Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangentially, wouldn't it be nice if we could buy a 1990-quality car for the inflation-adjusted price? Poor(ish) people would have a decent shot at actually affording reliable transportation and climbing up the ladder.
With the exception of a few brands (e.g. Honda, Toyota), I’m not sure the dismal mechanical quality of many 1990-quality cars would save people money versus buying a 10 year old used car for the same money. Remember, 1990 is still the era of the 5 digit odometer. Cars have gotten hugely more reliable over the years. A 2010 car hitting 200k miles is routine and expected; a 1990 car hitting 200k miles would be exceptio…
You said it yourself: cars from the 1990s might last 100k miles! You think a poor person today is going to buy any used car that has 100k miles of life left? I highly doubt it.
As for the safety and emissions standards- you're right. That's a big part of what has driven up the price of cars. And while I know that they are less safe, were they really that unsafe? I mean, the 90s had airbags, seat belts, ABS brakes (at least some models). At the end of the day, I'm not saying I would be happy that a poor person could only afford the safety of a 1990s car. But what I am saying is that it's still better than what they have access to today. Ideally, we just wouldn't have people so poor that they can't afford safe transportation.
For emissions, specifically, I don't want poor people to have to pay the cost of saving our environment. I know a bunch of people who are financially comfortable enough to have multiple cars and/or recreational boats- let them pay for it. I'd be fine adjusting my wish to "1990s standards car + modern emissions standards, as long as the government subsidizes it such that it still would cost 1990s prices".