FR-S or Veloster turbo

[n2oinferno]

Originally Posted by Justin.b

The steering wheel looks more like a game controller than a simple turning control.

Funny you say that, because the non-turbo version does have the integrated "save mpg game" that rewards you for driving economically.

On the test drive with my friends, I asked the salesperson if the screen displayed "GAME OVER" if we crashed. He wasn't amused.

[Justin.b]

Originally Posted by n2oinferno

Funny you say that, because the non-turbo version does have the integrated "save mpg game" that rewards you for driving economically.

On the test drive with my friends, I asked the salesperson if the screen displayed "GAME OVER" if we crashed. He wasn't amused.

It's not just that car, it's a lot of new cars. Minis have a ton of buttons (although I would guess most are optional), I've driven a new Ford Focus and that was also loaded with buttons. The Ford Flex is awful. It has a ton of 'buttons' but they're not physical. The entire center console is like a touch panel so you can't even reach over and feel for the right button while keeping your eyes on the road - you actually have to look over at the radio to find the button and then 'press' it and hope it registers - which it often doesn't so you have to do it multiple times.

-Justin

[Vonsamhain]

Originally Posted by DrDuquette

No Car Payment at 18!!! Bad idea!
School First!!
Career Second!!
Notice I didn't say Job!?

Thats unrealistic. To always live life in the future is against the point of living in the first place. If I was always focused on the future instead of right now, and that age, I would have missed out on a lot of the best times in life.

Their is a better balance then that

[driftartist]

Originally Posted by Vonsamhain

Thats unrealistic. To always live life in the future is against the point of living in the first place. If I was always focused on the future instead of right now, and that age, I would have missed out on a lot of the best times in life.

Their is a better balance then that

This^ is truth. Life is to be enjoyed the best it can while working towards all goals.

[Exhaust]

Originally Posted by Vonsamhain

Thats unrealistic. To always live life in the future is against the point of living in the first place. If I was always focused on the future instead of right now, and that age, I would have missed out on a lot of the best times in life.

Their is a better balance then that

This post hit right at home with me because thats what I do now (21) I'm always calculating and thinking about how much money i'll have in this amount of time and where I plan to spend it. But then again I dont see that being bad, but wise.

[DrDuquette]

Originally Posted by Vonsamhain

Thats unrealistic. To always live life in the future is against the point of living in the first place. If I was always focused on the future instead of right now, and that age, I would have missed out on a lot of the best times in life.

Their is a better balance then that

Yes balance, but you still need forward thinking. Do you want to retire? If you do, you should start thinking that now. Fund 401k at 100%. Then play with the extra money. But if you are making $15/hour and spending all your money on toys. I wish you luck, because playing now without forward thinking will not have a double digit retirement age.

[Vonsamhain]

Originally Posted by DrDuquette

Yes balance, but you still need forward thinking. Do you want to retire? If you do, you should start thinking that now. Fund 401k at 100%. Then play with the extra money. But if you are making $15/hour and spending all your money on toys. I wish you luck, because playing now without forward thinking will not have a double digit retirement age.

actually if i was under 22 and making $15 an hour I wouldnt put a dime in 401k. id spend it all on toys, save for retirement when i actually made money to save.

I still think you are not living life saving for death as a young adult.

[Walla Walla]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Unfortunately, a low credit score can affect some other things because companies have become brain-dead.

It can affect insurance rates.
It can affect the ability to get a job, even if your field has nothing to do with FInance or money.

if you have a bad credit, it's probably because you made bad choices in life...
and if you make bad choice, your are most likely to dont take care of your car,

and people who are proud of never using credit and loan and blah blah.... just don't know how the system works....

if i had 150 000$ cash, I would be the stupidest person on earth to buy a 150 000$ house cash... but not everybody understand that... there is a time to have debt, depends on your income, and what you expect, in your only life

as for being 18 with a sportscar, i had a 240sx at the age of 20, it was a rust bucket, i did stupid things with it, but i was always scared to push it to the limit.... guess it saved me....

but now, i know what i can or i can't do.... because I learned.... sad thing though, is that some people die learning...

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Walla Walla

..and people who are proud of never using credit and loan and blah blah.... just don't know how the system works....

if i had 150 000$ cash, I would be the stupidest person on earth to buy a 150 000$ house cash... but not everybody understand that... there is a time to have debt, depends on your income, and what you expect, in your only life ...

Actually people that don't carry debt pretty much understand exactly how the system works, and have decided they don't like it. 100% of repossessed homes had mortgages on them. When you carry a mortgage, you are at the very least trading cash for risk, its you choice but it is a valid choice.

At the end of the day though, taking out a $150K loan and keeping $150K in the bank is the same as spending the money on the house from a balance sheet prospective. You already spent the money, you just are pretending you didn't.

There is absolutely nothing "stupid" about paying cash for a house or any other item regardless of age/income/IQ. That doesn't mean making an informed decision to borrow money is the worst decision you could make.

That's really about all I'll contribute to this discussion. Bottom line, its almost as much a zealot discussion (on both sides) as the AT vs MT discussion in a sports car!

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Vonsamhain

actually if i was under 22 and making $15 an hour I wouldnt put a dime in 401k. id spend it all on toys, save for retirement when i actually made money to save.

I still think you are not living life saving for death as a young adult.

That's exactly when you should be doing it. That's when you have time on your side, and time is what turns most people into successful retirees. And you are not saving for "death", you are saving so you don't have to work when you are older.

I couldn't care less what I leave behind materially when I die, but I do care if when I'm 80, I have to work at WalMart as a greeter because I purchased some $10,000 brakes for my $25,000 car when I was 20.

For example, if you take that $10,000 and invest it at 20 at a relative modest 5% interest (yes you can still get that or better in some investments) and contribute to it $100 a week for the next 40 years, you will have at age 60 $725,811.29.

if you make the same investment, but don't start until 40, you have $205,601.65.

And yes I realize $100 a week is more than most at age 20 can contribute, but you get the point.

A bit of a difference.

[Walla Walla]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

At the end of the day though, taking out a $150K loan and keeping $150K in the bank is the same as spending the money on the house from a balance sheet prospective. You already spent the money, you just are pretending you didn't.

nerver said you should keep the 150k in a bank account (has if anybody get that kind of money one shot, and not progressively) .. but you could buy a house with 10k, and you will have the same payment has if you were renting... wich you would have done to get your 150k$ over years....

and if you have 150k cash, dont waist it all on a 2.19% interest mortgagee... invest at least a part of it!


maybe our point of view is a bit different because we're not in the same country, and we don't have the same economic reality or stability! but still, if you wait to have all the money to pay everything cash, in quebec, you will have your first house at the age of 55...

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Walla Walla

...maybe our point of view is a bit different because we're not in the same country, and we don't have the same economic reality or stability! but still, if you wait to have all the money to pay everything cash, in quebec, you will have your first house at the age of 55...

Our viewpoints are different but I don't think it has to do with the countries we are in, this is a pretty standard debate. Your original statement read as if you were saying "Even if I had the cash to buy a house, I'd be stupid to do it rather than taking out a mortgage." That is what I'm disagreeing with.

On the last point, most people never really own their homes, even at 55 regardless of whether they take out a mortgage or not. I realize its a different point of view from the norm, but as I alluded to above, if the banker can come kick you out of your house you don't own it, he does.

Did I pay cash for my house? No. If I had had the cash available would I have? Yes, and I thought that was what you were saying. I also paid off the mortgage in 8 years on a 15 year loan. Lots more money for toys without a mortgage/rent payment!

[DrDuquette]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

That's exactly when you should be doing it. That's when you have time on your side, and time is what turns most people into successful retirees. And you are not saving for "death", you are saving so you don't have to work when you are older.

I couldn't care less what I leave behind materially when I die, but I do care if when I'm 80, I have to work at WalMart as a greeter because I purchased some $10,000 brakes for my $25,000 car when I was 20.

For example, if you take that $10,000 and invest it at 20 at a relative modest 5% interest (yes you can still get that or better in some investments) and contribute to it $100 a week for the next 40 years, you will have at age 60 $725,811.29.

if you make the same investment, but don't start until 40, you have $205,601.65.

And yes I realize $100 a week is more than most at age 20 can contribute, but you get the point.

A bit of a difference.

Finnaly, someone else that understands what investing for the future and your family is all about. "Good Day, welcome to Walmart, the place where people that didn't listen work when they are 80"

[Justin.b]

Don't get too sour on the oldsters working as greeters now. Those people came up expecting that pension and social security would be more than enough to take care of them. Along the way, most pensions were killed off, corporate raiders discovered it was profitable to downsize employees in their 50's before they get to their retirement and unsecured revolving credit became easier to get than a burger with no pickles at McDonalds.

The people that get it can't believe that there are people who don't get it.... but there are a lot more of them than the ones who get it.

-Justin