

I mean, you’re the one making claims of bell graphs and whatnot here bro… I said I’d be more than happy to correct myself if I’m wrong, but you’re the one making the claims here; That means the onus of proof is on you… I’m not the one who needs to be right so bad they had to say that kinda lame and honestly a bit nonsensical ‘i was joking even though there is clearly nothing in my comment that even remotely supports that interpretation’ thing.
Feel free to keep that ‘do your own research’ energy over there in MAGA land tho… and be a big boy and provide your own proof. It’s really telling (and doesn’t exactly scream ‘credible/competent’ tbh) if the strongest rebuttal you have is… Nothing? Lol
Honestly, I would think that the whole ‘sweat equity’ aspect would argue more in my favor, to be honest… Even assuming you are doing the necessary restoration work or whatever yourself at cost it doesn’t just magically make that ‘value’ disappear, it would just be externalized and distributed (so to speak) over whatever time you’ve spent acquiring the ability to do so, would it not?
I’m not trying to be argumentative necessarily, but keep in mind I’m considering this strictly from the viewpoint of it being an investment with anticipated return over that of an index over 30 years, so I’m not considering the enjoyment or what have you you might expect from a car enthusiast to be a factor. I also am basing my opinion on my feeling the implication in the original reply was that you could go out right now, get whatever car you wanted, drive it for 30+ years and finally still sell it in whatever state it may be in for something like a 5% return on what you originally paid. Do you consider (or preferably could you provide some evidence?) this to be accurate?