I swear I read this article last night and it had a different title. Would be interesting to see what the linkbait choices were.
The Cheapest Generation
31–40 of 213 posts
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#32Well, where exactly are they supposed to get the money to buy these things that cost tens of thousands of dollars? There are no jobs and these kids are saddled with insane student-debt bills.
I like how this article also brings up that kids of this generation are sharing living quarters. Indeed! Noticing a pattern here?
I can't help but feel that this cartoon is apt: http://studentloancrisis.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/student... . This article reeks of people with money curiously studying the habits of those without it, as if they're another species.
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#33[deleted]
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#34Aside from those whose livelihood depends on car sales, who have an obvious incentive not to believe it, why is it so hard to believe that people might simply not want to own a car? The whole tone of this article seems like: It appears that millennials don't want to own cars, but that can't be right, can it? If I could get away with not owning one, I certainly would. As it is, I spend as little time in it as possible…
Me too. I only use my car when I absolutely have to. My bike, however, I use every day for commuting.
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#35One word: insurance.
Rates for drivers under 25 are upwards of $200/mo in most urban areas, and that's for the utmost basic 'one-way coverage' insurance. Under one-way, if you are deemed even partially at fault in an accident, however minor, the insurance pays the other's bill only - and essentially ensures you cannot drive for the next three years as premiums quite literally skyrocket.
Anecdote from my university years: friend of mine was driving his van, had a lady sideswipe him and send him into the median, immediately crashing into a tree. She kept driving. The van incurred damage from the sideswipe. He was found 100% at fault regardless. His insurance went from an already preposterous ~$240/month to over $900. Nine hundred dollars per month - isn't that what they charge for Lamborghinis? Fully licensed, clean record for 4+ years at the time, I believe he was 21. It was over two years until the rates finally lowered to 'a more affordable' $300+/mo, which is AFAIK still what he pays.
I currently pay $250/month, one-way of course. I could drive a '95 Civic or an '08 BMW, my rate would differ ~$20/mo. The difference between dozens of insurance companies is about the same - $20 more or less. I am 24.
FWIW, bikes are not exactly feasible for over half the year in our climate (Toronto).
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#36> “In the past, housing was the main vehicle for investment, but education is also a vehicle.”
Is this why university costs more than a house now?
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#37In 1985 the average age of a car on the road was about 6 years. In 2012, the average age is over 11 years. This has a number of obvious implications on new-car purchasing behavior of young people: 1. It's much easier to buy a used car now since they have more years of service in them. 2. Getting a hand-me-down from a relative is possible. 3. Culturally, getting a new car is much more rare so there is less pressure to…
A bit ironic for the car companies that their progress in reliability of a vehicle as it ages ends up biting them in new car sales.
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#38The closeout of the article is overly optimistic. Oh I know many Millennials who are "investing" in themselves. Trouble is it is not education but instead clothing, electronics, and expensive trips. I can understand why many do not want a new car or even a car, it is far easier to declare you don't want a thing than to admit you cannot afford what you want.
So there are two sides to this story.
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
> younger generations don't see a house or a car as a symbol of status or wealth, merely as something to be used, as a necessity And then there are fixies - impractical bikes that cost 700 euro simply because they are cool. Whereas you can get a practical bike for less than 200 euro. Maybe it is that we are cheap, so those things that cost beyond a certain threshold (like cars and housing) just need to work, whereas…
> Bikes Fixies aren't really popular beyond the hipster demographic; while there are a lot of bikes that cost >$500 dollars, they're generally bought by serious bikers for whom the value proposition is more than worth it. > iPhone The only thing exorbitant to me about the iPhone is the data plan, because of how often I'm in the range of WiFi. I'd argue having a personal GPS, email client, information lookup, etc. etc…
Sunglasses, unfortunately, are in a stranglehold market. You either spend $20 and get colored glass or spend $200 and get an actual product
I've found pretty much the opposite.
I've owned 3-4 pairs of expensive sunglasses in my life, and all but one of them was crap. I'm convinced that the price differential is for nothing but a designer name.
My favorite sunglasses ever I paid $25 for at Rite-Aid, and I liked it so much I bought another pair to keep in the car. They're polarized, the optics seem good, they're solid and durable, comfortable, and don't make me look like a madman. What else do I need?
Re: The Cheapest Generation
#40I believe the next shift in the economy is towards an "Entertainment Economy" (we're currently in an Service Economy, or least the Western world is). Which means everything we do has to be part of some sort of entertainment or experience. Anything that is a commodity, such as car, train, plane, or bus, is no longer going to yield high profits. For example, it means companies like BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, will win out, because they no longer sell something that gets you from point A to point B, but rather they sell you the Ultimate Driving Machine™. Heck, even cycling is now more of an "experience" than a car. Cars are just plain boring to my generation.