Of course, cars don't really have a straight-line basis value. Cost of maintenance and repairs goes up with vehicle age. So the 3% savings on the used one with 48k really isn't 3%, it's less than that. Possibly less than 0, possibly there are some savings. Certainly not enough to get me to buy used though.
Not everything is a Prius. Some cars are worth buying used, some (Prius) are not. Perhaps if you expanded your search beyond 500 miles and what's currently available you could find the needle in the haystack that is worth buying used. But with a Prius you're better off buying new. An off-lease 5-series may very well be a different story.
For most people, mortgage interest and property taxes are required to allow them to itemize. Do you know something about this that I don't? If so, please share.
And while you're at it, please detail how a minimum wage worker would go about itemizing. I'm certain that there are several here who would be curious to hear about this.
My career had a high level of professional fees and expenses.
My Dw and I both took the free IRS courses on tax filing, we were each certified tax preparers [as a volunteer-position] for a number of years, for my employer. For the majority of my working career, I did the tax filings for many of my co-workers, and nearly all of them were income tax-free.
Yes, you are correct. For the general public, they likely do not have enough write-offs to really be able to itemize their taxes. We were tax-free for so many years that I forget sometimes, that my career followed a different path. My apology.
My professional fees and expenses, were far more than enough to get us into itemizing.
Then we got into investing in tax-shelters [we bought and collected Multi-Family-Residences, in different state/nations] which provided reasonable tax-sheltering, that covered the rest of our income, until I retired. Once we got into taking the VITA courses, the instructors [IRS Auditors] were always very encouraging in ways to maximize write-offs [within the tax code].
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
One of those 47%ers, eh? And making well above minimum wage.
Yes.
The last time that any of my income went into individual income taxation was 1982.
...To ask them again: Do people choose their parents? Do people choose the work ethic instilled them or not by parents, peers, society? Do children choose their own schools and their parents' level of education, knowledge, and genius? Do people choose their genetics? Do people choose their exposure to disease? Do people choose the peers they are exposed to from an early age, the dialect they speak, the country they are born into, or their physical appearance (aside from fitness)?
I will add to your list of questions: Do people choose their personality? Do people choose how charismatic they are? Do people choose how much sex appeal the exude?
If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide people with sexual mates rather than to leave coupling to chance.
Do some people who wish children choose to be barren? If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide such people with children.
I will add to your list of questions: Do people choose their personality? Do people choose how charismatic they are? Do people choose how much sex appeal the exude?
If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide people with sexual mates rather than to leave coupling to chance.
Do some people who wish children choose to be barren? If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide such people with children.
Why stop there? People can't choose their parents? Glass half full: they were born as people. Humans. The top of the food chain. With consciousness, 80 years, and the potential to utilize Reason to solve problems and achieve happiness.
They could have been born deer. Or insects. They didn't choose their species. Why should they be so lucky when the house fly has a life expectancy of 20 days, certainly not enough time to establish life goals?
This illustrates the utter insanity of determinism.
So we have established that need is not a claim on the lives of others. Neither is bad luck. No matter how little luck you have had, or how bad your parents were, you never have the right to take stuff from other people without their permission. This basic rule of decency and honesty transcends all hard luck stories and all excuses.
Just be honest. Make the most of what you have. If you want or need help, ask others rather than holding them up with an actual gun or a proxy (the state). Guess what? People are inherently good and are more likely to help in a useful way when morality is observed and they are asked, rather than being beaten over the head.
Collectivism is so inherently and obviously immoral. Yet the apologists persist, despite the fact that it is wrong both logically and empirically. In other words, we can prove it is evil by simple analysis. But, if we choose to evade and ignore that, we have endless real-world models glaring out at us from every inner city and every third world country.
Last edited by Marc Paolella; 09-21-2014 at 08:30 PM..
May not be worthwhile. There's 80 listings (50 miles), 250 (500 miles) for 2012-2013 Toyota Prius Two (car I just recently bought). Average listing is $19,000. Taking the cashback instead of 0% offer from Toyota, the Prius Two was a hair under $21k...
There is a big problem with owning a used Prius. They all come with Obama bumper stickers, of course, so there is no way to tell which one is yours when you park at Whole Foods. Anyone who put on a Romney bumper sticker just so they could find their car in the parking lot had the warranty revoked.
There is a big problem with owning a used Prius. They all come with Obama bumper stickers, of course, so there is no way to tell which one is yours when you park at Whole Foods. Anyone who put on a Romney bumper sticker just so they could find their car in the parking lot had the warranty revoked.
We have a Prius.
I do not recall seeing any Prius with a Hussein sticker.
My career had a high level of professional fees and expenses.
My Dw and I both took the free IRS courses on tax filing, we were each certified tax preparers [as a volunteer-position] for a number of years, for my employer. For the majority of my working career, I did the tax filings for many of my co-workers, and nearly all of them were income tax-free.
Yes, you are correct. For the general public, they likely do not have enough write-offs to really be able to itemize their taxes. We were tax-free for so many years that I forget sometimes, that my career followed a different path. My apology.
My professional fees and expenses, were far more than enough to get us into itemizing.
Then we got into investing in tax-shelters [we bought and collected Multi-Family-Residences, in different state/nations] which provided reasonable tax-sheltering, that covered the rest of our income, until I retired. Once we got into taking the VITA courses, the instructors [IRS Auditors] were always very encouraging in ways to maximize write-offs [within the tax code].
Yes.
The last time that any of my income went into individual income taxation was 1982.
There is a big problem with owning a used Prius. They all come with Obama bumper stickers, of course, so there is no way to tell which one is yours when you park at Whole Foods. Anyone who put on a Romney bumper sticker just so they could find their car in the parking lot had the warranty revoked.
Maybe outside of California. They're pretty apolitical here. Best friend is pretty religious and definitely Republican. He and his wife both drive Priuses. They do shop at Whole Paychecks though, so I'll have to ask if they have any problems finding their cars
I will add to your list of questions: Do people choose their personality? Do people choose how charismatic they are? Do people choose how much sex appeal the exude?
If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide people with sexual mates rather than to leave coupling to chance.
Do some people who wish children choose to be barren? If you answer "no", then by your logic, it is the responsibility of the State to provide such people with children.
Oooh, I knew someone would come in with a slippery slope fallacy. Just because it is true that people don't choose those deficits, I don't see how there would be an overall increase in utility from forcing people to mate. That said, I don't think there would be a problem ranking barren people above equally fit parents who can procreate.
I get that libertarianism is about pretending that the line drawing fallacy isn't real, and therefore that perfect internal logical consistency is more important than creating a functional world, but you don't have to bring it on to this thread...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
