←back to thread

The $25k car is going extinct?

(media.hubspot.com)
319 points pseudolus | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
tlogan ◴[] No.44422630[source]
This is a great example of how factually incorrect narratives - so long as they align with a preferred agenda (which is that things are not affordable any more) - it gets upvoted.

Reality check:

- In 2025, there are 12 new car models available under $25,000

- In 2005, there were around 10 new models under $15,000 (25k adjusted by inflation)

So the premise that “cars used to be much more affordable” is not true. This article is full of misleading or outdated information that distorts the real trend.

HN deserves better data-driven discussions.

replies(17): >>44422669 #>>44422707 #>>44422749 #>>44422885 #>>44422919 #>>44423014 #>>44423067 #>>44423538 #>>44423622 #>>44423626 #>>44423874 #>>44423904 #>>44423959 #>>44424442 #>>44425246 #>>44425626 #>>44430456 #
foobarian ◴[] No.44422707[source]
Not to mention how much more functionality present day cars have. (mentioned in a couple comments elsewhere, but things like airbags/backup cameras/other sensors etc).
replies(3): >>44422849 #>>44423228 #>>44423635 #
pif ◴[] No.44423635[source]
Cars have much more functionality these days, and it is good. But too much of that functionality is mandatory, and this is bad.
replies(2): >>44424293 #>>44424576 #
1. mitthrowaway2 ◴[] No.44424293[source]
For functionality meant to protect people outside the car (eg. automatic braking, or pedestrian airbags) there is a very good case for it being mandatory.

Unfortunately those are often not on the list of mandatory features.