Dave Ramsey Car Payment Rant (not what you expect)

[clarkfan1979]

Dave Ramsey makes fun of a friend who drives a car worth $200. Highly unlikely that the car is only worth $200. If it runs, it's worth at least $1000. Dave claims that his friend drives it with a badge of honor and it drives Dave nuts because Dave claims that his friend is not modeling success. Once you can afford a more expensive car, you upgrade. He tells his friend to stop embarrassing himself.

I disagree 100%. I have a modest car and drive it as a badge of honor. Cost me $2750. I parade it around like a show pony. I like to lead by example and show people that an alternative path is possible. What is considered "normal" is not normal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbftLWeaRMQ

[nereo]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

[Syonyk]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

That's pretty much it.

His "early game" (going from pants on fire in debt to substantially positive cashflow) is solid, and he's a good motivator on that part, but I have a major problem with his "Why?" answers - because his reasoning for getting your act together is so that later, you can consume all the luxury goods.  "Live like nobody else so that later, you can live like nobody else!"

His late game?  At least a while back it it involved "Buy Dave Ramsey Funds," which he makes a good bit on.  They're not particularly good (for the buyer).  I suppose they're better than cash in the checking account, but... still.

However, at a deeper level, I don't like him because despite claiming to be a "Christian financial group," they're very much secular financial wisdom, with some Bible verses thrown around on top for seasoning.  In general, if you start with the Bible and end up with exactly what the world would say, there's a really good chance you've done something wrong, and that's exactly how his stuff ends up (at least last time I looked into it, I've not gone through it recently but don't get the impression it's changed a lot in the past few years).  It's secular financial wisdom dressed up in some Bible seasoning, and that's just gross.

[bryan995]

The comments suggest it’s Scotty Kilmer, let’s run with it.

When your NW is >15M yes you are wasting breath driving around a beater and pinching Pennies.

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

But Scotty Kilmer has a persona to keep up to ensure his 1.4M/yr in YouTube revenue keeps flowing. Rev up those enginesss!

[shuffler]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

Not to mention the expense of gluten free gasoline.

[Dave1442397]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

Not to mention the expense of gluten free gasoline.

If your car is 94' long (or even 22' long) it's going to use a whole lot of that gluten free gas.

[wageslave23]

It all depends on the relative wealth of the person owning the "beater".  If you are scrounging to get to FIRE as soon as possible, probably worth it to drive a beater.  If you are a well off, high earner with no understanding or desire for FIRE, then yeah it doesn't make sense to deal with the hassle of driving a beater in order to save a couple thousand dollars a year.  I think his point is that once you have enough money and income, the focus turns to saving time and maximizing convenience and enjoyment.  Going to the mechanic or DIYing vehicle issues on a beater every year is not a good use of someone who makes $200k+/yr precious free time.  So I agree to an extent.  On the other hand, I definitely take pride in driving around an old beater and seeing how long I can make it last - I just don't think its maximizing the use of money in an efficient way for most people who earn a lot and don't plan to retire early.

[OtherJen]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

'Tis the main religion in the US.

[Icecreamarsenal]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

Not to mention the expense of gluten free gasoline.

If your car is 94' long (or even 22' long) it's going to use a whole lot of that gluten free gas.

Underrated comment.

[tooqk4u22]

Yeah, I think it depends on where one is in life, income, and wealth and balanced between one's needs and wants. 

Driving a beater with $15mil probably is silly just like driving a 40k car when one has no money is silly.   

I drive a 2006 that is generally fine, a little beat up bc I won't repair some cosmetic stuff (not worth it) but it runs fine and has just required regular maintenance.  I get comments all the time from friends and family that I should get a new car bc I can afford it and mine is old.  I usually say "but mine fits me like a glove"

Yet here I am contemplating getting a newer vehicle, which is somewhat motivated by the fact that my kid will be drivers age soon so they can use (not have) the 2006.   

So I am split on my view.

[Samuel]

Sounds to me like Dave is running out of ways to bring up how dumb car payments are for most people so he's ragging on his friend as a way to bring it up again.

[dandarc]

After finally buying a car outside of "call your dad (who runs accounting department at a car dealership), then show up to do the paperwork", I'll drive the cars we have until they just won't go any more just to put off the whole car buying experience again.

[dandarc]

After finally buying a car outside of "call your dad (who runs accounting department at a car dealership), then show up to do the paperwork", I'll drive the cars we have until they just won't go any more just to put off the whole car buying experience again.

Actually I basically mail ordered our 2nd car (had cut down to 1 car upon moving cross country, decided we had more need for a 2nd car upon moving back). That was pretty easy - saw a great price on a 2014 Leaf even after delivery fees, two phone calls and Fedexed a check and it shows up in the mall parking lot near us a week later. Guess it is basically "buying from a dealer without a connection" that I don't like at all.

[Syonyk]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

... sorry, what forum are we on again?

[FiveSigmas]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

... sorry, what forum are we on again?

It’s sometimes a little hard to tell, but I think it’s the one run by this guy:



Cheap shots aside, this is the article I grabbed the image from.

[nereo]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

... sorry, what forum are we on again?

It’s sometimes a little hard to tell, but I think it’s the one run by this guy:



Cheap shots aside, this is the article I grabbed the image from.

Pete hasn't been an active member for about 7 years.  His last post was over 10 months ago, and he's posted exactly three times in the last 3.5 years.

Regardless, I think we should chalk up any claim that current cars are 10x [everything!] to be hyperbole. No question there's been improvements, but the safety, fuel efficiency and other data doesn't support an order of magnitude improvement.

[yachi]

Dave claims that his friend is not modeling success.

Did he use these words?  *modeling success*  Eww, cringe.

[GodlessCommie]

When you compare a 94’ celiac to a 22’ anything, you can easily see a 10x improvement in passenger safety, efficiency, accident avoidance, comfort, UX, LiDAR, cameras etc.

But it isn't the stated reason. The stated reason is "Dave claims that his friend is not modeling success. Once you can afford a more expensive car, you upgrade. He tells his friend to stop embarrassing himself." And that's not a very good reason at all.

Don't get me wrong - I like safety, efficiency, and all that. I drive a new-ish car. But *modeling success*? I need a throwing up emoji...

[PDXTabs]

But it isn't the stated reason. The stated reason is "Dave claims that his friend is not modeling success. Once you can afford a more expensive car, you upgrade. He tells his friend to stop embarrassing himself." And that's not a very good reason at all.

Don't get me wrong - I like safety, efficiency, and all that. I drive a new-ish car. But *modeling success*? I need a throwing up emoji...

Right? I want my base model 2014 Focus SE hatchback to run forever. I don't want to upgrade because I can afford to.

[bacchi]

In no way does Dave relate how his friend is "proud" of the $200 car. His friend might simply not care as long as the beater gets him from point A to point B.

"And he's driving this $200 car. And it's ticking me off. Cos I'm like, dude, you are not modeling success here. You know, this is not anything to be proud of. You drive a $200 car so that you never have to drive a $200 car again. That's the only reason to drive a $200 car."

[Syonyk]

^^ Yeah, that would be the heavily materialist streak I can't stand of his.

[PDXTabs]

He's an asshole and a charlatan. Of course he's a dick about cars. 

EDITed to add: I hope I don't get sued by him.

[roomtempmayo]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

I'd really like to see him have a monk on for an earnest conversation about God and mammon.  The eye of the needle and all that.

[sonofsven]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

I'd really like to see him have a monk on for an earnest conversation about God and mammon.  The eye of the needle and all that.

Ideally, a Jesuit.

[kite]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

is there a citation for this?

Not a Ramsey apologist or anything.  But Prosperity Gospel isn't theologically sound.  While my particularly slice of Christianity isn't the same as Ramsey's, he's not one of those "Send me $100 and the Lord will bless you in return with $10,000 for your faith" kinds of hucksters.  Ramsey's math holds up and so do his scriptural references. 

[dandarc]

I'm inclined to think "prosperity gospel" might be a bit harsh, but Ramsey's math particularly beyond the get-out-of-debt phase is at least suspect. Or is he no longer telling people an 8% withdrawal rate is sound these days?

[roomtempmayo]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

is there a citation for this?

Not a Ramsey apologist or anything.  But Prosperity Gospel isn't theologically sound.  While my particularly slice of Christianity isn't the same as Ramsey's, he's not one of those "Send me $100 and the Lord will bless you in return with $10,000 for your faith" kinds of hucksters.  Ramsey's math holds up and so do his scriptural references.

I'd call anyone who says there's a relationship between worldly success/money and virtue/God's favor a prosperity gospel huckster.  It's so deep in much American Christianity it's easy to normalize the mild versions of it.

There's zilch in the Gospels that says being wealthy is good and a lot that says it's dangerous for your soul.

[kite]

Ramsey's schtick is that those who have been blessed need to be good stewards of that, and not live beyond their means, save for the future, etc.
Very in line with MMM on these points.

Doesn't make either of them a prosperity gospel huckster or devotee. 

ETA -- DR seems like a jerk for other reasons. Notably, the idea baked into the corporation reg's in the firm that bears his name is that the sinner should be indefinitely shunned. This is the antithesis of Christianity.  That's increasingly a part of secular corporate and academic philosophy as more and more people get publicly shamed for being anti-woke. Christians are supposed to have a 'love the sinner' approach. 

[wageslave23]

It’s all part of the prosperity gospel of which Ramsey is a devotee.

is there a citation for this?

Not a Ramsey apologist or anything.  But Prosperity Gospel isn't theologically sound.  While my particularly slice of Christianity isn't the same as Ramsey's, he's not one of those "Send me $100 and the Lord will bless you in return with $10,000 for your faith" kinds of hucksters.  Ramsey's math holds up and so do his scriptural references.

I'd call anyone who says there's a relationship between worldly success/money and virtue/God's favor a prosperity gospel huckster.  It's so deep in much American Christianity it's easy to normalize the mild versions of it.

There's zilch in the Gospels that says being wealthy is good and a lot that says it's dangerous for your soul.

Careful about making generalizations.  The whole old testament is filled with people that are blessed materially because of their faithfulness.  Or punished materially for their disobedience.

[Syonyk]

Ramsey's math holds up and so do his scriptural references.

His math is fine, but unless his content has radically changed in the past decade, it's very much "pick and choose verses for seasoning" style references, not a long form study of the sections of the Bible talking about money.

Ramsey's schtick is that those who have been blessed need to be good stewards of that, and not live beyond their means, save for the future, etc.
Very in line with MMM on these points.

Sure... and buy the luxury car because why did you live like nobody else, except so you can later live like nobody else???

That's really the root of my problem with him - he still teaches a fairly materialistic view of wealth, and getting wealthy to have the good life.  I'm far more interested in how to be content with what one has, and to wisely steward resources.  For the cost of a new luxury car, you can run a mid-size church plant for a year or two...

It's probably in line with current Tesla-owning MMM, though certainly not 2012 era MMM.

Doesn't make either of them a prosperity gospel huckster or devotee.

It's not the most overt version of prosperity gospel, but it's in that realm.  And I'm going based on some older info, I haven't actually listened to him recently (I don't do talk radio in any form).  But nothing I've seen indicates he's substantially changed.

ETA -- DR seems like a jerk for other reasons. Notably, the idea baked into the corporation reg's in the firm that bears his name is that the sinner should be indefinitely shunned. This is the antithesis of Christianity.  That's increasingly a part of secular corporate and academic philosophy as more and more people get publicly shamed for being anti-woke. Christians are supposed to have a 'love the sinner' approach.

Which aspects of?  I'm not familiar with that particular part, but if it's in the realm of "If someone is living in sin after claiming to be a Christian, turn them out until they change this" is entirely in line with church discipline teachings in the Bible.

[lhamo]

The Gospels are in the New Testament.

[roomtempmayo]

Careful about making generalizations.  The whole old testament is filled with people that are blessed materially because of their faithfulness.  Or punished materially for their disobedience.

Yes, which is why I specified the Gospels, i.e. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, i.e. the teachings of Jesus.

It's totally possible to connect material prosperity with individual merit using the Old Testament and to a lesser extent the Pauline Letters.  But to do it you have to deliberately look over that inconvenient Jesus part of Christianity.

[Syonyk]

There's zilch in the Gospels that says being wealthy is good and a lot that says it's dangerous for your soul.

This is almost certainly neither the thread nor forum to dive deeply into that, but I don't agree with that assertion.

Being wealthy is neither here nor there, Biblically, as long as your trust isn't in your wealth.  And as long as you're not, to borrow some phrasing Paul uses a lot, "greedy for dishonest gain" - which is applicable at whatever wealth you might be at.  I think you see that sentiment pretty clearly from Jesus as well, when He clears out the temple courtyards calling the vendors and moneychangers a "den of thieves" as well, and it shows in his interactions with some of the tax collectors also - they were pretty much the case study in "dishonest gain."

There's also a consistent thread of, "From those whom much is given, much is expected," and we certainly try to live that out in our lives as we can.

I don't think owning a reliable car to get around is a huge problem, though I grant I've got a pretty flexible set of definitions for reliable.  I do think owning a high end luxury car, because you deserve it, is pretty questionable from a Biblical perspective.  If someone wants to drive a $200 car, and it gets them around fine, great!  Have a ball, I've had more fun with my $200 cars than with the expensive ones (autocrossing an 1800 lb, 50hp Daihatsu on a wet morning is hysterically fun when the Mustangs can't hook up the power on the course).

[roomtempmayo]

Biblically, as long as your trust isn't in your wealth. 

I agree that this isn't the place for a theological debate, but I'll say I think you've got to go beyond the direct words of Jesus to find that nuance and leave it at that.

[kite]

ETA -- DR seems like a jerk for other reasons. Notably, the idea baked into the corporation reg's in the firm that bears his name is that the sinner should be indefinitely shunned. This is the antithesis of Christianity.  That's increasingly a part of secular corporate and academic philosophy as more and more people get publicly shamed for being anti-woke. Christians are supposed to have a 'love the sinner' approach.

Which aspects of?  I'm not familiar with that particular part, but if it's in the realm of "If someone is living in sin after claiming to be a Christian, turn them out until they change this" is entirely in line with church discipline teachings in the Bible.

Firing people who are unmarried & pregnant for being unmarried & pregnant.

Off the bat, it's sexist.  There is only one sex that suffers. 
Punishment for pregnancy encourages abortion.  If pregnancy marks one as having had sex, getting an abortion can allow one to appear as though they have never had sex.  Not something Christendom takes lightly.  Ramsey does profess to be Christian.
Being pregnant outside of marriage doesn't indicate that one rejects Christian teachings. She may whole heartedly embrace the teachings of the church and either have lapsed or never consented to the sex in the first place.  It's also increasingly common for conceptions to occur without the pregnant woman having any kind of sex.   

[dandarc]

I heard that might have happened once, but increasingly common?

[nereo]

It's also increasingly common for conceptions to occur without the pregnant woman having any kind of sex.

I’m not sure I understand what you are getting at here…

[Dave1442397]

It's also increasingly common for conceptions to occur without the pregnant woman having any kind of sex.

I’m not sure I understand what you are getting at here…

Well duh, what rock have you been living under? It's obviously aliens - http://proofofalien.com/top-10-alien-impregnation-and-birth-stories/

[clarkfan1979]

He's an asshole and a charlatan. Of course he's a dick about cars. 

EDITed to add: I hope I don't get sued by him.

One of my friends owns an insurance company. He has a website with followers and posts anti Dave Ramsey articles regarding his insurance recommendations. He received many letters and threats by lawyers from the Ramsey corporation. They tried to get his insurance license revoked. My friend stood his ground and nothing ended up happening because everything he posts is factually correct.

[kite]

I heard that might have happened once, but increasingly common?

1978 -- Louise Joy Brown was the first person conceived outside of her mother's body. Estimates that around 5 million have been born who were conceived with some manner of ART.  Given that most conceptions using ART don't result in a live birth, there have been tens of millions of these pregnancies in the past 40 years.

It does take a male having a bit of solo sex to get the semen for IVF or IUI, though not for ICSI. With ICSI, the sperm are surgically removed.
But however the sperm (in the case of IUI) or the fertilized egg ( in the case of IVF or ICSI) gets into the mother, it's not sex.

For anyone to presume something about the conception of another person's child and judge them harshly for it whilst professing to be a Christian is to out themselves as not just a hypocrite, but a moron, too.  Tens of millions.  Very likely someone you know. 
Ramsey's company is bonkers on this point.  But he's still not a prosperity gospel guy like Meyer, Osteen, Dollar, Ashimolowo, Okotie, Minn, etc.