Right, but if I’m willing to stop buying new and paying interest, instead buying well used, how am I not saving money? That used to be the smart thing to do, buy a car a few years ild, save more than a few dollars.
Another example of how still crazy high the used car market is- especially for cheap used cars
- Thread starter GON
- Start date
For every winner there is a loser, and the market will set it straight eventually to balance things out. Banning used car export is artificial manipulation, just like subsidizing EVs, or cash for clunkers.
What if you are building your custom home and suddenly your county says you cannot sell it above a certain price after you live in it, except to your neighbors' kids, and you two have to agree on your own price (or you can tear it down if you don't want to sell to your neighbor's son) instead of checking Redfin to see what is fair? Do you like that kind of mandate?
Don't confuse trade tariffs with political systems, the US has lots of trade tariffs on all sorts of imports and exports. Personally I think its not a bad idea to put some high tariffs on exporting cheap cars, then new manufacturers will have to compete a bit more against used vehicles and keep prices lower, and offer simpler, cheaper cars...
No, but I never said I wanted to ban anything. Just that I agreed, if we are shipping “lots” of used cars, then we are reducing supply and driving price up.
This is one of the reasons I am so opposed to mandating things like radar systems. What was once a minor front end collision is now a major calamity If the insurance company has to pay to repair and calibrate all that junk.
I’m not saying such systems are worthless or they shouldn’t be an option. What I’m saying is I should be able to choose a new car without it. Or at least be able to choose the option of my insurance not repairing it after a crash.
A death will cost a lot more- especially if you are at fault, and one of these systems could have prevented it. You could lose or have a lien on all your assets- for avoiding a anti collision option ( if you had the ability to choose). In short your argument is silly.
A legal vehicle is a legal vehicle... Do pickup truck owners get sued more because they could've been driving a smaller car and done less damage, or had a shorter stopping distance?
Do you expect everyone to drive on 200tw summer tires in the summer because they out perform all season tires by quite a bit... Otherwise they get sued for having sub optimal tires on?
I guess anyone can try to sue for anything, but you sound like your afraid to leave your property in case someone sues you?
So people driving cars produced before these systems were available always lose their assets in a collision? Of course not. A road legal vehicle is just that. Or must classic car owners retrofit radar cruise to their show cars before taking them on the road?
Until you can point me to some cases where this has actually happened I’m going to consider your response to be based in paranoia and not reality.
If that was the case we wouldn't have collapsible steering columns, energy absorbing bumpers, crash standards (how many lifes have those saved?) ABS, seat belts, airbags etc.
What nonsensical reasoning you have. I will go make a foil hat now......you know to keep my rights.
CKN,
Why must you resort to straw mans, hyperboles, and insults to argue a point? Your counter arguments are like “Oh so you must want children to DIE because you want people to be able to choose whether or not you want radar sensors on your bumper!”
respecting others opinions can get you farther than just yelling at them. We don’t have to agree on everything.
Last edited:
Getting hit by a car because the owner chose to not equip their car with FCW isn't choosing your own risk.
Everyone always takes a risk driving. And there will always be a risk.
I respectfully disagree. People drive less safe vehicles than me. I drive a 2014. But I don’t grumble and mumble about people with lesser cars than my own saying “they put me at risk.” I just do the best I can as a driver and move on.
as long as they are not being disrespectful or breaking laws, I could care less if they drive a 2001 Honda civic. Accidents happen.
But the truth of the matter is they are putting you at risk. That's a fact due to how much faster, for example ABS can react verses human reflexes. Again a cold stone fact. That's not an opinion.
Insurance is what the buyers want. They probably have the most data telling us what is worth the money in the long run. Personally I prefer a discount instead of mandate but if cost make sense adding them will be a good thing in the long run. ABS and TPM probably doesn't cost much these days, maybe $500 when it is new and will last you 10 years. It probably save you that $500 back in insurance cost over 10 years.
Radar in theory should help prevent accident, hopefully enough of it to reduce your liability cost, and hopefully you don't get into accident and save you the bumper cost instead of getting into an accident and cheaper to repair the bumper without radar.
I sold an old car for 2,000 bucks. The buyer did not even test drive it! He was so excited!
Safety? That is a huge hilarious topic especially in the automobile world.
All you have to do is look to the famous airbag, alone it is a great safety device, but when paired to
a very dangerous ill designed inflation device, they can be the most dangerous safety feature there is.
Not including the inflator there have even been many fatalities of small frame females, and or large short people that have to
have their stomach sitting close to or on the steering wheel. I think I read one time about instant heart problems in some people caused by the deployment of the airbag. With all these airbag problems we constantly hear about, why is it that they continue to use a litteral tin can to hold the possible high pressure when things go wrong? No talk ever about trying to add a system to relieve an over pressure condition and exit it away from the peoples faces, as well as adding strength to the sections that have been known to fragment?
This alone proves safety is not a high priority IMOP.
All you have to do is look to the famous airbag, alone it is a great safety device, but when paired to
a very dangerous ill designed inflation device, they can be the most dangerous safety feature there is.
Not including the inflator there have even been many fatalities of small frame females, and or large short people that have to
have their stomach sitting close to or on the steering wheel. I think I read one time about instant heart problems in some people caused by the deployment of the airbag. With all these airbag problems we constantly hear about, why is it that they continue to use a litteral tin can to hold the possible high pressure when things go wrong? No talk ever about trying to add a system to relieve an over pressure condition and exit it away from the peoples faces, as well as adding strength to the sections that have been known to fragment?
This alone proves safety is not a high priority IMOP.
Yea-we have ascertained the safest drivers in the world are on this forum-despite what the average age is-and the delayed reaction times that come with age.
So in all your years of driving-you never had a slick condition that caused the ABS to kick in? Nor a panic stop?
Sorry-I'm not buying it.
We’ve all disconnected our ABS because we have better reaction times
In truthfulness I did disconnect the ABS in my 98 Chevy because of a persistent low speed error that caused it to prevent stopping around 3-4 mph. After I smacked the side of a building while standing on the brake I decided to pull the plug. Now it stops when I tell it to.
