At what income is it appropriate to buy a 200k car?

[Anonymous]

So there's no purchase that we could reasonably characterize as excessive?
How about a golden toilet?

a $50k jacket?

How about a $1billion dollar house?

http://www.businessinsider.com/thelife50#indias-richest-man-moves-into-a-house-that-cost-1-billion-to-build-50

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Man here who owns an exotic sports car (paid for in cash). I was at the salon last week and the woman next to me was arranging to get some styling done. I didn't listen closely enough to what she wanted done, but the price was $250. To me, that seems extravagant.

In other words, to each their own.

Lol. I think women's hair styling costs are ridiculous too. But try getting someone to do a "magic straight hair perm" for less than $250. Perms cost 100 plus and the ones to make the hair straight costs a whole lot more. I hate the high cost but those are market rates for people like me with very curly and unruly hair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do rich people always ask dumb questions related to money?

OP is high income, not rich.

[Anonymous]

Wrong question OP. The question is, "How high should our net worth be before we buy a $200K car?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do rich people always ask dumb questions related to money?

OP is high income, not rich.

Not even sure about that. Middle class for this area really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, you can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase, but the comparisons only go so far. OP's DH can buy a different luxury car for $100k, which is still way, way more expensive than any car most people could ever afford to buy AND still feed a hundred people for an entire year with the leftovers. I am upper middle-class in one of the richest countries in the world and the biggest splurges in my entire life are still many orders of magnitude smaller than $200k.

Typical rich liberal nitwit. It's okay if she does it. But anyone else richer than her or more extravagant than her - oh go feeeeed poorrr people!

I am as liberal as they come, definitely not a car person (drive a mid-range Civic, and see no reason to change) and won't get anywhere that income level in this lifetime - and this post is spot on. The sanctimony and hypocrisy in this thread is amazing, but not at all surprising.

Yep. PP who said her "splurges" in life are magnititudes smaller than $200K... how much does your house cost? Choosing to live in the DMV is a splurge in itself. You could easily move to a more affordable area of the country and free up hundreds of thousands of dollars over your lifetime, even if your income went down, to put your money where your mouth is.

Why stop there? PP should go live for free under a highway overpass and save even more money! That would really put her money where her mouth is and show you!

She should! I'm sure her splurges now are magnitudes larger than what the homeless can spend, so why not live with them and free up money to help them? Or, alternatively, she could spend the way she wants and STFU about how others choose to spend.

+1

Signed, not rich but sick of the wealthy Liberal hypocrisy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full of envious people. If you can afford it, what's the big deal?

I don't know how to drive around in a $200k car knowing all the lives I could change with the, I dunno, $175k I could have saved if I just bought a normal car?
Start a scholarship fund, fund a dog shelter, I dunno. But spending $200k on a car is a perfect example of what's wrong with people.

You can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase. Did you buy any new clothes? New shoes? You bought a car other than a retired Crown Vic police car? Shame on you for wasting money instead of using that money to change other people's lives.

You may find it incomprehensible to drive around in a $200k car, but other people can. Your value system isn't superior on an objective basis.

Yes, you can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase, but the comparisons only go so far. OP's DH can buy a different luxury car for $100k, which is still way, way more expensive than any car most people could ever afford to buy AND still feed a hundred people for an entire year with the leftovers. I am upper middle-class in one of the richest countries in the world and the biggest splurges in my entire life are still many orders of magnitude smaller than $200k.

Typical rich liberal nitwit. It's okay if she does it. But anyone else richer than her or more extravagant than her - oh go feeeeed poorrr people!

This is why I can't stand most liberals. They have their own set of rules, and are not at all tolerant of anyone else. And yet they'll never see it.

OP - I say go for it. I am a car person myself. Just make sure your husband drives it and enjoys it!

Super weird that you are assuming that the people who think it's more important to donate to charity than to buy luxury items are liberals.

I'm a liberal who thinks depending on finances it's fine to buy the car. But IME philanthropy is pretty uncorrelated with political party. Though if you believe what many of the liberal-bashers say, it's conservatives who donate more to charities than liberals.

It's desire to spread other people wealth, suggestions to save the poor, the needy with other people money, not donating your own to charity, that gets this name.

Look, not defending her position, but she said she's UMC and she doesn't spend this kind of money on splurges. You have no idea how much she donates to charity. She's suggesting that the money could be used better elsewhere, and, yes, judging OP's DH for not doing so. I've seen plenty of conservatives bashing liberals for spending on luxiuries here on DCUM, so I maintain that the political angle to your criticism is just odd.

I also think you're a troll, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, you can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase, but the comparisons only go so far. OP's DH can buy a different luxury car for $100k, which is still way, way more expensive than any car most people could ever afford to buy AND still feed a hundred people for an entire year with the leftovers. I am upper middle-class in one of the richest countries in the world and the biggest splurges in my entire life are still many orders of magnitude smaller than $200k.

Typical rich liberal nitwit. It's okay if she does it. But anyone else richer than her or more extravagant than her - oh go feeeeed poorrr people!

I am as liberal as they come, definitely not a car person (drive a mid-range Civic, and see no reason to change) and won't get anywhere that income level in this lifetime - and this post is spot on. The sanctimony and hypocrisy in this thread is amazing, but not at all surprising.

Yep. PP who said her "splurges" in life are magnititudes smaller than $200K... how much does your house cost? Choosing to live in the DMV is a splurge in itself. You could easily move to a more affordable area of the country and free up hundreds of thousands of dollars over your lifetime, even if your income went down, to put your money where your mouth is.

Why stop there? PP should go live for free under a highway overpass and save even more money! That would really put her money where her mouth is and show you!

She should! I'm sure her splurges now are magnitudes larger than what the homeless can spend, so why not live with them and free up money to help them? Or, alternatively, she could spend the way she wants and STFU about how others choose to spend.

+1

Signed, not rich but sick of the wealthy Liberal hypocrisy

At least liberals are conscious that they should give something to charity. Republicans are like, "I got mine, you go get yours, and don't take any of mine."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH wants to buy a 200k sports car. He is late 30s and earns around 1.5m per year. Right now we both drive luxury SUVs (80k).

It's appropriate at whatever level you can buy it and not suffer financially for it. Personally, I would never buy a car that expensive. Waste of money and I'd be constantly paranoid about driving the stupid thing. But, to each his own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do rich people always ask dumb questions related to money?

OP is high income, not rich.

Not even sure about that. Middle class for this area really.

Barely; you can hardly throw a baby without hitting a millionaire in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full of envious people. If you can afford it, what's the big deal?

I don't know how to drive around in a $200k car knowing all the lives I could change with the, I dunno, $175k I could have saved if I just bought a normal car?
Start a scholarship fund, fund a dog shelter, I dunno. But spending $200k on a car is a perfect example of what's wrong with people.

Ah, another sanctimonious jerk. People like you make me never want to donate again.

If arguments on the Internet make you not want to donate to people in need, you're not the kind of person charities are looking for.

LOL. Someone made me mad so suck it, starving children!

Liberal nutjobs like you should really can it. You love to use philanthropy and altruism as a way to put other people down and feel good about yourself. People like you suck. You're making the entire party look bad. Go walk into traffic or something.

There's that compassionate conservatism I've been hearing about!

[Anonymous]

I don't get why someone would want to own a car like that in the DC area, where the weather would prohibit driving it a good chunk of the time, but if that's what he wants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is full of envious people. If you can afford it, what's the big deal?

I don't know how to drive around in a $200k car knowing all the lives I could change with the, I dunno, $175k I could have saved if I just bought a normal car?
Start a scholarship fund, fund a dog shelter, I dunno. But spending $200k on a car is a perfect example of what's wrong with people.

You can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase. Did you buy any new clothes? New shoes? You bought a car other than a retired Crown Vic police car? Shame on you for wasting money instead of using that money to change other people's lives.

You may find it incomprehensible to drive around in a $200k car, but other people can. Your value system isn't superior on an objective basis.

Yes, you can say the same thing about any non-essential purchase, but the comparisons only go so far. OP's DH can buy a different luxury car for $100k, which is still way, way more expensive than any car most people could ever afford to buy AND still feed a hundred people for an entire year with the leftovers. I am upper middle-class in one of the richest countries in the world and the biggest splurges in my entire life are still many orders of magnitude smaller than $200k.

Typical rich liberal nitwit. It's okay if she does it. But anyone else richer than her or more extravagant than her - oh go feeeeed poorrr people!

This is why I can't stand most liberals. They have their own set of rules, and are not at all tolerant of anyone else. And yet they'll never see it.

OP - I say go for it. I am a car person myself. Just make sure your husband drives it and enjoys it!

Super weird that you are assuming that the people who think it's more important to donate to charity than to buy luxury items are liberals.

I'm a liberal who thinks depending on finances it's fine to buy the car. But IME philanthropy is pretty uncorrelated with political party. Though if you believe what many of the liberal-bashers say, it's conservatives who donate more to charities than liberals.

It's desire to spread other people wealth, suggestions to save the poor, the needy with other people money, not donating your own to charity, that gets this name.

Look, not defending her position, but she said she's UMC and she doesn't spend this kind of money on splurges. You have no idea how much she donates to charity. She's suggesting that the money could be used better elsewhere, and, yes, judging OP's DH for not doing so. I've seen plenty of conservatives bashing liberals for spending on luxiuries here on DCUM, so I maintain that the political angle to your criticism is just odd.

I also think you're a troll, though.

You missed the point. I think the word liberal is misused here. Liberal doesn't have to be socialist, but lately they been lumped together.

[Anonymous]

The new Aston will get you a ton of as.

[Anonymous]

The Toyota Supra with a 36 cubic cm turbo that makes 900 whp, more than a lambo and a ferrari combined, is a very enjoying ride. I would reccomend the T-top that was in Fast and the Furious.