Comment on Who needs retirement when you can buy an asset that loses value over time?

<- View Parent
alaphic@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

No offense, but I feel like if this is true at all, it’s likely still at the very least misleading… I can’t think of really any secondary sales markets in which the most important determination of value isn’t one thing: Condition. (I’m sure there are plenty of arguments to be made for it to be trumped by rarity, but… Let’s be realistic here - unless you’re an archeologist it doesn’t matter how well the pot’s glaze holds its finish, if it amounts to nothing more than a few shards in the end, it’s not going to be quite as awe inspiring as one perhaps more worn yet still intact.)

So, yeah, sure, your 30 year old vehicle could appreciate… Assuming you’ve managed to keep it in something near showroom condition, it hasn’t suffered any major accidental/structural damage, and you not only did all the required/recommended services in a timely manner but also kept the records to prove it. (It also certainly wouldn’t hurt you if that particular make/model ceased production, by any means, either, obviously.)

But I sincerely doubt your F-350 with X00k miles on it that needs a new motor mount and only has 2 knobs left on the console is gonna beat a decent, stable, and well managed index fund investment of the same amount. I’m more than willing to admit my mistake(s) if someone has evidence to the contrary, but I feel like this is another one of those lies ‘temporarily embarrassed millionaires’ tell themselves when they kick the can a bit further down the road of their inevitable prodigious wealth. 😋

source
Sort:hotnewtop