Has anyone looked into knock on effects from the Obama era cash for clunkers that reduced the used car supply by 677,081 cars? I always thought that was going to impact affordability. It removed lower cost vehicles AND their future cannibalization for parts to keep other low cost vehicles on the road.
The other change I wonder is just the longevity of cars (which could counteract impact from cash for clunkers). My father used to buy a new car every 3-4 years in the 90s because cars sucked. Cars are more expensive now, but last much longer. My 7 year old car is as good as new still, my dad kept his last car 10 years.
Is a product that lasts triple the amount of time for less than triple the old price actually more expensive? No, but it IS now contradictingly unaffordable. It becomes the rich people and shoes trope. Poor people can only afford cheap shoes that wear out more often. When I could afford nice italian boots that lasted longer and were amazingly more comfortable I actually spent less on shoes, but I had to be able to shell out $500 for boots. Now I can only afford $40 for junk. Heck I have shirts from Nordstroms from 10 years ago that I still get complimented on but can't replace and am forced to slowly replace with cheap garbage shirts than wear out in a year because I'm broke and am sad to see myself fall into that trap knowing I am throwing away money to the benefit of looking worse for more $$$ spent over time.
All that said having moved down about 10 social economic groups the people I know have 2 daily struggles that keep them in constant anxiety. Housing and keeping their cars running. The system is not going to hold if this keeps up. People can't live in this constant stress and anxiety with no hope and are going to look to some way out. In the past in other countries that's been far left or far right political charlatans. Yet the people up high still expect the status quo to hold and are doing nothing to make things better.