[motorhead]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

The impression that cars cost way more today is basically false.

1969 Camaro - Average base price was about $2,900... and that was with NO options. No seat belts, no radio, no A/C, no nothing. So a real car you'd actually want was about $3,100. 1969 median household income was $7,330 (U.S. Census Bureau). So a Camaro was around 42% of your yearly income.

And a 1969 Camaro... despite looking really cool... was, by today's standards, a total piece of crap. If it hadn't already rusted away, they were generally worn out and worthless at 100,000 miles.

2017 Camaro - Base price for a 2LT is $31,400. And that's a very nice car with lots of goodies that will last almost indefinitely if well maintained. 2015 median household income was $53,657 (U.S. Census Bureau). So a 2017 Camaro is 58% of your yearly income... 16% more than in 1969... but it is infinitely better in every way than a 1969 Camaro.

Yes, you can option one up to be really expensive, but you don't need to. You could option up a '69 pretty good, too, so it's the same thing.

You need to read this. Your numbers don't tell the real story. I know from living through all those years that buying a nice car back then was much easier for a lot more people than it is now. It's out of hand. If you can't see that then you have to be too young to have lived it or you are just very naive, and if you think a 2017 Camaro will last forever being used as a daily driver just by maintaining it, you are naive.

http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2...-middle-class/