The cost of living

AnotherJoe

saver861 wrote: »

I'm not sure it makes any difference where the money comes from - either savings or income.

If you are costing out the cost of living for your personal circumstances you would need to include all costs. So a car costing say £20,000 new and kept for 15 years would be have lost about 95% of it value i.e. about £1,200 per year.

Thats irrelevant if the purchase came from savings before retirement and the OP doesn't intend to replace the car when it is beyond reasonable life. The money to purchase it has gone, and they are not spending £1,200 a year on depreciation, not are they depleting savings or income to "afford" that depreciation.

In contrast, I am because I'll be buying another car, so I save each month to fund that next car, but if i didn't intend ever to buy another one, it would be wholly misleading to pretend that the deprecation has any effect at all.

saver861

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Thats irrelevant if the purchase came from savings before retirement and the OP doesn't intend to replace the car when it is beyond reasonable life. The money to purchase it has gone, and they are not spending £1,200 a year on depreciation, not are they depleting savings or income to "afford" that depreciation.

Yes that would be true if you were not intending on replacing the car. However, for most people, it is likely the car would be replaced so the money will therefore need to be sourced.

Put another way, you would need to be putting aside £1,200 per year to be able to replace the car in the stated 15 years or so.

AnotherJoe wrote: »

In contrast, I am because I'll be buying another car, so I save each month to fund that next car, but if i didn't intend ever to buy another one, it would be wholly misleading to pretend that the deprecation has any effect at all.

It would only not have an effect if you were definitely not going to buy a replacement car. That's not a likely option for most cases but clearly you would plan accordingly.

I'm guessing I would be replacing cars up until around 80 or so.

Ganga

Is it not true that as people get older,and i mean over65/70 they tend to drive a lot less and more steadier,do not drive to the local shops when they can walk etc. so their cars tend to last forever.You often read about cars up for sale when older people die that have only very low mileage on the clock.

AnotherJoe

saver861 wrote: »

Yes that would be true if you were not intending on replacing the car. However, for most people, it is likely the car would be replaced so the money will therefore need to be sourced.

Put another way, you would need to be putting aside £1,200 per year to be able to replace the car in the stated 15 years or so.

It would only not have an effect if you were definitely not going to buy a replacement car. That's not a likely option for most cases but clearly you would plan accordingly.

I'm guessing I would be replacing cars up until around 80 or so.

So, retire at 65, OP stated car was for about 15 years, that leads us to...errm, about 80 :-)

Triumph13

I'd be interested to know how much that 5-7 year lifespan for domestic appliances is being dragged down by 'fashion' purchases and upgrades with perfectly functional appliances being junked so the owner can buy something new and shiny!
I'd also suggest that anyone who's concerned about having the funds to replace a car shouldn't be thinking about buying a new one anyway. Let someone else have the job of running it in for you and paying two thirds of the depreciation!

saver861

AnotherJoe wrote: »

So, retire at 65, OP stated car was for about 15 years, that leads us to...errm, about 80 :-)

I don't think it was the OP that stated buying a car and keeping it for 15 years.

Triumph13 wrote: »

I'd be interested to know how much that 5-7 year lifespan for domestic appliances is being dragged down by 'fashion' purchases and upgrades with perfectly functional appliances being junked so the owner can buy something new and shiny!

I don't think that happens so much with white goods. While its true that some appliances could be repaired, it tends to be almost as cost effective to replace rather than repair.

Triumph13 wrote: »

I'd also suggest that anyone who's concerned about having the funds to replace a car shouldn't be thinking about buying a new one anyway. Let someone else have the job of running it in for you and paying two thirds of the depreciation!

True .... much more financially effective!!

greenglide

it tends to be almost as cost effective to replace rather than repair.

Not if you fix it yourself it doesn't.


Replacing consumable parts of washers, driers etc (drive belts, brushes, door seals) costs very little in parts and are not difficult to fit.

These are the things that tends to be used to "justify" a replacement.

Triumph13

saver861 wrote: »

I don't think that happens so much with white goods.

Washers and driers maybe not so much. Fridges and freezers definitely.


I very much agree with greenglide about the repairs as well. Sometimes it doesn't even need a new part, just cleaning or unblocking. In these cases I'm sure 'I'm bored with it and fancy a new one anyway' is part of the equation for many people.

saver861

greenglide wrote: »

Not if you fix it yourself it doesn't.


Replacing consumable parts of washers, driers etc (drive belts, brushes, door seals) costs very little in parts and are not difficult to fit.

Sure it depends on what the faulty component is. I have fixed washing machines and dishwashers. A little help from a YouTube video invariably does the trick.

However, there will be components that will be more costly. Equally there are many who do not have the time or inclination to fix such machines.

Every situation is different but if you have older models then they are likely to be inefficient so you would be losing money yearly on running costs. It does not make sense. For busy families with younger children etc., reliability of these things would have a higher priority than perhaps a retired couple etc etc.

greenglide wrote: »

These are the things that tends to be used to "justify" a replacement.

We are in a throw away society that's true. Equally though, to keep and maintain older equipment is no more justifiable than changing them. Its down to peoples circumstances and choices.

Triumph13 wrote: »

Washers and driers maybe not so much. Fridges and freezers definitely.

Not sure why you say that? Why would someone throw out a perfectly working fridge for something newer? If however, it is older, unreliable etc then, as above, it would be counter productive to keep it.

Triumph13

saver861 wrote: »

Not sure why you say that? Why would someone throw out a perfectly working fridge for something newer? If however, it is older, unreliable etc then, as above, it would be counter productive to keep it.

"A shiny silver one will be much prettier than white" (or whatever the latest fashion is)
"I want a twin door US one like the Jones's next door"
"I NEED to have an ice-cube dispenser"
etc