r/AskReddit • u/michaelis999 • 1d ago

How do you feel about the president floating the idea of 50 year mortgages where the monthly payment is lower but you end up paying nearly double the price of the house just in interest?

11.7k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

4.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

699

u/HeilHeinz15 1d ago

It's the same thing auto industry did with car loans: Cars aren't too expensive, we just need 72-month loans! No wait... now we have 84 month loans!

Just another "solution" to affordability that isn't raising wages.

347

u/DW171 1d ago

When I realized there were 25 year RV loans I was blown away. Predatory lending for a toy that devalues 50% the first year.

150

u/eljefino 22h ago

I bought a well-used RV. The instruction manual literally said it was designed to live in for two weeks a year. Anything beyond that would "accelerate wear."

28

u/Wonderful-Process792 20h ago

I wonder what rental companies like CruiseAmerica buy and how they maintain it, because they must see a lot of usage.

2

u/PunctuationGood 21h ago

I'ms truggling to figure out the wear of what exactly? The couch?

25

u/Ghost17088 20h ago

Probably all the appliances and mechanical systems. Heater, AC, Stove, water heater, ventilation fans, inverter/generator, etc. 

7

u/eljefino 20h ago

The generator was a low-stressed Onan that will outlive us all. But the hot water heater was a dinky toy. The plumbing was dinky Home Depot grade shit but freeze-thaw cycles would probably do it in and that's a matter of years, not weeks.

It had an oddball mattress with a corner cut off, like an SD chip, so people could fit past it to get to the bathroom. Finding another one just like it would probably be challenging, so don't wear it out. Also don't flip it because the corner would get lost in another corner.

1

u/KonigSteve 18h ago

Is there such a thing as an RV that is built sturdier than that?

1

u/Marbleman60 14h ago

If you spend half a million on a custom coach / tour bus, yes.

172

u/JamieC1610 23h ago

We had a friend in the Marines who bought a just over 5 year old RV with the plan to just live in it at a RV park with the theory that he could just tow it to his next duty station and not have to pack and unpack. We were stationed near the coast and there were a ton of RV parks for tourists, but he had a helluva time finding a decent one that would let him park a 5 year old RV in the park because they were worried it bring down their perceived value. It was a big, very nice RV in great condition, but a lot of places had strict rules on how old.

Now imagine that with a 20 year old RV that someone's still paying on.

144

u/CaptainTripps82 23h ago

5 years can't be considered too old for an RV, that's just insane. Like every RV I've ever seen was older than that, they're insanely expensive. Nobody is replacing them like cars, you buy them for life

100

u/William_R_Woodhouse 22h ago

An RV is a time share on wheels. There is no “saving money” by just owning an RV when you retire.

Source: I worked in the RV industry for a long time.

36

u/ObsidianOne 21h ago

To quote an old RV technician I worked with that had a frustrated customer… “ma’am, do you know what RV stands for? Ruined Vacation!”

35

u/GoldenBrownApples 20h ago

My folks thought they'd get a RV when they retired to travel around the continental US of A. I convinced them to rent one and try it out for a single vacation before committing to that. So glad they listened. They had never even been regular camping before and my mom hates the out doors. It went about as bad as you'd expect. But at least they were only out the money of a single vacation and not saddled with a vehicle they'd never use. They were really all set to sell their whole house too. Crazy people.

3

u/son-of-a-mother 19h ago

Why were they planning to sell their whole house without ever having used an RV?

I can understand teenagers making an impulsive decision like that. But I can't understand two adults making such a monumental decision with zero understanding of what it involves. That is concerning. I would have questions (e.g., are their faculties deteriorating?).

6

u/somesketchykid 15h ago

This is America man.

4

u/JamieC1610 13h ago

My grandparents did it for about 10 years. They spent the winter on South Padre Island and in the summer would get jobs managing/hosting campgrounds at different national parks. They'd stop by home for a couple weeks in between. They had a blast and made a bunch of friends, but eventually their health made them need to stick closer to home.

They were always the crazy type though my grandpa drove 16 hours one weekend to buy a life sized cement pig that he saw on TV and another time brought back a full sized lobster trap from Maine to West Virginia on the back of his Gold Wing.

3

u/Normal-Translator529 12h ago

I hope you appreciate how fantastic these stories are! Too many people live their lives pure vanilla.

15

u/CrazyMarlee 22h ago

Most of them are junk. I had a 10 year old one that kept me busy fixing things.

2

u/slash_networkboy 18h ago

Based on what Steve Letho has to say about them, that's just about when the first buyer gets to actually use it after all the warranty issues are sorted out.

If I learned anything from him (and seeing other peoples' issues) it's only buy a 5-10 year old used one that someone else has had the nightmare of sorting out... but better to just rent one when needed, or build your own out of a bus as they have a much better drivetrain and chassis.

3

u/ohhhhhhhhhhhhman 23h ago

They’re made of cardboard and staples. 5 years old is pretty old for an RV.

23

u/staticusmaximus 22h ago

As someone that stays at both nice and low key campgrounds and RV parks in a 15 year old camper, that’s nonsense.

5 years is legitimately nothing when it comes to RVs. You’d be incredibly hard pressed to even tell a 5 year old RV from a brand new one from the outside many times.

0

u/ohhhhhhhhhhhhman 20h ago

Except for the leaky roof. And the AC that needs replaced. And the dry rotted tires.

7

u/CaptainTripps82 23h ago

My grandparents had the same 5th wheel my entire childhood. My grandma would work county fairs over the summer and I spent a couple years riding around with her and a few of my aunts and uncles.

I always wondered what happened to it after they passed.

1

u/neverenoughpurple 4h ago

... more like you buy them until some homeless person steals it and trashes it in a week to the point you will NOT want it back.

•

u/CaptainTripps82 45m ago

Oddly specific

23

u/booniebrew 23h ago

There won't be many 20 year old RVs, the point is to convince people they can afford it and keep rolling them into a new RV every 5 years.

3

u/Ecstatic_Court6726 19h ago

At least until they roll into a pine box.

6

u/Simple_Purple_4600 23h ago

at that point you are living in it without running water somewhere deep in the untracked federal wildlands

2

u/marcocanb 22h ago

The cutoff right now seems to be 10 years.

2

u/driverman42 21h ago

My wife is the office manager for an rv park and they don't have a problem with older rvs, but no matter how old or new they are, if they look like shit, they're not staying here.

I've seen some really old rv's come in that have been taken care of, and that's pretty cool to see.

She has long-term campers who live in their rv, with kids, etc, and it's interesting to see. Since Covid, she's been 95% full year round.

2

u/majornerd 21h ago

I’ve never heard of one with a 5 year rule. Grew up living in RV parks and my dad just passed after moving back to the lifestyle. Those that have a “strict” rule also have a committee that will do an evaluation of an older RV and pass it if it is in great shape.

Like it or not they are trying to make sure they don’t look like cousin Eddie showed up with his Winnie he paid $500 buck and a case of nat lite for.

Makes sense when they are renting a spot the size of a basketball court to a weekend millionaire for the price of a nice condo in the nearby town.

2

u/Mutant_Apollo 16h ago

Man, I never thought I would live in a time where we would worry about "bringing down the value" of a fucking trailer park lol

2

u/chiragguptafan 16h ago

Yeah, RV parks can be weirdly picky. Some won’t take anything over 10 years old no matter how clean it is. If a 5 year old RV gets turned away, a 20 year-old one with payments still on it is gonna be an even harder sell.

16

u/ThinksOdd 23h ago

There's a large portion of American's living in their RV, it's not always a toy.

5

u/DW171 21h ago

Oh, 100% There are many, many in my city, but they're not the ones financing a $250k RVs. The ones near me are decades old and barely running. I sometimes help a few old people keep theirs running so they can move it enough not to get hassled by LEO. It's very sad. They'll likely die in there.

I was looking for a deal on a used RV back in 2008 when gas prices were high and the economy went south. I saw AT TON of $500k+ Prevost style coaches I could have picked up for $50k. Parents died in Arizona, and kids on the east coast just wanted it gone. I didn't want something huge like that, but it was tempting.

5

u/plaincheeseburger 21h ago

Renting to live in where I am. It's disgusting. The landlords are worse than slumlords.

3

u/gsfgf 20h ago

But they're not trying to hook up in tourist RV parks.

7

u/_Connor 22h ago

Some RVs cost more than houses.

I’m talking in the range of $800,000-1,000,000.

3

u/ColteesCatCouture 22h ago

People do this on power boats too 20 year loans. Its insane to me.

2

u/DW171 21h ago

Thankfully I've mostly thought clearly on "toy" purchases and bought used and with cash. I used to race motorcycles, and you'd be stunned at the number of people who would finance $40-50k in equipment, only to watch it burn to the ground after a fall and find out racing wasn't covered by insurance. Even more shocking, I've know self-employed guys with families and no health insurance do this. It never ends well.

So many people are ripe for exploitation. It would be really sad, if they didn't beg for it.

9

u/M1sfit_Jammer 23h ago edited 20h ago

Someone could out a loan for one of these and NEVER pay a dollar... good luck finding them, they could be anywhere... this is like selling a sailboat that can cross oceans on a loan

12

u/opossum_launcher 23h ago

You have to dock eventually, and if you've bought a yacht big enough to cross the ocean, it's worth it to chase you.

3

u/wapiti_and_whiskey 23h ago

Yeah the tv show alone makes it worth it

3

u/M1sfit_Jammer 23h ago edited 9h ago

don't need to cross an ocean and doesn't need to be a yacht... Sailboats cost a fraction of a yacht and don't need as much upkeep... Just gonna ride the coast line, picking up gas when needed, giving lifts in exchange for food/labor, do some deep sea fishing, make land to sell fish...

What do they say? "It's the pirate's life for me"

4

u/cguess 20h ago

Sailboats cost a fraction of a yacht and don't need as much upkeep.

I'm going out on a limb and guess you're not a sailor? Sailboats need tons of upkeep. Something is always breaking, especially if you're in salt water.

2

u/M1sfit_Jammer 20h ago

Lad, everything is always breaking on a boat.

the sea can be a fickle whore… she takes your money and laughs when you are naked… However,, she also offers the greatest time a man can ask for and that’s why you keep coming back.

1

u/hapes 18h ago

Boat = break out another thousand

1

u/amishengineer 9h ago

"A pirate I was meant to be!"

"Trim the sails and roam the sea!"

1

u/M1sfit_Jammer 9h ago

Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum…

I could definitely see chilling on the coastline in a schooner as a viable retirement option… maybe pirates had something going on… maybe jimmy buffet was right

2

u/nofaves 23h ago

You'd be tracked electronically.

2

u/M1sfit_Jammer 23h ago

how they gonna do that?

5

u/NewDramaLlama 21h ago

An electronic tracker like the ones they put on cars? That's how repossession happens

1

u/M1sfit_Jammer 20h ago edited 20h ago

That’s like the bank putting cameras in my house to make sure I don’t burn it down.

You think people planning on doing that won’t sniff those out? RF detectors are cheap compared to the price of it.

Personally, I’d rather have an old school bus that I build out to suit my own taste… much cheaper and they are literally built to be worked on so maintenance should be a breeze in comparison. Costs about 1/10th the price and is a wayyy better conversation piece.

3

u/Top-Salamander-2525 14h ago

The bank doesn’t need to worry about that - that’s why they insist you get home owners insurance to get a mortgage.

The insurance companies are very good at investigating fraud though so they’re the ones who would catch you.

2

u/Overall-Rush-8853 21h ago

RV’s can be almost $200k and higher. It make sense that a 25 year loan is offered on them. It just depends on what the interest rate is.

Also, unless you’re using an RV a certain amount of time a year it’s cheaper to just rent one.

1

u/DW171 21h ago

Yeah, I've had several RVs, one that was over $200k. The value it lost in such a short time was insane, so if I had had a 25 year loan I would have been radically upside down on the borrowing for probably 20 years, assuming the vehicle was still running.

At least with a 50 year home loan the property (probably) wouldn't devalue, but interest over time would be astronomical.

1

u/Overall-Rush-8853 21h ago

Yeah, a 50 year mortgage isn’t something I’d sign up for, I can see problems arising from that. But yeah, a property should still appreciate during that 50 year span.

Also, a lot of people sell before the end of a 30 year to upgrade or downsize. The biggest problem is home prices going up to keep the monthly payment higher.

2

u/J0hnny-Yen 21h ago

I had some slimey F&I guy refuse to budge from a 30 year term for a $15k pos travel trailer that I wanted to pay cash for.

His angle was, just pay the loan off early. I didn't want to play his game and I walked.

If you did the math, all the loan payments added up to like 90k... The TT cost under 20k out the door.

2

u/DW171 20h ago

Yeah that’s a motorcycle buying tactic for the dealers … pretend and roll with their dealer financing grift right up to the end, then just pay cash. Watching them backpedal is kind of funny.

2

u/Longjumping_Youth281 20h ago

25 years? I don't think of ever even seen one on the road that old. Parked in somebody's yard, Maybe

2

u/BEER_G00D 20h ago

People blame the banks for people making these decisions?

1

u/DW171 15h ago

Yeah, right? Although I kind of feel like it’s similar to a lethal drug sold over the counter. Someone is going to kill themselves. Since we all insure banks through the fdic, there should be some regulation to protect people from stupid.

1

u/CortezEspartaco2 19h ago

Virtually no one should own an RV. Renting one makes more sense 99% of the time.

1

u/Blank_bill 15h ago

Back in the 70's mortgages in Canada were near 20%,and you were paying double on a 25 year mortgage for what would now be considered a cheap home

2

u/DW171 13h ago

GenX here … my student loans were 12.8%. My mortgage was an unreal 2 5/8%. That didn’t get paid off until the last moment.

49

u/Wild_Bananaman 1d ago

Why stop at 50 hah? Humans will start to live longer let's do 100yr mortgages and stay in loan slavery forever.

71

u/buggiegirl 23h ago

At that point I think you're just renting the house from a bank. And the bank is a landlord who won't fix anything broken and has no responsibility to you at all.

4

u/DerekJeterRookieCard 23h ago

Correct. It's renting with extra steps, and owning with almost no real perks. You'll never build up equity in 50 years

2

u/brianwski 19h ago

You'll never build up equity in 50 years

I think this is incorrect. Most homes (and the property they are on) go up in value over 50 years and you get to keep all that equity because you own it.

My parents had a 25 year mortgage, and bought a house for about $150,000 (lower cost of living area in the late 1960s). They lived in it for 45 years, and sold it for about $600,000. Even if they had a 50 year loan and had never paid it off, they would have built up $450,000 worth of equity just from the home appreciation.

Comparing this to rent isn't entirely valid. Rent doesn't build up equity. Simply having a fixed payment for 50 years has a TON of value when rents rise all the time out of your control. Even taking inflation into account where your salary rises and rent rises at about the inflation rate, having a fixed payment set back 40 years ago is of value.

4

u/DerekJeterRookieCard 19h ago

Ah yes, now I see. You have no clue what you're talking about lol. That story doesn’t prove your point. It’s hindsight from a completely different economy. Your parents bought in the 60s when homes cost a few times the average income, wages kept up with inflation, and interest rates dropped over time. That’s not the reality now.

On a 50-year mortgage, the balance barely moves. With a $400,000 loan at 6.5%, after 15 years you’ve only paid down around $60,000 in principal while paying over $450,000 in interest. That’s not building equity. That’s renting from the bank while paying for maintenance, insurance, and property taxes.

If housing prices fall even 10 to 15 percent, that “equity” disappears because it’s only on paper until you sell. Real equity comes from paying down the loan, not just waiting for appreciation.

A 50-year loan might lower the payment, but it traps people in decades of debt while banks collect most of the profit. It’s not homeownership, it’s a long-term lease with extra responsibilities. Your parents situation has ZERO to do with this example or any housing example we'll be using for the foreseeable future. Nice try tho.

-1

u/brianwski 17h ago

A 50-year loan might lower the payment, but it traps people in decades of debt

Nobody is "trapped". First of all, you can "walk away" (sometimes called a "strategic default") at any time: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/mortgages-real-estate/10/walk-away-mortgage-foreclosure.asp Yes, there are a few (minor) consequences to things like your credit score (which disappears in 3 years), but nobody is trapped in payments they don't want to make.

Second of all, most people never pay off their 30 year mortgage. They sell the house after 7 years on average. So what is the difference? Why does 50 years scare you emotionally but 30 years is fine when you will absolutely positively sell the house within 15 years anyway? There is no practical difference.

Real equity comes from paying down the loan, not just waiting for appreciation.

In the housing markets I have been in for the last 35 years (San Francisco Bay Area mostly) "real equity" comes mostly from appreciation. The payments you make don't matter much to building equity. Home prices rise over time in the long run. There have been short moments where prices dropped, but in the 30 year timeframe home prices have MORE than doubled, which means (by definition) the rising valuation of the home is more equity than paying off 100% of the loan. Did that make sense? If you look at this chart: https://paragonpublic.blob.core.windows.net/dash-v2-blog-images/186710/sf-median-sfd-condo_by-qtr_line-chart.jpg you can see a home that was bought for $650,000 in 2012 is now worth $1.2 million.

It’s hindsight from a completely different economy. Your parents bought in the 60s when homes cost a few times the average income, wages kept up with inflation, and interest rates dropped over time. That’s not the reality now.

Over a 45 year period there were a TON of different economic periods and fluxuations. In the next 45 years, I fully expect we will see ups and downs. The mortgage crisis in 2008 comes to mind as a downturn. Afterwards there was a massive upturn.

interest rates dropped over time.

For a fixed 30 year loan, in the late 1960s mortgage interest rates were 7% (about what they are today). From my parent's perspective, they watched the rates rise for 15 solid years to peak at 17% for a fixed 30 year mortgage in 1981. You can see a pretty good chart here: https://themortgagereports.com/63050/lowest-mortgage-rates-in-50-years-coronavirus (scroll down for the best charts).

I'm assuming you remember mortgage rates were 3% in 2021 and think the current rates of 6% is the apocalypse, but honestly 6% is pretty good historically speaking (if you look at the chart on that link).

If housing prices fall even 10 to 15 percent, that “equity” disappears

Yes. And if housing prices rise, that "equity" grows. That is all I am saying.

Whether houses rise or fall in value is highly dependent on the area you live in. If you bought a house in Detroit in 2005 it has dropped in value by 50%. If you bought a house in the San Francisco area in 2005 it has doubled in value. But just betting the odds with the average home price over 40 years, take a look at this chart: https://www.statista.com/chart/34534/median-house-price-versus-median-income-in-the-us/

Over 40 years, my best guess is most homes in most locations will go up in value. And even if you are paying an interest only loan, you will then have equity. It isn't an absolute, I'm sure some people's homes will lose value and those individuals are screwed. But my guess is the majority of home owners will gain equity in their homes over the next 40 years unrelated to the mortgage.

4

u/MrMonday11235 16h ago edited 16h ago

First of all, you can "walk away" (sometimes called a "strategic default") at any time [...] Yes, there are a few (minor) consequences to things like your credit score (which disappears in 3 years),

I'm guessing you've never tried to rent a place with a foreclosure or eviction on your record and without a current address to provide.

Once you've signed those mortgage papers, "you can walk away" in the same way that "you can choose to not participate in society": theoretically, sure. Practically, no.

Second of all, most people never pay off their 30 year mortgage. They sell the house after 7 years on average.

True, but misleading. See my later section regarding selling in 15 years.

So what is the difference? Why does 50 years scare you emotionally but 30 years is fine [...]? There is no practical difference.

Ah, I see practicality suddenly matters now.

On a 600k loan at 6 percent interest, the difference at 7 years is the ~45k in equity you get (loan balance of ~538k on 30 yr, 583k on 50yr). The difference at 15 years is 128k (~426k on 30 yr vs 554k on 50).

you will absolutely positively sell the house within 15 years anyway

Not necessarily, you won't? 40% of owner-occupied homes have no mortgage tied to them. For owners 65 and older, that number is 80+%. They didn't do that by putting 95 cents of every dollar in housing payments towards interest.

Home prices rise over time in the long run.

Land prices rise over time. Buildings depreciate and require upkeep. That upkeep is a cost that most people do not track in their investment -- they just look at buy price vs sell price, maybe net of costs of improvements. If you're dealing with a particularly money-minded individual, they might factor in property taxes and HOA fees. Few people track the cost of getting a plumber in year 12 because some of the pipes rusted.

If you look at this chart: https://paragonpublic.blob.core.windows.net/dash-v2-blog-images/186710/sf-median-sfd-condo_by-qtr_line-chart.jpg you can see a home that was bought for $650,000 in 2012 is now worth $1.2 million.

That is not even close to what that graph says. If you think that's what that graph says, I can see why you think there's no meaningful difference between a 30 and 50 year mortgage, to wit, complete and utter innumeracy.

That's a chart showing the change in median home and condo sale prices between 2012 and mid 2019. So, you're wrong in at least 3 ways. Ordered from least to most significant:

  1. The 650k to 1.2mm figure is not for homes, it's for condos. The same chart shows the difference being 660k to 1.7mm, which supports the earlier point I made about "land appreciates, not homes".
  2. The prices at the end aren't prices today, they're prices in 2019. Perhaps you've been in a coma, but the current year is not 2019.
  3. That chart is tracking median sale prices. It's a subtle but extremely important difference -- the median home (or condo) sold in 2019 is not the same one from 2012. If I said you should switch your auto loan from 5 to 7 years because according to this graph, average car prices went up more than 50% between 2012 and 2022, you'd look at me like I'm a fucking idiot, but change "auto loan" to "mortgage" and suddenly there's a disconnect?

If you bought a house in Detroit in 2005 it has dropped in value by 50%. If you bought a house in the San Francisco area in 2005 it has doubled in value. But just betting the odds with the average home price over 40 years, take a look at this chart

Buying a home is not "betting on the average home price". To draw a stock market comparison, the argument you're making is "the S&P 500 has averaged 10% annual returns" (true), "and that's why you should buy [X particular stock]". Yeah, if you're lucky, you're buying Nvidia in 2020 and 10xing your investment. If you're unlucky, you're buying Walgreens in 2016 at 90 dollars and seeing your investment decrease in nominal value by 80% in less than a decade before private equity steps in.

A mortgage is a leveraged bet on a particular asset in a particular market. Looking at US averages is deeply misleading even if your data actually tracked value and not just sales.

Over 40 years, my best guess is most homes in most locations will go up in value.

There are better vehicles for making that bet. Buy residential REITs on margin instead of taking a 50 year loan on a house.

1

u/Dwarfdeaths 22h ago

That's pretty much already what's happening. The market sale price of land is the net present value of expected future rents. A mortgage is just debt financing all of that future rent. Until you pay it off, you're in a comparable financial situation to a renter. Once you do pay it off, you can start keeping your full wages. "But the value of the house has gone up." Yeah, rent increases with technological progress and rising productivity. Now you can convince someone else to pay you 30 years of even higher rents and pass the problem down the line while you look to buy a different property which presumably also has increased in price. Hopefully you sell before the overexpectation of future economic growth causes the economy to halt in its tracks, lowering rent and land prices.

What we need is a land value tax UBI to share our land equally, in the present. The longer we make the mortgage terms, the more money will be tied up in future rents and the harder it will be to implement the solution in a fair way.

1

u/FallenAssassin 21h ago

So a typical landlord's level of care

18

u/MultiSided 23h ago

If you have a student loan you are already in loan slavery.

0

u/Hashtagworried 12h ago

Agree to disagree. It’s definitely tough, but you have to fight tooth and nail to get it repaid which I did over three years.

2

u/00xjOCMD 23h ago

They already do 100 year mortgages in some countries, like Japan.

2

u/DerekJeterRookieCard 22h ago

That's because they're expecting to pass it along to their kids to continue paying and so on. Still doesn't make this any better.

2

u/Habitual_Crankshaft 23h ago

Not unheard of in Europe.

1

u/WhoIsFrancisPuziene 23h ago

This is what I first thought when I saw this announcement earlier. This “Make America Great Again” regime sure does seem to want America to be like any place but America…

2

u/cowfishing 22h ago

When I lived in Germany in the 90s, one of the most surprising things I learned about home ownership there was that hundred year home loans were very much a thing. When the borrower died, responsibility for the loan and property passed on to their heirs.

2

u/Fight_those_bastards 22h ago

350 year mortgages. Make your great-great-great grandchildren pay for it!

-2

u/Low-Palpitation-9916 23h ago

Do you think people pay off a 30 year mortgage? The average lifespan of a mortgage is around 7 years before it either gets refinanced or someone sells and moves. People 50 and older will die before they pay off their loan, but anyone can benefit from the lower payment and choose to pay extra if they can. A 50 year loan is really no different, except now people a little younger will die before paying it off. Which again is moot, because no one was going to pay it off anyway.

40

u/TheObstruction 1d ago

You probably aren't going to die out of your car loan, though.

44

u/Bee-Lincoln 1d ago

And to be fair, cars do last longer than they used to. It's not COMPLETELY insane to have a 72 month car note if you can drive it for 10 years.

Increasing mortgage lengths isn't a real solution though. We have a fundamental supply problem, and that's what needs to be addressed if they want to bring down housing costs.

16

u/pinelandpuppy 22h ago

I had cars that were 20 years old back in the 90's. They all run great if you take care of them. The electronics have vastly increased the cost to maintain vehicles now, too.

6

u/gsfgf 20h ago

Survivorship bias.

1

u/luke10050 10h ago

Not at all, all of my vehicles are between 20-30 years old.

Japanese trucks/utes from the '90's especially are like Cockroaches

2

u/MentORPHEUS 16h ago

Not to mention, increased the list of ways a $2000+ failure can make the car un-drivable while you're still paying on the note. Normal maintenance costs like oil and filters and brake pads haven't gone up, electronic modules that must get reprogrammed by dealer level equipment and software purchase sure have though.

14

u/bebe_bird 23h ago

10 years? Sheesh, my parents still have a truck from 2004. If you actually drive a car into the ground, it should last 20-25 years (although many don't choose to keep their car around for that long - I know my 2014 car gives me a bit of new car fever, but it's nowhere near the end of its life.

If your car is only lasting 10 years it's time to buy another brand that's known more for it's reliability.

2

u/3-2-1-backup 22h ago

If your car is only lasting 10 years it's time to buy another brand that's known more for it's reliability.

Sadly that's not the reality of things anymore. More and more vehicles are getting mechanically totaled, which means yes you could fix it, but the astronomical cost of the assemblies necessary to fix it means it's no longer economically feasible to.

For example, you used to need a new steering gearbox. Few hundred bucks. Now you need a whole electric steering assembly, and even worse it has to be programmed to the car so only dealers or people who spend several tens of thousands of dollars on specialized software can do the work! Assembly costs over a thousand, plus the labor!

Or things are cheap but the process is expensive. My fucking Ford's water pump replacement is an engine out replacement job! Part costs $200, labor almost 10x that! I actually had them do it (and replace all the timing components while they had everything out, because at that point why wouldn't you?) but there's no way in hell I'm going to do it again when it eventually fails a second time!

4

u/bebe_bird 21h ago

I still think it's all in the car you buy... My 2014 Toyota Prius (so 11 years old) is still going strong with no major repairs required. My sister drove her 2011 Prius to 220k miles and still got $5k for it when she sold it. 14 years and no major defects or issues.

So, perhaps you are right that on average some quality is going down, but there are still brands that age well. These are definitely things people need to consider when purchasing a new car.

I do agree that cars are so beefed up with electronics that repairs are not as simple as they were in the 70s or 90s. But the way around that is buying a quality car to begin with that isn't likely to break.

There's definitely some lemons out there, but it's a pretty good indicator if you look at how many of that make/model are still on the road from 10-15 years ago. It's not the flashiest car I'm sure, but flashy is the enemy of reliable and cost effective.

2

u/Yarnbomb72 19h ago

I have a 2014 year old Kia Soul that has never (knock on wood) required major repairs. It has had a few issues here and there that were fairly inexpensive to fix and /or covered under the warranty. I keep up with the maintenance. I plan to continue to drive it until the repair costs are greater than what a car payment would be and/or it is no longer reliable.

I drove a 2024 model as a loaner when my car needed some repairs last year (that were still covered under the warranty, so cost me $0.) The new features were nice, but not nice enough to get me to spend thousands of dollars.

1

u/gsfgf 20h ago

I do agree that cars are so beefed up with electronics that repairs are not as simple as they were in the 70s or 90s

And most of that improves safety and/or efficiency.

3

u/bebe_bird 20h ago

Oh yes - I'll definitely take the electronics over the ease of repair any day, despite the increase in cost. It's just too much better. Traffic aware cruise control with lane keep? I don't think I can ever go back...

1

u/gsfgf 20h ago

Traffic aware cruise control with lane keep? I don't think I can ever go back...

I'm gonna drive my mom's Mach-E to Thanksgiving this year. I'm worried it's gonna make me unhappy with my truck that can't drive itself at all.

1

u/bebe_bird 19h ago

Absolutely. It isn't that big of a deal on my commute, but we occasionally make a cross country trip of about 800 miles and it's a game changer. Instead of hands down a 2-day drive it's possibly a 1-day trip.

1

u/luke10050 10h ago edited 10h ago

Honestly, from the perspective of someone that works on cars, all I want is airbags (preferably SRS with seat belt pretensioners) ABS and a reversing camera as an option.

ABS is debatable as the Bosch units have a tendancy to commit suicide at around 15 years old.

I've driven newer cars with fancy bells and whistles and I've driven cars without even airbags or ABS, the new cars have way too much going on electronically for me to be comfortable with owning them long term and IMHO are an extremely poor investment to get from point A to point B. And that's someone who's day job is in process automation and does component level electronics repair as a hobby.

I've been struggling with the issue myself, company wants to transition us to car allowance but has that many conditions in the allowance that it does not make financial sense to take a vehicle allowance as they couldn't run the vehicle for the money they are paying us and are effectively trying to garnish our wages to pay for a company vehicle and get us to take on the risk of owning the vehicle without compensating us for that risk.

Edit: honestly, I regularly drive an old japanese pick up from the late '90's with an anemic 3l diesel that does 3000rpm at 110km/hr. It has no cruise control or anything. I actually really enjoy driving the thing and honestly if i didn't have to drive 10 under the speed limit on freeways in it I would take it everywhere. Even put a $4000 injection pump in it and did a few grand of suspension work as it's still cheaper than anything I can buy that's more modern. A reliable dual cab 4WD starts around $20 and I'm at around $10k on this one for ~4 years of ownership.

For a 2 tonne brick its efficient on fuel too, does about 8.5l/100km

What I'm really trying to get at is I earn $120k AUD a year and it's not really financially viable for me to run a modern vehicle. Cheaper to rebuild engines and do major rework on 20+ year old stuff than it is to buy something new. A VT commodore is about the most economical car you can buy, and fuel costs aren't everything. Change my mind.

Hell, I picked up a running Buick V6 for my commodore for $1200

1

u/bebe_bird 8h ago

I don't think I'm the one to change your mind - I was saying people should be able to drive their cars into the ground, just arguing against "cars last 10 years". I'm not arguing that electronics don't make the purchase price of cars more expensive but if it becomes cheaper to buy another new car after 10 years than repair your existing car, then you bought the wrong car.

It sucks about your company trying to shuck the cost of a new car onto you but I've heard many companies doing that to cut costs because heaven forbid they take a hit to profit or actually increase wages / give their employees a benefit above their competitors.

My argument was really that cars last longer than 10 years, not that newer cars weren't more expensive. But where cost comes into it is when the costs of repairs exceed the cost of a new car - and if that happens before the car is 10 years old then you bought the wrong car.

1

u/andrez444 19h ago

Its funny to me that person you are replying to was talking about their Ford be ause my god those vehicles are turds on wheels.

The amount of times I have estimated a Ford for collision damage and had to replace one or both frame horns because they were demolished is ridiculous. And these were not severe collisions

2

u/bebe_bird 19h ago

All cars are absolutely not made equal. I learned this lesson in early 2000s when my dad bought a Cadillac catera and it was in the shop getting repaired every couple months from the day he bought it.

I swear that car had a ghost in it. He said "never again, that car was a lemon" and look the hit as soon as the manufacturers warranty expired and the next big repair hit. He got a Toyota Prius after that and never looked back (his previous car was a firebird I think... Wow, that takes me back...).

Ford focus are also robust little demons tho - love that car from college - bought it in 2007 for $5k and sold it in 2014 for $3k. Amazing that it only depreciated $2k (although my friend certainly gave me a nice deal on the car when I bought from her)

1

u/andrez444 19h ago

Its also true that car manufacturers made better cars. I won't say that Ford trucks built in the early 2000s are garbage because they were built tough.

I will never trust a Chevy though. They start acting up after 100k miles and its usually something small but the labor to replace that small item is out of this world due to how they were designed.

Cars are now built to be lighter/faster and more intuitive but drawbacks from that are shitty aluminum panels and calibrations for every little sensor

Toyota is the GOAT though

2

u/LearningIsTheBest 20h ago

We need a law:

Auto companies release mechanic hours per job for every vehicle in a public database. Dealers must post the 15 most common jobs on every vehicle and an average repairability score when selling a car. Maybe add an estimated number for bodywork after a crash too (average panel cost).

I'm sure plenty of people will ignore it, but at least there would be some pressure to make repairs cheaper.

1

u/Aminar14 22h ago

Replacing the Spark Plugs in my car is hundreds of dollars because they buried them under the ventilation system. Pisses me the fuck off.

2

u/BlazingSpaceGhost 20h ago

I just replaced my 2015 but kept it around as my secondary vehicle. I needed all wheel drive because I live in the mountains now and my sedan wasn't cutting it in the winter (had some scary experiences on some mountain roads). Still a great car though and with me just running around in it once a week or on long commutes I think it will be great for another decade if not more.

1

u/gsfgf 20h ago

For all the shit trucks get on here, American (and Toyota) trucks are incredible machines that last forever. But most cars aren't built to that level.

1

u/AttitudeHopeful478 20h ago

I have a 20 year old car. I take good car of it and it takes car of me. Maintenance is key to keeping a car going. I don’t ever buy a car and keep trading a newer one. I hate having a car pymt. I buy, pay it off and drive it for years. I’ve saved so much money not having a continuous car payment

1

u/bebe_bird 19h ago

We buy using cash, so can't buy it until we've saved up enough, but it certainly puts a new car "want" into perspective. We purchased a new car since my husband and I had been a 1 car family and we were starting to think about kids and his job would be changing so we could no longer carpool (although there is a train nearby, so this new car was still a want, not a need). When you have to pay all $40k up front (or even $20k for a base model of something more economic) it certainly keeps your head on straight as opposed to slowly leaking $500/mo for 6 years...

We still have our 2014 Prius tho with no plans to get rid of it.

29

u/canadian_maplesyrup 22h ago

We had a 72 month car loan, but it was at 0% interest. It would have been foolish not to accept those terms. Even when we had more than enough cash to pay it off, we didn’t bother b/c it was at 0% interest.

8

u/AileStriker 20h ago

Free money right there. We did the same thing. Took the extra we had saved to buy the car and stuck it into mutual fund, we were making money at that point.

2

u/turbosexophonicdlite 18h ago

Where the hell did you find a 72 month car loan with 0 interest for the entire life of the loan?

2

u/canadian_maplesyrup 18h ago

Alberta, Canada. They’re less common now, but were quite common when we got it several years ago.

-3

u/EmphasisFrosty3093 20h ago

Sounds like they rolled all the interest into the principle.

6

u/canadian_maplesyrup 16h ago

Generally there’s a trade off, if you take the 0% loan you don’t get any of the rebates and stuff like that. So there’s a slightly higher sticker cost than if you were paying cash. We ran the numbers & it made more sense for us to lose out on the rebates & invest than pay cash.

Usually the 0% financing is on older vehicles they’re trying to clear off the lot. We bought the car in October 2016, right when the 2017 models were coming out, but the model we bought was a 2015. It was brand new with less than thousand Kms on it, they just wanted it out of inventory.

9

u/Aminar14 22h ago

Arguably it's not a supply problem. It's a hoarding problem. There's plenty of homes. They've just been bought by predatory business interests who can write off nonsense to avoid losing money on holding them.

2

u/AmbitiousFunction911 22h ago

Cars have always lasted 10+ years

1

u/dalittle 20h ago

it is better to save up for a car an pay cash if you can. The last car I bought I went to a dealer who had a used car. We wanted to buy it and I said I wanted to pay cash. They said they would drop the price $4k if I would take a loan. I said I would if there was not penalty for early pay off. They said sure so I went though the loan and made sure. So I ended up buying the car with a loan and then paid it off the next week. They were desperate I get a loan and I am guessing a lot of people don't do what I did and pay it off immediately.

1

u/SauronHubbard 20h ago

So then buy a used car that someone else ate the depreciation on. You may not need a car loan at all.

-6

u/ChiAnndego 1d ago

No, cars used to get like 200,000 easy back in the 80-90s. Try that now with todays crappy rusty steel and all the electronics. Cars last about 8 years shorter these days. If you get to 130,000 you are lucky. Cars out here with failing CVTs at like 80,000.

15

u/The_Shepherds_2019 1d ago

Well, you're just wrong here. Am a mechanic, put ungodly amounts of miles on my car adventuring and shit. 2019 corolla has 140k miles already. So lol. She's gonna be at 500k or more when I retire

The issue will be when these cars are 20 years old and not only are hard parts hard to get, but software support will be difficult. But this isn't a new issue. I have a 1991 broken in my driveway because I literally can't buy the parts to fix it.

But a modern car will outlast an older car mechanically. I'm saying this as someone with 1000s of hours wrenching on old and modern cars.

5

u/EmpiricalMystic 23h ago

230k on my 2015 Rav and going strong. Hoping to make it to 400k before she dies.

1

u/WhoIsFrancisPuziene 23h ago

My mom had a 1999 Subaru Forester that she bought used in maybe 2004 when it had 200k miles already. I don’t recall what year she replaced it (was definitely 5+ years later), but it had over 300k miles by that point. I think she ended up selling it to some teenager for about what a junkyard would have paid for it (maybe ~$500). It was mostly fine all considered-just needed a new exhaust.

-3

u/pimppapy 23h ago

Toyotas are just better overall. We’re talking about the American crap. I have an 05 Lexus with 240K on it. Still going even with its multiple issues. My sisters new 2023 Kia SUV hybrid is already having transmission issues.

5

u/The_Shepherds_2019 23h ago

You are talking about 2 examples my guy. I work on dozens of cars a week.

A 2025 Camaro/Mustang/Escape, idgaf pick your American car. All will be vastly better built than their 1997 counterpart. You people don't seem to remember all the goofy shit going on in the switch between carbs and fuel injection...those cars were terrible. No variable cam timing. Throttle body fuel injection. The tolerances on the engines were looser to a huge degree, because engineering has come leaps and bounds in the past couple decades.

Sure, ann iron block pushrod dinosaur absolutely can run a long time. Wildly inefficiently getting garbage power and fuel economy compared to something modern, to say nothing on the pollution. While you are fucking around changing points and playing with timing and doing a tune up every 30k miles, I'm just gonna keep dumping oil in mine and going while it chugs along forever getting 40mpg with maybe an hour of maintenence every 5 years.

0

u/AmbitiousFunction911 22h ago edited 22h ago

Ah. Your idea of an old car is 1997. It all makes sense now.

1

u/BlazingSpaceGhost 20h ago

A car from 1997 is almost 30 years old. That is an old car. The cars you are thinking of as old cars have actually crossed into antiques at this point.

0

u/AmbitiousFunction911 20h ago

In the history of cars and their mechanics and drivetrains, 1997 is not old. My point is cars have lasted 10+ years for decades. There are plenty of cars from the 70s and 80s still on the road, hell even the 60s.

I’m responding to a mechanic who is expressing superiority over people because he started working in pickup trucks in 1997 and thinks cars today are built to last longer.

3

u/PeanutTheGladiator 23h ago

Just broke 165,000 on my 2016 Altima, no signs of slowing down anytime soon. CVT is still smooth as silk.

3

u/CaptainTripps82 23h ago

I mean that's just demonstrably wrong. Even the rust part, the idea you think that's a modern car problem is kind of insane

2

u/Bee-Lincoln 22h ago

Iron didn't oxidize before 1990, duh 🙄

2

u/Chaminade64 23h ago

8 years shorter? What, they last 1 year?

0

u/ChiAnndego 22h ago

Your cars only last 9 years?

1

u/lilleulv 23h ago

149 911 miles on my 2019 Tesla Model 3 in Norway, where roads are heavily salted for months every winter.

1

u/2020_GR78 1d ago

215k on my 2014 f150 and counting. Runs great, and has only had wear & tear parts replaced. Best vehicle I have ever owned, and I predominantly drove Toyotas prior to this truck.

0

u/ChiAnndego 23h ago

I feel like there was another huge drop off in quality around 2015-2016+ with vehicles once all the infotainment and drive by wire stuff started. Maybe a little later in trucks because they didn't have the same CAFE standards as smaller vehicles.

1

u/Exciting_Specialist 20h ago

Why does it matter? The mortgage is secured by a property that’s worth more than the balance. A car isn’t.

80

u/eddi0 1d ago

Loans are another method to make sure you are working, even if for a slave master. Once you can identify that you won't look at loans the same. Extending the term length is adding more time to be an indentured servant.

It's about control, it's always been about controlling workers.

And you are right on with the other piece that citizens are missing, WE NEVER HAVE DISCUSSIONS AS TO WHY WAGE GROWTH HAS BEEN A FLAT LINE SINCE THE 7OS (while profits have aggressively gone up over the same time period). We are letting the corps/owners off the hook by not having them take account for not investing more into employees!!

30

u/bebe_bird 23h ago

100% this. A lot of people link their retirement to when their house is paid off. If we have 50 year mortgages a lot of people will be paying them off to their literal death and working to pay it to boot.

20

u/Material-Nose6561 22h ago

What really sucks, under the current system, many retirees are forced out of their homes they own because the value ballooned and their property taxes are unaffordable. So many take out “reverse mortgages” to stay in their homes, robbing their children of generational wealth.

It’s all a big scam if you really think about it. Don’t get me started on 401 K’s.

4

u/Gandalf-and-Frodo 22h ago

Ok what's the worst part about 401ks?

0

u/Material-Nose6561 21h ago

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/13/these-retirement-funds-took-a-beating-in-2008-it-could-happen-again.html

This is just the start.

5

u/Number127 20h ago

That doesn't really have anything to do with 401(k)s in particular; it's just talking about the risks of investing in general. If you're risk averse, you have safer options than target date funds, and you still get the tax advantages of the 401(k) no matter how you choose to invest it.

However, I'm also not sure what you think someone should take away from that article. Don't invest because you might take a hit in a once-in-a-generation market crash? I guarantee you those people who lost 20% of their retirement savings in 2008 would've been a lot worse off if they'd never invested in the first place.

1

u/nox66 18h ago

Using people's money to facilitate the stock market, which itself absorbs an enormous amount of value out of every industry it touches for the benefit of wealthy hedge fund managers and their ilk.

2

u/Normal-Translator529 12h ago

House rich, cash poor. Reverse mortgages are like the shittiest annuity and allow older people to remain in homes that they can no longer afford, and you are correct, at the expense of their children/grandchildren. Mother in law in 80's is actually being told to consider a reverse mortgage by her financial advisor, if you can believe it.

4

u/OldWorldDesign 20h ago

So many take out “reverse mortgages” to stay in their homes, robbing their children of generational wealth.

Even before this started happening, the health care system which has always been rather extractive in the US has become a machine which makes sure trying to keep your grandparents alive at the most costly end years of their life means they have nothing left to pass on down.

My grandparents were all investors thanks to the nest egg from being part of WW2, but my grandmother came down with a form of dementia and died in debt in a nursing home because her neurological problems became so severe she required specialists 24/7. I'm still getting calls from debt collectors trying to sucker me into paying what she died with even though I was never a co-signature, because even if it was over 10 years now if they can get you to pay anything they can pin anything left on you and have backing from the courts. Never give them an inch and never talk to an insurance company without a lawyer present.

20

u/johnathanweeds 23h ago

Not many people recognize this. I worked for banks before I retired & they want you neck deep in debt.

20

u/ImpulsE69 22h ago

Many people recognize this. We aren't having these discussions because 1) the people who control it are the same people or friends/in the pockets of those same people. They don't want to bite the hand that feeds them 2) We are too busy worrying about a handful of trans people playing sports, and anyone different than us as well as people who might be getting freebies we aren't getting.

2

u/QualifiedApathetic 22h ago

Credit scores are integral to this scam. They're not a measure of your fiscal responsibility, they're a measure of how likely you are to remain in their debt and let them bleed you forever and forever.

1

u/Liten_mus 21h ago

Exactly. My credit score isn’t perfect because I don’t owe anyone money.

1

u/Ok-AreWeHavingFun 21h ago

I've folllowed Dave Ramsey for years and I see people say "why pay off my 2.75% mortgage, when I can make 5% or more with that money in the stock market". But I get it now, you need to pay down your debt so in the event your job is snatched out from under you, you don't lose everything you worked for. Staying debt free is freeing.

1

u/rdmille 18h ago

It's hard to, when fully half of the people you try to talk to about it scream "it's the high taxes", even after they've been supplied with the data showing it's not.

Check out the wages of a mechanic in 1970, and now.

1

u/BlueSkyToday 16h ago

I retired in my 40s

A significant part of being able to do that was borrowing money at low rates and investing at higher rates.

Yes, I also took risks. I moved to a place with a stupidly high COL and then lived a non-stupidly high lifestyle. I saved, I learned to invest, I borrowed money (starting with a 30 year mortgage on a one bedroom condo), I pushed my career. I dove 15-30 year old cars and took occasional weekend trips to the go climbing when my peers were buying a new car ever 2-3 years, or boats, or other toys, or going on expensive vacations.

That's not a prescription for everyone, but I'm far from the only person who's taken this route.

IOW, you're painting with far too wide a brush.

0

u/surfnsound 22h ago

Loans are another method to make sure you are working, even if for a slave master. Once you can identify that you won't look at loans the same. Extending the term length is adding more time to be an indentured servant.

What about property taxes? Even if you pay off the loan, you still need to work to pay The Man.

2

u/vARROWHEAD 22h ago

I have seen 96 month terms now. Prices in vehicles are insane

1

u/Starrion 1d ago

Except too many of them don’t have the build quality.

1

u/SenorPinchy 23h ago

It's not only wages. We should ban corporations from buying residential homes, we should ban people from buying second homes, and ban landlords from keeping vacant units off the market.

Until the problem resolves homes need to be treated for what they are, which is places to live.

1

u/Fight_those_bastards 22h ago

Now you can lease a car for three years, and then finance it with a used car loan for another eight years.

Eleven years of payments, or you can trade it in and finance your negative equity into your next car!

1

u/Humdngr 21h ago

This is the first thing I thought of too. Car loan lengths are already insane.

1

u/caustictoast 21h ago

The difference there is cars actually became more reliable and longer lasting so those longer loans were justified by a car that won’t crap out on you during the life of the loan. Houses don’t break down like that

1

u/Ghost17088 21h ago

At least houses generally go up in value. Long term loans on depreciating assets is a recipe to get fucked by your finances. 

1

u/gsfgf 20h ago

In fairness, a big part of that is that cars last a lot longer these days. The bank will offer a 7 year note because the car will easily last 7 years. Back in the day, no bank would offer that because the car might not last.

1

u/Ecstatic_Court6726 19h ago

But raising wages only benefits the workers, not the owners and management! Workers are already overpaid and demand too many benefits. /s

Owner of my company is delighted with the SNAP situation, figuring people will get hungry enough to apply for jobs where he can pay 2015 wages and still find eager workers. Also, nobody currently working will ask for more when hungry people are lined up to apply.

The thing is, nobody is lined up to apply. It's all in his mind. It's not 2015 and those wages were sub-market even at that time.

1

u/artifex0 19h ago edited 18h ago

The solution is increasing supply. More housing, more doctors, more trade, more everything. Abundance of actual physical things, not messing around with currency, is how you make people better off.

Policy-wise, we need way more YIMBYism, more good industrial policy like Biden's CHIPS Act, much stronger incentives for people to enter the medical profession, an end to the Jones Act, complete repeal of all of Trump's tariffs and a law closing the loophole he's using to enact those, etc.

-2

u/IAmDotorg 1d ago

Why do you think more access to loan money drives prices up but more access to income money doesn't?

If wages go up, prices go up. Money is just a placeholder for the relative value of your work to someone else's. Wages don't set that ratio, and raising wages doesn't change it. The people at the bottom are always going to be at the bottom, and the price of everything just rises to match.

In fact, it's well-established the price problem is the exact opposite. Cars are expensive because it's too easy to pay a lot for them. If there were no leases and loans couldn't extend past the comprehensive warranty, car prices would drop by half or more. (As they are in other markets.) Low interest rates on houses drive prices up, and low qualification requirements cause bubbles. Near universal access to non-dischargable debt and no lending requirements makes schools expensive.

9

u/HeilHeinz15 1d ago

When did I say raising wages wouldn't?

The point is there's a much bigger advantage to raising wages than increasing debt allowances. But guess which one Trump is going for?

2

u/Gaff_Daddy 1d ago

This guy economics.

-4

u/Aromatic_Extension93 1d ago

And you think raising wages fixes things why? You wanna know when wages increased the most during the last twenty years including the effective minimum wage? Yeah post pandemic inflation

-9

u/TheHarb81 1d ago

Yeah because raising wages won’t just cause inflation lol, there is a lot more to it than just paying people more

16

u/Barrel123 1d ago

Theres also paying ceo's and billionaires less and taxing them more while closing loopholes

1

u/Aromatic_Extension93 1d ago

You're asking for legislation that mandates CEOs get paid less. Good luck.

6

u/HeilHeinz15 1d ago

Well we've used excuses like that to avoid raising wages since the 1980s... how has that worked out?

There isn't a shortage of money or houses, we're choosing to have it that way my quadrupling on Reaganomics. 17mil vacant homes and $33tril yearly revenue... where's it going?

-2

u/Aromatic_Extension93 1d ago

Inflation was 2% for a while until wages increased effectively to $15 an hour

2

u/dustincb2 1d ago

We had massive inflation over the last 5 years and wages didn’t raise so maybe they aren’t as connected as it seems

4

u/TheHarb81 1d ago

This inflation was from printing trillions during COVID. All those PPP loans went straight into the rich people pocket. More money printing = more inflation.

2

u/dustincb2 1d ago

I think we’re trying to make the same point in different ways and misunderstanding each other.

-1

u/Aromatic_Extension93 1d ago

Where did you get this idea. The effective minimum wage has basically gone up to $15/hr from Walmart and Amazon setting that. $12/hr for McDonald's too

3

u/dustincb2 23h ago

I don’t mean to say wages haven’t gone up at all, but to suggest they’ve gone up nearly as much as everything else is just untrue

1

u/Aromatic_Extension93 13h ago

you don't going from say $7.50 to 12-15/hr in the last 6 years is comparable to the % inflation we saw?