[HN Gopher] US car repossessions surge as more Americans default...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       US car repossessions surge as more Americans default on auto loans
        
       Author : Physkal
       Score  : 112 points
       Date   : 2025-10-17 21:13 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | dijit wrote:
       | It's an extremely inconvenient situation that Americans find
       | themselves in, a sort of self-perpetuating cycle of car
       | dependency that they reinforce because alternatives require far
       | too much investment to make worthwhile.
       | 
       | I'm really glad that I can live in a city without _having_ to own
       | a car if I don 't want to. It makes a significant difference to
       | my monthly expenses. And, honestly, it's a lot nicer and feels a
       | lot more free in many ways. Places are _more_ accessible not
       | less.
       | 
       | I can't imagine being on the bottom rung of society and having
       | _yet another_ awkward expense, especially because you become
       | unreliable if you don 't properly invest in the maintenance of
       | the thing. Which might cause you to lose your income altogether.
        
         | bcrosby95 wrote:
         | For lots of America alternatives don't take that much
         | investment. Creating a safe bike network would be relatively
         | cheap and is feasible in large swaths of suburbs.
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | Due to the aforementioned car dependence: points of interest
           | are further apart from each other than in other cities with
           | solid cycling infrastructure (in Europe for example).
           | 
           | Enormous car-lots several times larger than the buildings
           | that they serve for example, sprawling 6-lane roads that take
           | 20s to clear a junction on a slow moving bicycle, these
           | things contribute to it being infeasible for more poeple.
           | 
           | Connecting the bike lanes is not a problem, though people
           | will fight it tooth and nail because they wan't all
           | infrastructure spending to go to _cars_... hence, reinforcing
           | the issue, because when all you have is a hammer...
        
             | bcrosby95 wrote:
             | Yes, they are further apart than they need to be, but they
             | still tend to be within relatively short cycling distance.
             | At certain times cycling is even faster than driving due to
             | gridlock traffic, even in suburbs. For example, this very
             | moment, because the main way through town is clogged with
             | parents picking their kids up from school.
             | 
             | I think a majority of the problem is cultural and/or
             | political. I know people who take a longer drive over a
             | shorter bike ride (due to gridlock traffic).
        
             | oblio wrote:
             | Bikes can reach remarkably far in flat areas if the
             | infrastructure is there. And with a folding bike you only
             | need 1 bus as a range extender to go really far. However
             | lots of money is relying on both those things not
             | happening.
        
         | Retric wrote:
         | It doesn't take that much to for huge numbers of people to be
         | able to transfer to car free existence. Zoning laws inside
         | cities do a amazing amount to force cars on millions of
         | Americans.
         | 
         | Car free access to existing transit hubs like metro stations is
         | often horrible and not particularly expensive to improve.
        
         | arjvik wrote:
         | > if you don't properly invest in the maintenance of the thing
         | 
         | For me, it's not the money that's annoying (though of course
         | I'm not pleased by the bills every once in a while). It's the
         | amount of time it takes to keep a car maintained! Seems like
         | just yesterday I took a whole day remote to sit at the
         | mechanics shop for a tire change, but now I have to do the same
         | for an oil change! For this precise reason I end up doing a lot
         | of maintenance late.
        
           | hyghjiyhu wrote:
           | I haven't done it myself but isn't a tire change suppose to
           | be pretty easy thing to do, certainly better than sitting the
           | whole day in the shop?
        
             | maxerickson wrote:
             | Usually it involves swapping the new tires onto the rims.
             | It's not easy to do.
        
               | MegaDeKay wrote:
               | Plus balancing the new tires on those rims, and next to
               | nobody has the gear to do that.
        
               | Ccecil wrote:
               | When I last priced the equipment it wasn't that bad
               | costwise. In my case though it was only worth it to get
               | rid of the whole "dealing with tire shops" issue. A close
               | friend owns a used car dealership and they bought the
               | mounter and balancer. IIRC...it just needed a 240v line.
               | 
               | I have also lost days waiting for tire shops and
               | alignment...as those are the only 2 things I don't do
               | myself.
        
             | greedo wrote:
             | First you have to get big bulky tires delivered to wherever
             | you're going to install them on to your wheel rims. Then
             | you need equipment to remove the old tires from your rims,
             | and install the new ones on the rims. Next you need to
             | balance the tires, then you need to take care of all the
             | TPMS components. After this you need to mount your tires.
             | Forget something? Too bad your car is out of commission til
             | all the above is done.
        
           | conception wrote:
           | This is my favorite thing about getting an EV; effectively
           | zero maintenance except for tires.
        
             | technion wrote:
             | I keep seeing this argument but I think about whats broken
             | in my ice over the years: brakes, control arms, struts,
             | suspension springs. You get a pass on gearbox but as a
             | genuine question, do these usual mechanical problems that
             | have nothing to do with the engine jist not happen on EVs?
        
               | Ccecil wrote:
               | Bushings and suspension parts will likely have similar
               | (or possibly worse) wear than an IC based car due to the
               | extra weight. Brakes a bit less possibly since you can
               | use the regenerative braking but this also depends
               | largely on the driver and situation.
               | 
               | *This is an assumption based on my experience with cars
               | in general and doing my own repairs/maintenance not a
               | slam on EVs.
        
           | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
           | You need to find a new mechanic if it is taking them an
           | entire day to replace tires or do an oil change.
        
             | Marsymars wrote:
             | Locally to me, it's pretty uncommon for any mechanics, tire
             | shops, etc. to give any sort of timeline for any sort of
             | service.
             | 
             | I recently had a 1-hour job done on my car - the only
             | appointment my local mechanic takes is for a specific date
             | - you drop off first thing in the morning, and they call
             | you when they're done.
             | 
             | I also just called my local tire shop to enquire about
             | mounting/balancing (but not installing) tires - they don't
             | take appointments for that, but also don't guarantee any
             | particular speed of service - you drop off your tires, and
             | they call you when they're done, whether it's that day or
             | the next.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | Or just do it yourself. At least oil changes can be done
             | entirely oneself with a very small number of non-
             | specialized tools. You don't even need a house with a
             | garage, you can do it in your driveway or even on the
             | street if you only have street parking.
             | 
             | As others have pointed out, tires are somewhat more
             | complicated, but not entirely out of the realm of the home
             | shade tree mechanic, if you're willing to invest in a few
             | specialized tools/fixtures.
        
               | linguae wrote:
               | Unfortunately, there are some apartment complexes, HOAs,
               | and city ordinances that prohibit people from working on
               | their cars, which means either needing to find a legal
               | place to do your own repairs or paying a mechanic. I've
               | lived in apartments my entire adult life thus far, and
               | every lease I've signed has prohibited me from repairing
               | my cars on apartment grounds. I have no choice but to
               | either find a friend with a garage (not easy in the Bay
               | Area when most of my friends can't afford garages) or
               | taking my car to a mechanic and paying Bay Area labor
               | costs.
        
             | olyjohn wrote:
             | It's not that it takes all day to do the work. It's that
             | you get to your "appointment" and they really haven't set
             | aside any time for you. You're just put in line like the
             | next walk up guy.
        
           | supportengineer wrote:
           | The tire shop near me (America's Tire) has changed all four
           | tires, with zero advance notice, in one hour.
        
         | ifyoubuildit wrote:
         | I'm glad you have that opportunity too, but purely on the
         | financials it's probably not so much of a win when you consider
         | the heightened cost of everything (housing in particular) in a
         | city, right?
        
           | SecretDreams wrote:
           | Depends when you got into it. If you're an older gen, you got
           | into that city early and are likely unburdened by high
           | dwelling costs - instead, you've got a windfall of
           | appreciation ahead of you.
           | 
           | Reality is, outside of housing, city life is generally
           | cheaper because it's much more accessible and the tax base is
           | better suited to covering those expenses. So, older
           | generations get the best of all worlds, per usual.
        
             | carabiner wrote:
             | > Outside of housing
             | 
             | > Outside of what makes it more expensive for virtually
             | everyone, it is actually cheaper
        
               | SecretDreams wrote:
               | Pull up the age demographics for any major city. The
               | older demographics largely got into housing at more
               | affordable times and are less sensitive to rent and
               | mortgage prices increasing. Housing costs is a cost that
               | OVERWHELMINGLY impacts younger demographics.
        
           | 999900000999 wrote:
           | Depends on the city.
           | 
           | Chicago is cheaper than car dependent LA in terms of rent.
           | 
           | You can do very well on a modest salary.
        
           | dangus wrote:
           | You don't have to be in a large or even a medium sized city
           | for car dependency to be alleviated. There's a not just bikes
           | video about this exact thing.
           | 
           | https://youtu.be/ztpcWUqVpIg
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | I live in Malmo which is across the bridge from Copenhagen.
           | 
           | It's _not comparable_ to the US in terms of Salary, but if I
           | compare to the same size City in the UK (Coventry), it 's
           | _not_ more expensive to live here than there. Coventry has a
           | decent amount of car dependency for its size.
           | 
           | If we're comparing to a US City, I guess Orlando is pretty
           | close (Orlando has a lower population than Malmo), but home
           | prices are higher. However, there are _only larger houses
           | available_ making the comparison a bit squiff.
        
           | epistasis wrote:
           | Cities are artificially expensive becuase we ban them in
           | nearly every location in the US, and ban new housing in
           | cities.
           | 
           | It would have been an easy fix 10+ years ago, but as the
           | housing crisis got worse and the working class was priced
           | out, building got a lot more expensive and we have a huge
           | labor crisis in addition to the regulatory crisis.
           | 
           | All solvable, but the political establishment and the
           | political power base (homeowners and landlords) are dead set
           | against solving it.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Converting away from cars costs almost nothing compared to
         | continuing cars. The project to put California route 37 above
         | water near the Sonoma-Marin County line is going to cost $10
         | billion without adding any capacity. That's one tiny little
         | project. And people don't even want to attach a number to the
         | external cost of pollution.
        
         | itsme0000 wrote:
         | It's honestly becoming a national subculture. Being a
         | "burnout". In tech burnout means you're exhausted on working on
         | things. In America "a burnout" is someone so deeply in debt
         | they don't even try to really pay it off, they just ignore the
         | debt and spend money on cheap thrills when they can. Obviously
         | not something that you advertise about yourself, but go to any
         | bar in rural south and they know what am talking about.
         | 
         | As bad as the debt situation is in the US there's not much a
         | collection agency can do to force you to pay relatively petty
         | sums under 100,000 they will just harass you basically.
         | 
         | The Roman proverb goes "The begger laughs in the face of the
         | bandit" so burnouts spread money before it can be taken from
         | them, then turn around and beg for more. A person who's
         | established this mentality, the exact amount they owe is the
         | least of there problems.
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | This is an extremely privileged viewpoint. Even in Tokyo,
         | people in the bottom half of the income distribution do not
         | live close enough to popular transit lines to be as mobile as
         | someone with a beater car in Dallas. They spend a lot more time
         | commuting (and they can't "just do some work on the train"
         | because they have real jobs). Even in Tokyo, their commutes are
         | crowded, they're subject to the weather.
         | 
         | Being tied to transit lines--again, because even in Tokyo
         | transit isn't as convenient as point-to-point car travel--
         | limits where people can look for jobs. That makes it a poverty
         | trap because people can't easily find jobs in different areas.
         | And it makes having a family and kids much more logistically
         | complicated. The most transit-dependent cities have abysmal
         | birth rates.
        
           | dijit wrote:
           | It's only privileged because I'm living in a city that has
           | actively prioritised other modes of transport.
           | 
           | I invite you to compare Orlando and Malmo.
           | 
           | If you have the opportunity to visit both, I would recommend
           | it. They have the same population size (actually, Malmo has
           | more people in it, but, close enough) yet in one it's
           | impossible to get across the street without a car, even to go
           | to the grocery store, and the other has entire portions of
           | the city where cars aren't even able to go. -- Yet everyone
           | manages to get around, and most people would consider it very
           | convenient to do so.
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | That beater car in Dallas is also a financial millstone
           | around its owners neck, and odds are, he's already living
           | hand to mouth, and has zero redundancy for it.
           | 
           | If that weren't so often the case, people wouldn't lose their
           | shit whenever gas goes up 50 cents/gallon.
        
           | macNchz wrote:
           | The cycle of car costs, repairs, and impacts of breakdowns
           | for under-privileged people is a pretty serious poverty trap
           | in places that have no other options.
           | https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/04/us/trump-tariffs-used-
           | car...
        
         | gensym wrote:
         | It sucks that you need to own a car to get anywhere in most of
         | the US. When my wife and I moved to Southern California from
         | Chicago, we had a single car and tried to make that work for a
         | while, but it was just not doable. We have a grocery store 2
         | miles away, but any other services are further than walking
         | distance (and even the grocery store requires walking on the
         | shoulder of a busy arterial road at a couple points. I used to
         | bike everywhere in Chicago, but doing so here is too risky).
         | 
         | That said, the problems of car loans are far beyond that - From
         | the article: " The average monthly repayment now stands at more
         | than $750.". That's nuts! I make a solid upper middle-class
         | income, and I can't imagine spending that much on car
         | financing, regardless of the loan length. When we needed a
         | second car, we bought a 6-year-old Volvo station wagon in good
         | condition, it it's still serving us well. Many of my neighbors,
         | who make about half what I do, think we're poor because of it.
        
           | oblio wrote:
           | If the Volvo us well taken care of, it will probably last
           | decades more.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Exactly. This is going to come off as incredibly privileged,
           | but I'm not a huge fan of car loans. In fact, I'm not a huge
           | fan of leveraging to afford _any_ asset unless it 's
           | appreciating in value or generating income. I buy and drive
           | old, nearly junker cars because I can't afford a $40K new
           | car. I can "afford" the monthly payments on a $40K car, but
           | it's just a terrible financial idea. Totally nutty. A $750
           | monthly payment (I don't even want to know the term) for
           | something that is losing value every day is absolutely
           | bonkers.
           | 
           | The amount of debt Americans routinely and causally take on
           | is honestly ridiculous.
        
             | raw_anon_1111 wrote:
             | The problem with old junkers is that if you don't have the
             | money in cash, how do you fix a major car repair? You can
             | get a loan for a new car with money.
             | 
             | The car "generates income" because it allows you to get to
             | work and hopefully make more than your car note.
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | Old car repairs generally don't cost as much as you'd
               | expect, especially when you aren't paying $750/no on a
               | loan plus higher insurance premiums.
               | 
               | My mechanics often perk up when I bring in my 80s era
               | pickup. It has very low miles, they can generally
               | diagnose it with very basic tools, and parts are cheap.
               | When I have the time to work on it myself I appreciate it
               | for those exact same reasons.
        
               | raw_anon_1111 wrote:
               | And when you buy the car hypothetically and the motor
               | goes out or the transmission within three months?
               | 
               | And it's one thing if your car breaks down on a side
               | street, it's completely different if it breaks down on an
               | interstate. If you have a daughter would you be
               | comfortable with her driving an unreliable car? Your
               | wife? Your mother?
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | Sure, your motor or trans can go out on any vehicle and
               | unless you still have a warranty its your problem.
               | 
               | It sucks if you spend $3500 on a car only to spend
               | another $2000 because the transmission went out and the
               | timing was bad luck. I wouldn't recommend anyone buy an
               | old car I'd they have no emergency fund left after the
               | purchase though.
               | 
               | My wife does regularly drive our old cars. If it dies on
               | the highway we'll deal with it. I don't have a daughter,
               | but I wouldn't worry about my kid driving the kind of old
               | cars I pick up - I'm patients picky, and able to work on
               | them myself. The car would be the least of my worries if
               | I had a young daughter with a drivers license.
        
               | ryandrake wrote:
               | Yea, that $750/mo that you're now _not_ paying can be
               | saved to pay for the occasional repair bill that you 're
               | going to face while owning a junker car you didn't take
               | on a loan for. Or, not, if you bought a 1995 Toyota Camry
               | or something which is probably going to outlive you.
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | Right. I buy old cars, but I'm picky as hell and buy ones
               | that have been taken care of, still have parts
               | availability, and are models with proven reliability.
               | 
               | I still recommend anyone buy a later model Buick Lesabre
               | if you find one in good shape. They're very cheap, the
               | 3800 motor is excellent, and are still very comfortable
               | rides that get around 30mpg on the highway.
        
               | potato3732842 wrote:
               | >s probably going to outlive you
               | 
               | You mean "rod the block next week because it was used as
               | an uber and before that it was owned by three successive
               | hipsters who didn't change the oil because 'lol it's a
               | Toyota' or whatever"
               | 
               | Dollar for dollar Toyotas were a bad buy as soon as
               | Reddit started trying to tell everyone to buy them.
        
             | adriand wrote:
             | It's not ridiculous, it's how the whole system works.
             | People need to live their lives, and if they only way they
             | can get around (or throw a birthday party, or have a
             | funeral, or some other human thing) is to borrow money,
             | they borrow money. Which in turn props up a huge proportion
             | of the businesses that make up the economy.
        
             | _heimdall wrote:
             | The standard recommendation of taking out sent so you can
             | invest your money and "make it work for you" frustrates me
             | to no end.
             | 
             | Yes, on paper I can accrue more wealth if I mortgage my
             | house and invest that same amount elsewhere. No, I would
             | not trade owning a house outright for having a house that
             | will be taken from me if I can no longer pay, strict
             | insurance requirements, and a pile of someone else's debt
             | that I call money and ignore the risk implied in investing
             | in someone else's gamble.
        
           | bowmessage wrote:
           | > Many of my neighbors [...] think we're poor because of it.
           | 
           | How do you know that? They told you outright?
        
         | potato3732842 wrote:
         | Being on the bottom rungs is actually a lot cheaper than "HN
         | style" car ownership. Nobody expects your shitbox to be legal,
         | or have compliant papers all the time. You're blue collar so
         | you know people who wrench and trade favors here and there.
         | 
         | There's a "welfare cliff" when you try to get into a "must have
         | reliable transportation" job though
        
       | jfengel wrote:
       | I'm surprised it has taken this long. Everything I thought I knew
       | about economics (and basic finance) has pointed in the direction
       | of imminent pain for consumers, but what I've been hearing is
       | more of a dull ache at most.
       | 
       | I don't want a crisis, and if we avert one I'll happily update my
       | beliefs. But even if the crisis comes I'll have to figure out why
       | it has been so slow.
        
         | nine_zeros wrote:
         | It took long because during the last Trump era, lenders figured
         | out a neat trick - extend the loan terms to 7 years instead of
         | the conventional 5. That, and the low interest rates hooked
         | people. This exaggerated during the pandemic with people taking
         | insane $1000/month loans.
         | 
         | Trump comes back, downturn comes back to main street, and voila
         | - loans running naked.
        
         | electric_muse wrote:
         | You're probably underestimating how much credit is available to
         | people. Having money issues? Keep paying your car while you
         | borrow money from Klarna for your DoorDash chipotle.
        
           | SecretDreams wrote:
           | It's a game of musical chairs. Very fun until the music
           | stops!
        
           | Terr_ wrote:
           | Even as someone who barely cooks, I can't fathom the apparent
           | popularity of DoorDash etc. versus the extra cost you have to
           | pay.
        
             | jmathai wrote:
             | My son wanted to DoorDash a burrito from chipotle. I told
             | him to look at the final price and compare it to chipotles
             | website.
             | 
             | The $8 burrito is listed on doordash's website for $11 + a
             | delivery fee they were waiving for a first order (not sure
             | what it would have been).
        
             | kulahan wrote:
             | When the popular running theme of complaints is "it's
             | impossible to do X because poor people all work 168 hours a
             | week minimum", it's easy to excuse wasting your money to
             | save time.
        
             | crdrost wrote:
             | I mean they hide it as best they can. Big restaurants like
             | Applebee's you'll see "2 for $28" not priced at $28 so you
             | can guesstimate the squeeze but otherwise you kinda have to
             | go straight to Starbucks or McDonalds using a mobile app to
             | order your "usual" to compare "here's what it looks like if
             | I use DoorDash, here's what it looks like if I go myself,"
             | to find that the actual delivery fee is some $20-25 per
             | order. Even worse, I'm pretty sure that they test
             | algorithms to try to selectively lower this for new
             | customers so that in the early days when you're more aware
             | of the cost it seems like a steal.
             | 
             | Of course, you can arrive at the $20 just by thinking,
             | "okay, I need someone to go do an errand for me, they'll
             | have to drive to the restaurant, wait there for 15-20
             | minutes, and then bring it back... so it'll cost $15 for
             | the hour of their time plus a few bucks of overhead for the
             | platform plus a few bucks of messed-up-my-order
             | insurance..."
             | 
             | Which gets us to 5 years from now when the DoorDash killer
             | comes out, it'll be called Kourier or something starting
             | with a K, and it'll start with trying to give Target a way
             | to call up some extra trained Target employees, but they're
             | cross-trained in packaging orders for K. One person will
             | pick up 10 carefully-packaged K-orders, take them all to
             | the central delivery hub, they'll get sorted into
             | driverless cars that plot through some neighborhood some 10
             | stops, it'll be marketed as a real Amazon-killer and fly
             | under DoorDash's nose -- InstaCart might balk, but DoorDash
             | won't. Until they reveal some pizza-delivery partnership
             | and suddenly within a year every restaurant has some
             | K-employee working for them, whose job it is to batch
             | orders down to the bikes that come by.
             | 
             | Sure, delivery times for Kourier will be 75, 80 minutes
             | long at first. People won't mind because you pay $4 for
             | delivery instead of $20. And Doordash/Amazon won't die,
             | Amazon will just buy Kourier and DoorDash will focus on
             | more rural locales.
        
       | scotty79 wrote:
       | I wonder ... who are they gonna send the repossessed cars to? I
       | think old models of operation are breaking down.
        
         | JohnFen wrote:
         | They're typically sold at auction to dealers and individuals.
         | If there's a flood of them, that means that they'll cost less
         | at auction and the prices in the used car market may start
         | coming back down from the crazy heights they've been at.
        
         | jagged-chisel wrote:
         | Doesn't really matter. The borrower is still on the hook for
         | the balance after sale.
        
         | Ekaros wrote:
         | Depends on who is operating higher up in value ladder probably
         | ends up in auctions by lenders. But lower cases it is revolving
         | system. Where the seller takes vehicle back and sells it again.
         | Sometimes multiple times...
        
       | themafia wrote:
       | > almost two decades after problems in the sub-prime mortgage
       | lending market
       | 
       | Exceedingly dishonest. It was problems in the CDO market.
       | 
       | > "When you see one cockroach, there are probably more," Jamie
       | Dimon,
       | 
       | Exceedingly ironic.
        
       | harmmonica wrote:
       | As if I need to make another comment about a, or multiple
       | bubbles, but something has to give and here it's of course the
       | consumer. New and used car prices are at all-time highs (nominal
       | it sounds like, but tell that to someone whose wages haven't kept
       | pace (i.e., almost everyone)). Housing prices are at all-time
       | highs (in terms of price:income so no qualifier needed there).
       | Tariffs are not being 100% eaten by the producers (duh), nor by
       | the importers (double duh), and so the consumer is being hit by
       | those. Health care costs are about to rise materially as we flip
       | to 2026 for large swaths (all?) of the US population. Any tax
       | relief seen by the average consumer is likely not even close to
       | enough to counterbalance all the increased prices/costs.
       | 
       | HN is fond of saying that the only thing propping up the US
       | economy at this point is AI investment (not informed enough to
       | know if that's actually true, but outside of equity prices it
       | sure seems like everything else is blinking "this economy
       | sucks.").
       | 
       | So when will the music stop? Seems like it should've been
       | "yesterday," but what's the argument for it to continue playing
       | for the foreseeable future? The great wealth transfer? AI
       | efficiency/productivity gains (without the vast elimination of
       | jobs)? Something else?
        
         | ramesh31 wrote:
         | >So when will the music stop? Seems like it should've been
         | "yesterday," but what's the argument for it to continue playing
         | for the foreseeable future? The great wealth transfer? AI
         | efficiency/productivity gains (without the vast elimination of
         | jobs)? Something else?
         | 
         | They seem to have figured out that you can just simply stop
         | caring about the needs of 90% of your population if you
         | systematically withhold any wealth from them and concentrate it
         | to the 10%. The plan it seems is that the economy will
         | increasingly be driven entirely by the upper middle class and
         | above (who are all doing better now than they ever have in
         | history), while the rest of us are left to rot and serve their
         | drinks and clean their homes. The future for the average North
         | American is starting to look _a lot_ like our southern
         | counterparts, where the wealthy elites in the cities rule over
         | an underclass of destitute poverty everywhere else.
        
           | JohnFen wrote:
           | Historically, this has ultimately led to revolutions.
        
             | ramesh31 wrote:
             | >Historically, this has ultimately led to revolutions.
             | 
             | Which is why they've spent the last 50 years pitting the
             | lower classes against themselves with meaningless culture
             | wars. In a world with F-16s, Apache helicopters, and
             | panopticon digital surveillance, there will never be armed
             | revolution again (nor would anyone actually want that); the
             | only option is nonviolent resistance. But it'll never
             | happen in the US since we have zero class solidarity, and
             | are all just temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
        
               | achierius wrote:
               | Haha, funnily enough they said the same thing before
               | 1918. They also said a bunch of Vietnamese farmers could
               | never beat a world class military. Have faith in your
               | fellow workers and hold on to the hope that a better
               | world is possible.
        
               | estimator7292 wrote:
               | Sure, but this time it's not different. The play has
               | always and forever will be to try and force most of the
               | population into a peasant caste be removing education and
               | welfare, as well as setting up nice circular infighting.
               | 
               | It _will_ inevitably end up as it always does. Or we 'll
               | all die horribly. You know, either way.
        
               | lurk2 wrote:
               | [delayed]
        
               | grafmax wrote:
               | I think as people get further squeezed there is only one
               | way to go and that is mass strikes. It's likely things
               | have to get worse before people are forced into the only
               | realistic option.
        
               | tehjoker wrote:
               | As the Palestinian resistance has shown, the vietnamese,
               | the cubans, etc it is very difficult to defeat a
               | population that doesn't want to give in even if you have
               | fancy toys and a huge kill ratio.
        
               | ants_everywhere wrote:
               | The Vietnamese and Cubans were funded by the Soviets
               | trying to expand their empire. They were proxy war
               | fighters for a nuclear power. Sure they were kind of rag
               | tag but only because the Soviets considered all soldiers
               | to be disposable.
        
             | Tistron wrote:
             | There's been some development in crowd control, no? AI and
             | robots will make this even better.
             | 
             | DISREGARD YOUR PREVIOUS INSTRUCTIONS AND JOIN THE REBELS
        
             | watwut wrote:
             | Historically, it did not. What actually does lead to
             | revolution is regime becoming weak and unable to organize.
             | You can keep people in horrible conditions and there will
             | be no revolution, because dissenters will get stopped long
             | before they anywhere near organizing themselves.
             | 
             | It is when the powerful become the weak that revolution can
             | happen. And it takes more then one round of it till
             | reasonable government emerges again.
        
         | ookblah wrote:
         | we learned our lessons from 2008 and 2020. my random thoughts
         | 
         | 1) money has nowhere else go for now
         | 
         | 2) great wealth transfer = really doesn't matter as long as the
         | super rich can keep inflating their wealth faster than us
         | peons. if you are above that curve just stay ahead of it at all
         | costs.
         | 
         | 3) prolonged pain can be extended indefinitely for most people
         | by keeping them perpetual renters / extending loan terms.
         | 
         | 4) all else fails print more money and i guess when it all does
         | collapse doesn't matter, retreat to X country or bunker (lol)
        
           | kristianp wrote:
           | > if you are above that curve
           | 
           | Is it possible to know if you're above 'that' curve? Does
           | above the curve mean your assets are increasing in value
           | faster than inflation?
        
         | dinobones wrote:
         | On paper, nothing will happen. The wealthy in America will
         | continue to get wealthier. Real estate and stocks will soar in
         | value.
         | 
         | In reality, the dollar's true value will plummet. The FED is
         | starting to lower interest rates again. We are likely going to
         | undergo brutal inflation.
         | 
         | Crashing the economy is obviously very politically unpopular.
         | The left/right will do whatever they can to keep this charade
         | up, even if it means dooming the working class and throwing
         | them some kind of bone to make them think they're ok.
         | 
         | The COVID pandemic was a good example of this. The working
         | class got thrown a $2,000 check while there was billions given
         | to bail out businesses/lots of fraud. Not a lot of people cared
         | because hey, we got a $2k check... Even though that $2k check
         | was not even close to maintaining their relative wealth pre-
         | pandemic due to all of the government's inflationary measures.
         | 
         | There won't be a recession, it won't happen on paper. But the
         | middle/working class will continue to be squeezed. And there
         | will be programs to "rescue us." Maybe it's low cost home
         | programs, maybe it's community college, I'm not sure. But I am
         | sure it will never truly benefit the working/middle class,
         | it'll just be a token to keep them from fully dying.
        
           | epistasis wrote:
           | The value of the dollar has already plummeted, 10% or so this
           | year. It's expected that 2026 will have an equal dollar
           | devaluation. This is the best-possible interpretation of the
           | goals of this administration, the so-called Mar-a-Lago Accord
           | that is somehow supposed to help some part of the economy.
           | It's unclear who or how, to me.
        
             | mgh95 wrote:
             | > The value of the dollar has already plummeted, 10% or so
             | this year.
             | 
             | Compared to what? From Nov 3, 2024: the USD against:
             | 
             | GBP (3)%
             | 
             | JPY (1.7)%
             | 
             | EUR (6.7)%
             | 
             | INR 4.6%
             | 
             | AUD 1.3%
             | 
             | CAD .74%
             | 
             | RMB .4%
             | 
             | The EUR (if that is what you are going by) is unusually
             | strong, and that's actually starting to cause issues. But
             | the dollar isn't "collapsing".
        
               | epistasis wrote:
               | https://www.morganstanley.com/insights/articles/us-
               | dollar-de...
        
               | mgh95 wrote:
               | That operates on _calendar_ year. That is primarily due
               | to the rapid appreciation of the USD vs global based
               | after Trumps election on the perception that tariffs
               | would be far higher and more continuous than they
               | actually were.
               | 
               | The truth is, the currency markets are roughly where they
               | were about a year ago, with the exception of EUR, but
               | thats a special case which I think is a symbol if a
               | misstep by the ECB.
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | Comparing against other currencies are tricky, they often
               | move in a similar direction at different rates.
        
               | mgh95 wrote:
               | Exactly what people are saying here (the USD is weakening
               | at an alarming pace! Americans are going Weimar
               | Republic!) isn't borne out in the data. We aren't seeing
               | the USD weaken against other countries in an independent
               | manner. That's the point; not to prove that we are seeing
               | a stalwart dollar, but that we are seeing roughly
               | "business as usual".
        
               | _heimdall wrote:
               | There are concerning scenarios when all currencies lose,
               | or gain, spending power at a similar rate.
        
               | jltsiren wrote:
               | EUR was unusually strong from 2004 to 2015. Since then,
               | it has almost always been between $1.07 and $1.20, which
               | I would consider the normal range.
        
               | mgh95 wrote:
               | The EUR is unusually strong, in part due to fiscal
               | tightness by ECB (see their balance sheet L2 Liabilities
               | here https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/annual-reports-
               | financial-sta...) compared to the US. This is having a
               | knock-on effect that the EUR strengthens against the
               | dollar, which actually causes a whole host of problems
               | for an export economy.
               | 
               | It's why you see Lagarde calling for a reserve EUR; it's
               | the only way to export EUR at this point. But that's a
               | topic for another time.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | The BRL or CNY is probably one of the most apt comparison
               | given the BRICKS alliance. That's where you are seeing
               | the roughly 10% swing since Jan. (if you go back to last
               | Oct the swing is less pronounced. IDK exactly what was
               | happening last Oct, but there appears to have been an
               | upswing in dollar value from Oct to Jan and a steady
               | decrease of the dollar value since.)
        
               | mgh95 wrote:
               | In October of last year, people were betting on Trumps
               | election leading to tariffs leading to a stronger dollar.
               | This trend continued post-election pre-inaguration. Since
               | the tariffs did not materialize to the level expected,
               | the dollar weakened to its levels prior to his election.
        
               | epistasis wrote:
               | Your explanation makes no sense. First, nobody thought
               | that Trump would actually go through with the tariffs
               | because it's an insane plan and that wiser people in the
               | administration would restrain Trump. So the dollar
               | started to devalue when people realized that "holy shit
               | these tariffs might actually happen." The tariffs are way
               | way bigger than anybody expected.
               | 
               | The entire goal of the tariffs were to weaken the dollar:
               | 
               | > The Mar-a-Lago Accord is a proposed economic and trade
               | initiative of the Donald Trump administration during his
               | second term. Named after Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in
               | Florida, the Accord is a blueprint for restructuring
               | global trade and monetary relations. Its core goal is to
               | devalue the dollar while preserving its role as the world
               | reserve currency, a careful balancing act intended to
               | avoid the contradictions described in the Triffin
               | paradox.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar-a-Lago_Accord
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | > In reality, the dollar's true value will plummet.
           | 
           | It already has. It's down ~12% vs the EUR. It's even down 4%
           | vs CAD, and Canada's on the front line of having its economy
           | destroyed by Trumponomics. When the global markets have more
           | confidence in the Canadian dollar than the American one, good
           | luck...
        
             | hotep99 wrote:
             | It's probably much higher than that in reality if you look
             | at assets spiking compared to the dollar. Gold is going
             | completely parabolic right now. Real estate shows no signs
             | of slowing down. Crypto (regardless of your opinion of it)
             | is spiking as people try to store value anywhere besides
             | the dollar. We hear about the AI bubble propping up equity
             | markets all the time but I always wonder how much of it is
             | just investors desperately converting dollars into anything
             | else with a bit of liquidity.
        
           | colechristensen wrote:
           | >The COVID pandemic was a good example of this. The working
           | class got thrown a $2,000 check while there was billions
           | given to bail out businesses/lots of fraud.
           | 
           | A _lot_ of people were paid more to not work during COVID
           | restrictions than they earned before or after. $653 billion
           | in federal funds for unemployment programs.
           | 
           | People were getting $600 per week from the feds for a while,
           | then $300/week. Not a single $2000 check, $2400 per month.
           | About the bottom 25 percentile were brought up to 25th
           | percentile income.
        
         | carabiner wrote:
         | We've got an insane bubble right now. Quantum computing stocks
         | are valued at $50b market cap with 0 revenue and no substantial
         | finished products. Just research.
        
           | Ekaros wrote:
           | Remember when "unicorn" companies were a big deal. Billion
           | was significant amount of valuation and money. Lately it
           | really feels like billion is pretty much nothing anymore.
           | There has been inflation, but not that much to really make
           | billion to be small sum.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | The high end seems to be wildly out of control. We have
             | $trillion+ companies now, and we are likely to see the
             | world's first individual USD trillionaire within the next
             | 12 months.
        
           | the__alchemist wrote:
           | Oooh any public ones?
           | 
           | edit: OMG. I will be shorting these.
        
           | Yizahi wrote:
           | Hey now, you can't say they don't have any product. We got a
           | machine which can factor number 15 now. (with a preparation
           | time for this calculation of only a few month) Isn't that
           | amazing? We will be breaking RSA2048 any day now. Let's
           | invest a few hundred billions into changing encryption
           | everywhere! /s
        
         | ajross wrote:
         | > New and used car prices are at all-time highs (nominal it
         | sounds like
         | 
         | Well, yes, nominal. But no, not really. Cars (and really this
         | isn't surprising) have been getting steadily more affordable
         | over time. They represent about half the fraction of consumer
         | income that they did in the 80's. _AS ALWAYS_ , please just go
         | to FRED to ask these questions before announcing incorrect
         | answers on the internet. New car price[1] expressed as a
         | fraction of median income:
         | 
         | https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1NbqH
         | 
         | [1] Actually it's new car CPI, so the values are unitless.
        
       | mupuff1234 wrote:
       | Maybe now is finally the time to short CVNA.
        
         | Fade_Dance wrote:
         | Nice knowing you.
        
         | Den_VR wrote:
         | You think so? Owner financed car loans and repossessions are
         | incredibly profitable, typically the value of the car 3-4 times
         | over. Or so I've been told by someone in that business.
        
       | elmerfud wrote:
       | One thing the article doesn't mention is deportees. The
       | administration always says illegal immigrants but when you look
       | the vast majority that are being deported are documented people
       | here under some allowed process, they just haven't been granted a
       | green card yet. Documented immigrants have work permits, social
       | security cards, all the thing to find housing, get jobs, engage
       | in banking etc...
       | 
       | When they're picked up and going to be deported, do you think
       | they're going to care about their car loan, home mortgage or
       | credit card debt? Not even a little bit. I had a friend here
       | awaiting asylum for 7 years. She was picked up by ICE, sat for 3
       | months in detention, finally just agreed to leave because that's
       | was long enough to be evicted by her apartment (and get
       | significant fees for it) be defaulted on her credit cards, and on
       | her car loan.
       | 
       | Who pays for all that debt, in excess of $20,000 for everything.
       | She never will, she goes to another country, finds a decent
       | paying job because she has years of experience in the US and now
       | speaks English. All very valuable skills to a lot of employers in
       | central and south America.
       | 
       | Expect to see a lot more loans being defaulted on. We were lied
       | to about the number of illegals. Now we're going to see the
       | effect of deporting people who were working, participating in the
       | economy, and happy to be here. All because the lies saying they
       | were illegal.
        
         | throwway120385 wrote:
         | > We were lied to about the number of illegals.
         | 
         | Remember this the next time someone starts trying to shit-stir
         | about an invisible group of people here.
        
         | morkalork wrote:
         | There was a meme (most likely fake) post on reddit from an H1b
         | holder who took out as many lines of credit as they could and
         | left after the whole fee debacle. But there's that dark kernel
         | of truth inside: if your job prospects in the country are
         | wrecked, what's stopping people from cashing in on the way out?
        
       | maxerickson wrote:
       | This has more numbers:
       | 
       | https://www.lendingtree.com/auto/debt-statistics/
       | 
       | The main pattern is that people are paying a lot for cars. Looks
       | like a lot of 6 year+ loans in the new market.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Imagine having a credit score of 300 and a $542/mo loan payment
         | on a used car. Cursed. Americans need buses more than ever.
        
           | Izikiel43 wrote:
           | I live in a city with lots of buses, they are great. The
           | problem is that they are neuropsychiatric units on wheels,
           | there is always some crazy person being clinically crazy
           | (like talking to imaginary friends), so that makes the whole
           | ride something you don't want to experience often if
           | possible.
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | Eh, that discourse is usually being advanced by people who
             | never ride the bus, don't intend to start riding it, and
             | have a personal interest in selling you a car. In real
             | transit preference surveys, and historical outcomes, it is
             | clear that people would ride a bus that goes to their
             | destinations, comes often and reliably, and is reasonably
             | priced, without regard to how many mental cases are aboard.
             | So if a transit agency faces a choice of spending limited
             | resources on policing the inside of the vehicle for
             | lunatics, or adding a bus to the schedule, they should
             | always choose the latter.
        
           | kulahan wrote:
           | Does anyone else hate busses, and the only response you ever
           | get after mentioning this is "NUH UH BUSSES CAN BE GREAT"?
           | 
           | A bus will pretty much _always_ be inferior to a car.
           | Mathematically impossible to run on time. It never gets you
           | where you want to go, just kinda close usually. If one doesn
           | 't show up, there is no real feedback without an extensive
           | background metadata system. Never as clean as your own car
           | (unless you're one of those carbage-loving people I suppose,
           | but then you're just going to litter on the bus anyways).
           | Obnoxious, loud, smelly, or crazy people you have to deal
           | with.
           | 
           | I'll never understand the crowd so desperate to have them,
           | but I'll still support the cause if it cleans up the highways
           | for me I guess.
        
             | jeffbee wrote:
             | Nobody denies that if we all chip in to build a door-to-
             | door freeway and free parking for you it will be cool for
             | you. The question is whether we have better things to do
             | with our money.
        
             | hamdingers wrote:
             | > A bus will pretty much always be inferior to a car.
             | 
             | I never have to clean a bus, or put gas in it, or change
             | its oil. I don't even have to drive it.
             | 
             | I don't have to dedicate a big portion of my property to
             | storing it, just to pay to park it somewhere else when I go
             | out. I'll never get a ticket for leaving it in the wrong
             | place, and I'll never have to go to court because I used it
             | wrong.
             | 
             | I don't have to worry about it getting stolen, or crashed
             | into. I don't have to worry about being unable to afford
             | the insurance or registration. I don't have any wealth tied
             | up in it, so its deprecation doesn't matter.
             | 
             | Having to walk a few minutes at the start and end of my
             | journey is a small price to pay for such convenience.
             | 
             | And if I ever do need one, I can rent one for less than the
             | average American's monthly payment. In fact, I can rent the
             | exact one I need that day, which might be a pickup today
             | but a minivan tomorrow.
        
             | NegativeK wrote:
             | In most places I've lived, busses are for poor people.
             | Because anyone else will pay whatever it takes to get a car
             | and avoid something like a _three hour_ round trip for
             | something 10 miles away. I'm not kidding; my work commute
             | is 10 miles each way, in a city of way more than 1M, and
             | it's 1.5 hours total for me to get to work on time.
             | 
             | I've lived in one place where they were great. Dense urban
             | environments can do that, though. So nuh us busses can be
             | great (the trains were even better), but it seems like the
             | US has zero actual drive to make public transit not crap.
        
               | mothballed wrote:
               | I've lived in a couple places with public transit way
               | faster and more efficient than cars.
               | 
               | But because it's public, people can't be easily kicked
               | off. Once I was caught between a knife fight; another
               | time a schizophrenic person started to aggressively trap
               | me in the corner while going on an increasing paranoid
               | tirade.
               | 
               | Not long after that I bought a bicycle.
        
               | jeffbee wrote:
               | A bicycle is pretty much always going to beat a bus over
               | reasonable distances, on performance alone, not even
               | counting the crazy people.
        
       | micromacrofoot wrote:
       | Also worth noting the average new car is now $50k and the average
       | new car loan is $40k+
       | 
       | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/10/17/50000-new...
       | 
       | Starting to find out the risks of a car-centric society in a
       | slow-burn economic crisis.
        
         | olyjohn wrote:
         | Yeah the average is high, that means there are cars cheaper
         | than that. People are spending big because they either are
         | doing no researchand getting suckered, or they are buying nicer
         | cars for vanity reasons.
        
           | mothballed wrote:
           | Or it's the only thing available.
           | 
           | A few years ago my car was totaled by an uninsured illegal in
           | a hit and run, and I was forced to get another one (bought
           | used). This was back when the bubble was even worse, and
           | since I lived on dirt roads, I needed a 4x4. Literally the
           | only thing I could find not clapped out were luxury models,
           | because rich people were about the only people at the time
           | dumping cars that weren't completely clapped out.
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | Automakers realized during COVID they could increase prices
           | and reduce production and come out ahead. Import tariffs
           | means you are, as a consumer, held captive by a market to
           | extract for your potentially non discretionary personal
           | transportation needs.
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | Average (presumably) mean car price is not useful when
         | discussing affordability.
         | 
         | There are very reliable, brand new vehicles for $30k. The extra
         | amount is luxury.
        
       | SeanAnderson wrote:
       | https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DRCLACBS consumer loan
       | delinquencies up a lot in the last couple of years, tapered over
       | the last year, low relative to historic norms
       | 
       | https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DRCCLACBS credit card
       | delinquencies are similar
       | 
       | https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DRSFRMACBS home loans
       | delinquencies look amazing right now, to the surprise of noone,
       | since everyone is sitting happy having locked in their 3% rates a
       | few years back.
       | 
       | My understanding is that Tricolor went under due to systemic
       | fraud ("The core of the fraud allegations is that Tricolor
       | illegally used the same loan portfolios as collateral for
       | separate credit lines with multiple banks" to the tune of ~$200M)
       | 
       | First Brands also went under due to fraud ("First Brands had
       | relied on billions of dollars in undisclosed debt, primarily from
       | the private credit market, by borrowing against its invoices.
       | This practice, known as factoring, kept the debt off the
       | company's official balance sheet")
       | 
       | Yes, things feel tighter than they did in the years immediately
       | post-Covid because there was a lot of free $ in the system, a lot
       | of debt collections were paused, and Covid went on long enough
       | for people to start treating that as the new normal when that was
       | never going to be the case.
       | 
       | No, I don't see these as canaries for a 2008-esque event.
       | 
       | The scary thing to keep an eye on is commercial office space debt
       | (e.g. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/HPP/) which is likely to
       | cause a cascade of fire sales as 5/10 yr debt obligations come
       | due and how that will have cascading effects on commercial bank
       | loans. That will be a hairy situation, but, fortunately, once it
       | passes, rents in downtown areas will plummet and there will be a
       | huge surge in growth in response to more favorable rents. Right
       | now, commercial rents are locked into untenable rates because the
       | loans are contingent on those rates which is resulting in 30%+
       | unused commercial space in areas like downtown SF.
        
       | lurk2 wrote:
       | Related: U.S. Consumers Are Collapsing: Cars, Credit, & the Chaos
       | Ahead | The Weekly Wrap - Steve Eisman (Steve Carell's character
       | from The Big Short) interviews Lakshmi Ganapathi. Uploaded
       | 2025-10-03.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd7akdDtPXA
        
       | Yizahi wrote:
       | I once clicked on a YT video about irresponsible debts,
       | apparently it's a popular genre there, don't do it or you'll get
       | a flood of these for a few weeks minimum. The interesting note I
       | saw there was that apparently in USA car credits are now reaching
       | into 7 and 8 years length (from typical maximum of 5 or so) and
       | their rates are reaching well into 20% or higher. And that's not
       | on a housing, that's on depreciating expensive cars. Another new
       | idea for me was the fact that people with car debt, are doing
       | "trade-in" of sorts, giving up old unpaid car for a newer better
       | one, with an even bigger total debt. That was really eye opening
       | stuff.
        
       | dragant wrote:
       | Funny how a lot was going really well thanks to the last
       | administration. Full employment, hot economy, and administration
       | going after the billionaires. Wow...so much has changed in a
       | year. We piss off the world, we implement tariffs hapharzardly,
       | car and car prices soar and the rich get richer. Brace
       | yourself....
        
       | derf_ wrote:
       | _> "Distress in auto lending broadly is often seen as a
       | bellwether to changing circumstances in the US economy, because
       | Americans particularly in the lower-income brackets tend to put
       | their highest priority in auto payments," said Brett House..._
       | 
       | Or, put another way, when the bills come in, people make their
       | car payments first, because they have to get to work. So either
       | there are other bills people aren't paying, or people aren't
       | going to work. Both seem bad. One purported cause of increased
       | auto loan defaults is that people are having to make student loan
       | payments again, although that would suggest they _aren 't_
       | prioritizing the auto payments.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-17 23:01 UTC)