Eh, vehicle safety, especially when you're talking about rear ending people, is all on the driver. If you are that afraid of rear ending someone, you don't need to be driving yet. Leasing is not a good idea IMO.
That sounds reasonable. The healthy balance of buying the safest car you can afford does imply you can afford a safe car. I could never afford anything even near new until I was promoted to engineer and was making $100K/year. This was way later in my life. As a technician, I could afford a 4 cylinder Honda Civic. It wasn't exactly a ton of metal. But, I was getting like 27 MPG back in the 70's. I would buy a used Civic - for $300-$400 and get those cheap 50K Japanese engines for $400 and put one in. I could squeeze another 100K out of the recycled engine. The law forbade the Japanese commuters from driving a car with more than 50Kmiles. I was happy to find this fact. I'd sell the Civic when I'd go travel again. I'd sometimes get back the $400 I spent for the car - not all of it - I'd consider the engine expense a road tax. I got to know the engine-selling guys and would have them save me a good engine when I returned from traveling. There is a way to beat the financial system. The safe car is for getting into head-ons with. I just never planned for that situation.
I seen an insurance commercial where a dude driving a 1958 Cadillac parks into between two identical small crappy cars and the front and rear of both cars fall off... thing is I have no clue what insurance company it is for. All this commercial tells me is to drive a 1958 Cadillac, cuz it sustained no noticeable damage at all.
A little light seems to be shedding. There's quite a difference between what you can really afford and what you wish you could afford. You've established what the problem is. Now, one must collect all the available options on how to solve the problem.
Comments