Yes, I did look at the site. Shared vehicles that are community owned is not a great idea in my opinion. However your experience may vary.
Sort of reminds me of communism and I will leave it at that.
Haha. Wow. You’re more special than I thought.
I think we agree to disagree. 
I have never been in favour of community sharing for items such as vehicles based on my previous experiences.
I too was raped on a bus. I wanted to share.
I now spend less annually on music than I used to spend monthly, and yet I not have access to way more music, and I have more ways to listen to it. The same can be said for books and movies.
Admittedly, I’ve rented my home all my adult life, but between the period when I was moving almost yearly, and then marrying someone with a disability that would make helping maintain a home more difficult, it made sense for me to rent.
On the other hand, I own my two vehicles outright (one has been paid off 11 years, the other for 8) and use them daily, sometimes more than once daily. Under current circumstances that makes sense for me. On the other hand, when I lived in Chicago and relied on the CTA/RTA for my transportation needs I seldom required a car and did not own one, I either hired a cab or rented a vehicle on the rare occasions I needed one. That made more sense at the time.
I remember when everyone rented their phone from AT&T. Currently, I outright own every phone I have. If I could rent a cellphone for cheaper per month than owning one I’d certainly consider it, but I have a rock-bottom phone service right now.
I’ve been renting movies for as long as that’s been a thing (currently via Netflix) but I choose to own a subset of those I watch, and usually watch them multiple times. Music is things like the radio or YouTube but, again, I purchase a select few and I like to own them outright on some form of media, not have them residing in the “cloud” because I’m not always hooked up to the internet.
Renting isn’t really entirely new. Options for renting vs. owning are more plentiful these days. I don’t mind that. I do mind the notion that in the future no one will own everything and you’ll be forced to rent everything - I like having options.
“Renting” books, newspapers, magazines, etc. has long been a function of an institution known as a “library”, which I’ve been visiting nearly 50 years now, and you can borrow more stuff from them these days than ever before. But, again, I choose to purchase a subset of what I read because I know I’ll return to it in the future.
Where, exactly, have you found this? It’s not the case with Zipcars.
ETA: OIC…the dread Communism.
-
Up to the late '70s or so, every phone was a rental. Ma Bell didn’t allow you to plug your own phone into their system. You had to rent one from Bell.
-
Housing rental increased significantly after the housing market crashed and many people found that banks would not extend mortgage loans to them.
This is not at all true for me. I really don’t think I’m any more or less careful with a rented vehicle than an owned one, but if there is a very slight chance of a difference, I would probably be even more careful with the rented vehicle. I mean, I could ignore a scratch on my car, but a scratch on a rental is going to cost me.
I remember going to the phone store to get the family’s Ma Bell phone. I wanted either the pink princess phone or a Mickey Mouse phone (hey, I was 8 or so). Mom chose a beige phone.
The rental model is usually seen as more profitable then the buy to own model.
There is a growing trend of companies to sell you a service rather then a product. Microsoft has tried many times to break through with SAAS (Software as a service). And this trend is so even when companies are actually selling you a product. Apple has mastered this, your iProduct has a designed life span, non-user replaceable parts (specifically battery) of a determined life expectancy, locked OS, limited RAM, and generally will make changes which will only support a short window of expected device life. It is their device that you can not change (well you can but lose all support if they find out).
Music has already gone this way, monthly service fees for streaming instead of buying the songs (technically licensing them, but they were yours to listen to forever once you bought them).
Pharmaceutical companies have been demonized for making not cures but drugs that must be taken continuously. And there is a financial incentive for that practice, now if they actually do that or not IDK, but it does seem likely that they will research based on expected return. So you are renting your health.
It’s called specialization, and it’s old as dirt.
Some time ago, I may have lived in a house I built, drank milk from a cow I raised, wore clothes I made myself and ate food I grew and prepared.
That’s great. But what I’m really good at is being an IT Business Analyst. I’m actually a petty mediocre builder and milker and farmer and seamstress. I don’t have time to train to be better at all this stuff. Nor do I have the capital to invest in tractors and milking machines and other equipment that would make these things more efficient.
As economies get more complex and people develop tools like banking systems, political order, transportation networks, communications, etc. we started being able to share our goods and services more easily. And that enabled people to become, say, professional builders who were actually really good at building houses and could invest in equipment that makes that faster and easier.
This meant I get a better house, cheaper than I could build it, AND I now have time to go be a Business Analyst.
Smart phones are another technology, like roads or banks, that facilitate more efficient specialization. Uber, for example, allows people to use the investment they’ve made in their cars and the skills they’ve developed driving to serve those who don’t have those things, freeing them up to do something else with their time and money.
Wow. You must really hate public libraries then.
(BTW, if you’re posting right after someone, you really don’t need to quote their entire post in your reply.)
This is such a bitchy thread. Old people bitching at young people and the young people bitching right back.
For the grandpas in this thread: sorry, it’s the new paradigm.
For the young ones in this thread: Some of the things our grandpas did do make sense.
It amazes me how much people want to judge.
I rent my house. I can’t afford a downpayment for a house right now and honestly, am not ready to. People have been looking down on me for this all my life. “You’re throwing your money away!” I admit to some schadenfreude when the housing market collapsed and people finally shut their traps. I was smart and didn’t buy a house when I couldn’t really afford one.
We own both of our cars debt-free. But we live in a place where you need a car. Living in the City? What am I going to do with a car? I’ll take the subway and use a Zipcar when I need one.
Renting entertainment? I have a wall full of DVDs and rewatch often and I prefer streaming movies off Netflix. Much easier. I like digital downloads; it saves space.
Big house? Don’t need it. I don’t really get people who have one child but “need” a four bedroom space. No, you don’t, and I have seen lots of people go into massive debt because of it.
What I’m trying to say is, things are changing, and you’re just going to have to suck it up. But, that doesn’t mean we don’t have stuff to learn from you either. However if you sit on your rocking chair muttering about “kids these days” I don’t really think the kids are going to listen.
- Anaamika, officially middle aged in six more months.
Actually, it’s mostly an old person saying stupid things and young people correcting him (her?)
Example: for-profit car sharing services are like communism.
Nope. For-profit car sharing (like uber) just won’t work for a lot of people. Including myself and my Wife. No way, no how.
I believe you live out in the country. So I can well understand that a car sharing service isn’t for you. But a lot of people live in urban areas, and the density (along with the availability of public transit, taxis and walkable distances) mean that they can work for them. (Plus parking in a city is limited and expensive.)
Did you quote the wrong post or something? First, Uber is not “car sharing”; it’s “ride sharing”, though really it’s just a de-glorified taxi service. Second, I didn’t say car sharing worked for everybody; it doesn’t work for me, either. In fact, I didn’t say anything about it at all except that the OP thinks it’s like communism.
That might be my fault. The OP mentioned Uber, a ride-sharing service, and I suggested Zipcar, a car-sharing service, might be a better example of what he’s talking about. Equating either to communism is still nuts, however.
I don’t really see an answer to this: what’s wrong with a “rental economy”? Why shouldn’t we rent things that are expensive to own out of proportion to actual need - cars for many people, power sport equipment, RVs, etc.? Why is buy-to-own the only acceptable alternative for things that take a big bite of our money and are only used some small fraction of the time - especially things like vehicles that have continual maintenance and overhead costs whether they’re used or not?
How many families would be in better financial shape if, say, they’d rented an RV a few times instead of buying one that turned into a crushing economic anchor?